No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 December 2021
The political history of medieval China is written primarily on the basis of official records produced at centers of political power by victors in the preceding trans-dynastic war. With the help of alternative sources, one can hope to challenge the triumphalist and teleological narrative imbedded in these records. In this article, I use documents preserved in the Dunhuang “library cave” to uncover a failed attempt to establish a regional state with imperial pretensions in Dunhuang immediately after the fall of the Tang. This kind of political regionalism seen in Dunhuang is also found in several other post-Tang states in Sichuan and Guangdong. My investigation of their similarities exposes the teleological nature of the conventional framework of “Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms,” and demands that we rethink the political history of China after the fall of the Tang.
The conception of this article began with my MA thesis in the Regional Studies, East Asia Program at Harvard University in 2011. I want to thank my advisor Mark Elliott for his guidance. An early version of this article was delivered at the Conference on “Middle Period China, 800–1400” at Harvard University in 2014. I am grateful for the comments by Wang Ao and the encouragement from Patricia Ebrey at that conference. Subsequently, Zhang Ling gave me many substantial suggestions for revision, and my friends Liu Chen, Du Heng, Lincoln Tsui, and Yin Hang also provided useful comments. Two anonymous reviewers gave useful feedback to the manuscript of this article. I thank all of them for their help in improving this article.
1 A note on the use of toponyms: Different names existed for this area and the polity in this area. Its official name originally was Sha Prefecture (Shazhou), and Dunhuang was one of the two counties of Sha prefecture (the other being Shouchang 壽昌). After Zhang Yichao won its independence from the Tibetan Empire, it was also officially named “the Military Prefecture of Returning to Righteousness (Guiyi Jun).” For the sake of consistency, this article will always use the name “Dunhuang.” The region in which Dunhuang situates itself, now the western part of the Gansu province usually known as Hexi Corridor 河西走廊, will be referred to as Hexi in this article.
2 For a general history of the decline of the Tang and particularly the local powers in late Tang, see Peterson, C. A., “Court and province in Mid- and Late Tang,” in The Cambridge History of China, Volume 3: Sui and T'ang China, 589–906 AD, Part 1, edited by Twitchett, Denis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1979), 464–560CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a summary of the history of Dunhuang during this period of Tang decline, see Xinjiang, Rong 榮新江, Eighteen Lectures on Dunhuang, trans. by Galambos, Imre (Leiden: Brill, 2013), 31–46Google Scholar.
3 Jiu Wudaishi 舊五代史 (974), comp. by Xue Juzheng 薛居正 et. al. (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1976), 138.1840. The same exact line was copied in Xin Wudaishi 新五代史 (1053), comp. by Ouyang Xiu 歐陽脩 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1974), 915.
4 For a comprehensive survey of the content of the Dunhuang manuscripts, see Rong Xinjiang, Eighteen Lectures on Dunhuang, 267–426.
5 For the history of Dunhuang in this period, see Xinjiang, Rong, Guiyijun shi yanjiu 歸義軍史研究, second ed. (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2015)Google Scholar. In this article, I use the term “emperor” to translate huangdi in the context of Dunhuang with full awareness of its irony, and of the fact that one can claim to be an emperor without their state being in any way imperial.
6 The scholarly attention this short-lived state has received is almost exclusively limited to Chinese works. The most important works include: Zhongmin, Wang 王重民, “Jinshanguo zhuishi lingshi” 金山國墜事零拾, Beiping tushuguan guankan 9.6 (1935), 5–32Google Scholar; Li Zhengyu 李正宇, “Guanyu jinshanguo he dunhuangguo jianguo de jige wenti” 关于金山国和敦煌国建国的几个问题, Xibei shidi 1987.2, 63–75; Li Zhengyu, “Tan ‘baiquege’ weibu zaxie yu Jinshanguo jianguo nianyue” 谈白雀歌尾部杂写与金山国建国年月, Dunhuang yanjiu, 1987.3, 75–79; Wang Jiqing 王冀青, “Youguan Jinshanguo de jige wenti” 有关金山国的几个问题, Dunhuangxue jikan 1983.3, 44–50; Lu Xiangqian 卢向前, “Jinshanguo chengli zhi wojian” 金山国成立之我见, Dunhuangxue jikan 1990.2, 14–26; Xinjiang, Rong, “Jinshan guoshi bianzheng” 金山國史辨正, Zhonghua wenshi luncong 50 (1992), 72–85Google Scholar; Xiuqing, Yang 杨秀清, Dunhuang xihan Jinshanguoshi 敦煌西汉金山国史 (Lanzhou: Gansu renmin, 1999)Google Scholar; Tingliang, Yan 颜廷亮, Dunhuang xihan Jinshanguo wenxue kaoshu 敦煌西漢金山國文學考述 (Lanzhou: Gansu renmin, 2009)Google Scholar.
7 There are a number of works on this topic. For a summary, see Yang Baoyu 楊寶玉, “Jinshanguo jianli shijian zaiyi” 金山國建立時間再議, Dunhuangxue jikan 2008.4, 44–52.
8 This event is mentioned the Dunhuang manuscript version of the “Stele of Virtuous Governance (dezheng bei 德政碑) of Zhang Huaishen.” See Stein (hereafter referred to as S.) 6161+S.3329+S.11564+S.6973+Pelliot chinois (hereafter referred to as P.) 2762, in Rong Xinjiang, Guiyijun shi yanjiu, 400.
9 Fu Junlian 伏俊琏, “Tangdai Dunhuang gaoseng Wuzhen ru Chang'an shi kaolue” 唐代敦煌高僧悟真入长安事考略, Dunhuang yanjiu 2010.3, 70–77.
10 Collecting map and household registrations as a sign of conquest is most well known in the case of Xiao He who collected these documents from the Qin court for the Han dynasty. In the spirit path stele (shendao bei 神道碑) of the mid-Tang prime-minister and geographer, Jia Dan 賈耽, it is said that “since the western barbarian (Tibetans) occupied He[xi], Huang [river] areas, the maps, household registrations, geographies and records were all lost.” See Quan tang wen 全唐文 (1819), comp. by Dong Hao 董誥, et al. (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1983), 478.4888.
11 P.3720, P.3886, S.4654, in Xu Jun 徐俊, Dunhuang shiji canjuan jikao 敦煌詩集殘卷輯考 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2000), 339.
12 Xu, Dunhuang shiji canjuan jikao, 332.
13 See Zhen, Zhao 赵貞, Guiyijun shishi kaolun 歸義軍史事考論, (Beijing: Beijng shifan daxue, 2010), 1–24Google Scholar.
14 Rong Xinjiang, Guiyijun shi yanjiu, 155–61.
15 For a chronology of the political history of Dunhuang, see Rong Xinjiang, Guiyijun shi yanjiu, 1–42.
16 This incident is recorded in a petition sent back to Dunhuang that is written on S.1156. For a transcription and interpretation of this text, see Rong Xinjiang, Guiyijun shi yanjiu, 187–89.
17 The majority of this year corresponds to the year 886. But the twelfth month falls into the year 887.
18 The emperor was threatened by Zhu Pi 朱沘 and had to leave the capital and take refuge in Xingyuan.
19 The title of puye 僕射 was one of Zhang's official titles at this time. In the early and mid-Tang, the term meant the deputy head of the Ministry of State Affairs (shangshu sheng 尚書省). By the ninth century, however, it has become an honorific title liberally offered to regional rulers without any real power.
20 The Chinese text by Zhang Wenche: “僕射有甚功勞？覓他旌節。二十年已前，多少樓羅人來，論節不得 … … 待你得節，我四人以頭倒行”; by Song Runying: “修文寫表，萬邊差人，涉歷沙磧，終是不了,” “如不得節者，死亦不歸者.” See Rong Xinjiang, Guiyijun shi yanjiu, 187–89.
21 For a study of the bianwen written to honor Zhang Yichao and Zhang Huaishen, see Xie Haiping 謝海平, Jiangshixing zhi bianwen yanjiu 講史性之變文研究 (Taipei: Jiaxin shuini gongsi wenhua jijinhui, 1973), 81–91. Victor Mair dates these two texts “not long after approximately 856 and 862 (probably sometime between 874 and 880).” See his T'ang Transformation Texts: A Study of the Buddhist Contribution to the Rise of Vernacular Fiction and Drama in China, (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989), 34.
22 Rong Xinjiang, Guiyijun shi yanjiu, 268.
23 “Heluo (meaning areas around Luoyang) was in chaos … included in the domain of southern Fan … appeased the succumbed and made treaties from afar … Therefore the practice of using braids was followed and tattoos were considered beautiful. They covered their bodies with robes folding on the left (zuoren 左衽) and had to kneel down to lords. The ancestors harbored resentments, but having met no one of high morality for a hundred years, they had nowhere to resolve their grievances.” The full title of the inscription is “The Inscription of the Virtuous Rule of Lord Zhang, Minister of Military, the Military Commissioner of Hexi by Royal Order.” The text of this inscription is found in several Dunhuang manuscripts, including S.6161, S.3329, S.11564, S.6973 and P.2762. See Rong Xinjiang, Guiyijun shi yanjiu, 399.
24 Bantang, Ren 任半塘, Dunhuang geci zongbian 敦煌歌辭總編 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1987), 449Google Scholar.
25 Ren Bantang, Dunhuang geci zongbian, 45.
26 Ren Bantang, Dunhuang geci zongbian, 673.
27 The sentiment expressed in the poems confirms the observation of by Yang, Shao-yun in “‘Stubbornly Chinese?’ Clothing Styles and the Question of Tang Loyalism in Ninth-Century Dunhuang,” International Journal of Eurasian Studies 5 (2016), 152–87Google Scholar. For the meaning of “loyalty” in Chinese history, see Standen, Naomi, Unbounded Loyalty (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2007), 41–63Google Scholar.
28 Rong Xinjiang, Guiyijun shi yanjiu, 197–213.
29 For a study of similar polities known in China proper, see Zhang Guogang 张国刚, Tangdai fanzhen yanjiu 唐代藩镇研究 revised edition (Beijing: Zhongguo renmin daxue, 2011).
30 This sequence of event is expertly elucidated in Yang Baoyu 楊寶玉 and Wu Liyu 吳麗娛 Guiyi jun zhengquan yu zhongyang guanxi yanjiu: yi ruzou huodong wei zhongxin 歸義軍政權與中央關係研究–以入奏活動為中心 (Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue, 2015), 42–58.
31 The standard treatment of this subject is Gu Jiegang 顾颉刚, “Wude zhongshishuo xia de zhengzhi he lishi” 五德终始说下的政治和历史, Gushi bian 古史辨, vol.5 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1982), 404–617. See also Chan, Hok–lam, Legitimation in Imperial China: Discussions under the Jurchen-Chin Dynasty (1115–1234) (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1984)Google Scholar.
32 Yang, “‘Stubbornly Chinese?’ Clothing Styles.”
33 The name of the kingdom might have connections to the Turkic idea of Golden Mountain, see Esin, Emel, “Altun-yiš (The Golden Mountain): The Mountain with Metallic Elemental Appurtenance in Turkish Culture and Art of the Kök–Türk Period,” Journal of Turkish Studies 4 (1980), 33–47Google Scholar.
34 See Jiu Wudai shi, 100.1333 (for the Northern Han) and 135.1808 (for the Southern Han).
35 For instance, see P.4632+P.4631, in Tang Geng'ou 唐耕耦 and Lu Hongji 陆宏基, Dunhuang shehui jingji wenxian zhenji shilu 敦煌社會經濟文献真蹟釋錄 (hereafter as Shilu) 5 volumes (Beijing: Shumu wenxian, 1986–1990), vol. 4, 291–92.
36 P.2594+P.2864. This poem is transcribed in Tingliang, Yan “Baiquege xinjiao bing xu”《白雀歌》新校並序, Dunhuang xue jikan 16.2 (1989), 60–69Google Scholar. On early examples of panegyric poem, see Fusheng Wu, Written at the Imperial Command: Panegyric Poetry in Early Medieval China (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2009). The genre of ge (song) is discussed in Ge Xiaoyin 葛曉音, “Chu sheng Tang qiyan gexing de fazhang” 初盛唐七言歌行的發展, Wenxu yichan, 1997.5, 47–61. See also Cai Yijiang 蔡義江, “Shuo gexing,” 說歌行 Wenshi zhishi, 2002.10, 4–15.
37 See Wen Daya 溫大雅, Da Tang chuangye qiju zhu 大唐創業起居注 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1983), 1.13.
38 See Yu Xin 余欣, “Furui yu difang zhengquan de hefaxing goujian: Guiyijun shiqi Dunhuang ruiying kao” 符瑞與地方政權的合法性構建：歸義軍時期敦煌瑞應考, Zhonghua wenshi luncong 100.4 (2010), 249–56.
39 Rong Xinjiang, Eighteen Lectures of Dunhuang, 25.
40 Yan, “Baiquege xinjiao bing xu,” 63. The writer is not well-known elsewhere. There are attempts at identifying this name with more famous figures in the history of Dunhuang, but these identifications remain conjectural. For existing research on this issue, see Yu, “Furui yu difang zhengquan de hefaxing geoujian,” 351–52.
41 The term zhongxing was used to mean a period of re-established splendor. In actual practice, however, it could mean at least two things: either the resurgence within a single polity or the claimed “continuation” by what was in fact a different polity. For a comprehensive study of the idea of zhongxing in Chinese history, see Wright, Mary, The last Stand of Chinese Conservatism: The Tʻung-chih Restoration, 1862–1874 (Palo Alto: Stanford University Press, 1957), 43–67Google Scholar.
42 Lewis, Mark Edward, China Between Empires: The Northern and Southern Dynasties (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Press, 2009), 74CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a history of the “Five Liangs,” see Qi Chenjun 齊陳駿, Lu Qingfu 陸慶夫, and Guo Feng 郭鋒, Wuliang shilue 五涼史略 (Lanzhou: Gansu renmin, 1988).
43 For example, see poems preserved in P.2672 and poem number ten in the “Twenty Songs of Dunhuang” preserved in P.3929; see Xu, Dunhuang shiji canjuan jikao, 659 and 164.
44 James Hamilton, “Le pays des Tchong-yun, Čungul, ou Cumḍa au Xe siècle,” Journal Asiatique 265.3–4 (1977), 351–79.
45 For the trade relations between Khotan and Dunhuang, see Hansen, Valerie, “The Tribute Trade with Khotan in Light of Materials Found at the Dunhuang Library Cave,” Bulletin of the Asia Institute 19 (2005), 37–46Google Scholar.
46 Takao, Moriyasu, “The Sha-chou Uighurs and the West Uighur Kingdom,” Acta Asiatica 78 (2000), 28–48Google Scholar.
47 For an edition of the entire poem, see Yan Tingliang, “Longquan shenjiange xinjiao bing xu”《龍泉神劍歌》新校並序, Gansu shehui kexue 1994.4, 108–12, with additional notes on page 59. While this is not the task of this article, I want to emphasize that it is necessary to have a real critical edition of the text, because previous editors of the text such as Yan Tingliang aimed at producing a “correct” version. On the other hand, I argue that the errors and erasures are not merely distractions. Rather, they offer a chance to look at the process of the production of a political/literary work. According to my examination of the original manuscript at the Bibliothèque nationale de France in August 2013, there are several types of editorial work: 1. circling and blackening, 2. interlineal addition, 3. long vertical line, 4. interlineal correction, 5.overwriting. These editorial steps seem to have been taken by different people. For example, three references to Zhang Yichao were erased in this poem, making the final edition much more focused on Zhang Chengfeng and not Zhang Yichao. For a discussion of editorial procedures in Dunhuang manuscripts, see Nugent, Christopher, “The Lady and Her Scribes: Dealing with the Multiple Dunhuang Copies of Wei Zhuang's ‘Lament of the Lady of Qin,’” Asia Major 20 (2007), 25–73Google Scholar; Imre Galambos, “Correction marks in the Dunhuang manuscripts,” in Studies in Chinese Manuscripts: From the Warring States Period to the 20th Century, edited by Imre Galambos (Budapest: Institute of East Asian Studies, Eötvös Loránd University, 2013), 191–210. All the readings of Dunhuang documents are my own based on original manuscripts.
48 It appeared, for instance, in the biography of Zhang Hua 張華 in the Western Jin dynasty (266–316) as giving out a purple aura that signified political prosperity. See Jinshu 晉書 (648) compiled by Fang Xuanling 房玄齡 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1974), 36.1075–76.
49 For the symbolism of sword in China, see Cutter, Robert, “‘Well, how'd you become king, then?’ Swords in Early Medieval China,” Journal of American Oriental Society 132.4 (2012), 523–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
50 Yan, “Longquan shenjiange xinjiao bing xu,” 109.
51 This manuscript is broken into two pieces, P.4632 and P.4631. See Shilu 4.291–2.
52 In the bureaucracy of late-Tang military, an “unofficial commander (san bingmashi)” has the title of a commander (bingmashi) but is not allowed to actually lead an army. See Zhang Guogang 張國剛, “Tangdai fanzhen junjiang zhiji kaolue” 唐代藩鎮軍將職級考略, Xueshu yuekan 1989.5, 74. Charles Hucker translates yaya 押衙 as “Lackey, categorical designation of non-official hirelings used for menial work in units of territorial administration.” See Hucker, A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1985), 576. While Hucker's translations of official titles are for the most part useful, here it is quite clear that yaya in the tenth century designated an office much more prominent than a mere “lackey.” See Zhang, “Tangdai fanzhen junjiang zhiji kaolue,” 75–76.
53 This text is found in P.3405. My reading is based on the photo accessed from the International Dunhuang Project website (http://idp.bl.uk/).
54 Rong Xinjiang, Guiyijun shi yanjiu, 222–28.
55 For an edition of the text, see Yan Tingliang, “Shazhou baixing yiwanren shang Huihu Tiankehan zhuang xinjiao bingxu”《沙州百姓一萬人上回鶻天可汗狀》新校並序, Lanzhou jiaoyu xueyuan xuebao, 1994.1, 3–9. See also Shilu, 4.381–3.
56 Taibao was the honorific title Zhang Yichao received upon his death in Chang'an. In the Tang dynasty, Taibao was one among the “Three Preceptors (san shi 三師)” and one of the highest official posts with a 1a rank; see Hucker, A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China, 480. This was the highest post that Zhang Yichao attained, and after Zhang's death, Dunhuang documents generally referred to him as Taibao; see Rong Xinjiang, Guiyijun shi yanjiu, 72–78.
57 See Tang Geng'ou's 唐耕耦 entry in Ji Xianlin 季羡林 ed., Dunhuangxue dacidian 敦煌学大辞典 (Shanghai: Shanghai cishu, 1998), 379.
58 Shilu 4.386.
59 Zheng Binglin 鄭炳林, “Tang wudai dunhuang de suteren yu guiyijun zhengquan,” 唐五代敦煌的粟特人与归义军政权, Dunhuang Yanjiu, 1996.4, 80–96.
60 S.1563 “Royal Decree Issued by the King of Dunhuang of Western Han in 914.” See Shilu 4.64.
61 It might be of some interest that the house that replaced Zhang was Cao. Cao Yijin and An Huaide could both have been of Sogdian origin, and perhaps the opposition Zhang Chengfeng faced was a Sogdian faction?
62 Rong Xinjiang, Guiyijun shi yanjiu, 309–28.
63 不說別郡諸州，唯論瓜沙兩郡。There are two copies of the same text. In S.5693 only the beginning is extent, while a much more complete version is preserved in P.3721. See Shilu 1.79–82.
64 For examples see Teiser, Stephen, The Scripture on the Ten Kings and the Making of Purgatory in Medieval Chinese Buddhism (Honululu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 1994)Google Scholar; Nugent, Christopher, Manifest in Words, Written on Paper: Producing and Circulating Poetry in Tang Dynasty China (Cambridge MA: Harvard University Asia Center, 2010)Google Scholar.
65 Johannes Kurz has already pointed out that Ouyang Xiu had clear interest in upholding the legitimacy of the “Five Dynasties” and condemning that of the “Ten Kingdoms.” See “Problematische Zeiten: Die Fünf Dynastien und Zehn Staaten in Chinas 10. Jahrhundert,” in Zeitenwenden: Historische Brüche in asiatischen und afrikanischen Gesellschaften, edited by Sven Sellmer and Horst Brinkhaus (Hamburg: E.B. Verlag, 2002), 273–90.
66 Xin wudaishi, 914–15.
67 Kurz, “Problematische Zeiten.”
68 Liu Pujiang 刘浦江, “Zhengtonglun xia de wudai shiguan” 正統論下的五代史觀, Tang yanjiu 11 (2005), 73–94.
69 See the chapters by Naomi Standen and Hugh Clark in Cambridge History of China, Volume 5: The Sung Dynasty and its Precursors, 907–1279, edited by Denis Twitchett and Paul Jakov Smith (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009), 38–205.
70 Clark, Hugh, “Why Does the Tang-Song Interregnum Matter? A Focus on the Economies of the South,” Journal of Song-Yuan Studies 46 (2016), 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
71 Unlike most of the polities in China proper, Dunhuang was cut off militarily from the center of state power in north China. Any reaction to the fall of the Tang observable in Dunhuang must have had more to do with ideology than military or strategic considerations. The fact that, as I would argue, Dunhuang did react to the end of the Tang attests to the strength of the imagination of the world-order developed under the Tang.
72 Hongjie, Wang, Power and Politics in Tenth-Century China: The Former Shu Regime (Amherst: Cambria Press), 2011Google Scholar.
73 See Chen Xin 陈欣 “Nanhan guoshi” 南汉国史 (PhD diss., Jinan University, 2009). Interestingly, just as Dunhuang used the Five Liangs as an historical precedent of a local state, the history of the empire of Southern Han was similarly used in the nineteenth century; see Steven Miles, “Rewriting the Southern Han (917–971): The Production of Local Culture in Nineteenth–Century Guangzhou,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 62.1 (2002), 39–75. Johannes Kurz already noticed the similarities between Former Shu and Southern Han, and their differences from the other “Ten Kingdoms.” He called these two states empires (Kaiserreiche); see Kurz, “Problematische Zeiten.” I would add Dunhuang to this list and point out that there are important differences between this type of “local empire” and other empires in the core areas of early Chinese Empires. Most significantly, the “local empires” usually only had local territorial ambitions that did not include conquering north China, the traditional heartland of the Han and the Tang dynasties.
74 Zizhi tongjian 資治通鑒 (1084), comp. by Sima Guang 司馬光 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1977), 8799.
75 Xin Wudaishi, 63.787.
76 Jiu Wudaishi, 136.1819.
77 See Gou Yanqing 句延慶, Jinli qijiu zhuan 錦里耆舊傳 in Wudai shishu huibian 五代史書彙編 edited by Fu Xuancong 傅璇琮, et al. (Hangzhou: Hanzhou, 2004), 10.6028.
78 See Zhang Tangying 張唐英, Shu Taowu 蜀檮杌, in Wudai shishu huibian, 10.6074.
79 Jinli qiujiu zhuan, in Wudai shishu huibian, 10.6034.
80 Jinli qiujiu zhuan, in Wudai shishu huibian 10.6036.
81 仲謀方爭攘之時，猶知有漢. In Shiguo chunqiu 十國春秋 (1669), comp. by Wu Renchen 吳任臣 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1983), 77.1073.
82 This story is pieced together from two accounts. See Qian Yan 錢儼 Wuyue beishi 吳越備史 (Sibu congkan edition, 1934) 1.40b and Xin Wudai shi 67.839.
83 Liu Wensuo 劉文鎖, “Nan Han Gaozu tianhuang dadi aice wen kaoshi: jianshuo liushi xianzu xuetong wenti” 南漢《高祖天皇大帝哀冊文》考釋——兼說劉氏先祖血統問題, Hanxue yanjiu 26.2 (2008), 285–316.
84 Tao Yu 陶岳, Wudai shi bu 五代史補 (1012) (Yuzhang congshu edition, 1923), 2.5b.
85 Indeed, there are many other similarities in the state-building efforts between Min and Dunhuang. See Hugh Clark, “Quanzhou (Fujian) during the Tang-Song Interregnum, 879–978,” T'oung Pao 68.1/3 (1982), 132–49. I thank one anonymous reviewer for pointing me to this work.
86 See Davis, Richard, From Warhorses to Ploughshares: The Later Tang Reign of Emperor Mingzong (Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 2014), 10–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and Johannes Kurz, “On the Southern Tang Imperial Genealogy,” Journal of the American Oriental Society 134.4 (2014), 601–20. I thank one anonymous reviewer for pointing me to these works.
87 Standen, “The Five Dynasties.”
88 For the claim of the king of Khotan as “king of kings of China,” see Prods O. Skjærvø, Khotanese Manuscripts from Chinese Turkestan in the British Library: A Complete Catalogue with Texts and Translations (London: British Library, 2002), 551–53, and Xin Wen, “King of Kings of China: Khotan and the Imagination of Political ‘China’ after the Fall of the Tang,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies (forthcoming). For the claim of the Korea as Majin (摩震 ＜ 摩訶震旦< Skt. Mahācīnasthāna meaning “great China-land”), see Kim Pu-sik 金富軾, Samguk sagi 三國史記 (Seoul: Hangilsa, 1998), 326.
89 For the centrality of the Khitan state, see, for example, Hansen, Valerie, “International Gifting and the Kitan World, 907–1125,” Journal of Song-Yuan Studies 43 (2013), 273–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
90 I would suggest that the “Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms” concept is mostly still useful as a way of understanding Song historical thinking. As Hugh Clark shows in a series of recent articles, the “Tang-Song Interregnum” idea works beautifully as an organizing framework for the understanding of social, cultural, and economic change in places like South China. See Clark, Hugh, “Why Does the Tang-Song Interregnum Matter?: A Focus on the Economies of the South” Journal of Song-Yuan Studies 46 (2016), 1–28CrossRefGoogle Scholar, “Why Does the Tang-Song Interregnum Matter? Part Two: The Social and Cultural Initiatives of the South, ” Journal of Song-Yuan Studies 47 (2017–18), 1–31, and “Why Does the Tang-Song Interregnum Matter? Part Three: The Legacy of Division and the Holistic Empire,” Journal of Song-Yuan Studies 49 (2020), 1–44.
91 Lien-sheng, Yang, “A ‘Posthumous Letter’ From the Chin Emperor to the Khitan Emperor in 942,” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 10 (1947), 418–28Google Scholar.
92 Lorge, Peter, “Introduction,” in Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms, edited by Lorge, Peter (Hong Kong: Chinese University Press, 2011), 7CrossRefGoogle Scholar.