University of Virginia Library

CHAPTER III

HUAN K'UAN AS PROSE WRITER

§ 1. Stylistic Features

"Pre-Confucian" literature was in style terse, simple and direct.
As authentic examples there remain the Shih-ching and parts at
least of the Shu-ching. After the Ch'un Ch'iu[173] period (VIIIth—Vth
cents. B.C.) and especially in the era of the Warring States[174]
(Vth—IIIrd cents. B.C.) came the introduction, then the general
prevalence, of an involved, prolix, and ornate style. Due to the
so-called southern influence, the school of Ch'u,[175] and the "diplomats",
shuo-k'o,[176] the one exemplified in the Chuang-tzŭ[177] and the Li Sao[178]
of Ch'ü Yüan,[179] the other in the discourses of Su Ch'in[180] and
Chang Yi,[181] and the celebrated memorial of Li Ssŭ[182] on the employment
of "foreigners" in the state,[183] a more poetic and emotional
style developed. In the philosophical writings of the schools of Lu
and Ch'i[184] in the ante-Han period, structure is subordinated to
logical exposition.[185]

Chia I[186] is the typical writer of the early Han. His style is
held by the lettered to be one of the most beautiful of all Chinese
literature. He already manifests a tendency towards the erudite style,
with frequent references to names famous in history and tradition.
By Wu-ti's time this characteristic became emphasized. Two types
of literary allusion appear. One takes the form of brief aphorisms,
upon which the argument is developed as a preacher does with his

"text". Or again the style assumes the form of a literary mosaic
harmoniously pieced together by means of sentences and phrases
culled from a variety of sources. The latter stylistic method undoubtedly
became more favored by Huan K'uan's time with the
rising tide of literary production, as well as because of the recovered
writings of the pre-Ch'in period, furnishing a vast treasury to draw
upon. The literary renaissance of the early Han produced material
which rapidly became stereotyped in its frequency of usage.

The new erudite style depended largely upon quotations from the
writings of the Confucian school, later to become the "canonical"
books. Well known authors provided further material. The writers
of the time indicated their reverence for the old as advocated by
the Great Sage himself, by "transmitting antiquity".[187] The abundance
of classical allusions and historical references led to their later often
absurd applications. The work of Huan K'uan reflects in their
entirety these marked literary characteristics of his time.[188] His
Yen T'ieh Lun combines the style of the discourses of the Warring
States and the didactic style of the philosophers; while the influence
of the revival of the "old learning" in the early Han, with its
reverence for the writings attributed to Confucius and his followers,
is clearly discernible.

A noteworthy feature of Chinese prose style is the binome or
synonym-compound. Two simple monosyllabic words with the same,
or at least analogous, meanings are joined together to form a single
idea. While this device is already found in the Mencius, the two
words forming the binome still may usually be translated singly, i.e,
each with its original meaning. The synonym-compound as employed
by Huan K'uan furnishes a formidable difficulty to the translator.
The two words yen t'ieh in the title of the work itself, literally
"salt-iron", actually connote "state monopoly of national resources",

and illustrate the fondness of the Chinese writer for the balance of
two complementary words or phrases.[189] This linguistic phenomenon
doubtless indicates a significant trend in the development of the essentially
monosyllabic Chinese language.[190] In many cases the literal
translation of the binome is superfluous. For example, chün and
kuo, "provinces and demesnes", are almost invariably placed together,
by literary habit, as it were. The question arises whether the binome
represents a natural development of the language in an unconscious
attempt to escape the difficulties of homophony; or as might be the
case in relation to the written language, which appeals the eye only
and not the ear, simply an affection of style.

The former hypothesis has some justification, for Chinese prose
was sufficiently young to have escaped, as yet, on the whole, the
later processes of "fossilisation", by being divorced from the actual
spoken language.[191] The prose of the Han era, influenced doubtless
by the older literature, brought to light in the "revival of antiquity"
was simple in style. In discourses such as those of Chia I or as in
Huai-nan-tzŭ, the style followed the Lun-yü or the Mêng-tzŭ. In
narratives as found in the Shih-chi or the Ch'ien-han-shu, the Tso-chuan
or Kuo-yü formed the models. The prose literature of the

time, though not identical with the spoken language of the people,
retained much of the natural grammar and construction. In fact,
in many cases, the spoken language was partially employed and
incorporated in written forms. Instances of this are found in the
Shih-chi and Ch'ien-han-shu.[192] Thus, while the prose of Ssŭ-ma
Hsiang-ju (d. B.C. 117) is already indicative of the "fossilization"
of Chinese writing, Huan K'uan at least in his liberal use of the
binome retained touch with the spoken language.

§ 2. The Citatory Element

A study of the composition of the Yen T'ieh Lun discloses a
valuable deposit of material[193] indicative of the literary resources
available to the Chinese writer of the first century before the
Christian era. The intellectual backgrounds of the men of letters of
the time are made clear through their marked predilection for the
use of quotation and allusion. Our own medieval scholastics, "well
read in the Latin writers", scarcely equalled in resourcefulness and
versatility the literary giants of China, who could at will dig down
into the colossal literature of all preceding time and extract an
historical or literary similitude to round out their thought. Stereotyped
and dogmatic quotation makes its appearance particularly
since the Middle Han period, together with cadenced sentence and
topical parallelism. Such early Han writers as Chia I[194] or Ch'ao
Ts'o,[195] and their successor Tung Chung-shu,[196] are not found to employ
the quotation as a mere literary affectation, but as the necessary
basis upon which an argument should rest.

An examination of the borrowed material, the bagage littéraire,
of Huan K'uan in his complete sixty chapters discloses some one
hundred and twenty-nine direct citations from at least twenty different

sources. These frequently represent variants from the present-day
texts.[197] In the Yen T'ieh Lun it is noteworthy that about four-fifths
(over ninety) of the quotations emanate from the side of the
Worthies and Scholars, the Hsien-liang and Wên-hsüeh.[198] Of the
entire number, thirty citations are identified as from the Lun-yü
to which may be added seven ascribed generally to K'ung Tzŭ.[199]
Ten are from the Mêng-tzŭ;[200] thirty-three from the Shih-ching and
eighteen from the Ch'un-ch'iu (9)[201] and its commentaries (9).[202] The
remaining represent direct quotations from the 1-ching (6),[203] the
Shang-shu (2)[204] [Shu-ching],[205] T'ai Kung (1),[206] Kuan Tzŭ (4),[207]
 Lao  Tzŭ (3),[208] Yen Tzŭ (1),[209] Kung-sun Lung (1),[210] Lu Lien (1)[211]
[Lu Chung-lien],[212] Yang Tzŭ (1)[213] [Yang Hu or Huo],[214] Sun
Tzŭ (1)[215] [Hsün Tzŭ],[216] Han Tzŭ (1)[217] [Han Fei],[218] Chia I (1),[219]
and Ssŭ-ma Ch'ien (1).[220] These are all introduced by [OMITTED],
[OMITTED], or [OMITTED]. Seven are ascribed to popular sayings.[221]

A number of personages are mentioned in the text but with no
citations from the works attributed to them. We look in vain for
the name of the brilliant Chuang tzŭ.[222] The perhaps apocryphal
Su Ch'in[223] and Chang I,[224] whose speeches enliven the Chan-kuo-ts'ê[225]
and are repeated in the Shih-chi, are made to appear in the mise
en scène, but provide nothing for the argument. Tung-fang So[226] is
mentioned twice, but not Tung Chung-shu, and neither are quoted.

A chapter for each is devoted to Shang Yang[227] and Ch'ao Ts'o[228]
but no acknowledged quotations appear from the works accredited
to them. Neither the Chan-kuo-ts'ê, the Han-shih-wai-chuan,[229] or the
Kuo-yü[230] is cited by name. Yet the six hundred and twenty-five
authors and their works listed in the bibliographical section of the
Ch'ien-han-shu indicate the volume of literature which may have
been available to Huan K'uan. There are accordingly interesting
and unexplained lacunae in the citations.

Various conclusions may be drawn from this survey. The author's
later editors take it that "he enlarged upon and expanded the ideas
set forth in the debate in order to form a school of thought."[231] The
supposition is then that the compilation is not a verbatim report,
recorded by Huan K'uan at the time of the great forum of 81 B.C.
On the one hand, accordingly, it may be assumed that the compiler
of the Lun had access to no other material than the authorities
actually cited in his text. Many works had been destroyed in the
first "bibliothecal catastrophe", the holocaust of literature instigated
by Ch'in Shih Huang-ti's minister Li Ssŭ (213 B.C.). During the
disorders which followed the fall of the Ch'in house, and the struggle
between Han and Ch'u, most of the great cities were burned. These
were the seats of the feudal princes, many of whom as literary
Maecenases, such as the later Liu Tê, Prince of Ho-chien,[232] had
made collections of books. The country-side, too, was ravaged by
the armies of the generals contending for the Empire.

Only a century or less before Huan K'uan, the law for the
suppression of literary works was formally repealed (191 B.C.).
Despite vigorous efforts made to recover the ancient writings, even
towards the close of the first century B.C. many works were still
wanting and others incomplete. It remained for Liu Hsiang[233] and
his son Liu Hsin[234] in that time to restore the national library as
represented in the catalogue of the Ch'ien-han-shu. Even if works
lay buried in the Imperial archives, as appears to have been the

case of the Tso-chuan,[235] Huan K'uan unlike the Grand Astrologer
Ssŭ-ma Ch'ien and his successor the Archivist Liu Hsin, may not
have gained access to them, though residing at the capital as a
lang.[236] Later as a provincial t'ai-shou-ch'êng at Lu Chiang the
presumption is that he would be without easy access even to
standard material.

On the other hand, with a voluminous and varied literature
already in existence and accessible, the author seems likely to have
restricted his references to such works as were immediately pertinent
to his argument. Moreover as an adherent of the Han ju school,
he would defer to those works which, while not yet formally elevated
to the Canon, where the only primary sources from which
to draw lofty moral precepts and sound principles of government.
The scholar disdained to make use of those writers who "at times
deny the teaching of the classics and criticize the sages, and at
times glorify spiritual beings and gods and put faith in prodigies."[237]
This explains the paucity of quotations or complete disregard of
the writings of the economic and jurist school, such as represented
by the Kuan-tzŭ, the Shang-chün-shu, and the Han-fei-tzŭ, works
in circulation in Ssŭ-ma Ch'ien's time.[238]

Huan K'uan was steeped in the Kung-yang commentary[239] of the
Ch'un-ch'iu.[240] Hence after the apostolic Shih-ching and Lun-yü,
the greatest number of references attach to this work, which so
engrossed the earlier Han scholars. Seven of the quotations assigned
to the Ch'un-ch'iu derive from the famous commentary itself.

None of the ascriptions to the Chuan are derived from the Tso-chuan,
although the Ch'ien-han-shu[241] indicates that the latter was in
circulation in Ching-ti's time (156—141 B.C.). With four-fifths of the
quotations belonging to the Confucian bibliography, and half of these
from the Shih-ching and the Lun-yü, these two works appear thus
to have already formed the vademecum of the scholar of the time.
Contrasted with seeming carelessness in other directions, both of
these works are quoted on the whole accurately and faithfully.[242]

It is a striking fact that Huan K'uan's work reveals only one
direct quotation from the monumental compilation of his immediate
predecessor, and in part at least contemporary, the historiographer
Ssŭ-ma Ch'ien. Too, the quotation is placed in the mouth of the
Lord Grand Secretary, Sang Hung-yang, who speaks of his authority
as Ssŭ-ma Tzŭ.[243] The great historiographers's death has been determined
as occuring at the beginning of the reign of Chao-ti (86-74 B.C.).[244]
Thus it is probable that his life terminated shortly before the great
debate of the second lunar month of 81 B.C. Had the Shih-chi
been accessible to Huan K'uan, and had he chosen to make use of
it, he would have had at hand a veritable thesaurus of material
upon which to draw. Ssŭ-ma Ch'ien himself records that he placed
one copy of his work — whether on boards or silk rolls, we do not
know — in the Imperial library, and one at the Capital.[245] But the
Shih-chi, in the form completed by its compilator, appears to have

been withheld from general publication for reasons of state, until
Hsüan-ti's time (73-49 B.C.), to be again withdrawn from public
circulation in 28 B.C. Its contents represented material of a "heterodox"
and otherwise dangerous nature, in contemporary opinion.[246] Thus
only a few privileged persons could have had access to its
treasures.

It has been found, on the other hand, that the Shih-chi, though
quoted directly only once by the high officer of state, Sang Hung-yang,
yields a number of parallels to Huan K'uan's citatory passages.
But Huan K'uan's citations, notably in the case of the Lun-yü,
prove to be more faithful to the accepted (i. e. present day) texts
than those of the historiographer.[247] Ssŭ-ma Ch'ien makes a notably
limited use of the Shih-ching. Only six principal citations from this
earliest of extant Chinese literary documents have been noted by
Chavannes,[248] although others are suggested as occuring; Huan K'uan's
Yen T'ieh Lun contains no less than thirty-three direct quotations.
It may thus be concluded that Huan K'uan had available his own
collection of books, from which his citations were culled. Certain
passages in the Yen T'ieh Lun parallel in style or content the
Shih-chi.[249] This suggests little more than that these writers were
familiar with the same documents, and that both made use of much
which had become common property through oral tradition. Yet the
occurrence of an actual quotation from Ssŭ-ma Ch'ien's work, in
the words of the historiographer himself, would tend to indicate
that Huan K'uan, nevertheless, was familiar with the Shih-chi. The
caution in its use, however, would seem to corroborate the tradition
of its contemporary disfavor.

The foregoing examination of Huan K'uan's intellectual background
reveals with some certainty this early Han writer's place
in the evolution of China's school of letters. He represents, in a
word, the beginning of the Chinese scholastic mentality. The time
had arrived when the ascendancy of the "Confucian" bibliography

induced the scholars to ignore the litterature which later was to be
definitely regarded as non-canonical. Immediately before him, Ssŭ-ma
Ch'ien earned the condemnation of his own generation by an indiscriminating
eclecticism in the employment of all extant literature.
Huan K'uan's work may thus be regarded as among the earliest
influences which finally formed the Confucian canon.