Reconstruction of Yunnan’s history

For centuries, China’s governance of Yunnan was in fact only nominal, with concrete administration held in the hands of indigenous chieftains. Even the existence of frontier administrative units set up by the central authority was always unsustainable. Thus, the influence of sinicisation was surely limited.Footnote ¹⁶ However, in the Dali fuzhi 大理府志 (Dali Prefecture gazetteer) and Yunnan tongzhi 雲南通志 (General gazetteer of Yunnan), Li Yuanyang’s reconstruction of history overestimates Yunnan’s submission to central China.Footnote ¹⁷ He narrates that the Han empire established effective governance in Yunnan, with 13 officials assigned to the four newly established commanderies to administer the local population and numerous schools opened to disseminate Chinese classics, suggesting that as early as the Han Dynasty, Yunnan was already fully incorporated into China, with Chinese culture extending throughout the region. Also, he illegalises the independence of the Nanzhao and Dali kingdoms from Tang–Song China, even disparaging them as barbaric states that cut off the process of transforming local customs. Based on this, the Ming’s occupation is naturally justified as restoring Yunnan to its former cultural superiority, and the Ming’s achievement is thereby greater than that of any previous dynasties.Footnote ¹⁸

There are two distinct narrative frameworks regarding the history of Nanzhao’s founding: the Sino-centric one and the Nanzhao centric one. The former attributes Nanzhao’s success to the endorsement of the Tang authority, while the latter, on the contrary, sanctifies Nanzhao’s origin with a founding legend and strives to shake off the connection with Tang China. Of the two categories of sources on Nanzhao’s history summarised by Xiang Da 向達, the first category exclusively consists of China-centred narratives, whereas some works of the second category narrate from Nanzhao’s perspective.Footnote ¹⁹ As a Nanzhao-centred discourse probably originating from the Nanzhao tuzhuan, the founding myth possesses two significant episodes: one is that Guanyin, transforming into an Indian monk, delivered a prophecy to the first two kings of Nanzhao, Xinuluo 細奴邏 and Luoshengyan 邏盛炎, and then helped them to become sovereigns; the other is that the tribal leader Zhang Lejinqiu 張樂進求 voluntarily abdicated to Xinuluo at a ritual gathering beside an iron pillar because a bird flew from atop the pillar to rest on Xinuluo’s shoulder, which was regarded as a divine sign.Footnote ²⁰

Yet, the inclusion of the legend in an author’s composition does not represent his political orientation. For instance, Yang Shen 楊慎 (1488–1559), an erudite scholar-official who spent a lot of time investigating Yunnan history during his exile there, does not mention the episode of Guanyin’s guidance in his Dian zai ji 滇載記 (Historical records of Dian). Also, he only vaguely touches upon the abdication episode.Footnote ²¹ By contrast, in the informal record Nanzhao yeshi 南詔野史 (Unofficial history of Nanzhao) which is also attributed to him, Yang writes in more detail on both episodes. However, the Nanzhao yeshi still abounds with Sino-centric accounts: the sovereign of Baizi Guo 白子國 (White People Kingdom), Lejinqiu’s forefather Longyouna 龍佑那, was enfeoffed as a chieftain and bestowed with the surname Zhang by Zhuge Liang 諸葛亮 (181–234), who pacified Nanzhong 南中 (the south-west regions) and set up an iron pillar to mark his victory; centuries later Lejinqiu recast the pillar and offered sacrifice to it, and it was at the gathering under this pillar that Lejinqiu transferred power to Xinuluo; Lejinqiu had been enfeoffed as chief and grand general by the Tang; Xinuluo sent his son Luoshengyan to pay tribute to the Tang court and was thereby assigned as prefect of Weizhou 巍州刺史.Footnote ²²

In comparison, Li Yuanyang adheres even more closely to the China-dominated tradition. He omits Guanyin’s prophecy from the formal historical records—mainly the ‘Yange’ 沿革 (History and development) sections of both Dali fuzhi and Yunnan tongzhi—and even from the ‘Nanzhao shimo’ 南詔始末 (Rise and fall of Nanzhao) section of Yunnan tongzhi, thereby fully denying the sacredness of Nanzhao’s reign.Footnote ²³ Instead, he relegates Guanyin’s seven manifestations (qihua 七化, including his prophecy), which he derives from the Nanzhao tuzhuan, to the ‘Guaiyi’ 恠異 (Anomalies) section of the final chapter ‘Zazhi’ 雜志 (Miscellaneous accounts) of the Yunnan tongzhi, thus suggesting that these episodes were nothing more than unreliable legends.Footnote ²⁴ Moreover, in the ‘Yange’ sections, while noting that Xinuluo established himself as King Qi 奇王, Li also states that the Tang dispatched two capable generals—Wei Renshou 韋仁壽 and Liang Jianfang 梁建方—under Emperors Gaozu 高祖 and Taizong 太宗, respectively, to the Xi’erhe 西洱河 region (in central Dali) to rule the local tribes, as if implying Xinuluo’s obedience to the Tang dominion. Similarly, as for the fourth Nanzhao ruler, Piluoge 皮邏閣 (r. 728–748), Li specifies that the Tang emperor bestowed upon him the title King of Yunnan and the name Guiyi 歸義 (lit. ‘returning to righteousness’) and that, with imperial authorisation and support, he unified the other five zhao 詔 (regimes).Footnote ²⁵ Although the abdication story is retained, especially in the ‘Nanzhao shimo’, the narrative is still overwhelmingly Sino-centric since all the above-mentioned details manifesting China’s control over Yunnan, as presented in Yang Shen’s works, are woven into the account.Footnote ²⁶

Two of these details are particularly noteworthy: first, the mention of Baizi Guo and the acknowledgement of the Zhang family as sovereigns; second, the association of Zhang with Zhuge Liang. As Hou Chong suggests, a systematic account of Baizi Guo first appeared in the Baigu tongji of the early Ming Dynasty.Footnote ²⁷ The Baigu tongji and any other Bai-centric works, according to Hou’s research, were originally composed by early Bai elites in pursuit of an independent ethnic identity.Footnote ²⁸ Consequently, these elites must have striven to portray Baizi Guo as an autonomous nation of the Bai people, while rejecting narratives of Zhuge’s conquest and the Tang’s intervention. They might have also selected the Zhang clan as their spiritual leader by describing the Zhangs as the state’s monarchs. In sum, the Baizi Guo legend should be read as a Bai-centred narrative.

It seems that accounts of Baizi Guo and Zhuge Liang rarely exist in pre-Ming documents. The Nanzhao tuzhuan only claims that Zhang Lejinqiu was ‘the grand general of Yunnan’ (雲南大將軍) and ‘the grand chieftain and grand general of the Bai tribe Sandan’ (三賧白大首領大將軍), making no mention of Baizi Guo, Zhuge, or the Tang.Footnote ²⁹ Also, the Yunnan zhilüe reports very simply that Zhang Renguo 張仁果 was a chieftain of barbarians during the late Han Dynasty, and the 33rd sovereign of his clan, Lejinqiu, was eventually replaced by Xinuluo, who thereafter named his state Da Meng 大蒙 (Great Meng) and called himself King Qi. But neither Baizi Guo, Zhuge, nor Longyouna is mentioned.Footnote ³⁰ Even the Yunnan tujing zhishu 雲南圖經志書 (Gazetteer of Yunnan with illustrations and maps)—the earliest extant provincial gazetteer of Yunnan, compiled by the Ming government during the Jingtai 景泰 era (1450–1457)—acknowledges the region’s long-standing autonomy prior to Ming rule.Footnote ³¹ Moreover, its historical records make no mention of Baizi Guo or the Zhang lineage, though Zhuge’s southern campaign is briefly noted.Footnote ³² Only in the ‘Renwu’ 人物 (Notable figures) section of Dali Prefecture does it list Zhang Renguo, who established a Bai kingdom at Baiya 白崖 during the late Han Dynasty, and his 33rd-generation descendant, Zhang Lejinqiu, who was enfeoffed as chieftain by the Tang and served as grand general.Footnote ³³

By contrast, from the sixteenth century onwards, the Ming Dynasty scholars, of whom Yang Shen and Li Yuanyang were representatives, began to enrich their accounts and present a strong Sino-centric orientation. On the one hand, they adopted the Baizi Guo legend and the recognition of the Zhang lineage as Bai rulers; on the other hand, they simultaneously implanted Zhang’s connection with Zhuge Liang and the Tang (which might have been invented by them)Footnote ³⁴ to dilute the Bai- (or Nanzhao-) centred narratives. Furthermore, Li was eager to discover historical sites as proof of Zhuge’s campaign in Yunnan. In both Dali fuzhi and Yunnan tongzhi, he writes under the entry for an iron pillar in Baiya, southern Zhaozhou 趙州 (the location of this pillar belonging to present-day Midu County 彌渡縣, where it still stands), that the pillar was established by Zhuge to commemorate his military achievements following the capture of Meng Huo 孟獲. He further identifies this pillar as the one featured in the abdication tale. Also, he inserts a notable plot in which Lejinqiu admires Zhuge’s merits and therefore has the pillar recast.Footnote ³⁵ In this way, Li may be implying that the divine sign was bestowed by Zhuge, rather than by Guanyin. However, according to the Dali xingji 大理行記 (Record of travels to Dali), a Yuan Dynasty record by the imperial inspector Guo Songnian 郭松年 based on his investigative tour in Yunnan, this pillar was in fact erected by the Nanzhao emperor Shilong 世隆 (r. 859–877), as explicitly stated by the inscription on it. Guo particularly notes that some people believed the pillar had been set up by Zhuge, but he immediately clarifies that this is a misconception.Footnote ³⁶

In addition, Li Yuanyang reconstructs the whole history of Baizi Guo in the section ‘Baiguo shimo’ 白國始末 (Rise and fall of the White Kingdom) of Yunnan tongzhi. Apart from Zhuge enfeoffing Longyouna and Lejinqiu abdicating to Xinuluo, for the Han times he records that at first Zhang Renguo was granted the title King of Dian by the Han emperor, but later when the emperor worried about Zhang’s potential threat and thereby dispatched a general to Yunnan, Zhang submitted and his kingdom was transformed as Yizhou Commandery 益州郡.Footnote ³⁷ Hence, Li’s narratives put Baizi Guo and early Nanzhao (i.e. Yunnan’s history from the Han to early Tang periods) fully under the orthodox Chinese governance. The tradition of affirming Yunnan’s subordination to the central Chinese state persisted into later periods. For example, the Dian zhi presents Yunnan as an integral part of China throughout history, while expressing indignation at the ‘illegitimate’ seizure by the Meng and Duan lineages. It documents the events of Zhang Renguo’s assertion of kingship at Baiya and his subsequent submission to the Han; Zhuge’s enfeoffment of Longyouna, who was the ruler of Baizi Guo, and conferment of the Zhang surname; and the Tang court’s appointment of Zhang Lejinqiu as chieftain and grand general.Footnote ³⁸ The text further asserts that schools were established as early as the Han Dynasty but destroyed during the Tianbao 天寶 era (742–756), implying that the rise of Nanzhao and Dali interrupted the region’s civilisational continuity. While the Yuan Dynasty was credited with opening Confucian temples, it was the Ming that most actively and effectively promoted education.Footnote ³⁹ Additionally, the Dian zhi identifies the iron pillar as a monument to Zhuge’s expedition, while relegating Guanyin’s manifestations to the ‘Lingyi’ 靈異 (Supernatural phenomena) section—thereby casting them as implausible and unorthodox.Footnote ⁴⁰ All these narrative strategies closely resemble those employed in Li Yuanyang’s gazetteers.

Harmonisation of Buddhism and Confucianism

Surprisingly, Li Yuanyang traces the ancestry of Baizi Guo to the great Buddhist king Ayu Wang 阿育王 (Ashoka), who was also called Baifan Wang 白飯王 (White Rice King) because he followed Buddhist doctrines by abhorring killing and only eating white rice.Footnote ⁴¹ Moreover, Li mentions more than once that Dali was originally within the territory of Tianzhu 天竺 (ancient India) under the enfeoffment of Ashoka. He also perceives several prominent scenic spots of Dali as holy sites in Buddhist canons; for example, Mount Diancang 點蒼山 (also Mount Cangshan 蒼山) as Mount Lingjiu 靈鷲 (Gridhrakūta) where Buddha Shakyamuni preached the Lotus Sutra, the Xi’er River as the Henghe 恆河 (Ganges), and Mount Jizu 雞足山 as the place where Jiaye 迦葉 (Mahākāśyapa) entered samadhi while guarding the Buddha’s kasaya until Mile 彌勒 (Maitreya) Buddha appears.Footnote ⁴² This seems contradictory to Li’s Sino-centric views, but actually can be explained if we understand that for the pre-Han history of Dali, Li employs two narrative systems: the historical one and the mythological one.

In the ‘Yange’ section, which is an overall account of the orthodox history, the historical narration is used. As he states, Dali belonged to Liangzhou 梁州 from prehistorical times to the Shang Dynasty. In the Zhou Dynasty, Liangzhou was incorporated into Yongzhou 雍州, so Dali was a part of Yongzhou. Later, since Yunnan was conquered by the Chu general Zhuang Qiao 莊蹻, Dali was consequently subdued to the Chu state. After the Qin’s unification, Dali was placed under imperial control.Footnote ⁴³ Besides, to testify that Yunnan belonged to Liangzhou, Li conducted an evidential study demonstrating that the term Heishui 黑水 (Black River) in the passage ‘[the regions bordered by] the southern side of Mount Hua and the Black River constitute Liangzhou’ (華陽黑水惟梁州) from the ‘Yu gong’ 禹貢 (Tribute of Yu) chapter of the classic Shangshu 尚書 (Book of documents) refers to the Lancang River 瀾滄江.Footnote ⁴⁴ By contrast, the mythological narration is applied in less formal accounts, such as the ‘Shanchuan’ 山川 (Mountains and rivers) section of gazetteers, the description of scenic sites in essays, and the history of regional regimes (like Baizi Guo)—Li’s references to India discussed above all fall into this category. Additionally, he introduces local legends in the ‘Guaiyi’ section of Yunnan tongzhi. A very popular one is that Guanyin subjugated Luocha 羅剎 (the Rakshasa) before transforming Dali into a human realm.Footnote ⁴⁵ Li would regard it only as a weird (maybe also interesting) tale but would certainly not attribute Dali’s historical origins to the guidance of Guanyin.

These two parallel narratives are similarly employed in later gazetteers. For instance, the Zhaozhou zhi 趙州志 (Gazetteer of Zhaozhou; Zhaozhou being a sub-prefecture under Dali, located in present-day Fengyi town 鳳儀鎮), compiled by the magistrate Zhuang Cheng 莊誠 around 1587, cites Li Yuanyang’s historical accounts in its ‘Yange’ section. In recounting the specific events of ‘Yange’, it also includes the previously discussed Baizi Guo, Zhuge Liang, and the Zhang lineage. By contrast, the final chapter, ‘Zazhi’, incorporates more mytho-Buddhist narratives: that after Guanyin opened up Dali by dispersing the floodwaters, two cranes guided the people to settle on the newly emerged land; that Ashoka enfeoffed his second son in the Cangshan and Erhai 洱海 region, and this son, known as Baifan Wang, became the ancestor of the Bai kingdom; and that his descendant Zhang Renguo was appointed the ruler of Dian by the Han emperor.Footnote ⁴⁶ Additionally, the Chongxiu Dengchuan zhou zhi 重修鄧川州誌 (Recompiled gazetteer of Dengchuan Sub-Prefecture; Dengchuan being another sub-prefecture under Dali, in present-day Dengchuan town), compiled by Ai Zixiu 艾自修, a native of Dengchuan, in the twilight years of the Ming Dynasty, strongly underscores the role of local gazetteers in upholding orthodox morals and restoring social order during periods of turmoil.Footnote ⁴⁷ Accordingly, its ‘Yange’ part recounts Yunnan’s continuous belonging to China throughout historical times. Meanwhile, Buddhist tales appear only in its ‘Guji’ 古蹟 (Antiquities) section, such as Jiaye guarding the kasaya on Mount Jizu; Guanyin, in the form of a commoner, teaching Buddhist doctrines; and local people claiming descent from Baifan Wang.Footnote ⁴⁸

Li Yuanyang’s turn to Buddhist India in his mythological narration serves no other purpose than to enhance Dali’s historical and cultural status. A case in point is Mount Diancang. A poem by Zhang Laiyi 張來儀, a scholar of the late Yuan to early Ming periods, acknowledges that the mountain lay beyond the purview of Confucian classics and outside the dominion of great emperors of ancient times.Footnote ⁴⁹ Yet, Li in his essay seeks to associate the mountain with Chinese history by citing these events: (1) it is referenced in a commentary on the Xu Han shu 續漢書 (Continued history of the Han); (2) it was unlawfully occupied by the Meng regime, which consecrated it as the Central Peak; (3) the Tang envoy Cui Zuoshi 崔佐時 formed an alliance with Nanzhao at Cangshan; (4) stone from the mountain was used by the Tang statesman and poet Li Deyu 李德裕 (787–850) as sobriety stone in his villa; (5) Emperor Taizu of Song 宋太祖 (r. 960–976) formally renounced all claims to this territory.Footnote ⁵⁰ However, the mention of the mountain in the Xu Han shu is probably Li’s own interpretative reading, and Li Deyu’s appreciation for the stone appears merely anecdotal, while any connections with Nanzhao and the Song’s relinquishment are surely inglorious. Now that Dali lacks substantive historical ties with China, linking it with Buddhist India emerges as an alternative tactic aimed at elevating its cultural prestige. Indeed, in the same essay, Li further asserts that Mount Diancang was where the Buddha once practised asceticism, so that even the grass and rocks on it emit the fragrance of sandalwood. He also claims that Dali was previously within the borders of Tianzhu, conferred as a vassal state by Ashoka.Footnote ⁵¹

The strategy of tracing one’s origin to Buddhist India was also employed by Nanzhao rulers—through the Indian monk in the Nanzhao tuzhuan—and by early Bai elites, who depicted Baizi Guo as their independent nation descended from Ayu Wang. In these cases, however, the purpose was political: to distance themselves from Chinese influence. Some local families likewise associated their ancestry with Buddhist legends to proclaim their nobility. For example, the epitaph of a Mr Zhang portrays his clan as having been rooted in Dali since the founding of the state by Guanyin, while that of a Mr Li affirms that the Li family was brought by Guanyin to Dali from the West.Footnote ⁵² Similarly, to celebrate their long-standing tradition and reputation, local temples often claimed that they were initially built by Nanzhao kings whose rule had been bestowed by Guanyin following his subjugation of the Rakshasa and cessation of the floods.Footnote ⁵³ This strategy, therefore, should be regarded as a regional characteristic that likely originated in Nanzhao and remained widespread in Dali during the Ming period. Thus, despite his contempt for the Nanzhao regime, Li may have unwittingly inherited aspects of its Buddhist legacy. Also, to a certain extent, he accepts some Bai-centred narratives, most notably the Baizi Guo story and its origin from Ashoka.

In contrast to some literary men who chastised Buddhism as an exotic heresy in defence of the orthodoxy of Confucianism, Li respects Buddhism as a highly refined tradition and insists that these two philosophies are compatible. The civilising of barbarians is usually ascribed to Confucian teachings. Yet, Li notes that Buddhism also serves the social function of transforming indigenous customs.Footnote ⁵⁴ This observation implicitly corresponds to Guanyin’s manifestations in the Nanzhao tuzhuan, where Guanyin pacified fierce tribesmen and led them to worship his Acuoye 阿嵯耶 form.Footnote ⁵⁵ Moreover, according to a local tomb inscription from the early Ming period, the commemorated Mr Wang, erudite in Buddhist learning, was a wise and seasoned elder held in high regard by the local community. In response to the government’s plea, he worked alongside imperial officials to instruct recalcitrant indigenes and finally gained their allegiance.Footnote ⁵⁶

It is difficult to determine precisely how and when Buddhism entered Yunnan and subsequently flourished.Footnote ⁵⁷ However, it is certain that acharyas, or Azhali 阿吒力—ritual masters of a form of Esoteric Buddhism mixed with local shamanistic beliefs (known as Azhaliism, Dianmi 滇密 (Yunnan Esotericism), or Baimi 白密 (Bai Esotericism))—prevailed in Yunnan from Nanzhao to the Yuan periods. Azhaliism had some noteworthy traits. For example, it included tantric sex practice; the Azhali monks were believed to possess supernatural powers through the use of spells and mantras, and such powers were particularly employed in controlling waters and in warfare; the practitioners did not need to stay in temples, but instead they could practise at home and were allowed to marry and have children, so they were also known as zaijia seng 在家僧 (lay monks); the priesthood was hereditary, passed down from father to son, thus forming many prominent Azhali lineages in Dali.Footnote ⁵⁸ From the Ming Dynasty onwards, however, the central government launched a severe crackdown on Azhaliism alongside the reform of gaitu guiliu 改土歸流 (replacing local tribal chiefs with imperial officials), since Azhaliism contradicted orthodox teachings of Confucianism and sometimes provided support for local chieftains.Footnote ⁵⁹ Consequently, Azhaliism was gradually marginalised to lower social strata, eventually converting into a form of Benzhuism (the worship of benzhu 本主, i.e. local patron deities). On the other hand, various Han Buddhist schools expanded into Yunnan and flourished, replacing Azhaliism. After the mid Ming period, Mount Jizu developed as a sacred site for Chinese Buddhism with numerous new temples established there, while the original Azhali temples were driven and forced to relocate down the mountain.Footnote ⁶⁰

In this social context, younger generations of prominent Azhali families transformed their social status from Azhali priests to Confucian scholars.Footnote ⁶¹ Actually, Li Yuanyang was one of them. According to an anecdote, moved by compassion for the Dali people’s suffering from floods, Li—likely in his youth—consulted his grandfather, who explained that the calamity was caused by evil dragons, as the pagodas that once subdued them had fallen into ruin. The old man also told Li that their family had practised the art of controlling waters for generations but by then no longer possessed sufficient power. He therefore encouraged Li to assume this responsibility in the future.Footnote ⁶² Ironically, this account refrains from clarifying the reason for the destruction of pagodas and the loss of power, which was largely due to the Ming’s suppression of Azhaliism. Whereas Li chose to establish himself as a Confucian literatus rather than continuing his family’s career as acharyas, he nonetheless, during his retirement in Dali, made significant contributions to the construction and renovation of temples and pagodas—although these were now very probably aligned with Han Buddhist styles.Footnote ⁶³ Furthermore, probably because of his Azhali origin, Li wrote in a respectful manner the biography of He Qing 何清, an Azhali monk, recording that He earned military merit by employing magic arts during the Ming’s campaign against Luchuan 麓川 and was therefore honoured by the emperor.Footnote ⁶⁴ Conversely, He was criticised by many non-Yunnanese scholars who lacked a strong Buddhist family background as cunning and as responsible for the government’s protracted war in the south-west.Footnote ⁶⁵

Holding a dual role as both a Buddhist devotee and a Confucian scholar, Li seeks to harmonise these two religions, claiming that Buddhism and Confucianism are interconnected, pointing to the same dao (a single truth instead of two).Footnote ⁶⁶ Based on his personal experience, he reveals that through the practice of pohuo 破惑 (dispelling delusions) taught in the Lengyan jing 楞嚴經 (Śūraṅgama sutra), one can also achieve the aim of gewu zhizhi 格物致知 (investigating things to extend knowledge) as expounded in the Daxue 大學 (Great learning).Footnote ⁶⁷ Besides, he quotes the words and deeds of great Confucian scholars from previous generations. He deeply appreciates Yan Zhenqing’s 顏真卿 (709–785) statement that ‘Only through reading Buddhist texts did I truly understand Confucian principles’ (因讀佛書始知儒理). Also, when asked why he did not discuss Buddhist teachings, Sima Guang 司馬光 (1019–1086) admitted that he had learnt much from Buddhism, which helped him handle state affairs, yet to safeguard the orthodoxy of Confucianism, he could not leak this fact to others.Footnote ⁶⁸

Furthermore, Li Yuanyang dates the spread of Buddhism in China to a very distant era by reinterpreting some classical texts. In 1530, he and Yang Shen toured the cave temples in Mount Shibao 石寶山, Jianchuan 劍川. Unaware of when and how these Buddhist statues were created, Yang thought that they might have formed naturally in primordial times, so he began to doubt whether Buddhism was really first transmitted into China during the reign of Emperor Ming of Han 漢明帝 (r. 57–75).Footnote ⁶⁹ Approving of Yang’s ideas, Li further authenticated Buddhism’s long tradition by reexamining three documents: (1) Liu Xiang’s 劉向 (77–6 BCE) preface to the Liexian zhuan 列仙傳 (Biographies of immortals) states that 24 figures in this work are cited from Buddhist scriptures, so the import of Buddhism into China must have occurred before the time of Emperor Ming. (2) As recorded in the Liezi 列子, Confucius once spoke of a great sage in the West, who, Li claims, was exactly the Buddha. Hence, the Buddha was already known during the Spring and Autumn period. (3) The term ziyi 緇衣 (black garments) in the Shijing 詩經 (Book of songs), as Li judges, refers to Buddhist robes, verifying that Buddhist adherents were esteemed in China as early as the Zhou Dynasty.Footnote ⁷⁰ Of course, Li’s interpretation may not be accurate, but it is more important for us to notice his efforts to integrate Buddhism into Chinese culture by ‘discovering’ textual evidence in classical literature.

What best exemplifies Li’s reconciliation of Buddhism and Confucianism may be an anecdote from the biography of Yang Fu, which reads,

This story resolves the contradiction between monastic practice and fulfilling filial duties at home. The biography portrays Yang as erudite in both Confucian Five Classics and Buddhist scriptures, particularly praising his devotion to filial piety. Moreover, it recounts Yang’s miraculous death: through his profound Buddhist cultivation, he foretold his departure and manifested after burial to his relatives. Li then compares this with the celestial ascension of Confucian sages, not only commending Yang’s virtue, but also demonstrating a common belief appliable to both philosophical traditions.Footnote ⁷¹

However, these accounts simultaneously pose problems which Li himself may have failed to realise. When filial caregiving is recognised as a form of cultivation, this cultivation is necessarily practised at home. But practising at home rather than residing in temples is precisely the approach taken by Azhali monks. Furthermore, Yang Fu’s transcendence to immortality readily evokes the supernatural abilities associated with Azhaliism. Probably for this reason (or at least partly for this reason) these two anecdotes are both removed from Yang’s biography in the Ming shi, compiled by the Qing authorities who suppressed Azhaliism through more severe measures.Footnote ⁷²

Chinese values practised in Yunnan

In 1573, the upland communities of Tiesuoqing 鐵索(鎖)箐 (Iron Chain Gorge) and Chishiya 赤石崖 (Red Rock Cliff), which had maintained autonomy for nearly two centuries, were eventually subdued and annexed by the Ming.Footnote ⁷³ Li Yuanyang describes these communities as fierce barbarian bandits frequently harassing neighbouring lowland areas. Attempts to pacify them had all failed until the grand coordinator of Yunnan Zou Yinglong 鄒應龍 (1525–1585), a capable man with determination and tactical acumen, eliminated them in a decisive campaign.Footnote ⁷⁴ The next year, Zou ordered the construction of irrigation systems to develop local agriculture, turning previous wasteland to fertile fields. To commemorate Zou’s feat, local people built a living shrine to him, positioning his statue next to that of Zhuge Liang.Footnote ⁷⁵

As a previous study on shrines to living men (shengci 生祠) in Ming China has demonstrated, teaching and transformation alone were insufficient to earn a premortem shrine; rather, any one of the following criteria would be enough: protection of the people from banditry, implementation of infrastructure, or enhancement of local livelihoods.Footnote ⁷⁶ Nevertheless, in border regions, these four deeds tended to be integrated. Zou’s case illustrates that the suppression of bandits constituted the foundation upon which the construction of irrigation facilities was subsequently initiated, while cultural transformation and the improvement of local welfare represented the ultimate objective and outcome. Living shrines also reflected public feedback on governance: honouring a former administrator would effectively pressure the incoming one to perform well.Footnote ⁷⁷ According to Li’s records, local people established Zou’s shrine out of genuine sentiment, fulfilling the criteria for a living shrine.Footnote ⁷⁸ Thus, this shrine signified the local population’s voluntary receptivity towards the central state’s sinicisation and incorporation projects. Shrines to eminent officials (minghuan ci 名宦祠) were also built across Yunnan in Ming times. They served a similar function of exhibiting local reaction and exhorting future bureaucrats.Footnote ⁷⁹ Furthermore, Chinese cultural heroes, especially Zhuge Liang, were likewise extensively worshipped. All these shrines, whether dedicated to the deceased or the living, not merely functioned as a symbol of the righteous Chinese rule but simultaneously represented Chinese values practised in this region.

Loyalty certainly ranked among the most revered values, which was manifested by shrines to Zhuge Liang and Guan Yu 關羽 (160–220) across the south-west.Footnote ⁸⁰ One more instance is that a shrine to Liu Jun 劉俊, a military commander of the Yongle 永樂 period (1402–1424) who died in his campaign against Annan 安南 (modern Vietnam), was constructed by his brother Liu Jie 劉傑 in Dali when Jie was stationed there. More than a century later, the shrine was repaired by their descendant Liu Wei 劉維, who was then inspecting Yunnan, making Liu Jun’s heroic deeds of loyalty widely celebrated by the Dali people.Footnote ⁸¹ Benevolence was another admirable virtue. As in Zou Yinglong’s case, apart from his devotion to the imperial cause, Li particularly recounts that Zou treated the barbarians as equal humans—the crown of creation as Zou himself said, while regretting that due to a lack of proper teaching, they grew unrestrained and caused offence to the court. Also, Zou commanded his soldiers not to disturb the innocent.Footnote ⁸²

Teaching and transformation were of special significance to newly occupied areas. For a long time, it was a controversial topic whether the non-Chinese ethnic groups could be wholly transformed. In some frontier regions, the demarcation between Han Chinese immigrants and indigenes was even reinforced by the Ming authorities who attempted to identify and categorise the so-called barbarians. At the same time, some literati also reaffirmed the boundaries between Chinese and non-Chinese.Footnote ⁸³ By contrast, Li Yuanyang insists that all lands of the Ming empire are equally within the imperial cultivation and no person cannot be transformed. ‘Fidelity and trustworthiness in speech, earnest reverence in conduct’ (言忠信, 行篤敬) as admonished by Confucius, Li argues, are key qualities for the fulfilment of this mission. Therefore, when Liu Pu 劉樸, the judicial commissioner of Dali, was to be dispatched to ‘barbaric’ Guangxi as a sub-prefectural magistrate, he was confident that Liu would nurture the local peoples there (whom Li called pure-hearted persons for they had not been cultured) because he believed Liu possessed all these virtues, plus his incorruptibility and martial talent.Footnote ⁸⁴

Yet, Li disapproves of an overly eager transformation; rather, he advocates perseverance and trustworthiness as principles of sustained governance. In a farewell essay to Zhou Lu 周魯, the prefect of Dali who was set to travel to the capital for evaluation, he praises Zhou’s commitment to gradual progress instead of precipitous reforms, thus allowing the people to rest and recover, and consequently earning their trust.Footnote ⁸⁵ Moreover, Li agrees that the vast regions beyond the Lancang River were permitted to be administered by indigenous chiefs under the premise that these chiefs were recruited into the national bureaucratic system and that the boundaries of their territories were clearly defined. In this way, the tribal leaders would be satisfied with their positions and local peoples would have their livelihood protected.Footnote ⁸⁶ Hence, at the cultural level, he proposes that all humans can be taught and transformed; at the political level, however, he supports a gradual transformation and still does not deny the distinction in administrative patterns.

The qualities of loyalty, benevolence, persistence, sincerity, and trustworthiness, discussed above, were all manifested by imperial officials or cultural heroes who came from outside Yunnan, contributing significantly to the education and acculturation of this region. Additionally, Li Yuanyang took particular pride in highlighting Yunnan native exemplars who likewise successfully embodied these and other core Chinese values. As he writes, when Sima Xiangru 司馬相如 (179–117 BCE) opened up roads to the south-west by imperial decree, Zhang Shu 張叔 and Sheng Lan 盛覽, two natives of Dali who were distressed by local people’s illiteracy, went to learn from Sima and used the new knowledge to transform local customs.Footnote ⁸⁷ This story may not be true, whereas it conveys the Yunnan literati’s cultural consciousness and aspiration for Chinese teachings since Han times.

As the Ming government promoted Confucian education in Yunnan, a considerable number of native scholars obtained jinshi degrees and entered the state bureaucracy, thereby exerting political influence across the empire. Their names were honoured both in gazetteers and on local steles.Footnote ⁸⁸ After their deaths, they were laid to rest in their hometowns, and notably, they adhered to the Han Chinese funeral custom of inhumation rather than the traditional Bai practice of cremation. Local celebrities, most of whom were themselves retired members of this group residing in their native places, actively composed epitaphs for those who had predeceased them. For instance, in the memorial inscription for Zhang Yunpeng 張雲鵬 (js. 1502), a native of Taihe who died in office in Sichuan, Yang Shiyun particularly extols Zhang’s moral integrity in opposing the notorious eunuch Liu Jin 劉瑾 (1451–1510) and military prowess in suppressing barbarian rebellions.Footnote ⁸⁹ Li Yuanyang produced even more works. Tang Shiying 唐時英 (js. 1529), for example, once served as the district magistrate of Pingyang County 平陽縣 in Zhejiang Province. Fearless of regional magnates, he enforced fair taxation based on the information he collected through measuring the size of fields and surveying the soil fertility conditions. Moreover, by developing water storage projects, he saved the community from drought.Footnote ⁹⁰ Some Yunnan-born scholar-officials were sent to culturally more backward places to improve cultivation there. When Zhu Pei 朱佩 (js. 1521) served as an assistant inspector in Guizhou, he earned local people’s trust thorough a series of benevolent policies and thereby prevented a rebellion. When in Guangxi, he won over the Yao bandits by exerting both kindness and martial power.Footnote ⁹¹ Similarly, Zhang Shiyi 張時宜, the educational supervisor of Chengfan Prefecture 程蕃府, Guizhou, taught the local students with Chinese ceremonies to reform their barbaric customs and developed school farmlands to support poor scholars.Footnote ⁹²

Filial piety as a core Confucian value is esteemed by Li Yuanyang as the foundation of statecraft. Zhao Dehong 趙德宏, a native of Heqing who was granted the imperial commendation xiaolian 孝廉 (filial devotion and moral integrity) and was therefore promoted to official posts in Sichuan, fulfilled his duties perfectly there.Footnote ⁹³ Besides, Li particularly values the influential power of moral paragons, asserting,

Thus, when some officials chose to resign from posts for the need to attend to their parents, Li always appreciated their decision, perceiving fulfilling filial duties as a special form of governance.Footnote ⁹⁴

From the Ming period onwards, the cult of female chastity appears to have gradually become predominant across Yunnan. Consequently, the earlier veneration of the Buddhist goddess Baijie Shengfei 白姐聖妃 (Holy Consort White Sister) was converted to the worship of the chaste heroine Baijie Furen 柏節夫人 (Lady of Cypress Chastity).Footnote ⁹⁵ This cult deeply permeated local society. Even Azhali families and indigenous chieftain households took pride in producing virtuous women, as demonstrated by the tomb tablets of their members.Footnote ⁹⁶ It was likely in this context that Li Yuanyang claimed that the local customs in his day were already substantially different from those described as primitive by the Yuan Dynasty scholar Li Jing.Footnote ⁹⁷ In fact, Li’s daughter-in-law, surnamed Yang 楊, remained faithful to his deceased son and was accordingly recommended for imperial commendation.Footnote ⁹⁸

Similar to filial piety, female virtue was also emphasised for its exemplary function and broader social impact. As previous scholarship on the woman scholar Yun Zhu 惲珠 (1771–1833) has shown, she established women’s role in the inner quarters as the ‘correct beginning’ (zhengshi 正始), from where their proper virtues would foster social morality and positively influence state affairs.Footnote ⁹⁹ Yun’s thought is, to some extent, anticipated by Li, who asserts:

Accordingly, he produced many works eulogising paradigms of womanhood, in which, as he observes, virtuous officials extended the good teachings of their mothers throughout society and thereby achieved successful governance.Footnote ¹⁰⁰ Furthermore, in frontier regions undergoing the civilising process, the transformative power of female morals was particularly noteworthy. When a local woman cultivated her moral character, she often served as an exemplar, influencing and reforming the community around her. As Yang Shen observes, in defiance of the levirate marriage custom, the Achang 阿昌 woman Fang’ai 方艾 chose to starve herself to death; thereafter, this ‘barbarous’ practice was abolished among her tribe.Footnote ¹⁰¹

The desire to exert the social influence of filial piety and womanly virtue may explain why Li Yuanyang earnestly documented numerous filial and chaste models in his gazetteer.Footnote ¹⁰² In fact, this was a conventional feature of gazetteer compilation during the imperial period. However, in the case of Yunnan, a newly transformed region, praising the embodiment of Chinese values by the Yunnanese—including Yunnan-born scholar-officials, filial sons, and chaste women—carries a twofold significance: on the one hand, these exemplars reflected the successful sinicisation of Yunnan; on the other hand, they proved that the Yunnan natives were equally admirable for their ability and morality, fully comparable to people from any other part of the empire.