Chinese Polymaths, 100 – 300 AD: the Tung-kuan, Taoist Dissent, and Technical Skills by Howard L. Goodman
This essay is on polymathy. Goodman says that at the time this essay was written it was a new field of study. He defines the term, initially in an ancient western context, as a new kind of knowledge. This is contrasted with polydidactics which is conventional knowledge, the set texts for a given context. To cover the topic, he is going to study some well-known early scholars of China to see what skills and teachings feature in their writings. Goodman holds up Pei Songzhi up as an example of one doing this, after he rewrote a conventional history in a new way. His study will focus on three areas; cultural history, synergy among skills and the impact upon our historical methods.
Goodman begins with the Dong guan [Tung-kuan], the court institution of learning for Eastern Han. It was a building within the palace that some very limited few scholars were allowed access to. It became the centre for polymathy as debates started about textual and ritual authorities which allowed for developing new ideas and approaches. The first important scholar linked with this was Pan Gu the historian. Initially the Dong guan was just a centre for historical record keeping but gradually became a centre for other areas too. For example, before Pan Gu was arrested there was evidence he was working on mathematical astrology.
Next Goodman takes a side step away from his primary topic to look at the impact the Dong guan had on politics. While few male scholars had access, eunuchs and the Emperor’s harem did and this may have led to the struggles between the two factions. This is because the scholars who did have access were those who had deigned to take a low paid job and position within the court – there was no formal role; however, it was deemed worth it because of the rare selection of books that were kept within.
When Goodman gets to the reign of Emperor Huan, he says that Daoism and Daoist rites became increasingly used by the Court. The Dong guan as a result became known as a centre for the study of Daoist texts. Goodman is keen to make a distinction between the mainstream Daoism and the Neo-Daoism of various rebel groups that arose around the same time. Suggesting that the Daoism of the scholars was more academic and was probably not practised in their private religion Scholars wished to be appointed to the Dong guan as it allowed them to be paid to further their studies without having to engage in factional strife, and Goodman gives an overview and examples of scholars who were executed for speaking out against the eunuchs, including a long section on Cai Yong who headed up the Dong guan until his death.
Goodman turns to astrology and court music. However, he points out that both of these were tied to rites and therefore legitimacy and so during the days of a falling dynasty these were perilous things to be studying as implications of disloyalty were never far away. Cai Yong led an attempt to try and rediscover a style of court music. The success (or lack) of the attempt itself is unimportant to Goodman’s study what he is interested in is the presence of a research program which “pushed the polymath envelope.”
The Dong guan and most of its material was destroyed in the fire in Luoyang set by Dong Zhuo so there was a period where it didn’t exist. Many years later the Imperial Library of Wei filled the gap, while in Wu and Shu some sort of Dong guan was established – Chen Shou was appointed to Shu’s. Western Jin created a formalised role called a Gentleman drafter, a change from the unofficial role in the Han. They were placed under the direction of the Imperial Library.
Between the burning of Luoyang and the Imperial Library assuming the role originally filled by the Dong guan, polymathy occurred more in local “schools”. Guan Lu, described as an outsider, is used as a case study to examine how this happened. After studying what he believed, Goodman contrasts him with Cai Yong. The later searched for knowledge in historical texts and ceremonial rites whereas Guan Lu used divination.
Goodman turns to study a third polymath. This one is Xun Xu. He spends some time describing the Xun clan. Goodman notes that Xun’s writings didn’t talk about Daoist or Confucian ideas, which was different to his direct contemporaries, and also different to the Dong guan school. However, Goodman argues that his polymathy grew out of the Dong guan school, this is because of the way he was informed by ancient devices and crossed bureaucratic lines, just as Cai Yong did. He was in charge of the Imperial library until he fell foul of politics.
The conclusion contrasts Roman polymaths with Ancient Chinese ones. One of the big differences he picks up on is how in the East the opportunities to make their mark as a polymath was inside the court. What made them worthy of study though, in this field was the way they approached science and rites with attitudes and methods that had no pedigree, developing techniques that later Tang polymaths built upon.
This is an incredibly technical essay. For those who are interested in the development of thought in the Han dynasty it is a truly great piece. It also provides an insight into the world of Cai Yong and the prominent Xun clan. Its discussion of the Dong guan school also provides another angle into the Eunuch vs scholar struggle. However, political history is not the primary aim of this study and if that is your area of interest you have to wade through a lot of other detail to find nuggets.
