![Sample our Humanities journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5939/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Humanities.jpg"})
Abstract
The Ming Dynasty imposed all-encompassing restrictions upon its princely population. Princes were effectively barred from participation in dynastic politics, from entering the civil service examinations in pursuit of office, and from undertaking common livelihoods. Many princes thus turned to alternative means of fulfilment or drifted toward dissolution; Zhu Yousi, an ambitious prince in Huguang Province, strove to function beyond these constraints. This article recounts his life and relationship with the Ming princely institution. It first studies his engagement with the Jiajing Emperor during the Great Ritual Controversy in 1521 and his advocacy for princes’ socio-economic freedom. It then examines his downfall in 1525 as well as the events which occasioned his redemption in 1539. Overall, this article situates Zhu Yousi’s story not only within narratives concerning Ming princes and their political activities, but also within an expanding corpus of scholarship which challenges traditional caricatures of princely debauchery.
Acknowledgements
I extend my gratitude first to Timothy Brook, who carefully read through and offered constructive comments on earlier drafts of this manuscript. I am also indebted to Li Haoyue for her tireless assistance in locating source materials and proofing several of my translations. This paper furthermore benefited from the constructive feedback of three anonymous reviewers as well as Ihor Pidhainy’s shepherding it from submission to publication. Finally, library staff at The University of British Columbia – Jing Liu, Wu Yamin, Shaun Wang, and Phoebe Chow – made off-campus research for this endeavor possible during the throes of a pandemic. I alone am responsible for all remaining errors.
Disclosure Statement
No potential competing interests to report.
Notes
1 A brief note on style and logistics: for the sake of consistency all Chinese characters are rendered in traditional form throughout this essay, no matter their original form. Translations have benefited greatly from Kroll’s A Student’s Dictionary of Classical and Medieval Chinese; dates have been converted using Academia Sinica Center for Digital Cultures’ 中央研究院數位文化中心 “Liangqian nian Zhong-Xi li zhuanhuan 兩千年中西曆轉換.”
2 He is mentioned briefly in Carney T. Fisher’s account of the Great Ritual Controversy: “The Great Ritual Controversy in Ming China,” 117. Zhu appears in an identical capacity in Fisher’s dissertation-turned-monograph, but in both cases is incorrectly referred to as the Prince of Xiang: The Chosen One, 61.
3 Jaeyoon Song observed that in the 1373 edition of the Hongwu Emperor’s Ancestral Injunctions, princes were granted “de facto sovereignty of their territories” in both administrative and military terms. Their powers were significantly restrained in the revised 1395 edition, however. Song, “Share and Rule,” 34–35.
4 Hucker, “Ming Government,” 26; Dreyer, Early Ming China, 173, 183; Farmer, Early Ming Government, 102–103; Liang Manrong 梁曼容, “Mingdai fanwang yanjiu 明代藩王研究,” 50–53, 57.
5 Shen Defu 沈德符, Wanli yehuo bian 萬曆野獲編, 4.106. For discussion and analysis of restrictions imposed upon Ming princes and their engagement with the capital, see: Liang Manrong, “Mingdai fanwang yanjiu,” 135–143.
6 Capable descendants of second-degree princes could ostensibly seek employment. The stipulation can be found in: Farmer, Zhu Yuanzhang and Early Ming Legislation, 141. It can also be found in the 1510 edition of the Ming Collected Statutes: Li Dongyang 李東陽 et al., comp., Ming huidian 明會典, 1.5b.
7 Bao Hongchang 暴鴻昌, “Mingdai fanjin jianlun 明代藩禁簡論,” 54. This prohibition was partially lifted for some in 1590: Liang Manrong, “Mingdai fanwang yanjiu,” 134–135. Also see: Shen Defu, Wanli yehuo bian, 4.128.
8 Gu Yanwu 顧炎武, Tinglin wenji 亭林文集, 2.34. For insightful discussion of the princely institution and its woes, see the writings of Zhang Han 張瀚 (js. 1535, 1510–1593): Songchuang mengyu 松窗夢語, 8.154–158.
9 For the most thorough treatment of Ming princes’ literary pursuits, see: Kerlouégan, “Printing for Prestige? Publishing and Publications by Ming Princes.” Kerlouégan’s study is divided into four individual essays, all published by East Asian Publishing and Society between 2011 and 2012.
10 Du Yue 都樾, “Mingdai zongshi de wenhua chengjiu jiqi yingxiang 明代宗室的文化成就及其影響”; see also Craig Clunas’ excellent work on princely material culture, Screen of Kings. For Ming princes’ turning to religion, see: Liang Manrong 梁曼容, “Kundun yu jietuo 困頓與解脫,” 319–328. Richard G. Wang has also produced several studies pertaining to Ming princes’ patronizing of Daoism: The Ming Prince and Daoism; “The Ming Princely Patronage of Daoist Temples”; “Ming Princes and Daoist Ritual.”
11 Liang Manrong, “Kundun yu jietuo,” 319–320.
12 Zhu Mouwei 朱謀㙔, Fanxian ji 藩獻記, Fanxian ji xu 藩獻記序 1b. The late Ming politician and memoirist Xie Zhaozhe 謝肇淛 (js. 1592, 1567–1624) offered similar remarks: Wuza zu 五雜組, 15.505.
13 Wang Shixing 王士性, Guangzhi yi 廣志繹, 3.4a. For a brief biography of Wang, see: March, “Wang Shih-hsing,” 1405–1406.
14 Xiaozong shilu 孝宗實錄, 164.2977; Zhang Tingyu 張廷玉 et al., Mingshi 明史, 103.2871.
15 Wu Dao’er 吳道邇, comp., Xiangyang fuzhi 襄陽府志, 19.1b (Zhiguan zhi 秩官志). For a biography of Xu, see: Li Zhi 李贄, Xu cangshu 續藏書, 27.1734–1736.
16 This may be a reference to the famous warlord Cao Cao 曹操 and his family more broadly. He and his son Cao Zhi were both recognized poets: de Crespigny, Imperial Warlord, 3. Also see: ibid., 349, 408. So too was Cao Cao’s heir Cao Pi 曹丕 a noted poet: de Crespigny, “Wei,” 40. Another possibility is that Xu is referring to the ‘Seven Masters of Jian’an’ 建安七子, revered writers who were hosted at the Cao residence for literary gatherings: Knechtges, “From the Eastern Han through the Western Jin (AD 25-317),” 169–170. My thanks to Suiyun Pan for bringing this to my attention. For examples of Zhu Yousi’s poetry: Liao Daonan 廖道南, Chu ji 楚紀, 8.6b.
17 This is an allusion to the illustrious historians Ban Gu 班固 and Sima Qian 司馬遷. Zhu Yousi himself authored two texts, Zhu Zhongzi ji 朱仲子集 in three juan and Fangcheng ji 方城集 in one juan. Neither seems to be extant. Chen Qinghui 陳清慧, “Mingdai fanfu zhushu jikao 明代藩府著述輯考,” 69; Kerlouégan, “Printing for Prestige? Publishing and Publications by Ming Princes Part 4: Appendices,” 146. For the catalogue entries, see: Huang Yuji 黃虞稷, comp., Qianqingtang shumu 千頃堂書目, 17.5a.
18 Xu Xian 徐咸, Xu Xiangyang xiyuan zaji 徐襄陽西園雜記, juan xia 卷下 23.23b.
19 Ibid.
20 He Qiaoyuan 何喬遠, Mingshan cang 名山藏, 39.22a. For a similar appraisal: Zhang Tingyu et al., Mingshi, 119.3631.
21 Zhu Mouwei, Fanxian ji, 3.9b; He Qiaoyuan, Mingshan cang, 39.22a.
22 Zhu Mouwei, Fanxian ji, 3.9b. This is possibly derived from Zhu Xiafu 邾夏父, a son of Zhu Wugong 邾武公 (n.d.), ruler of the state of Zhu during the Western Zhou period (1045-771 B.C.E.). Zhu Xiafu eventually succeeded to the Zhu state’s throne. Wei Tao 魏濤, “Zhuguo shi yanjiu 邾國史研究,” 12–19, passim.
23 Geiss, “The Chia-ching Reign, 1522–1566,” 442–446. Also see Geiss’ essay on the selection of Jiajing’s reign title, which in itself carried special ritual significance: “On the Significance of the Reign Title Chia-ching.” For more on the Great Ritual Controversy, see: Dardess, Four Seasons, 9–26; “Protesting to the Death,” 109–120. A recent and insightful study by Yiming Ha places the controversy in comparative dialogue with events in Chosŏn Korea: “Public Discourse and Private Sentiment.”
24 Fisher, “The Great Ritual Controversy in Ming China,” 106–121. For a general chronology of events, see: Mote, Imperial China 900–1800, 663–668.
25 Dardess, Four Seasons, 14; Geiss, “The Chia-ching Reign, 1522–1566,” 446.
26 For scholarship pertaining to the Minglun dadian, see: Franke, An Introduction to the Sources of Ming History, 189; Dardess, Four Seasons, 27–28. For the text itself: Yang Yiqing 楊一清 et al., comp., Minglun dadian 明倫大典, vol. 2, 4.7ab.
27 For Zhu Mouwei’s version of the memorial, see: Fanxian ji, 3.9b-10a. For Fanxian ji’s bibliographic background, see: Franke, An Introduction to the Sources of Ming History, 93. Jérôme Kerlouégan offers discussion of Zhu Mouwei’s literary undertakings in: “Printing for Prestige? Publishing and Publications by Ming Princes,” 54, 66–67.
28 Shizong shilu 世宗實錄, 2.109.
29 See Liao’s biography in the Dictionary of Ming Biography: Hok-lam Chan, “Liao Tao-nan,” 906–908.
30 I draw this translation from James Legge’s; I remove the italics from his original. Legge, trans., Chinese Classics: with A Translation, Critical and Exegetical Notes, Prolegomena, and Copious Indexes. Vol. III Part I, 73. This allusion is an abbreviation of the original: ibid., 73–74.
31 I draw the translations of these posthumous titles from McGrath in: “The Reigns of Jen-tsung (1022–1063) and Ying-tsung (1063–1067),” 342.
32 I borrow and revise the translation offered by Legge in: The Chinese Classics: with A Translation, Critical and Exegetical Notes, Prolegomena, and Copious Indexes. Vol. III Part II, 320, 323.
33 Legge, trans., The Chinese Classics: with A Translation, Critical and Exegetical Notes, Prolegomena, and Copious Indexes. Vol. III Part I, 73.
34 Legge, trans., The Chinese Classics: with A Translation, Critical and Exegetical Notes, Prolegomena, and Copious Indexes. Vol. III Part II, 322–323. As can be seen in the Minglun dadian version of the memorial, this particular allusion is rendered exactly in accordance with the Book of Documents’ original text. This would strengthen my claim that this is an allusion in this version of the memorial, as well.
35 For an example and analysis of the Prince of Pu being cited in opposition to Jiajing’s case during the controversy, see: Fisher, “The Great Ritual Controversy in Ming China,” 236–238.
36 This is an adapted abbreviation of the original text, which itself contains an allusion. It may be found in: Chen Bangzhan 陳邦瞻, Songshi jishi benmo 宋史紀事本末, 36.312; Tuo Tuo 脫脫 et al., comp., Songshi 宋史, 319.10380.
37 Cheng Hao 程顥 and Cheng Yi 程頤, Er Cheng ji 二程集, 517.
38 Fisher, The Chosen One, 28–37.
39 Fisher, “The Great Ritual Controversy in Ming China,” 61–73; Fisher, The Chosen One, 25–39; McGrath, “The Reigns of Jen-tsung (1022–1063) and Ying-tsung (1063–1067),” 336–337, 340–343.
40 Fisher, The Chosen One, 45; “The Great Ritual Controversy in Ming China,” 83–84. I adjust Fisher’s translation of Cheng Yi’s title recommendation for the Prince of Pu. Also see: Geiss, “The Chia-ching Reign, 1522–1566,” 444n6. The document Cheng Yi submitted on behalf of Peng Siyong, cited above, was submitted in 1065. See: Luo Chaohua 羅超華, “Songdai lixue zhuanxiang de xiansheng 宋代禮學轉向的先聲,” 137; Meyer, “Negotiating Rites in Imperial China,” 112n27. For the memorial, see: Cheng Hao and Cheng Yi, Er Cheng ji, 515–518. Peng Siyong (1000–1070) also submitted a memorial opposing the emperor’s wish to honor his father: Tuo Tuo et al., comp., Songshi, 320.10412.
41 This portion of the memorial reads somewhat awkwardly; in comparison, the rendition contained in the Minglun dadian reads more smoothly.
42 For the geographic distribution of princely estates in the Ming, see: Wang, The Ming Prince and Daoism, 4. For Huguang Province in particular: Satō Fumitoshi 佐藤文俊, Mindai ōfu no kenkyū 明代王府の研究, 306.
43 Zhu’s full memorial as recounted here and Jiajing’s response are preserved in: Liao Daonan, Chu ji, 8.5b-6b.
44 Xi Shu 席書 et al., comp., Dali zuanyao 大禮纂要, juan shang 卷上, 16b-17a. The Dali zuanyao rendition of the memorial is substantively approximate to the Minglun dadian rendition, as well as Fanxian ji’s, but appears to be incorrectly dated to the eleventh lunar month of 1521. Furthermore, the compilers note that this reproduction is an approximate one, which would support my speculation that Liao Daonan’s is a more complete version.
45 Shizong shilu, 59.1397.
46 Shortly before this text’s completion, a text entitled Dali zuanyao, cited earlier, was also submitted to the throne. This particular occasion should refer to the Dali jiyi, given that its completion was closer temporally to this initiative; the text is not named explicitly. See: Yang Yanqiu 楊艷秋, “Ming Shizong chaoguan xiu Minglun dadian shulun 明世宗朝官修《明倫大典》述論,” 167. Moreover, because Dali jiyi appears as a title in the top of the center columns of the consulted Dali zuanyao itself, it would appear that the former text was made to include the latter; however, the edition consulted only contains the Dali zuanyao’s contents. That the Dali jiyi incorporated the Dali zuanyao would appear to be confirmed in: Huang Yuji, comp., Qianqingtang shumu, 5.7a.
47 This was the Prince of Chu 楚王 Zhu Rongjie 朱榮㳦 (1474–1534), who submitted a memorial in 1524; he proposed the construction of a temple for sacrificing to Jiajing’s father. Fisher, “The Great Ritual Controversy in Ming China,” 148. For the memorial, see: Yang Yiqing et al., comp., Minglun dadian, vol. 5, 10.4b-5a.
48 Shizong shilu, 59.1398; Gu Yingtai 谷應泰, Mingshi jishi benmo 明史紀事本末, 50.756.
49 Translations of official titles are based on Hucker’s A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China.
50 Shizong shilu, 96.2234–2235. Fang was one of the few supporters of Jiajing during the onset of the rites controversy, but shared little enthusiasm for the hostile atmosphere that came to suffocate Beijing. He also participated in the compilation of the Minglun dadian and earned a promotion upon its completion. See: Dardess, Four Seasons, 17, 22, 27–28; Yang Yiqing et al., comp., Minglun dadian, vol. 1, zhiming 職名 1b.
51 Liu Zongzhou 劉宗周, Liu Zongzhou quanji 劉宗周全集, vol. 3A, 1.8. The historian Zhao Yi 趙翼 (1727–1814) relates that over ten members of the Tang imperial clan served as Grand Councillors from the Kaiyuan 開元 period (713–741) onwards: Nian’er shi zhaji jiaozheng 廿二史剳記校證, 32.779.
52 Shen Defu, Wanli yehuo bian, 4.116; Tan Qian 談遷, Guoque 國榷, 72.4461; Zhao Yi, Nian’er shi zhaji jiaozheng, 32.781.
53 Grass, “Revenue as a Measure for Expenditure,” 242. For a memorial submitted in 1561 describing the poverty of imperial clansmen, see: Shizong shilu, 493.8191–8192.
54 The line of descent is as follows: grandfather Prince of Zaoyang 棗陽王 Zhu Qizheng 朱祁鉦 (1437–1476); and father Prince of Zaoyang Zhu Jianmian 朱見沔 (1464–1493).
55 Grass, “Revenue as a Measure for Expenditure,” 250.
56 Li Dongyang et al., comp., Ming huidian, 28.9b; Grass, “Revenue as a Measure for Expenditure,” 250. The same figure is given in the Draft Gazetteer of the Ministry of Rites: Yu Ruji 俞汝楫, comp., Libu zhigao 禮部志稿, 73.13ab.
57 The two historians are Shen Defu and Fu Weilin 傅維鱗 (1608–1667). For their works in respective order: Wanli yehuo bian, 4.116; Mingshu 明書, 88.12a. For Grass: “Revenue as a Measure for Expenditure,” 250–251.
58 Shizong shilu, 17.529.
59 Liang Manrong, “Mingdai fanwang yanjiu,” 282–285. The cited memorial appears on 285.
60 Ibid., 286–288.
61 For more on this subject: ibid., 286–313.
62 Zhang Han offered foreboding remarks on this problem: Songchuang mengyu, 8.158.
63 Zhu Guozhen 朱國禎, Yongchuang xiaopin 湧幢小品, 5.25a. A similar request was submitted in 1563 by the Prince of Nanling 南陵王 Zhu Muyang 朱睦楧 (1499–1567): Des Forges, Cultural Centrality and Political Change in Chinese History, 18. For his original request and a biography, see: Jiao Hong 焦竑, ed., Guochao xianzheng lu 國朝獻征錄, 1.21ab. Also see: Shizong shilu, 543.8776–8777. Des Forges explains that resources in the late Ming period became increasingly concentrated in the hands of the upper nobility, which left those occupying lower ranks in utter destitution: Cultural Centrality and Political Change in Chinese History, 21. Moreover, princes were eventually permitted in the late Ming to pursue official careers through the examination system. The Chinese scholar Zhang Mingfu 張明富 has argued that 1590 was when princes were first allowed to sit for exams. “Lun Mingdai zongshi kaike 論明代宗室開科,” 129–130.
64 Gao Yi 高儀, comp., Gao Wenduan gong zouyi 高文端公奏議, 3.13ab.
65 Shizong shilu, 19.566.
66 For brief discussion of the attendant system in princely estates, see: Liang Manrong, “Mingdai fanwang yanjiu,” 78–79. For other instances of princely estate attendants’ criminality, see: Lei Bingyan 雷炳炎, “Wangfu guan yu Mingdai zongshi fanzui guanxi tanlun 王府官與明代宗室犯罪關係探論,” 132. The official Ni Yue 倪岳 (js. 1464, 1444–1501) lamented that princely estate attendants and other officials did not pay respect to the court and perpetrated local abuses: Qingxi man’gao 青谿漫稿, 14.6ab.
67 This should be Zhu Jianyi 朱見瀷 (d. 1523).
68 Shizong shilu, 20.591.
69 Ibid., 42.1095.
70 Zhu Younou was invested as the Prince of Zhenning in 1526: Tan Qian, Guoque, 53.3343.
71 Shizong shilu, 43.1122.
72 Ibid., 49.1242. Useful for my interpretation of the events is a punctuated version of the report that was later made: Li Qiongying 李瓊英 and Zhang Yingchao 張穎超, comp., Ming shilu leizuan: zongfan guiqi juan 明實錄類纂: 宗藩貴戚卷, 1426. Peng Yiyun’s assistance in interpreting this passage is gratefully acknowledged.
73 Zhang Tingyu et al., Mingshi, 119.3631.
74 Shizong shilu, 49.1242. Indeed, it is not clear if this incident was memorialized about in Zhu Younou’s complaint in October of 1524; no specific criminal acts are detailed therein. It is possible that Shao’s framing took place earlier, although it would be curious for such details to be omitted from the record.
75 Cf. Yingzong shilu 英宗實錄, 20.390–391. The first appearance of the Zaoyang princely title is on 13 February 1443: ibid., 100.2016–2017.
76 This is noted in the report later submitted about the incident, also cited below: Shizong shilu, 49.1242.
77 Hobsbawm, “Peasant and Politics,” 13.
78 For Zhengde’s controversial northern travels: Geiss, “The Cheng-te Reign, 1506–1521,” 419–423; Zhang Tingyu et al., Mingshi, 16.209–210. For Yuan’s protests: Zhang Tingyu et al., Mingshi, 208.5491; Wuzong shilu 武宗實錄, 156.3006–3008. For the 1524 fuque as well as Yuan’s participation, see: Dardess, “Protesting to the Death,” 109–119; Xia Xie 夏燮, Ming tongjian 明通鑑, 51.1742–1744.
79 See: Jiao Hong, ed., Guochao xianzheng lu, 2.30b-31a.
80 Shizong shilu, 49.1242.
81 One is made to wonder if Zhu Yousi had maimed, or even killed, other individuals. It is possible, given the editors’ noting of his record of unlawful behavior.
82 Shizong shilu, 49.1243; Tan Qian, Guoque, 53.3318; He Qiaoyuan, Mingshan cang, 39.22ab; Zhang Tingyu et al., Mingshi, 119.3631; Liang Manrong, “Mingdai fanwang yanjiu,” 108. For the Veritable Records entry reproduced in full and in punctuated form, see: Li Qiongying and Zhang Yingchao, comp., Ming shilu leizuan: zongfan guiqi juan, 1426.
83 This punishment is not specifically mentioned in the entry for Yuan’s report and the subsequent judgment. In an entry in the Veritable Records dating to 10 September 1528 which describes the forgiving of Zhu Younou, it is confirmed that one third of his stipend had been suspended because he had not accurately memorialized on the Shao Heng affair: Shizong shilu, 91.2104. The following work records the partial revocation of Zhu Younou’s stipend alongside the revocation of Zhu Yousi’s title: Tan Xisi 譚希思, Ming dazheng zuanyao 明大政纂要, 46.35b.
84 Xu Xian, Xu Xiangyang xiyuan zaji, juan xia 23.23b. 45 li east of Zhushan County 竹山縣, which was administered by and approximately 700 li west from Xiangyang Prefecture, there was a certain Fangcheng Mountain: its summit was level and on all sides was well-protected by its perilous topology. Lying south of the mountain was an ancient city: Li Xian 李賢 et al., comp., Da Ming yitong zhi 大明一統志, vol. 44, 60.2ab, 60.6a. According to a Tang-era geographical treatise, the city was also named Fangcheng: Li Tai 李泰 et al., comp., Kuodi zhi jijiao 括地志輯校, 4.203. Given the area’s relative proximity to Xiangyang, Zhu must have derived his alias from either the ancient city of Fangcheng or the mountain to its north.
85 Shizong shilu, 77.1724–1725. See also: Jiao Hong, ed., Guochao xianzheng lu, 27.39a.
86 A recounting of Jiajing’s meetings with princes en route may be found in: Zhu Hong 朱鴻, “Ming Jiajing shiba nian (1539) Shizong nanxun Chengtian yanjiu 明嘉靖十八年 (1539) 世宗南巡承天研究,” 27–28.
87 For Jiajing’s southward journey: Dardess, Four Seasons, 125, 154–160; Fisher, “Center and Periphery,” 15–34.
88 Fisher, “Center and Periphery,” 26.
89 Shizong shilu, 224.4678. It seems that a similar term, endian 恩典, refers to the ceremonial bestowing of gifts upon officialdom following an imperial death (cf. Xianzong shilu 憲宗實錄, 2.35–36). As for the burial of Jiajing’s mother, the conclusion of which might be referred to as “Great Celebration” (daqing 大慶), see an occurrence of the phrase in January of 1539, just months before Zhu Yousi’s memorial: Shizong shilu, 219.4523.
90 Jiao Hong and Zhu Mouwei both employ the term daqing endian 大慶恩典 in describing Zhu Yousi’s plea. See in respective order: Jiao Hong, ed., Guochao xianzheng lu, 2.31a; Zhu Mouwei, Fanxian ji, 3.10a. There were also those who instead claimed that Zhu Yousi cited the Great Ritual Controversy in his memorial: Shen Defu, Wanli yehuo bian, 4.119. The statesman and historian Wang Shizhen 王世貞 (js. 1547, 1526–1590) appears to corroborate this claim in: Jiajing yilai shoufu zhuan 嘉靖以來首輔傳, 2.21a.
91 Shizong shilu, 224.4678.
92 Wang Shizhen 王世貞, Yanshantang bieji 弇山堂别集, 36.639.
93 Shizong shilu, 426.7366.
94 Wu Dao’er, comp., Xiangyang fuzhi, 31.2a.
95 Zhang Tingyu et al., Mingshi, 103.2870–2871.
96 Wang, “Ming Princes and Daoist Ritual,” 58.
97 For a list of Ming imperial clansmen who achieved the juren degree between the Tianqi 天啟 and Chongzhen 崇禎 reigns (1620–1644), see: Zhang Mingfu, “Lun Mingdai zongshi kaike,” 135–137. For a list of those who achieved the jinshi degree in the same time frame: ibid., 138.
98 The mountain is endowed with considerable historical significance: Kroll, Meng Hao-jan, 34–35.
99 There was a formation referred to as nanshan 南山, located three li south of Fang County 房縣, which was itself located 550 li southwest of Xiangyang: Li Xian et al., comp., Daming yitong zhi, vol. 44, 60.2a, 60.5b. This may be a generic reference to mountains south of Zhu’s vantage point.
100 The vocabulary invoked by Zhu Yousi here, the ‘warmth of spring’ (yangchun 陽春), could connote the benevolence of a superior. See, for instance, a passage composed by the Tang poet Ouyang Zhan 歐陽詹 (758–801): Dong Gao 董誥 et al., comp., Quan Tangwen 全唐文, 596.6026. If this poem was composed after his being made a commoner, this particular passage could pertain to Zhu Yousi’s longing for Jiajing to reinstate him.
101 Liao Daonan, Chu ji, 8.6b. The melancholy tone of the piece, I believe, supports dating the poem sometime within the 14 years in which Zhu lived as a commoner. The reading of yangchun further strengthens this probability.
102 Fisher, “The Great Ritual Controversy in Ming China,” 212.
103 Liang Manrong, “Kundun yu jietuo,” 313. Zhang Mingfu and Huang Yongmei 黃咏梅, in a recently-published essay, join Liang in pursuing the long-overdue rehabilitation of princes: “‘Qiwu’ de lingyi mian ‘棄物’ 的另一面.” For more historiographical discussion on this issue, see another of Liang’s essays: “20 shiji yilai de Zhongguo Mingdai zongfan yanjiu 20 世紀以來的中國明代宗藩研究,” 40. Pessimistic impressions were shared by sixteenth century European observers of Ming princes in Southern China: Wakeman, The Great Enterprise, vol. 1, 333–334.
104 Clunas, Screen of Kings, 10–11.
Additional information
Notes on contributors
Aaron Throness
Aaron Throness is a PhD student at Harvard University specializing in the political history of Ming China. His current research focuses on the princely estates of Huguang Province during the 15th and 16th century Ming; he is also preparing a full-length political biography for the eminent Chief Grand Secretary Yang Tinghe (1459-1529).