![Sample our Area Studies journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two full volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5922/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Area-Studies.jpg"})
Abstract
This article investigates how the Tang ruling elite tried to integrate nomadic and other ethnic frontier peoples into the multi-ethnic empire and how effective such efforts were. By examining and analyzing the court debate in 630 on how to resettle the submitting Turks, a set of rewards by the government for incorporating the ethnic elites into the Tang structure, and the “loose-rein area commands and prefectures,” the article argues that Emperor Taizong did not intend assimilation but incorporation of the non-Han into the military in order to build a multi-ethnic empire. Although the rewards aimed at assimilation, the policy also validated ethnic differences. The Tang ethnic inclusion efforts, on the one hand, enhanced the ethnic consciousness of the non-Han peoples and, on the other hand, served the Tang’s political, economic, and military purposes, resulting in a gradual transformation of the non-Han peoples who came to identity with the Tang.
An early draft of this paper was presented at the 2009 annual meeting of the American Historical Association. I would like to offer my sincere thanks to Professor Van Ess, Professor Patrick Shan, the two anonymous referees, the editors of The Chinese Historical Review, and my copy editor Jeanne Barker-Nunn for their suggestions and comments on the earlier drafts. A limited portion of the materials presented here has been published in Asia Major, 3rd series, 5: 2 (1992), pp. 41–77. I would like to acknowledge the journal’s gracious support by granting me the permission of using the concerned materials.
Notes
1 Sima Guang (1019–86), Zizhi Tongjian, 193 (Beijing: Guji chubanshe, 1956) (hereafter ZZJT), 6073.
2 Ma Dazheng “Qianyan” Introduction. In Ma Dazheng (chief ed.), Zhongguo gudai bianjiang zhengce yanjiu (Study of Frontier Policy in Premodern China) (Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, 1990), pp. 1–4 (2).
3 See, for example, on Tang frontier issues (beginning with the most recent) Wang Zhenping, “Ideas Concerning Diplomacy and Foreign Policy under the Tang Emperors Gaozu and Taizong,” Asia Major, 3rd series, 22.1 (2009), 239–85; Marc S. Abramson, Ethnic Identity in Tang China (Philadelphia, PA: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2008); Michael R. Drompp, “Chinese ‘Qaghans’ Appointed by the Turks,” T’ang Studies, 25 (2007), 183–202; Jonathan Karam Skaff, “Survival in the Frontier Zone: Comparative Perspectives on Identity and Political Allegiance in China’s Inner Asian Borderlands during the Sui-Tang Dynastic Transition (617–630),” Journal of World History, 15.2 (June 2004), 117–53; Charles Holcombe, “Immigrants and Strangers: From Cosmopolitanism to Confucian Universalism in Tang China,” T’ang Studies, 20–21 (2002–03), 71–112; Jonathan Karam Skaff, “Straddling Steppe and Sown: Tang China’s Relations with the Nomads of Inner Asia (640–756)” (PhD dissertation, University of Michigan, 1998); Yihong Pan, Son of Heaven and Heavenly Qaghan: Sui-Tang China and Its Neighbors (Bellingham, Washington: Center for East Asian Studies, Western Washington University, 1997); Yihong Pan, “Early Chinese Settlement Policies Towards the Nomads,” Asia Major, 3rd series, 5.2 (1992), 41–77; Thomas Barfield, The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic Empires and China (Oxford: Blackwell, 1989).
4 Abramson, Ethnic Identity in Tang China, p. x.
5 Pamela Kyle Crossley, Helen F. Siu, and Donald S. Sutton, “Introduction,” in Empire at the Margins: Culture, Ethnicity, and Frontier in Early Modern China, ed. by Pamela Kyle Crossley, Helen F. Siu, and Donald S. Sutton (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2006), pp. 1–24 (5).
6 Although other measures for integrating frontiers, such as Han migration, military colony, trade, or transportation, were also taken, these will not be dealt with in the limited space of this article.
7 Abramson in his Ethnic Identity in Tang China maintains that the Tang emperors “devoted attention and effort to culturally transforming the ‘peripheral peoples’ (Han and non-Han) of the empire” (p. 174).
8 Pan, Son of Heaven and Heavenly Qaghan, pp. 21–22; Abramson, Ethnic Identity in Tang China, pp. 119–21.
9 Gongyang zhuan. Included in Combined Concordances to Ch’un-Ch’iu, Kung-yang and Tso-chuan (reprinted Taipei: Harvard-Yenching Institute Sinological Index Series, Supplement No. 11, 1966), p. 239: Cheng year 15, sentence 12.
10 Wang Mingsun, “Lun shanggu de Yi-Xia guan” (A Study on the Yi-Xia Concept of Pre-Qin Times), Bianzheng Yanjiusuo Nianbao, 14 (1983), 1–30; Yuri Pines, “Beasts or Humans: Pre-Imperial Origins of the ‘Sino-Barbarian’ Dichotomy,” in Mongols, Turks, and Others: Eurasian Nomads and the Sedentary World, ed. by Reuven Amitai and Michal Biran (Leiden, Netherlands: Brill, 2005), pp. 59–102.
11 Zuozhuan. In James Legge, The Chinese Classics (London: Henry Frowds, 1860–72), vol. 5, The Ch’un Ts’ew, with the Tso Chuen, part 1, 354–55. Legge used the term “race” to render “zulei.” In his comment of my previous version of this paper, Professor Van Ess points out that the word “race” is an anachronism. He suggests that the term should be understood for that time as “families and clans.” I follow Van Ess’ suggestion.
12 Yü Ying-shih, “The Hsiung-nu,” in The Cambridge History of Early Inner Asia, ed. by Denis Sinor (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), p. 118; Arthur Waldron, The Great Wall of China: From History to Myth (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990), pp. 13–14; Nicola Di Cosmo, Ancient China and its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 127–58.
13 Frank Dikötter, The Discourse of Race in Modern China (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1992), p. 3.
14 Gongyang zhuan, p. 35: Yin year 1, sentence 6. For a general introduction of the exclusive and inclusive perceptions in Chinese discourse, see Yuri Pines, “Beasts or Humans,” pp. 59–63.
15 Dikötter, The Discourse, pp. 2–3; Wang Mingsun, “Lun shanggu de Yi-Xia guan,” pp. 1–30.
16 Stevan Harrell, “Introduction: Civilizing Projects and the Reaction to Them,” in Cultural Encounters on China’s Ethnic Frontiers, ed. by Stevan Harrell (Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press, 1995), pp. 3–36 (4–7); Stevan Harrell, “Introduction,” in Negotiating Ethnicities in China and Taiwan, ed. by Melissa J. Brown (Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, 1995), pp. 1–18 (6).
17 James Townsend, “Chinese Nationalism,” in Chinese Nationalism, ed. by Jonathan Unger (Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 1996), pp. 1–30 (2–12).
18 Pines, “Beasts or Humans.”
19 Sima Qian (?–86 bce), Shiji , 99 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1959) (hereafter SJ), 2718–19; Ban Gu, Hanshu, 43 (Beijing: Zhonghua shujue, 1962) (hereafter HS), 2121–22. For English translation of Lou Jing’s biography, see Burton Watson, Records of the Grand Historian of China. Translated from the Shih Chi of Ssu-ma Ch’ien (New York: Columbia University Press, 1961), pp. 285–91; Xing Yitian, “Handai de yi Yi zhi Yi lun” (The Theory of “i-i-chih-I” (Using Barbarians to Check Barbarians) in the Han Dynasty), Shih Yuan, 5 (1974), 9–53 (22–23); Wang Mingsun, “Zhongguo beibian zhengce zhi chuqi xingcheng” (The Early Formation of China’s Northern Frontier Policy), in Guoli Zhengzhi Daxue guoji Zhongguo bianjiang xueshu huiyi lunwenji, ed. by Lin Enxian et al., National Chengchi University Proceedings of the International Conference on China Frontier Area Studies (Taipei, 1985), pp. 283–306.
20 Although there have continued debates since the Song dynasty onwards regarding the authorship of Xinshu, and in particular on the section of the Xiongnu, one can conclude that Xinshu represented the views of Jia Yi and his followers in the Han dynasty. See Xing Yitian, “Handai de yi Yi zhi Yi,” pp. 23–24; Wang Zhouming and Xu Chao, Jia Yi ji jiaozhu (Textual commentaries and explanatory notes on Jia Yi’s collected works) (Beijing: Remin wenxue chubanshe, 1996), pp. 1–6.
21 Jia Yi, Xinshu, 4 (Taipei: Yiwen, 1968; Baibu congshu jicheng), 1–7. Wang Zhouming and Xu Chao, Jia Yi ji jiaozhu, pp. 134–49. English translation of the “three standards and five baits” is based on Ying-shih Yü, Trade and Expansion in Han China: A Study in the Structure of Sino-Barbarian Economic Relations (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1967), pp. 36–37, and Lien-sheng Yang, “Historical Notes on the Chinese World Order,” in The Chinese World Order: Traditional Chinese Foreign Relations, ed. by John K. Fairbank (Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1968), pp. 20–33 (28–29).
22 Nicola Di Cosmo, Ancient China and Its Enemies: The Rise of Nomadic Power in East Asian History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002), pp. 267–72.
23 Pines, “Beasts or Humans,” pp. 79–81.
24 HS 94B: 3803–04.
25 Barfield, The Perilous Frontier: Nomadic Empires and China, pp. 63, 91.
26 Wang Mingsun, “Zhongguo beibian zhengce zhi chuqi xingcheng.”
27 Pan, “Early Chinese Settlement Policies towards the Nomads,” pp. 41–53.
28 Jia Yi, Xinshu, vol. 4, 1–2.
29 Pan, “Early Chinese Settlement Policies Towards the Nomads,” pp.41–53.
30 Wang Zongwei, “Qin-Han de bianjiang zhengce” (Frontier Policy of the Qin-Han Era), in Ma Dazheng, Zhongguo gudai bianjiang zhengce yanjiu, pp. 49–83 (61–68).
31 Dorothy C. Wong, “Ethnicity and Identity: Northern Nomads as Buddhist Art Patrons During the Period of Northern and Southern Dynasties,” in Political Frontiers, Ethnic Boundaries, and Human Geographies in Chinese History, ed. by Nicola di Cosmo and Don J. Wyatt (New York: Routledge Curzon, 2003), pp. 80–118 (80). See also Charles Holcombe, The Genesis of East Asia, 221 b.c.–a.d. 907 (Honolulu: Association for Asian Studies and University of Hawai'i Press, 2001), pp. 116–28.
32 Zhou Weizhou, “Sanguo liang-Jin Nan-Bei chao de bianjiang xingshi yu bianjiang zhengce” (Frontier Situation and Frontier Policy in the Period of the Three-Kingdoms, Two Jins and Southern and Northern Dynasties,” in Ma Dazheng, Zhongguo gudai bianjiang zhengce yanjiu, pp. 84–149; Pan, “Early Chinese Settlement Policies Towards the Nomads,” pp. 54–56; Pan, Son of Heaven and Heavenly Qaghan, pp. 32–38.
33 Wang Pu (922–82), Tang Huiyao (Shanghai: Commercial Press, 1935) (hereafter THY), 73: 1312; ZZJT 193: 6075.
34 THY 73: 1312; ZZJT 193: 6075.
35 THY 73: 1312.
36 THY 73: 1312–13; ZZJT 193: 6075–76.
37 THY 73: 1312; ZZJT 193: 6076.
38 Yao Weiyuan, Beichao Huxing kao (Investigation of the Hu Surnames of the Northern Dynasties) (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, revised edition, 2007), pp. 190–93.
39 Liu Xu (887–946), Jiu Tangshu (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1975) (hereafter JTS) 61: 2369–70.
40 THY 73: 1314.
41 Du You (735–812), Tongdian (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1988) (hereafter TD), 197: 5415. For a similar quotation, see JTS 194A: 5163. Xin Tangshu by Ouyang Xiu (1007–72) and Song Qi (996–1061) (Beijing: Zhonhua shuju, 1975) (hereafter XTS) has different wording: “teach them rites and let them work as farmers.” ZZTJ (193: 6076–77) says: “Within several years, they would become our subjects.”
42 JTS 61: 2360.
43 JTS 61: 2360–61; ZZTJ 191: 5996; 192: 6021.
44 JTS 71: 2548.
45 THY 73: 1312–14; ZZJT 193: 6076.
46 Wei Zheng (580–643), Suishu (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1973) (hereafter SS), 81: 1828.
47 SS 84: 1883–84.
48 Howard Wechsler, Mirror to the Son of Heaven: Wei Cheng at the Court of T’ang T’ai-tsung (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1974), p. 118.
49 THY 73: 1314; JTS 194A: 5163; ZZJT 193: 6076.
50 The Tang records do not give clear information on the area-commands for the Turks. I follow the study of Iwami Kiyohiro, “Too no Tokketsu imin ni taisuru sochi o megutte” (On the Tang Settlement Towards the Turkish Remnants), in his Ronshu Chugoku shakai seido bunkashi no sho mondai (Collection of Essays on China’s Social, Institutional, and Cultural History) (Fukuoka: Chugoku shoten, 1987), pp. 510–16.
51 JTS 194A: 5161.
52 XTS 215A: 6036; ZZJT 194: 6099.
53 JTS 194A: 5161; XTS 215A: 6038; ZZJT 193: 6073.
54 THY 73: 1311; JTS 194A: 5163.
55 ZZJT 198: 6247.
56 Barfield, The Perilous Frontier, pp. 140–45. Michael Drompp has shown that the Turks offered the title of qaghan not just to Taizong but to other Chinese. This was their strategy of “using the Han against the Han.” This Turkish strategy also demonstrates the mutual acculturation of the Inner Asian frontiers. See Drompp, “Chinese ‘Qaghans’ Appointed by the Turks.”
57 Chen Yinke, “Tangdai zhengzhi shi shulun gao” (Discussion of the Tang Political History), in Chen Yinke, Chen Yinke xiansheng lunwenji, 1 (Collection of Essays by Professor Chen Yinke) (Taipei: Sanrenxing chubanshe, 1974), 151–304; “Li-Tang shizu zhi tuice” (Conjecture on the Ancestry of the Li-Tang House), in Chen Yinke, Chen Yinke xiansheng lunwenji, vol. 1, 341–54; “Li-Tang shizu zhi tuice houji” (Follow-up of the Conjecture of the Ancestry of the Li-Tang House), in Chen Yinke, Chen Yinke xiansheng lunwenji, vol. 1, 355–63; “Sanlun Li-Tang shizu wenti” (The Third Examination on the Ancestry of the Li-Tang House), in Chen Yinke, Chen Yinke xiansheng lunwenji, vol. 1, 475–80.
58 Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang (The Fan Generals of the Tang Dynasty) (Xi’an: San Qin chubanshe, 1990), pp. 6–12.
59 Sanping Chen, “Succession Struggle and the Ethnic Identity of the Tang Imperial House,” Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society, 3rd series, 6.3 (November 1996), 379–405.
60 Abramson, Ethnic Identity in Tang China, p. xii.
61 Wu Jing (670–749), Zhenguan zhengyao. Included in Sibu congkan xubian (Shanghai commercial Press, 1934. Reprint Taipei: Commercial Press) (hereafter ZGZY) 9: 21.
62 ZZJT 193: 6082.
63 JTS 62: 2388–89; XTS 99: 3911–12; ZZJT 193: 6081–82.
64 ZGZY 9: 21. Chen Yinke thinks that Zhenguan zhengyao is correct, although he does not explain why he thinks so. See Chen, “Tangdai zhengzhi shi shulun gao,” in Chen, Yinke xiansheng wenji, vol. 1, 196–97.
65 XTS 215A: 6036; ZZJT 193: 6082.
66 Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang, pp. 23–27.
67 Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang, pp. 108–19; Pan, Son of Heaven and Heavenly Qaghan, table 3.
68 ZGZY 9: 21–22.
69 THY 73: 1314; 94: 1689–90; ZZJT 195: 6147; 6148–49; 196: 6165.
70 JTS 194A: 5163–64.
71 ZZJT 197: 6215–16.
72 THY 73: 1314; JTS 195: 5196; 199B: 5348–49; XTS 217A: 6112–13.
73 Abramson, Ethnic Identity in Tang China, p. xii, and passim.
74 For the discussion of possibility of multiple identities in ethnic studies, see Stevan Harrell, “Introduction,” in Negotiating Ethnicities in China and Taiwan, pp. 3–5.
75 Charles Holcombe, “Immigrants and Strangers: From Cosmopolitanism to Confucian Universalism in Tang China,” T’ang Studies, 20–21 (2002–03), 71–112.
76 Patricia Ebrey, “Surnames and Han Chinese Identity,” in Negotiating Ethnicities in China and Taiwan, pp. 19–36.
77 Albert Dien, “The Bestowal of Surnames Under the Western Wei-Northern Chou: A Case of Counter Acculturation,” T’oung Pao, 63·2–3 (1977), 137–77.
78 Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu (Study of the Fan Generals of the Tang Dynasty) (Taipei: Lianjing chuban shiye gongsi, 1986), p. 96.
79 Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang, 39.
80 I borrowed the concepts of cultural assimilation from Dudley L. Poston, Jr and Shu Jing. “The Demographic and Socioeconomic Composition of China’s Ethnic Minorities,” in The Population of Modern China, ed. by Dudley L. Poston, Jr and David Yaukey (New York: Plenum Press, 1992), pp. 573–600 (576).
81 JTS 109: 3289; XTS 110: 4115; 4117; ZZJT 199: 6280.
82 Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang, pp. 39–40.
83 JTS 109: 3291; XTS 110: 4118.
84 Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu, pp. 111–12; Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang, p. 35.
85 Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang, pp. 196–206.
86 I borrowed the concept of structural assimilation from Poston, Jr. and Shu Jing, “Demographic and Socioeconomic Composition of China’s Ethnic Minorities,” p. 576.
87 Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang, pp. 38–39.
88 Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu, p. 96.
89 Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang, pp. 34–38; 43–49.
90 JTS 109: 3291–94; XTS 110: 4117–21.
91 Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu, pp. 111–12; Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang, p. 205.
92 JTS 134: 3703–10; XTS 155: 4891–95; Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu, pp. 105–15.
93 ZZJT 200: 6307–08.
94 Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu, pp. 332–39.
95 Edwin G. Pulleyblank, The Background of the Rebellion of An Lu-shan (London: Oxford University Press, 1955), pp. 95–103; Abramson, Ethnic Identity in Tang China, p. 49.
96 Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu, pp. 332–39.
97 Holcombe, “Immigrants and Strangers,” p. 98.
98 Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang, pp. 168–78.
99 Charles A. Peterson, “P’u-ku Huai-en and the T’ang Court: The Limits of Loyalty,” Monumenta Serica, 29 (1970–71), 423–55.
100 For the settlement of the nomads by the Han dynasty, see Wang Zongwei, “Qin-Han de bianjiang zhengce,” pp. 61–68; Pan, “Early Chinese Settlement Policies Towards the Nomads,” pp. 41–53.
101 XTS 43B: 1119–20.
102 For example, Langchuan 浪川under Jiannan 劍南 circuit, XTS 43B: 1141; Gefu 哥富, Shangsi 尚思, Ande 安德 under Lingnan 嶺南 circuit. XTS 43B: 1145.
103 Lin Liping, “Sui Tang de bianjiang zhengce” (Frontier Policy in Sui-Tang), in Ma Dazheng, Zhongguo gudai bianjiang zhengce yanjiu, p. 155.
104 Hugh R. Clark, “Bridles, Halters, and Hybrids: A Case Study in T’ang Frontier Policy,” T’ang Studies, 6 (1988), 49–68.
105 The jimi concept was also applied to Tang diplomacy with foreign regimes. See Wang, “Ideas Concerning Diplomacy and Foreign Policy under the Tang Emperors Gaozu and Taizong.”
106 Hu Rulei, Li Shimin zhuan (Biography of Li Shimin) (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1984), p. 217.
107 XTS 43B: 1119. See also Pan, “Early Chinese Settlement Policies Towards the Nomads,” pp. 66–67.
108 XTS 37: 974–75; Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu, p. 137.
109 Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu, pp. 119–43; Zhang Guogang, “Tangdai de fanbu yu fanbing” (The Fan Tribes and Fan Soldiers of the Tang Dynasty), in Zhang Guogang, Tangdai zhengzhi zhidu yanjiu lunji (Collection of Essays on the Studies of the Tang Political Institutions) (Taipei: Wenjin chubanshe, 1994), pp. 95–97.
110 JTS 195: 5196; XTS 217A: 6123.
111 XTS 43B: 1135–37; Zhang Guogang, “Tangdai de fanbu yu fanbing.”
112 JTS 40: 1650.
113 Pan, “Early Chinese Settlement Policies Towards the Nomads,” 70–71.
114 For example, Na 納, Sa 薩, Yan 晏 and Gong 鞏 prefectures in Xuanzong’s time under Jiannan 劍南 circuit. XTS 43B: 1142. Under Jiangnan 江南 circuit, Zang 牂, Yan 琰, Zhuang 莊, Chong 充, Ying 應 and Ju 距 were standard prefectures in Gaozu and Taizong’s time when the tribal chieftains submitted to the Tang, but became the jimi in Xuanzong’s reign. XTS 43B: 1143.
115 Abramson, Ethnic Identity in Tang China, pp. 172–73.
116 XTS 49B: 1317.
117 Li Dalong, Tangchao he bianjiang minzu shizhe wanglai yanjiu (Study of the Exchange of Envoys Between the Tang and Frontier Ethnic Peoples) (Ha’erbin, Heilongjiang: Heilongjiang jiaoyu chubanshe, 2001), p. 119.
118 XTS 46: 1196.
119 Abramson, Ethnic Identity in Tang China, p. 171.
120 Lin Liping, “Sui Tang de bianjiang zhengce,” pp. 156–57.
121 See Denis Twitchett’s translation of Niida’s reconstruction of the Taxation Statues in Denis Twitchett, Financial Administration under the T’ang Dynasty, 2nd edn (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1970), pp. 142–45.
122 Iwami Kiyohiro, “Too no naifu iminzoku taizoo kitei” (Tang Regulations on Foreign Peoples Under its Rule), in Iwami Kiyohiro, Too no hoppoo mondai to kokusai chitsujo (Tang’s Northern Issues and International Order) (Tokyo: Kyuu ko Shoin, 1998), pp. 148–75 (164–73).
123 XTS 2: 43.
124 XTS 217A: 6113; ZZJT 198: 6245.
125 Some modern scholars do not consider the Uighur payment as tax, but as a form of tribute. See Lin Chaomin, “Jimi fuzhou yu Tangdai minzu guanxi” (The jimi fuzhou in the Tang Relations with Other Ethnicities) Sixiang Zhanxian, 5 (1985), 49–58; Yang Shengmin, Huihu shi (History of the Uighurs) (Changchun, Jilin: Jilin jiaoyu chubanshe, 1991), p. 61.
126 Ma Chi, Tangdai fanjiang. For other important works on the Fan generals, see Chen Yinke, “Lun Tangdai zhi Fanjiang yu fubing” (On the Fan Generals and the Militia of the Tang Dynasty), in Chen Yinke, Chen Yinke xiansheng lunwenji, vol. 1, 665–77; Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu; Zhang Guogang, “Tangdai de fanbu yu fanbing.”
127 XTS 219: 6170; 6174; ZZJT 221: 6720.
128 JTS 195, 5214-15; XTS 217B, 6131–32; Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu, 138–39; Zhang Guogang, “Tangdai de fanbu yu fanbing,” pp. 97–102.
129 For example, Sitang 思唐 prefect under Lingnan 嶺南 circuit, established in 737 became standard prefecture in 780. XTS 43A: 1108.
130 Wang Qinruo (962–1025), Cefu Yuangui (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju 1960) (hereafter CFYG) 992: 11652; 994: 11670; Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu, 136.
131 CFYG 994: 11670; Zhang Qun, Tangdai fanjiang yanjiu, p. 137.
132 Zhang Guogang, “Tangdai de fanbu yu fanbing,” pp. 100–02.