In the Shadow of the Han: Literati Thought and Society at the Beginning of the Southern Dynasties (review)

Reviews 145 beauty, even while his poems were often inspired by social and political events, with one patriotic poem becoming particularlywell known when set to music by Zhao Yuanren (pp. 171-172). The concluding chapter offers a good summary and puts SnowyMorning back in the context ofpoetic development in the 1920s. A fuller survey ofthe Chinese reception ofthese poets might have gone further in considering anthologies and translations as aspects ofreception. Hockx's book is based on his doctoral thesis, and rather than attempting an exhaustive search through sources, he makes the more valuable contribution oflaying groundwork and raising questions for further study. Hockx's work is a welcome addition to the field ofmodern Chinese poetry, especially since such monographs in English are still rather scarce. Perhaps the recent publication ofA Selective Guide to Chinese Literature, volume 3, Poetry (Leiden: Brill, 1988), and the forthcoming history of modern Chinese literature announced by Bonnie McDougall in the journal Modern Chinese Literature (vol. 8 [Spring 1994]: 127-170) will provide the necessary context and encourage further studies of this type. Gloria Bien Colgate University Gloria Bien is an associateprofessor ofChinese specializing in Chinese-French literary relations. m Charles Holcombe. In the Shadow ofthe Han: Literati Thought and Society at the Beginning ofthe Southern Dynasties. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 1994. xi, 238 pp. Hardcover $35.00, isbn 0-8248-1592-0. Charles Holcombe's study ofthe society and thought ofthe Eastern Jin (318-420) elite is a valuable addition to what has, to this point, been a rather thin Englishlanguage literature on early medieval history. In the Shadow ofthe Han makes a compelling case for Holcombe's claim that the "period ofdisunity" between the Han and the Tang has been an unjustly neglected area. Several American scholars© 1996 by University who haye madeimportantcontributions to the studyoftheperiod duringthe last awai ? ress^ decades have shifted the focus oftheir work: Albert Dien has found firmer ground in archaeology and material culture, while Patricia Ebrey and David Johnson have sought greener pastures on the other side ofthe Tang/Song divide. While the 146 China Review International: Vol. 3, No. 1, Spring 1996 problems and pitfalls with which Holcombe's book struggles—sometimes with mixed success—make very plain the difficulties inherent in working on early medieval history, In the Shadow ofthe Han gives us hope that Holcombe and others will maintain the field in the U.S. with as much vitality as it enjoys elsewhere.1 Though it is a relatively briefbook (139 pages, exclusive ofnotes), In the Shadow ofthe Han is comprised of two nearly independent studies. The first part is an excellent synthesis ofthe PRC, Japanese, and Western-language secondary literature on early medieval, and especially Eastern Jin, sociopolitical history—in particular the nature of the ruling elite and the system of selection for office that guaranteed that elite's preeminence. The second part provides a suggestive analysis of the "dark learning" (xuan xue XF, or "Neo-Taoism," as Holcombe calls it) ofthe Wei and Jin and its Buddhist offshoots. The introductory chapter 1, "Reimagining China," sets the Eastern Jin scene. A "new world" emerged in fourth-century southern China, as the elite, many ofthem émigrés from the occupied north, were forced to "reimagine" the Han realm under vastìy changed circumstances— in what previously had been a sparsely inhabited provincial backwater. Following a review in chapter 2 of Eastern Jin political history, chapters 3 and 4 provide perceptive analyses ofthe economic, social, and political background against which Eastern Jin literati culture emerged. Chapter 3, "The Socioeconomic Order," examines the origins of medieval literati power and the high degree ofindependence from the state that the "great families" were able to maintain . Holcombe rejects military might, control over land, and commercial wealth as the principal sources for literati hegemony: "the true foundation ofliterati authority [was] bureaucratic office holding, based on the old Han imperial model" (p. 72). However, following Tanigawa Michio, Kawakatsu Yoshio, and other Kyoto sinologists, Holcombe finds that die medieval elite also drew power from their local bases. The ability of the southern elite to control their local communities stemmed from vertically articulated "patron-client relationships," and adherence to the literati...