Kūnlún Héyuán kǎo 崑崙河源考
Examination of the Kūn-lún and the Yellow River Source by 萬斯同 (Wàn Sītóng, 1638–1702) — zhuàn 撰
About the work
A 1-juan early-Qīng kǎojù essay on the location of the Kūnlún Mountains and the source of the Yellow River, refuting the Yuán-era Pān Ángxiāo / Dūshí (Tùshí) line of tradition that conflated the Star-lodging Lake (Odon Tala) with the river’s true source and the Āmùnímǎlèzhànmùxùn mountain (Anye Machen) with the ancient Jīshí. Wàn Sītóng draws on the Yǔgòng, the Yǔběnjì, the Ěryǎ, the Huáinánzǐ, and the various standard histories to argue that the Hàn-era report of Zhāng Qiān (river-source from the Salt-Marsh, the Khotan Yútián) is in fact authentic, and to dismantle the Yuán-era forced association.
Tiyao
We respectfully note: this is the work of Wàn Sītóng 萬斯同 of our dynasty. Sītóng has the Miàozhì túkǎo, already catalogued. This book takes Yuán Dūshí’s saying that the Yellow River source comes from the Kūnlún — disagreeing with the Shǐjì and Hànshū; and the Shuǐjīng’s record, which also has erroneous matter — therefore he extensively cites the Yǔgòng, the Yǔběnjì, the Ěryǎ, the Huáinánzǐ, and the texts of the various standard histories, in order to investigate and verify.
We examine: Zhāng Qiān said the Yellow River source comes from the Salt-Marsh; Sīmǎ Qiān further said the Yellow River source comes from Yútián. We note: the ancient illustrated books named the mountain whence the Yellow River emerges as the Kūnlún; later writings showed no different statement. The Tángshū Tǔyùhún zhuàn first has Lǐ Jìng’s “from afar gazing at Jīshí Mountain, viewing the Yellow River source”; but it does not yet definitely identify the place.
When the Yuán’s Dūshí 篤什 was commanded to seek the source, he claimed to have obtained it at the western frontier of Duōgānsī. Pān Ángxiāo and others wantonly engaged in forced association with the Classics and Commentaries; the syllable-renderings were corrupted, and so they took the Star-lodging Lake — its hidden flow re-emerging — as the Yellow River source; and the Āmùnímǎlèzhànmùxùn mountain — that is, the ancient Jīshí — they identified as the Kūnlún. The Yuánshí therefore transcribed this into the Dìlǐzhì; ěrshí xiāngyán — “borrowed-ear and pass-along” — the corruption became greater.
Our State, with virtue and might propagated to the far distance — the two routes of Tiānshān fully entered into the registers, west of Yuèzhuō all our chambers — examining the maps and investigating, we know that the Yellow River has twin sources. What Dūshí investigated reached only the part that flows underground and re-emerges; while the river-water that emerges from Cōnglíng and Yútián, falls into the Salt-Marsh, hidden flowing to Jīshí — Dūshí had not seen.
We respectfully read the Yùpī Tōngjiàn jílǎn — its examination is precise and detailed; the Yellow River source has its definitive verdict for the first time. Sītóng made this book at the beginning of the Kāngxī era; what is examined accords not entirely with what is now seen with one’s eyes. Yet at that time the Western Regions had not been opened, and one had not yet obtained substantive evidence. But Sītóng, penetrating the old books and considering the variations, was able with brilliance to know that what Zhāng Qiān said was not in error, and to refute extensively the wandering and confused refrain of Pān Ángxiāo and others. What he points out and sets forth is in no case very far. He also may be called diligent in examination, not submerged in old conventions. We record his book to preserve it — and the more so to demonstrate the supreme transcendence of His Imperial Verdict over the myriad ages.
Abstract
The Kūnlún Héyuán kǎo is one of the principal early-Qīng kǎojù essays on Yellow River source ethnogeography. Its author Wàn Sītóng (1638–1702, zì Jìyě 季野), one of the most important Míng-loyalist historians of the early Qīng and a key figure in the Míngshǐ compilation, here applies kǎojù methodology to the centuries-old controversy over the location of the Kūnlún and the river source.
The work was composed in the early Kāngxī era — the Sìkù tíyào notes that this is before the political incorporation of the Western Regions into the Qīng empire (the Tiānshān bēilù / Northern Tiānshān route was incorporated only in 1755) and before reliable on-the-ground geographical reportage from beyond the Star-lodging Lake was available. Despite this, Wàn correctly inferred from the Hànshū and Shǐjì sources that the Yellow River’s true source must be west of the Yuán-era investigators’ final point, and dismantled the Pān Ángxiāo / Dūshí tradition’s conflation of Star-lodging Lake with the source and Anye Machen with Jīshí. The Sìkù tíyào endorses Wàn’s methodology while observing that his conclusions — being inferential rather than empirical — are partially superseded by the Qiánlóng-era expeditions and the Héyuán jìlüè (KR2k0072).
The text is preserved in the Wényuāngé Sìkù quánshū (vol. 579.2). Wàn Sītóng’s biography in the Kāng-xī-era Míngshǐlù and his role as compiler of the unpublished Míngshǐ gǎo are well-attested.
Translations and research
No English translation. Standard works on Wàn Sī-tóng: Lynn Struve, The Ming-Qing Conflict, 1619–1683: A Historiography and Source Guide (Ann Arbor, 1998); Wm. Theodore de Bary, The Trouble with Confucianism (Harvard, 1991); Achim Mittag, “Das Mingshi: Über die offizielle Geschichtsschreibung der Ming-Dynastie und ihre Quellen,” Saeculum 43 (1992). For the Yellow River source debate see Peter Perdue, China Marches West (Harvard, 2005). Standard Chinese reference: Yáo Hàn-yuán, Zhōngguó shuǐlì shǐ (1987).
Other points of interest
The work is exemplary of early-Qīng kǎojù methodology applied to historical geography: empirical sources beyond the Star-lodging Lake were unavailable, but careful re-reading of Hànshū and Shǐjì allowed Wàn to correctly infer the river’s longer course beyond the Yuán-era investigators’ reach.