Táng liùdiǎn 唐六典
Compendium of the Six Codes of the Táng by 張九齡 (Zhāng Jiǔlíng, 撰), 李林甫 (Lǐ Línfǔ, 注)
About the work
The Táng liùdiǎn in 30 juǎn is the earliest extant compendium of Tang administrative law. It surveys the Three Preceptors and Three Dukes (三師三公), the Three Departments (三省), the Nine Courts (九寺), the Five Directorates (五監), and the Twelve Guards (十二衛), listing the duties of each office with its subordinate posts, official ranks (品秩), and the classical precedents underpinning them — modelled deliberately on the Zhōulǐ 周禮. Compilation began under an edict of Xuánzōng 玄宗 in Kāiyuán 10 (722) and went through several teams (Lù Jiān 陸堅, then Xú Jiān 徐堅, then Wù Jiōng 毋焸, Yú Qīn 余欽, and Wéi Shù 韋述, who reorganized the material so that the codes (lìng 令) and protocols (shì 式) were distributed among the six departments and historical change relegated to the commentary). The work was finalized under Zhāng Jiǔlíng’s direction (with Yuàn Xián 苑咸 attached to him), submitted in draft in Kāiyuán 26 (738), and the commentary brought to completion by Lǐ Línfǔ shortly afterwards.
Tiyao
The editors respectfully submit that the Táng liùdiǎn in thirty juǎn was, in its old transmitted recension, titled “imperially compiled in the Kāiyuán reign” with annotations by Lǐ Línfǔ presented under imperial command. Its arrangement of the Three Preceptors, Three Dukes, Three Departments, Nine Courts, Five Directorates, and Twelve Guards — listing the responsibilities, official subordinates, and ranks of each — was an avowed imitation of the Zhōulǐ. Chén Zhènsūn’s 陳振孫 Zhízhāi shūlù jiětí 直齋書錄解題 cites Wéi Shù’s Jíxián jì zhù 集賢記注 to the effect that in Kāiyuán 10 (722) the Court Diarist Lù Jiān 陸堅 was ordered to compile this work; the emperor wrote out by his own hand on white-hemp paper six headings — lǐ 理 (governance), jiào 教 (instruction), lǐ 禮 (rites), zhèng 政 (administration), xíng 刑 (punishments), and shì 事 (administrative tasks) — directing that the compilation proceed by category. Zhāng Yuè 張說 entrusted the project to Xú Jiān 徐堅, who could not settle it after years of work; it was then reassigned to Wù Jiōng 毋焸, Yú Qīn 余欽, and Wéi Shù 韋述, who first integrated the codes (lìng) and protocols (shì) into the six departments, with the historical evolutions placed in the commentary. Later Zhāng Jiǔlíng entrusted the work to Yuàn Xián 苑咸, and in Kāiyuán 26 (738) the draft was submitted; even today it lies in the Academy and is not put into use.
Fàn Zǔyǔ 范祖禹 in his Táng jiàn 唐鑑 also said that since there were already a Grand Marshal, a Minister of Education, and a Minister of Works, plus a Department of State Affairs, government issued from two channels; and since there was already a Department of State Affairs and also Nine Courts, government issued from three channels. From Yáo and Shùn through Zhōu there were six ministries (六官) but no Courts and Directorates; from Qín to the Chén dynasty there were Courts and Directorates but no six ministries — only this book combines them, hence the offices are often duplicative. The present examination shows that within Lǐ Línfǔ’s commentary, the rule that the prefectures pre-establish entries for auspicious portents in advance of memorialization is indeed laughable; yet on the whole, the institutional framework of an entire dynasty is here laid out completely. As Wáng Pǔ’s 王溥 [Táng] huìyào 會要 attests, those memorializing on administrative matters constantly cite this book; Wéi Shù’s claim that it was not put into practice is not necessarily a true record, and Zǔyǔ’s argument — written in heat because the Yuánfēng 元豐 reorganization of offices had drawn entirely on this book — is also no settled judgment. Furthermore, the Huìyào records that in Kāiyuán 23 Jiǔlíng and others compiled this book, while the Tángshū records that Jiǔlíng in Kāiyuán 24 was relieved of the chief councillorship — meaning that Jiǔlíng was still in office when the book was completed. Only later, in Kāiyuán 27 (739), did Lǐ Línfǔ complete the commentary and submit the work alone. As Sòng Chén Kuí’s 陳騤 Guǎngé lù 館閣錄 notes, the Book Bureau had three categories — “compiled and submitted,” “compiled but not submitted,” and “submitted but not compiled” — and what we have here is what is called “compiled but not submitted.” That the front of the volume bears Lǐ Línfǔ’s name alone is not equitable; we therefore restore Jiǔlíng’s name, in accord with the actual situation. The old recension stands as is, and we leave it so. Respectfully collated, sixth month of Qiánlóng 43 (1778).
Abstract
Although the work was nominally an “imperial compilation” of Xuánzōng, the actual editorial labour was that of a series of Academicians: Lù Jiān 陸堅, Xú Jiān 徐堅, Wù Jiōng 毋焸, Yú Qīn 余欽, Wéi Shù 韋述, Zhāng Jiǔlíng, and Yuàn Xián 苑咸. The transmitted text in 30 juǎn lists every office of the Tang central government with its statutory duties as fixed in the Kāiyuán code (Kāiyuán 7, 719); the commentary, conventionally credited to Lǐ Línfǔ but actually produced by the editorial team under his name, provides classical precedents and traces administrative changes down to the late Kāiyuán reign. Wilkinson identifies it as the earliest extant compilation of Chinese administrative law to have survived intact. The Sìkù editors restored Zhāng Jiǔlíng to first authorship to reflect the scholarly judgment that Lǐ Línfǔ contributed only the commentary — though even this is an oversimplification, since the commentary was actually a team product. The text was preserved more reliably in Japanese transmissions than in China; the standard Song edition was the Konoe Iehiro 近衛家熙 Kǎodìng Dà Táng liùdiǎn 考訂大唐六典 (1724), which underlies modern critical editions.
Translations and research
- Konoe Iehiro 近衛家熙, ed. 1724. Kōtei Dai Tō rikuten 考訂大唐六典. Standard premodern critical edition based on a Sung manuscript preserved in Japan; facsimile, Dà Táng liùdiǎn 大唐六典, Wenhai, 1962, repr. 1974.
- Chen Zhongfu 陳仲夫, ed. 1992. Táng liùdiǎn 唐六典. Zhonghua. Modern critical edition.
- Yuán Wénxīng 袁文興 and Pān Yínshēng 潘寅生, chief eds. 1999. Táng liùdiǎn quányì 唐六典全译. Gansu renmin. Translation into modern Chinese.
- Des Rotours, Robert. 1975. Le T’ang lieou tien décrit-il exactement les institutions en usage sous la dynastie des T’ang? Journal Asiatique 263: 183–201.
- McMullen, David. 1988. State and Scholars in T’ang China. Cambridge UP, esp. 13–26 and 183.
- Okamura Ikuzō 奧村郁三. 1993. Dai Tō rikuten 大唐六典. In Hōseishi shiryō, 263–80.
Other points of interest
The Sìkù editors’ restoration of Zhāng Jiǔlíng’s authorship effectively reverses an attribution which had become entrenched in Sòng catalogues. Their reasoning — that according to Chén Kuí’s Guǎngé lù the Book Bureau distinguished works “compiled but not submitted” from “submitted but not compiled,” and that the Táng liùdiǎn belongs to the former — is a striking instance of historicist textual criticism in the Qiánlóng-era Sìkù enterprise.