4 Wang Fuzhi,Huangshu, 12 : 532 ; Zhao Tingdong,Dili wujue, 56 , 65. For an
overview of work on Wang in Chinese, see Sky Liu,“Studies of Wang Fuzhi,”
307 – 30. For Wang’s views on ethnicity as anti-Manchu thought, see Fa-ti Fan,
“Nature and Nation,” 417 – 19 , and Dikötter,Discourse of Race, 25 – 29.
5 For a significant qualification of the materialism of Wang’s thought, see Black,
Man and Nature, 63 – 74. Benjamin A. Elman and Richard J. Smith have noted
the interpenetration of empirical and metaphysical concepts in Qing systems
of thought that seriously challenge assertions of an unambiguous“decline in
Chinese cosmology”during the late imperial period; Elman,Cultural History
of Civil Examinations, 295 – 96 , 311 – 26 ; Smith, Fathoming the Cosmos,
192 – 94.
6 For Wang’s own (meta)physical concept ofqi-based change, see Black,Man
and Nature, 70 – 74.
7 Wang Fuzhi,Du tongjian lun, 10 : 502. For similar views from the Southern
Song, see Hoyt Cleveland Tillman,“Proto-Nationalism in Twelfth-Century
China?” 403 – 28.
8 Black,Man and Nature, 71 – 73.
9 The orthodox or heterodox status offengshuiin late imperial China is par-
ticularly difficult to determine. The prominent literatus Wei Yuan, for
example, criticized the Jiangxi school’s emphasis on topographical“forma-
tions and contours”(xingshi) in what appears to be an attempt to articulate a
more orthodox Confucian practice of geomancy; Wei Yuan,“Dili gangmu
xu”and“Zhi long cheng qi lun xu,” 12 : 239 – 40 and 12 : 241 – 42 , respectively.
Even the Kangxi emperor expressed ambivalence, acknowledging that while
many doctrines were mere fabrications,“such techniques cannot be com-
pletely dispensed with.”Cited, along with many other examples, in Bruun,
Fengshui in China, 65 – 66. Recent studies include Bruun,An Introduction to
Feng Shui; Field,“In Search of Dragons”; Yu Xijian and Yu Tong,Zhongguo
gudai fengshui.
10 Shen Hao,Dixue, 1 a.
11 The term also appears asHua-yiorXia-yi guan. For an extended pre-Qing
example of this discourse, see the Jin dynasty essay“Xi Rong lun”;Jinshu,
5 : 1529 – 34. Recent scholarship in Chinese has attempted to historicize this
discourse in linear fashion, which qualifies notions of Sinification; see Li
Dalong,“Quantong yi-Xia guan,” 1 – 15 ; Yu Fengchun,“Hua-yi yanbian,”
21 – 34 ; Zhang Shuangzhi,“Qingchao huangdi de Hua-yi guan,” 32 – 42.
Works in English have taken chronologically limited approaches, e.g., Wiens,
“Anti-Manchu Thought,” 1 – 24. Some recent work, however, surveys the
transdynastic context; see Dikötter,Discourse of Race, 1 – 30.
12 For an account of the contexts for practical learning in evidentiary scholarship
(kaozheng) and statecraft practices, see Elman,From Philosophy to Philology.
13 Hu’s attitude in this respect is strikingly similar to that of Zhu Xi’s approach
toYijing; see Kidder Smith et al., eds.,Sung Dynasty Uses of the I-Ching,
169 – 205. Wang Fuzhi’s relationship toYijing, and to Zhu’s views on it was
similarly complicated, as was Hu’s own; Smith,Fathoming the Cosmos,
175 – 77.
14 Legge,The Shoo King, III: 142 – 51.
ann
(Ann)
#1