The Cambridge History of China, Vol. 2: The Six Dynasties, 220–589, edited by Albert E. Dien and Keith N. Knapp. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2019. xxii, 897 pp. 7 maps, 7 tables. £ 120 (HB). ISBN 978-1-107-02077-1

Abstract

This is the first comprehensive Western-language survey on a period of Chinese history which now is commonly known as EarlyMedieval China. For those familiar with Chinese history it is not astonishing that the two volumes of the Cambridge History of China (CHC) which deal with the “unified empires” of the Qin/Han and Sui/Tang dynasties were published, respectively, forty and thirty-five years ago. It is fitting that the grand endeavor of the CHC is being completed with the publication of the volume under review. It must be noted that the history after the fall of the Han empire has been subjected to specialized research by scholars from various fields such as Daoism, Buddhism, or historical anthropology (e.g., lineage studies). Nevertheless, to conceive of this period as an entity for treatment in one single volume was a formidable challenge since it is one of the most volatile periods of Chinese history, characterized by an incessant influx of foreign peoples into the Chinese realm, by migration and resettlement on an unprecedented scale, and hence by constant bordercrossing, in a very physical way, yet also in a figurative sense, in terms of cultural practices, of music, spirituality, and imagery. Especially the fourth through the sixth century CE was “a time of unprecedented mobility of people, texts, goods, and ideas.” A better understanding of Chinese regionalism nurtured in the last few decades has definitely contributed to a new reflective historiography which made an impact on the project of dealing with this intricate period of Early Medieval China in an adequate way. In particular, scholars were encouraged “to think less in terms of ‘China’ as whole, and more in terms of local or regional cultures.” In the beginning, this proposal was probably regarded as a burden. Yet meanwhile it has come to be seen as a fortuitous notion, especially by those who abstain from “the teleological construct of ‘China’ and the ‘Chinese’ (or Han) people and culture” and thus – expressedly or not – follow the admonitions voiced by Hugh R. Clark some years ago. Thus the volume under review really is the state of the art in terms of a reflective thinking and writing about China and her past. As to the term of “Six Dynasties,” it must be noted that the usage of this term mirrors the historiographical conventions rooted in the concept of the Mandate of Heaven, which has been passed on from one dynasty to the next one. This has led some historians to denounce the term of “Six Dynasties” as Han-Chinese-centric or even as being permeated by a Jiangnan centrism shaped by Late Qing and Early Republican intellectuals from southern China. In an earlier article, one of the