|
|
|
| The Evolution of the Parallel Tradition of Above-ground Stelae and Entombed Epitaphs in Tang-Song China |
| Luo Changfan |
| School of Chinese Language and Literature, Central China Normal University, Wuhan 430079, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract Ancient Chinese society has long attached great importance to posthumous reputation, which gave rise to a distinctive funerary practice: erecting stelae above ground along the spirit way and placing epitaphs below ground in the burial chamber—a custom known as the parallel tradition of above-ground stelae and entombed epitaphs. Enduring for over a millennium, this tradition became a defining characteristic of traditional Chinese funeral culture. Current academic research on this parallel tradition remains predominantly focused on case studies, particularly comparative textual analyses of stelae and epitaphs dedicated to the same individuals, while comprehensive macro-level studies are still relatively inadequate. As a funerary custom, it falls within the scope of historical research; at the same time, given its intrinsic connection to literary composition, it can also be incorporated into the realm of literary studies. This article primarily examines the tradition from the perspective of evolving funeral practices, while also exploring the evolution of concepts regarding its textual composition.The custom of using stelae and epitaphs in parallel had already emerged during the Northern and Southern Dynasties. In the Southern Dynasties, however, its development was less prosperous than in the Northern Dynasties, due to persistent restrictions on erecting stone inscriptions. By the late Northern Zhou period, this custom had basically taken shape, as evidenced by Yu Xin, who left behind several sets of parallel stelae and epitaphs. How did this tradition evolve during the Tang and Song dynasties? What impact did it have on the funeral customs of the Ming and Qing periods? These questions all deserve in-depth discussions. This article systematically collects and draws on transmitted documents, excavated materials, and contemporary research findings to sort out its developmental context.The Sui Dynasty lifted the previous ban on erecting stelae and established a system governing stelae and tablets, thereby promoting the further development of the parallel tradition of stelae and epitaphs. After the establishment of the Tang Dynasty, with the relaxation of restrictions on stelae erection and the rising status of civil officials, this practice expanded from the aristocratic and meritorious elite to the literati-official class. From the High Tang period onwards, this custom became even more widespread among the literati class; in addition, the trend of posthumous and retrospective erection of stelae and tablets became prevalent, leading the parallel tradition of stelae and epitaphs to flourish. By the Mid-Tang period, the concurrent use of epitaphs and stelae in funerals had become extremely prevalent among the civil official group. During the Late Tang and Five Dynasties, this custom persisted without interruption.By the mid-Northern Song Dynasty, policies governing stelae erection were further relaxed, and the parallel tradition of stelae and epitaphs reached its peak, particularly among the literati-official class. During this period, the trend of posthumous and retrospective erection of stelae became even more prevalent, and there were even many cases where multiple stelae were erected for a single individual—reflecting the bereaved families’ persistent pursuit of disseminating the deceased’s reputation. In the mid-to-late Northern Song Dynasty, although figures such as Sima Guang and Su Shi raised objections to the separate composition of texts for parallel stelae and epitaphs, they did not explicitly deny the funeral custom of the parallel use of stelae and epitaphs itself. By this time, the initial signs of the convergence of stelae and epitaphs had already emerged. During the Southern Song Dynasty, with the southward shift of the political and economic centers, the further dissemination of culture among broader social strata, and the development of printing, the parallel tradition of stelae and epitaphs exhibited the characteristics of social stratification and formal transformation. Specific manifestations included the blurring of stylistic boundaries between stelae and epitaph texts, their textual convergence, and evolving burial practices such as “using epitaphs as stelae”. Throughout the Yuan, Ming, and Qing dynasties, the system governing stelae and tablets remained largely unchanged, and the custom of the parallel use of stelae and epitaphs also persisted, especially among the middle- and upper-ranking official classes. However, from an overall perspective, its actual influence gradually declined during the Ming and Qing periods. By the late Qing Dynasty and the Republic of China period, the use of entombed epitaphs further declined, and the stone-carving-based funeral system generally shifted to focusing on above-ground stone carvings for commemoration.
|
|
Received: 16 April 2025
|
|
|
|
1 魏徵等：《隋书》，北京：中华书局，2020年。
2 长孙无忌等：《唐律疏议》，刘俊文点校，北京：中华书局，1983年。
3 李林甫等：《唐六典》，陈仲夫点校，北京：中华书局，2014年。
4 柳宗元：《柳河东集》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2008年。
5 李昉等编：《文苑英华》，北京：中华书局，1966年。
6 韩愈：《韩愈全集校注》，屈守元、常思春主编，成都：四川大学出版社，1996年。
7 白居易：《白居易集》，顾学颉点校，北京：中华书局，1979年。
8 窦仪等详订、岳纯之校证：《宋刑统校证》，北京：北京大学出版社，2015年。
9 杨树坤、游彪：《何人可立神道碑——宋代神道碑刻立资格的制度规定及实际执行情况论述》，见姜锡东主编《宋史研究论丛》总第26辑，北京：科学出版社，2020年，第113-123页。
10 宋祁：《景文集》，见王云五主编：《丛书集成初编》第1879册，上海：商务印书馆，1936年。
11 杜大珪编，顾宏义、苏贤校证：《名臣碑传琬琰集校证》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2021年。
12 刘挚：《忠肃集》，见王云五主编：《丛书集成初编》第1928册，上海：商务印书馆，1936年。
13 苏颂：《苏魏公文集》，见四川大学古籍研究所编：《宋集珍本丛刊》第12册，北京：线装书局，2004年。
14 河南省文物局编：《安阳韩琦家族墓地》，北京：科学出版社，2012年。
15 尹洙：《河南先生文集》，见《四部丛刊初编》第822册，上海：商务印书馆，1922年。
16 欧阳修：《欧阳修诗文集校笺》，洪本健校笺，上海：上海古籍出版社，2009年。
17 司马光：《温国文正司马公文集 温公续诗话》，罗立刚、侯体健点校，上海：上海人民出版社，2024年。
18 苏轼：《苏轼文集》，孔凡礼点校，北京：中华书局，1986年。
19 张邦基、范公偁、张知甫：《墨庄漫录 过庭录 可书》，孔凡礼点校，北京：中华书局，2002年。
20 徐吉军：《中国殡葬史·宋代卷》，北京：社会科学文献出版社，2017年。
21 慕容彦逢：《摛文堂集》，见《影印文渊阁四库全书》第1123册，台北：台湾商务印书馆，1986 年。
22 周必大：《周必大集校证》，王瑞来校证，上海：上海古籍出版社，2020年。
23 朱熹：《晦庵先生朱文公文集》，见朱杰人等主编：《朱子全书》修订本，上海：上海古籍出版社，合肥：安徽教育出版社，2010年。
24 陈师道：《后山先生集》，见四川大学古籍研究所编：《宋集珍本丛刊》第28册，北京：线装书局，2004年。
25 范纯仁：《范忠宣公文集》，见四川大学古籍研究所编：《宋集珍本丛刊》第15册，北京：线装书局，2004年。
26 朱记荣辑：《金石全例》，北京：北京图书馆出版社，2008年。
27 谢深甫等：《庆元条法事类》，见《续修四库全书》编纂委员会编：《续修四库全书》第861册，上海：上海古籍出版社，2002年。
28 郑嘉励：《南宋的志墓碑刻——以浙江的材料为例》，见浙江省博物馆编：《东方博物》第四十五辑，杭州：浙江大学出版社，2012年，第84-90页。
29 陈柏泉编著：《江西出土墓志选编》，南昌：江西教育出版社，1991年。
30 欧阳修：《欧阳修全集》，李逸安点校，北京：中华书局，2001年。
31 周密：《癸辛杂识》，吴企明点校，北京：中华书局，1988年。
32 唐顺之：《荆川先生文集》，见《四部丛刊初编》第1584册，上海：商务印书馆，1922年。
33 郑庆华修、潘颐福纂：《光绪麻城县志》，清光绪二年（1876）刻本。
34 杨延烈修，郁方董、刘元栋纂：《同治房县志》，见江苏古籍出版社编选：《中国地方志集成·湖北府县志辑》第59册，南京：江苏古籍出版社，2001年。
35 吴讷、徐师曾：《文章辨体序说 文体明辨序说》，于北山、罗根泽校点，北京：人民文学出版社，1962年。
36 朱荃宰：《文通》，见《续修四库全书》编纂委员会编：《续修四库全书》第1714册，上海：上海古籍出版社，2002年。 |
|
|
|
2026, Vol. 56 
