The Crow Terrace Poetry Trial(or Crow Terrace Poetry Case, 烏臺詩案)was a trial on charges including treason and lèse majesté thatoccurred in the year 1079 of Song dynasty era in Chinese history. Thelegal action conducted against Su Shi ("Dong Po") bygovernment prosecutors has abiding interest in the case of governmentcensorship versus artistic freedom. "Crow Terrace"refers to the nickname of the Imperial Office of the Censorate (御史臺),which prosecuted the case, citing Sung Criminal Code, Article 122:"Denouncing the Imperial Chariot". The mostprominent figure of the dozens accused was the official and artist SuShi (1037 – 1101), whose works of poetry were produced in court asevidence against him.
The trial was a major landmark in thestruggle for free speech, in medieval China. The trial resulted in SuShi's conviction and exile, as well as the conviction of over thirtyother individuals, who faced varying punishments including fines andofficial reprimands. The Crow Terrace Poetry Trial had thesignificant effect of dampening subsequent creative expression andset a major negative precedent for freedom of speech, at least forthe remainder of Song Dynasty China. Besides the significance of theCrow Terrace Poetry Trial for Su Shi and poetry, it is also a ratherremarkably well-documented instance of a medieval Chinese literaryprosecution, with surviving copies of indictments, arguments, casedisposition; not to mention numerous of Su Shi's poems, which wereentered as evidence.
General background
The Crow Terrace Poetry Trial tookplace in 1079, the 2nd year of the Yuanfeng era (Yuán Fēng 元豐;"Primary Abundance") 1078–1085 of the Song dynasty.The disparate states of the Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms periodhad been unified by the first Song ancestor, Zhao Kuangyin (EmperorTaizu of Song); and, the capital city established in Kaifeng. TheCrow Terrace Affair occurred during the reign of Emperor Shenzong ofSong, who was then emperor: he was born in 1048 and reigned from 1067to 1085.
Poetic background
As Alfreda Murck puts it: "Poetrypervaded the lives of educated scholars in the Song dynasty"(51). The poetic legacy was greatly derived from poetry of the Tangdynastic era. Especially important was the work of the Tang poet DuFu (Murck, 52-59). Du Fu (712 – 770) had a revival of interest inhis poetry during the Song dynastic era. One of Du Fu's poems was"Autumn Day in Kui Prefecture": written in and aboutthe exile experience in Kui Prefecture.
Su Shi's early life
Su Shi (1037 – 1101) also hassometimes been known as Dongpo. It was he who was put on trial in1079, in the Crow Terrace Poetry Affair. Su Shi "Dongpo"was already a prominent and popular poet, as well as being deeplyinvolved in the factional political of the time. Su Shi's careerbegan with particular promise. His father, Su Xun, was a knownscholar-official and his brother, Su Zhe, followed. The brotherspassed the imperial civil service tests in 1057 with honors (followedup in 1061 with specially-decreed examinations). Thus, Su Shi came tothe attention of emperor Renzong, who reigned from 1022 to 1063. Notonly that, but Su Shi obtained the patronage of prominent governmentofficial and renowned poet Ouyang Xiu. When Renzong died in 1063, hewas replaced by Yinzong, who ruled for 4 years till his death. Thenew emperor was the 19-year-old Shenzong, who was eager for a fulltreasury to fund his ambitions of re-conquest of the former Tangempire's northern territories, which had been incorporated intoneighboring, non-Chinese empires (Murck, 32).
Wang Anshi's New Policies: initialimplementation
Much of Wang Anshi's New Policies hadto do with fiscal issues. Shenzong's support of them had much to dowith the aspiration to expand the imperial sway beyond the currentborders. For this, much cash would need to be forthcoming. Picturedhere is the obverse and reverse of a Tian Xi Tong Bao (1017–1022)coin, typical for much of Chinese history. The holes could be used tostring coins together into convenient groups. Song dynasty monetarypolicies also included experimentation with paper notes.
Although theoretically, the emperor wasthe final and absolute authority in Chinese politics during the Songdynasty, in actuality many factors importantly affected events: theseincluded other politically influential persons such as the emperor'sin-laws and other relatives and also party politics. Party politicaldivision at the time was severe: Wang Anshi led a group of"reformists", also known as the "New Policyparty", whose ideas were perhaps ahead of their time. Su Shiwas part of the politically-opposed "conservative"group, later known as the "Yuanyou party", after theera-name during which they had exercised most power. Wang Anshi's NewPolicies had their ups-and-downs in imperial favor, but initially hewas able to sweep the political field of oppositional voices. SimaGuang, the main oppositional leader retired to Luoyang, as didvarious others in his faction. Su Shi's patron Ouyang Xiu (1007 –1072) was demoted, exiled, and eventually permitted to retire. Su Shiwas not identified as a main leader of the opposition party and wasexiled as governor of Hangzhou, which in itself was not the worstplace to be sent, or the worst position for someone pursuing a careerin politics, but it forbade his appearance at court, andconsequentially denied him direct influence or interaction with theimperial government, at the national level.
Hangzhou: life and poetry in exile
Su Shi's political vulnerability hadbeen increased by a prior conviction, which resulted in his firstsentence to exile, before the Crow Terrace incident. His first exilewas relatively mild: it was as governor of Hangzhou, on beautifulWest Lake, where the poet Bai Juyi had previously governed, a citywhich would later become the capital of the Song dynasty after thefall of Kaifeng to invasion (much after Su Shi's lifetime). Su Shiobtained a small farm-hold, here, which he worked while fulfillinghis service as a local official. As governor of Hangzhou, Su Shiemployed more than 200,000 workers in environmental works to dredgemud and sediment out of West Lake, thus preserving it from silting upand no longer being a lake, as it was in danger of doing so. Thedredged material was used to build a causeway (just as the poet BaiJuyi had done similarly, in similar circumstance, back in the Tangdynasty era). Su Shi's works helped endear him to the localpopulation. Su Shi's sobriquet "Dongpo" derives fromthis period of exile to the "Eastern Slope", referring tothe location of his farm. An anthology of Su Shi's poetry from hisHangzhou era came into circulation, collected and published by hisfriends (Murck, 48). David Hinton (364) describes this first exile inHangzhou as the time when he "consolidatedhis mature poetics".
New Policy: continuation withoutWang Anshi
While Su Shi concentrated on making thelives of the local people in his charge better, and pursued hispoetry which his position allowed time for, Wang Anshi's policieswent awry. Were they bad policies, or were they badly implemented, orwere climatic changes leading to drought and poor harvests to blame?These are all serious questions, important to historians of the time,and nowhere near to being definitively answered; but, they are rathersubject of great scholarly debate. What is certain is that Su Shi wasexiled until emperor Shenzong became somewhat disillusioned with WangAnshi (the powerful empress dowager had never been much of a fan ofhis). The Kaifeng merchants were becoming angry at the priceinflation of wholesale goods together with additional tax increasesand imposition of fees; and in north of the country a major droughtfollowed by horrible famine occurred in 1074, displacing thousands ofrefugees (Murck, 37-38). In late 1075, this was followed by aspectacular comet, traditionally viewed as a sign of great changes onearth, if not portending the fall of dynasties (Murck, 48) Theseevents helped to lead Wang Anshi into a relatively gentle exile, andto lead to the restoration of Su Shi and other banished officials topositions of power and respect, aided by empress dowager Cao.However, this was just the warm-up to a bitter and deadly politicalstruggle between the two factions in the ensuing years: now bothgroups had had their ranks decimated, and all sorts of charges ofcriminal impropriety were our would be filed. Ouyang Xiu had evenalready been charged with incest, and placed in early retirement: thebattle lines drawn, and Su Shi would soon be charged with treason tothe state.
End of exile
Su Shi was no longer in formal exile,but he avoided returning to the court in Kaifeng. His persecutor WangAnshi had been removed from there. And, Su Shi had the support ofRenzong's widow, who recalled his stellar performance in theexaminations. However, despite recall and promotion, in the field ofbitter factional politics, this made Su Shi a target for whatevercharges could be invented or discovered. Even avoiding the harshscrutiny in Kaifeng would not guarantee safety, instead Kaifeng wouldvisit him.
Accusation and arrest
Su Shi Dong Po's poetry was not onlypopular with the literate set: his poems were even sung in thestreets (Murck, 49). This came to official attention. In the summerof 1079, Su Shi was arrested and spent the next 4 months in jail, inKaifeng, during his trial. He was also beaten (Hinton, 364). When hisfamily packed up their goods and followed him to Kaifeng, they werebrutally seized and searched by soldiers sent to stop their boat andsearch for incriminating manuscripts: as a result the women of thefamily burned most of Su Shi's writings that the soldiers did nottake away (Murck, 50). Fearing that any of his writings could be usedagainst him, Su Shi's wife burned his papers on the deck (Hinton,364). Despite this, some 2,400 of his poems yet survive (Hinton,365).
Other conspirators
Another major figure indicted in thiscase was Wang Shen, a wealthy noble and imperial in-law, who was alsoa painter, poet, and friend of Su Shi. Wang was particularly accusedof having caused a collected edition of Su Shi's allegedly subversivepoems to be printed and published. Another person involved in thecase was Huang Tingjian (Hartman, 20). Huang and his uncle wereheavily fined, and Huang was exiled. Another person implicated in theevents was Su Shi's brother Su Zhe. There were in total more than 30indictments in the case.
Prosecution
Prosecution was by the Office of theCensor (censorate, or "Crow Terrace"). This office,under a head official was charged with investigating and prosecutingthe other officials within the imperial bureaucracy. Lead prosecutorsin the case (non-pinyin) were Li Ting and Shu Tan, early supportersof Wang Anshi and New Policy party members: Li Ting had beenappointed chief of the censorate in 1078 (Hartman, 21). Su Shi's caseinvolved an initial indictment, out of an eventual total of fourseparate indictments.
Evidence
The main evidence used by theprosecution in the trial were over thirty years of poetry and prosewritten by Su Shi. This was collected from many of his associates,and printed editions from the market place were also considered. Theanalysis as to the meanings and implications of Su Shi's writings wasnot clear-cut, in terms of whether they were actually treasonous, orwhether they were in the bounds of acceptable expression. Much of SuShi's testimony revolved around these points, and what was saidversus what he intended to imply, a matter much open tointerpretation, much of it of an erudite nature, involving scholarlyallusions, often obscure, dating back over a millennium and more of acontinuous literary tradition.
Defense
Su Shi seems to have representedhimself, as according with the legal tradition in China at the time,as would have been the case also with the other accused. His defenserelied on admitting that he criticized the New Policy legislation andits supporters at the court. This criticism was legal, and his poetrywould not have been needed to demonstrate that he was critical ofthese policies. Su Shi had in fact memorialized the emperorexplicitly detailing his thoughts and feelings in this regard, inforceful prose (for a sample translation, see de Bary, 425-431). Toavoid conviction, it was necessary for Su Shi to avoid theprosecution being able to prove that he had criticized or demeanedthe emperor or his dynasty: using poetry to give indirect advice tothe emperor which involved criticism of his subordinates andsuggested policy improvements could be construed as a service to thestate, and indeed there was a time-honored tradition of doing so,dating back through the earliest phases of the Chinese poetictradition. The main question was: did Su Shi's poems cross the linefrom criticizing the imperial subordinates and their actions, or didhis criticism extend to actually defaming the emperor himself?Whether Su Shi had crossed this line was also key in the case of theother persons accused, as their indictments centered aroundpublishing or disseminating Su Shi's poems, which if illegally foundto defame the emperor, automatically made them guilty of criminalconspiracy, if found that they were even merely aware of the poemsand failed to report them to the authorities.
Trial
Su Shi's trial lasted for 4 months,starting in the summer of 1079: he was accused of writing or allowingwritings to circulate that the government might consider to betreasonously derogatory to the person of the emperor or to the state,which were considered to be basically equivalent. The charges were of"denouncing the imperial chariot" (Murck, 49) and of"great irreverence toward the emperor" (Murck, 49):conviction carried a mandatory death penalty by beheading, accordingto the statutory Song penal code, although this had never yet beenapplied (Murck, 49). Among the evidence were poems by Su Shi (alsoknown as "Master Dongpo"). Su Shi defended himself, denyingaccusations, or explaining how the lines of his poems really referredto the results of the actions of corrupt ministers, which accordingto ancient tradition it was incumbent as a duty of a loyal officialto point out. In his trial, Su Shi confessed to such things ascomparing the attachment of unscrupulous officials to their salarieswith an owl's attachment to eating a rotten rat (Murck, 76).According to Alfreda Murck (92), in a further confession, this timeregarding the interpretation of a poem that he had written on theoccasion of the banishment of Zeng Gong to serve in a remotegovernment posting, Su Shi admitted: "This criticizesindirectly that many unfeeling men have recently been employed atCourt, that their opinions are narrow-minded and make a raucous dinlike the sound of cicadas, and that they do not deserve to be heard."However, he omitted to enlighten the court upon his use in this poemof matched rhymes from Du Fu's "Autumn Day in KuiPrefecture", or the added meanings which could then bederived from his poem (Murck, 92). In the end, Su Shi was convicted.The failure of the court to notice the extended meanings derivable bycomparison of his rhymes with Du Fu's was apparent (to those in theknow), and Su Shi and others, such as Wang Shen, having learned a wayto avoid censorial persecution while still being able to expressthemselves to each other would continue to employ and expand uponthis rhyme-matching, in conjunction with similarly coded painting.
Sentencing
Numerous convictions resulted from theCrow Terrace Poetry Case. Sentences ranged from fines to exile. Someof the fines were quite large, and some of the exile destinationswere to remote and dangerous locations, with little literary cultureand a prevalence of malaria and other diseases. However, Su Shi andthe rest avoided the death penalty.
Su Shi: Commutation of deathsentence
Su Shi avoided the death sentence,partly due to the embarrassment which the government would face fordecapitating a popular figure for some verses of poetry which it tookthem 4 months to explain as being derogatory towards itself, andpartly because of the influence of empress dowager Cao. Cao wasRenzong's widow, and former regent, during the few years of the reignof the sickly and infirm emperor Yingzong (Paludan, 129-130). Sheremembered Renzong's pleasure at discovering the talents of the Subrothers through the imperial examinations process. Also, capitalpunishment by the public removal of Su Shi's head would have been aclear violation of the Song dynastic founder Taizu's precepts, whohad had written in stone for all of his successors to read that"Officials and scholars must not be executed", asthe 2nd of his 3 admonitions which each of his successors weresupposed to kneel down before and to read as part of their ceremonyof investiture as emperor (Paludan, 122). In early 1080, Su Shi wassentenced to exile, and placed under 2 years of house arrest, in avery remote and difficult place, the then relatively small village ofHuangzhou District, on the Yangzi River. Technically the sentence waspenal servitude for 2 years (Murck, 49 and 304, note 75). At the endof the 2 years he was then by law allowed to apply to the imperialauthority for recall from exile, but there was no legal mechanism bywhich this pardon would be automatically granted, and by this timeSu's supporter dowager empress Cao was dead; thus, Su Shi remained inexile for a few more years (Murck, 49).
Others
Others convicted included Su Shi'sbrother, Su Zhe, who was exiled. Huang Tingjian and his uncle Li wereheavily fined, and Huang was exiled. In total, there were over 30convictions.
Social and political import
The Crow Terrace Poetry Case had animportant and lasting effect on Song dynasty society and culture. Thefact that a popular poet and popular government official could becensored and relegated to extreme exile had a chilling effect onfreedom of speech (Murck, 49):
"The 1079 trial andconviction of a prominent figure, one of the realm's most respectedscholars, marks a further change in political culture. Civilbureaucrats were losing security along with respect. Su's convictioncaused consternation.... Already habituated to elaborate indirectionin their commentaries and poetry, anti-reformers were revising orburning poems that might be interpreted as seditious" (Murck,49).
Poetry criticism
The Crow Terrace Poetry Trial'ssurviving manuscripts provide a rare instance of self-criticism by apoet. Su Shi was forced to defend himself against charges for whichthe chief evidence was his poetry. The surviving records of the caseinclude detailed commentary by Su Shi on his own poems. The contextin which his self-commentary is made tends to emphasize the politicaland social criticism implied in many of his poems, which may nototherwise be so evident today (Hartman, 24). Also, Su Shi's defenserelied on making a case that his sociopolitical criticism wasdirected toward New Policy supporters as court, and not against theemperor himself or the state itself, rather that he was fulfilling atime-honored and legally acceptable function (if not indeed a duty),in which his poetry was intended as a service toward the emperor andthe state (the "imperial chariot"), intended to adviserather than illegally criticize the emperor or the dynasty (criticismof Wang Anshi and other officials was legally permissible, as such,so long as no blame appeared to be directed towards the emperor forretaining their services).
New poetry
Su Shi and friends continued to writepoetry, despite (or perhaps encouraged by) their frequent banishment.Su Shi collected some of his extant works from friends, havingensured that any offending lines had been removed (Murck, 50). Someof his poetry began more and more to use such a deep and subtleallusive process that it would be difficult for those outside hisgroup to grasp the real meaning, let alone put him back on trial. Oneof these techniques was to use rhymes from other poems; thus,alluding to lines from that poem, and also alluding to other poemswhich Su Shi and his friends circulated which also matched theserhymes. Subtle complexities of profound political dissent could thenbe masked under cover of seemingly innocuous lines about naturescenes in the Xiaoxiang region: indeed a set of 8 conventional scenesevolved (Murck, passim). These are known as the Eight Views ofXiaoxiang.