Reflection on the Spread of Chinese Popular Religion: A Case-Study of the Han Yu Belief in the Chaozhou Region

Abstract

Han Yu 韓愈 was a prominent literatus in the Tang dynasty and an influential figure in the history of Chaozhou culture. From the Song dynasty, the Neo-Confucian teachings became popular, and Han Yu was revered as a significant pioneer; hence, his position was raised to a new height. In Chaozhou, local officials and the literati continuously emphasized Han Yu’s significance to Chaozhou culture and education and built many temples and academies devoted to him. As a deity, Han Yu was viewed as a representative of Confucianism and was typical of orthodoxy sacrifices. The present article clarifies the origination and transmission of the Han Yu belief in the Chaozhou region and explores the process of deification and the spread of Chinese popular religion. Although local officials and the literati spared no efforts in promoting the Han Yu belief, the belief never became popular among Chaozhou people. Local officials and the literati focused on different aspects of the Han Yu belief. They stressed the orthodoxy of the belief and were never concerned with miracles. What they were concerned with and endeavored for somewhat hampered the spread of the belief among the masses.

1. Introduction

Han Yu 韓愈 (768–824), born in Heyang 河陽 (today Mengzhou 孟州, Henan 河南 province), was a prominent literatus in the Tang dynasty and an influential figure in the history of Chaozhou 潮州 culture. In his lifetime, Han Yu propounded Confucian orthodoxy to maintain and restore the ruling order of the Tang court. In the fourteenth year of Kaiyuan 開元 (819), Han Yu submitted a memorial entitled Jian ying fogu 諫迎佛骨, also known as Lun fogu biao 論佛骨表, to Emperor Xianzong 憲宗. In the memorial, he elaborated on the hazards of Buddhist worship, criticized Emperor Xianzong for welcoming and offering sacrifices to Buddhist relics, and advised Emperor Xianzong to destroy Buddhist relics (Han 1986, pp. 612–16). His sincere advice, however, provoked Emperor Xianzong to punish him: Han Yu was immediately relegated to the governor of Chaozhou, a city exceedingly far from Chang’an 長安. In Chaozhou, Han Yu did not lose heart and fulfilled his responsibility. During his eight-month term, Han Yu endeavored to remove the threat of crocodiles, valued farming, released slaves, and promoted local education (Zeng 2015, pp. 7–14). Although Han Yu attempted to contribute to local people, he was not able to bring much change to Chaozhou in a short period. For example, crocodiles still endangered Chaozhou people during the Song dynasty. It was, however, during the Song dynasty that local officials began to publicize Han Yu’s contributions to Chaozhao and build a temple for him. From the Song dynasty, Neo-Confucian teachings became popular, and Han Yu was revered as a significant pioneer; hence, his position was raised to a new height. In Chaozhou, local officials and the literati continuously emphasized Han Yu’s significance to Chaozhou culture and education. He was shaped into a mentor to enlighten Chaozhou people. Han Yu gradually became a key figure in the transformation of Chaozhou’s history and a symbol of Chaozhou civilization. Consequently, many areas were created and/or marked with Han Yu; for example, the largest river Exi 鱷溪 in Chaozhou was renamed Hanjiang 韓江. Another kind of site elevated Han Yu’s position to the highest level, i.e., temples. Han Yu became a deity and was presented with sacrifices in Chaozhou for more than a thousand years. As a deity, Han Yu was viewed as a representative of Confucianism and was typical of orthodoxy sacrifices (zhengsi 正祀) initiated and supported by local officials and the literati. They never worried about the image of Han Yu and never spared efforts in adapting the beliefs of Han Yu to national policies on sacrifices. From the Song dynasty onward, many local deities changed and had to adapt themselves to national policies by revising their background and performing miracles. They aimed to be recognized as orthodox sacrifices or at least avoid being labeled as illicit sacrifices (yinsi 淫祀).1 During this process, the literati and local officials played dominant roles in interpreting these local deities and negotiating with the court.

The process of deification and the spread of deities are important topics in the study of Chinese popular religion. From the Song dynasty onward, China underwent tremendous changes in its demographic, political, intellectual, and social landscape (see Hartwell 1982, pp. 365–442; Hymes 1986, pp. 82–135; Bol 1992, pp. 300–42; Shields 2015, pp. 48–64). Chinese popular religion entered a new era, with great changes in its national religious policies, regional economy, and social culture (Wang and Pi 2010, pp. 9–30). Hymes argued that the concerns and self-conceptions of the local elite shifted significantly, i.e., a turn from national to local spheres of interest, and increasingly supported the rise of local deities (Hymes 2002, pp. 2, 114–46). Local deities were confronted with new challenges and opportunities, and a few developed into nationwide deities. Watson explored how the Empress of Heaven transformed from a village god to a national deity from the Song to the modern period, and how this deity was interpreted and accepted by various groups. Watson pointed out the significance of the state and argued that the state exercised control over the religious lives of ordinary people by subtle means (Watson 1985, pp. 292–324). Duara used the concept of “superscription of symbols” to explain the complexity of Emperor Guan myths and interpret the wide spread of the belief of Emperor Guan (Duara 1988, pp. 778–95). Hansen used secular sources to analyze popular religious change in the Southern Song dynasty. She argued that the Song dynasty witnessed great changes in popular religion; many new deities and regional cults sprang up, and miracles became the core of popular deities (Hansen 1990). Kleeman continued the discussion of regional cults. He described the history of the deity Wenchang 文昌 and discussed how a local deity developed into a national deity of imperial civil examinations (Kleeman 1994). Zhu Haibin 朱海濱 focused on changes in national policies on sacrifices from the Song to Qing dynasties and explored the spread of important national and local deities in Zhejiang 浙江, such as Emperor Guan, Zhou Xiong 周雄, and Hu Ze 胡則. He argued that many groups adapted these deities to national policies and regional natural and human environments when they became widespread in a certain region (Zhu 2008). The spread of Chinese popular religion has been the subject of many studies, especially nationwide deities like Emperor Guan. Ter Haar performed a comprehensive study of Emperor Guan and explored the wide spread of Emperor Guan. He highlighted the significance of oral culture and reflected on previous different models and concepts of traditional Chinese religious culture (Ter Haar 2017).

The present article clarifies the origination and transmission of the Han Yu belief in the Chaozhou region2 and further discusses different groups in the spread of Chinese popular religion. A few scholars have conducted pioneering research on the Han Yu belief in Chaozhou. Zeng Chunan 曾楚楠 studied Han Yu’s activities in Chaozhou and compiled related historical resources (Zeng 2015).3 Wu Rongqing 吳榕青 expounded the origination and development of academies offering sacrifices to Han Yu (Wu 2009, pp. 81–85; 2011, pp. 8–15; 2019). Other scholars described the history of the Han Yu belief and explored how and why the belief rose in Chaozhou. They emphasized that the Han Yu belief was profound and popular among Chaozhou people, but their discussion only concentrated on the ancestral Temple of Han Wengong in the center of Chaozhou (Li 2012, pp. 166–71; He 2018, pp. 59–63; Bian and Lian 2020, pp. 42–49). Although local officials and the literati spared no efforts in promoting the Han Yu belief, they never became popular among Chaozhou people. The primary religious practice of Chaozhou people was described as “worshipping deities” (bai laoye 拜老爺). In the fieldwork, we can see that the number of temples ranges from one to over ten in villages/communities; there are more than ten thousand temples and hundreds of deities, but only very few Han Yu cults have been discovered. This is irrational and abnormal. Local officials and the literati were the most powerful and influential groups in traditional China, but their efforts to spread the Han Yu belief failed to make an impression on the masses. This article uses the example of the Han Yu belief to reassess the position of the literati in Chinese popular religion. It contains three sections. The first section delineates the history of the Han Yu temples supported by local officials in the center of Chaozhou and affiliated counties. It explores how local officials promoted the belief and why the belief was able to be transmitted. The second section focuses on another kind of organization involved in the belief, that is, the academy. Han Yu was viewed as the most significant figure in the history of Chaozhou culture and was worshipped in many academies. This section describes the history of academies and the transformation of Han Yu as a deity in literature. The third section explores the Han Yu belief among the masses by using oral resources, vernacular literature, and investigation data. It discovers that the masses depicted a different image of Han Yu and failed to respond to the official promotion of the belief.

2. The Han Yu Belief and Local Officials

Local officials initiated the Han Yu belief in Chaozhou and continuously supported the ancestral Han Wengong Temple (Han Wengong Ci 韓文公祠) from the Song dynasty to the Republic. In the second year of Xianping 咸平 (999), a Chaozhou controller-general (tongpan 通判), Chen Yaozuo 陳堯佐 (963–1044), first built a temple devoted to Han Yu behind the office of the regional inspector, which was the origination of the Han Yu belief in the center of Chaozhou. In that year, Chen Yaozuo wrote the Verse Summoning Han Wengong (Zhao Han Wengong wen 招韓文公文) and a preface to record his pioneering work. He argued that the Han Wengong temple was typical of orthodox sacrifices against ghost worship, which was frequently associated with local deities and was labeled as an illicit sacrifice; therefore, the founding of the temple was the local officials’ responsibility:

Nanyue [people] mostly worship ghosts, but the Han Yu temple was not established. How can officials who manage local people be described as [who administer the policy of] benevolence? 南粵大率尚鬼，而公之祠弗立，官斯民者，又曰仁乎？

(Yongle Dadian 1986, p. 2471)

His successors accepted this viewpoint and shouldered their responsibilities to maintain the Han Wengong Temple. In a thousand years (999–1949), the temple was relocated twice and was renovated or rebuilt more than twenty-eight times (Rao 2009a, pp. 784–801). In 1189, a Chaozhou prefect (zhizhou 知州), Ding Yunyuan 丁允元4, relocated the Han Wengong Temple to the East Mountain (Dongshan 東山, a. k. a. Hanshan 韓山), where Han Yu frequently visited in his eight-month term. Henceforth, the temple was never removed and continuously supported by local officials. The supreme governors of Chaozhou became strong supporters, donating their salaries and appealing to colleagues for renovation or reconstruction. Among the twenty-eight times rebuilding work is known to have taken place, nineteen of the works were advocated by prefects (zhizhou or zhifu 知府) or commanders (zongguan 總管), six by provincial officials, and three by magistrates of Haiyang. Advocated by provincial officials, the supreme governors of Chaozhou were still significant participants and implementers. The end of the nineteenth century witnessed a largescale reconstruction of the Han Wengong Temple by provincial and local officials. In 1887, the governor-general of Liangguang (Liangguang zongzu 兩廣總督) inspected Chaozhoufu and ordered the Chaozhou prefect Fang Gonghui 方功惠 (1829–1897) to renew the temple. Fang Gonghui took seven years to accomplish the reconstruction project and considerably extended the temple.5

The continuity of the temple became a kind of political achievement and a way for local officials to express their indignation and ambition. The first initiator, Chen Yaozuo, was a famous grand councilor (zaixiang 宰相) and experienced ups and downs in his more than fifty-year career (Zhao 2022, pp. 13–44). In 998, Chen Yaozuo was relegated to Chaozhou because his plain speaking enraged Emperor Zhenzong 真宗. Similar to Han Yu, Chen Yaozuo attached importance to local education and people’s hardships, i.e., renovating the Confucian temple and eliminating crocodiles (Guo [1547] 1991, p. 225). Chen Yaozuo was obviously inspired by Han Yu, and this subsequently evolved into a fixed pattern for many Chaozhou officials. In a well-known inscription entitled Chaozhou Han Wengong Miao bei 潮州韓文公廟碑, Su Shi 蘇軾 (1037–1101) pointed out that the Chaozhou prefect Wang Di 王滌 took Han Yu as the only model on which to cultivate talents and govern people (凡所以養士治民者，一以公為師) (Yongle Dadian 1986, p. 2472). From the Song dynasty onward, Neo-Confucian scholars regarded Han Yu as their pioneer and continuously promoted his position. Su Shi praised Han Yu that his articles rectified the deteriorating writing style of the past eight dynasties, and his Confucian way saved the world from degeneration (文起八代之衰，道濟天下之溺) (Yongle Dadian 1986, p. 2472). Han Yu became a role model for Chaozhou officials and was respected as a mentor for generations (baishi shi 百世師). The creation and renovation of the Han Wengong Temple demonstrated local officials’ admiration for Han Yu and their aspiration to follow Han Yu. In particular, local officials suffered setbacks in their official careers and demonstrated their indignation and indomitable spirit by supporting the Han Wengong Temple. In an inscription entitled Han Wengong Citang ji 韓文公祠堂記, the Chaozhou prefect, Xu Xiling 許錫齡, expressed his admiration for Han Yu and his disappointment in failing to contribute to the Han Wengong Temple. Xu Xiling assumed the role of prefect for only several months and was dismissed from office due a mistake by the subordinate magistrate. Before leaving, he visited the temple many times and wrote an inscription to express his sentiment (Zeng 2015, pp. 111–12). The aim of the temple, moreover, was to cultivate and create loyal and righteous people (Yongle Dadian 1986, p. 2471). Local officials had a responsibility to educate local people and promote good social customs, which were significant political achievements. Their primary means was to promote orthodox sacrifices. The Han Wengong temple was typical of orthodoxy sacrifices. Chaozhou officials attached great importance to the Han Wengong Temple and rebuilt it once destroyed. In the year 1575, the authorities pacified a prolonged period of banditry and chaos, and instantly rebuilt the Han Wengong Temple. A vice commissioner, Jin Zhi 金淛, initiated the rebuilding project and argued that the temple was closely connected to moral customs.6 The Han Wengong temple gradually became a reflection of the social and political situation. The establishment and abolishment of the temple were associated with the rise and fall of the world’s morals and were related to the merits and demerits of the administration (一祠之興革，固世道盛衰之攸關，吏治得失之所係).7

The Han Wengong Temple was destroyed and rebuilt more than twenty-eight times and left many inscriptions (see

Table 1. Inscriptions of the Han Wengong Temple8.

Time	Author	Title
999	Chen Yaozuo 陳堯佐	Zhao Han Wengong wen 招韓文公文
1092	Su Shi 蘇軾	Chaozhou Han Wengong Miao bei 潮州韓文公廟碑
Ca. 1253	Liu Kezhuang 劉克莊	Chaozhou xiu Han Wengong Miao 潮州修韓文公廟
1307	Zhao Mengpu 趙孟仆	Chongjian Chaozhou Han Wengong Miao ji 重建潮州韓文公廟記
Ca. 1326	He Minxian 何民先	Chongjian Shuidong Hanmiao ji 重建水東韓廟記
1443	Wang Yuan 王源	Zengxiu Hanci zhi ji 增修韓祠之記
1461	Liu Wei 劉煒	Chongxiu Han Wengong Miao ji 重修韓文公廟記
1507	Lin Tingyu 林廷玉	Chongxiu Han Wengong Ci ji 重修韓文公祠記
1575	Liu Zixing 劉子興	Chongxiu Han Wengong Miao beiji 重修韓文公廟碑記
1609	Lin Xichun 林熙春	Chongxiu Hanci beiji 重修韓祠碑記
1633	Huang Richang 黃日昌	Chongxiu Han Wengong Miao beiji 重修韓文公廟碑記
1666	Zu Zhichun 祖植椿	Chongxiu Hanci bei 重修韓祠碑
1681	Zeng Huagai 曾華蓋	Chongxiu Hangong Ci ji Guangji qiao beiji 重修韓公祠及廣濟橋碑記
1707	Xu Xiling 許錫齡	Han Wengong Citang ji 韓文公祠堂記
1762	Zou Chaoyang 鄒朝陽	Taishou Dinggong peixiang beiji 太守丁公配享碑記
1815	Hui Jing 惲敬	Chaozhou Han Wengong Miao beiwen 潮州韩文公庙碑文
1894	Fang Gonghui 方功惠	Zengxiu Hanshan Changli Ci ji 增修韓山昌黎祠記
1926	Fang Naibin 方乃斌	Chongxiu Han Wengong Ci ji 重修韓文公祠記

). These inscriptions were created by local officials and the literati, and reflected their views on the Han Yu belief. The extant eighteen inscriptions are as follows:

The above twelve authors were officials and initiators, primarily Chaozhou prefects or provincial officials. The content of each inscription was similar and generally contained four sections. First, they described Han Yu’s experience, highlighting his upright and unyielding heroism and emphasizing his contribution to Confucian orthodoxy. Second, the authors expressed their admiration for Han Yu and illustrated the significance of offering sacrifices to Han Yu. Third, the authors detailed Han Yu’s activities in Chaozhou and highly praised his contributions. Last but not least, they recorded the history of the Han Wengong Temple and demonstrated that the authorities valued the temple and continuously provided support. Similar contents can be seen in temple inscriptions of other deities. These inscriptions, however, reflect an unusual phenomenon with regard to temple inscriptions. Hansen argues that temple inscriptions contained modified miracle tales circulating at the time and can be used to study the social context of popular religion in the twentieth and thirteenth centuries (Hansen 1990, p. 14). Referring to the creation, intension, and content of the temple inscriptions, Hansen pointed out the following:

On certain occasions, often following the performance of a particularly marvelous miracle or the receipt of a title from the government, the followers, both literate and not, of a given deity joined together to sponsor the carving of a commemorative text onto a stele. Put up to impress people with the power of a god, steles were not necessarily designed to be read. The sheer magnitude of the stone (sometimes over two meters high and one and a half meters wide) amply conveyed both a deity’s power and the extent of support for him. The texts carved on steles often include a biography of the deity before his or her apotheosis, a history of the deity’s miracles, a list of titles received from the central government, and a physical description of the temple

(Hansen 1990, p. 14).

Miracles triggered the creation of temple inscriptions and constituted a significant (or even indispensable) aspect of them. Temple inscriptions, furthermore, became evidence of miracles and presented a deity’s efficacy. In a study on Zhejiang, Zhu Haibin argued that the wide spread of local deities relied upon miracles that adjusted to regional natural and human environments (Zhu 2008, p. 183). The meaning of miracles was obvious, and therefore their absence in all extant inscriptions of the Han Wengong Temple was most likely not an unintended consequence. This indicates that the authorities deliberately neglected all miracles and were never concerned about the efficacy of Han Yu. As a deity, Han Yu relied on his personality and charisma and constant support from the authorities.

From the sixteenth century, the authorities began to build temples devoted to Han Yu in affiliated counties of Chaozhou. During this period, national sacrificial policies returned to Confucian fundamentalism and highlighted the orthodoxy of temples (Zhu 2008, pp. 7–9). In the year 1572, a Chaoyang magistrate, Huang Yilong 黃一龍, supported the building of the Han Temple (Hanci 韓祠) in the East Mountain of Chaoyang. It was the first Han Yu temple outside of the Chaozhou center, and prefectural officials had promoted the Han Yu belief for more than five hundred years so that it had reached a high level: “river and mountain were surnamed Han” (江山易姓為韓). In 1570, Huang Yilong took office in Chaoyang and suggested building a temple devoted to Han Yu since he was exceedingly worshipped in the center of Chaozhou and because Han Yu also had a connection with Chaoyang.9 His suggestion, however, did not receive a positive response. Two years later, Huang Yilong visited the Temple of Twin Loyalty (Shuangzhong Miao 雙忠廟, a. k. a. Lingwei Miao 靈威廟)10. He looked at his colleagues and sighed:

The Twin Loyalty came to Chaoyang because [the spirit of] Han Yu had been here. Now there are temples devoted to the Twin Loyalty, yet how can it only lack a temple devoted to Han Yu [in Chaoyang]? The statue of Han Yu ever stood in a Buddhist temple, but it had been abandoned for a long time. Even if it still stands today, how is it enough to show respect? It is said that Han Yu never visited the East Mountain, and hence can we build a temple for Han Yu on the site of the former Temple of Dongyue this year? 夫二忠之來，以韓公之所在也。今二忠有廟，公可獨無？且像公者，故在沙門，然廢久矣。縱今猶存，曷足以示崇重？聞公嘗至東山，其以東嶽故地祠公，自斯年始，可乎？

(Lin [1572] 1963, juan 10: 8b)

On this occasion, his proposal was supported by colleagues and the local literati, especially Lin Dachun 林大春 (1523–1588), who was born in Chaoyang and became a reputable scholar and senior official.11 Huang Yilong spared no efforts in building the Han Yu Temple and utilized the belief of Twin Loyalty, an official and influential belief in Chaoyang, to accomplish his ambition. From the fourteenth century, local officials and the gentry increasingly focused on the belief of Twin Loyalty and emphasized their roles in protecting Chaoyang against bandits and pirates (Chen 2003, pp. 21–33). The Twin Loyalty gradually became guardians of Chaoyang. Moreover, they highlighted and constructed the connection between Han Yu and Twin Loyalty to establish the orthodoxy of the Twin Loyalty in Chaozhou (Chen 2001, pp. 128–29). In 1565, the Temple of Twin Loyalty was rebuilt after being destroyed by bandits; Li Dachun wrote an inscription for this reconstruction and acted as a witness to the connection between Han Yu and Twin Loyalty.12 Huang Yilong strengthened the connection and received support to build the Han Temple. Lin Dachun approved Huang Yilong and provided a portrait of Han Yu from his collection in order to create a divine image (Lin [1572] 1963, juan 10: 8b–9a). Based on these temples, local officials and the gentry created an atmosphere in which loyal officials could worship in the East Mountain of Chaoyang.13 This case in Chaoyang shows that the spread of the Han Yu belief in nearby counties was not smooth, even though the belief was highly valued in the center of Chaozhou. After a long period of hard work, the authorities constructed temples in the center of several counties (see

Table 2. The Han Yu temples in the centers of the affiliated counties14.

Temple	Creation Time	County	Initiator	Official Position
Hanci 韓祠	1572	Chaoyang	Huang Yilong	Magistrate
Jinghan Ci 景韓祠	1584	Chenghai	He Ganfu 何敢復	Chaozhou assistant-prefect (tongzhi 同知) and acting magistrate
Han Changli Ci 韓昌黎祠	1629	Jieyang	Feng Yuanbiao 馮元飈	Magistrate
Han Wengong Ci 韓文公祠	The Ming dynasty	Raoping	The literati and gentry
Han Wengong Ci	1735 (?)	Huilai	Qiu Yueju 裘曰菊	Magistrate
Hanci	1743	Puning	Xiao Linzhi 蕭麟趾	Magistrate
Han Wengong Ci	1862–1874	Nan’ao

below).

In Fengshun county, Han Yu was worshipped in the Temple of Eminent Officials (Minghuan Ci 名宦祠) (Ge [1884] 1967, p. 297). The magistrates led the promotion of the belief in counties and connected the Han Yu belief to local education. In the Qing dynasty, many temples were transformed into academies (shuyuan 書院) or constituted the principal part of academies. Han Yu became a significant deity among the literati.

3. The Han Yu Belief and the Literati

In his term, Han Yu contributed to the promotion of local culture and education; hence, he was exaggeratively depicted as the founder of Chaozhou education and was worshipped in academies from the end of the Song dynasty. In Chaozhou, Han Yu donated his salary to support the prefectural school and appointed Zhao De 趙德, a metropolitan graduate (jinshi 進士), as the county defender (xianwei 縣尉) of Haiyang, taking charge of the school.15 Su Shi argued that Han Yu exerted a profound impact on Chaozhou education:

Initially, Chaozhou people did not know learning. Han Yu engaged metropolitan graduate Zhao De as their mentor, and from then, on Chaozhou people were altogether devoted to articles and morals. 始潮人未知學，公命進士趙德為之師，自是潮之人士皆篤於文行。

(Yongle Dadian 1986, p. 2472)

Before the arrival of Han Yu, other Chaozhou prefects, including Zhang Xuansu 張玄素 (?–664) and Chang Gun 常衮 (729–783), had established schools and promoted local education (Zeng 2015, p. 13). Su Shi also realized that Han Yu was not the first figure to start a new era of Chaozhou culture and education. He excessively praised Han Yu and aimed to highlight Han Yu’s role in popularizing Confucian education among the lower and middle classes (Huang and Chen 2001, pp. 89–90). Su Shi’s viewpoint was accepted by some local officials, and they established the earliest academy in Chaozhou. In the third year of Chunyou 淳祐 (1243), Zheng Liangchen 鄭良臣, a Chaozhou prefect, founded the Hanshan Academy (Hanshan Shuyuan 韓山書院) on the south of Chaozhou city, in which the Han Wengong Temple was located before 1189. The academy primarily contained a lecture hall, a shrine, and four dormitories. The shrine was devoted to Han Yu (in the middle) and Zhao De (Wu 2011, pp. 8–10). In 1269, Zhou Dunyi 周敦頤 (1017–1073) and Liao Deming 廖德明 joined the academy; these were the Chaozhou controller-general and a disciple of Zhu Xi 朱熹.16 The academy enrolled twenty students, called zhaisheng 齋生, who prepared for civil examinations; the position of dean (shanzhang 山長) was occupied by an instructor of the prefectural Confucian school (zhouxue jiaoshou 州學教授) (Wu 2019, pp. 12–22). From the thirteenth to the early twentieth centuries, the Hanshan Academy was rebuilt, relocated, and renamed many times because of wars and official policies. It, however, never broke off and consecutively acted as a center of Chaozhou culture and education. The academy supplemented Confucian schools and trained students for civil examinations. Offering sacrifices to Han Yu was essential to the academy and led to an increase in Chaozhou education from the Tang dynasty. At the beginning of the Qing dynasty, the academy met both challenges and opportunities because of the vacillation of educational policies. In 1688, the Hanshan Academy was transformed into the School of South Corner (Nanyu Shexue/Yixue 南隅社學/義學), which provided public elementary education. In 1691, Shi Qixian 史起賢, a Hui Chao military defense circuit (Hui Chao bingbeidao 惠潮兵備道), established a new academy, which offered sacrifices to Han Yu, alongside the Han Wengong Temple in Mt. Han, and was named the Changli Academy (Changli Shuyuan 昌黎書院) (Wu 2019, pp. 36–38). In 1732, Long Weilin 龍為霖, a Chaozhou prefect, reiterated Han Yu’s groundbreaking advancement of education and extensively enlarged the academy, adding libraries, rooms, and the Kuixing Tower (Kuixing Ge 奎星閣). Moreover, the academy was renamed Hanshan Shuyuan.17 In the same period, the School of South Corner was retransformed into an academy named Chengnan Shuyuan 城南書院, which offered sacrifices to Han Yu and Wenchang 文昌 (Wu [1900] 1967, p. 173). In the Qing dynasty, the worship of Han Yu gradually became a characteristic of many academies.

In affiliated counties, more academies provided sacrifices to Han Yu and enshrined him with deities of literature. From the Song to the early Qing, local officials and the literati established many academies with various functions and purposes, and only a few sacrificed to Han Yu. From the eleventh year of Yongzheng (1733), the court supported the development of academies and promoted their institutionalization and regularization as a special supplement to Confucian schools (Wu 2009, p. 83). After the Yongzhen court, new academies also increasingly came into being in Chaozhou, and more academies offered sacrifices to Han Yu since his position had reached a peak and many temples had been built in affiliated counties. Based on local gazetteers (fangzhi 方志) and inscriptions, it is clear that fourteen academies offered sacrifices to Han Yu from the Song to the Qing dynasties (see

Table 3. Academies that offered sacrifices to Han Yu in affiliated counties18.

Academy	Creation Time	County	Related Temples
Hanshan/Chengnan Shuyuan	1243	Haiyang	Han Wengong Miao
Jingshan Shushe 京山書舍	1269	Haiyang
Longhu Shuyuan 龍湖書院	Ca. 1621–1627	Haiyang
Changli/Hanshan Shuyuan	1691	Haiyang	Wenchang Ge
Jinshan Shuyuan 金山書院	1877	Haiyang	Zhou Lianxi Ci 周濂溪祠
Dongshan Shuyuan 東山書院	Ca. 1612	Chaoyang	Shengong Ci 沈公祠 Hanci
Wenqi Shuyuan 文起書院	1629	Jieyang	Han Changli Ci
Kungang Shuyuan 昆岡書院	1743	Puning	Wenchang Ge
Sandu Shuyuan 三都書院	1830	Puning
Jinghan Shuyuan 景韓書院	Ca. 1765	Chenghai	Jinghan Ci
Wenming Shuyuan 文明書院	1762	Huilai	Wenchang Ge
Jinghai Shuyuan 靖海書院	Ca. 1736–1795	Huilai
Hangong Shuyuan 韓公書院	1785	Raoping	Han Wengong Ci Wenchang Ci
Qiyuan Shuyuan 啟元書院	1868	Dabu

below).

More than half were established in the Qing dynasty. The majority of academies were located in Haiyang, since the Han Yu belief originated in and was vigorously promoted in Chaozhou city. Depending on their connection with the belief, these academies can be divided into three groups. Firstly, some academies were in memory of Han Yu and initially offered sacrifices to him. Secondly, some academies were based on previous temples devoted to Han Yu. The temples were possibly extant or abandoned. Thirdly, some academies were transformed from other temples or initially sacrificed to other deities, frequently Wenchang and Kuixing. Some of these academies offered sacrifices to Han Yu at a time later than their creation time. This division was ideal, since the history of a few academies was complicated. The Hangong Academy was closely associated with the Han Wengong Temple established in the Ming dynasty. In the early Qing dynasty, the temple was abandoned, and the divine image of Han Yu was moved to a corner of Wenchang Ci. The gentry desired to reconstruct the Han Wengong Temple, but they failed because of underfunding. In 1785, the Raoping magistrate, Chen Huan 陳煥, and the gentry transformed the School of Sanrao (Sanrao Yixue 三饒義學) into the Hangong Shuyuan to sacrifice to the divine image and revive the Han Yu belief. Chen Huan wrote an inscription entitled Gaijian Hangong Ci beiji 改建韓公祠碑記19 (see Figure 1). The above table shows that many academies connected with the Wenchang temples. Academies frequently focused on the worship of Wenchang and Kuixing, since academies specially trained students for civil examinations in the Qing dynasty. Consequently, Han Yu was enshrined with deities of literature and became a deity of civil examinations in Chaozhou. In 1810, the literati of Zhanglin 樟林 asked the Chenghai magistrate, Qi Shouye 齊守業, if they could regain the Temple of Zhuzi (Zhuzi Ci 朱子祠) and transform it into the Temple of Wenchang. Four years later, the Temple of Wenchang was completed and devoted to Wenchang as the main deity and Han Wengong and Zhu Wengong 朱文公 as secondary deities. The newly appointed Chenghai magistrate, Li Shuji 李書吉, additionally set up a free school inside (Chen 2021, p. 311). However, the temple and its property subsequently were occupied many times. Chen Chunsheng 陳春聲 argued that this kind of temple supported by the literati possibly lacked a wide and powerful belief base (Chen 2021, p. 312).

Han Yu’s miracles related to civil examinations can be dated back to the Song dynasty. On the East Mountain, which is also known as Hanshan, an oak tree20 was planted next to a pavilion where Han Yu frequently visited; this later became the location of the Han Wengong Temple. In the Song dynasty, the tree was planted by Han Yu and was named Hanmu 韓木, since nobody knew its name. It became a tradition that Chaozhou people observed the tree’s blossom in order to divine the result of imperial civil examinations. In 1097, 1106, and 1124, the oak tree was in full bloom and Chaozhou students made outstanding achievements.21 After 1189, the tree became a part of the Han Wengong Temple and a famous landscape praised by the literati. It was said that the tree came to bloom in 1744, and the result of civil examinations reached a peak (Zheng [1824] 1995, p. 11). This was the last miracle, and the tree died decades later.

4. The Han Yu Belief and the Masses

Local officials and the literati delineated Han Yu as a brilliant and virtuous official and mentor, which exerted an impact on the masses and was reflected in local legends. Su Shi described the legend of Han Yu in the Song dynasty, stating that Han Yu taught Chaozhou people to build tile-roofed houses; Su Shi argued that the legend was not true and dropped it from his inscription (Zeng 2015, pp. 23–24). In Chaozhou, gazetteers of the Song and Yuan dynasties recorded four events related to Han Yu’s administration in Chaozhou. First, it was recorded that the ancient commandery seat was Yahu 鴨湖, which was located on the east side of the Han River, northeast of Chaozhou city today, and that Han Yu took office there. It was verified that Yahu was the seat before the Tang dynasty, and but it was found that Han Yu never took office there and was introduced into the legend to convince listeners. Second, villagers in Shuinan 水南, in the east of Chaozhou, spoke in a different tongue called bulao 不老. It was said that Han Yu taught Chaozhou people in the mandarin language in his term, which led to the formation of the bulao tongue. From the Tang dynasty, a large number of Fujian people immigrated to Chaozhou and brought new dialects. In the twelfth century, local dialects rapidly changed in Chaozhou, and the Min dialect gradually became a primary language. Local people could not interpret this linguistic phenomenon and needed Han Yu to explain it to them. Third, Han Yu made sacrifices to crocodiles in Shiguitou 石龜頭 behind Mountain Gold (Jinshan 金山) and established a Buddhist pagoda in the middle of the Han River to suppress the threat of crocodiles. It was verified that the development of Shiguitou was from the Song dynasty, and that Han Yu advocated the exclusion of Buddhism. Lastly, it was recorded that a wooden tortoise in a Daoist Temple did not rot in feces and was not destroyed by fire. It was said that the tortoise was made by Han Yu and had divine power. These Song and Yuan records were virtually legends, and the editors of gazetteers vigorously disputed their authenticity. These early legends reflected that Han Yu became a cultural symbol for verifying local history and explaining unknowns and abnormal phenomena (Wu and Li 2023, pp. 89–99). The legends of Han Yu were passed down from the Song dynasty to the present. In the 1980s, a few legends were collected in Chaozhou city, and these recorded that Han Yu acted as a diligent official who worked for Chaozhou people. Han Yu was concerned about people’s hardship and welfare once he arrived in Chaozhou; in his term, he built the north embankment to prevent floods, offered sacrifices to crocodiles to get rid of them, imparted techniques for the planting of sweet potatoes, created a kind of washcloth (shuibu 水布) to help workers who transported timber in the Han River, socialized with Monk Dadian 大顛 (732–824),22 and initiated the construction of Xiangzi 湘子 Bridge (Guan and Wei 1982, pp. 85–87; Cai 1988, pp. 22–27, 267–69; Chen 1987, pp. 24–26).

In vernacular literature, the image of Han Yu was slightly different and not so lofty. There were two early Chaozhou texts on Han Yu: Building the Pontoon Bridge (Zao Fuqiao 造浮橋 n.d.) and Newly Complete Songbook on Giving Winter Clothing (Xinzao Song Hanyi Quange 新造送寒衣全歌 n.d.). Zao Fuqiao, also known as Xinbian Zao Xiangzi Qiao 新編造湘子橋, was a script and was played by a theatrical troupe named Lao yutangchun ban 老玉堂春班. The script was published by Li Wanli 李萬利 in Chaozhou city before 1949. The version we collected was not complete and only included four parts (ji 集). The primary plot was that Han Yu built the Xiangzi Bridge, a pontoon, to help Chaozhou people avoid crocodiles. In his term, Han Yu saw crocodiles eating people when they crossed the Crocodile River (exi 鱷溪, also known as Hanjiang) by boat. Han Yu immediately sought help from Monk Dadian. Dadian readily helped him since Han Yu deeply respected him after assuming office. Dadian said that crocodiles were descendants of the Dragon King of the Eastern Sea, and it was difficult to eliminate them. Han Yu was determined to remove the scourge of crocodiles. Dadian practiced divination by fingers and told Han Yu that the scourge could be removed in a month. A merchant’s only son was severely harmed by crocodiles, and he was caught by the Dragon King. His wife sought help from Monk Dadian, who suggested that she should implore Han Yu to post an official notice inviting a courageous man to help. Liu Yishi 劉逸士 was good at martial arts and accepted the invitation. Liu was instructed by Dadian and was conferred magic weapons. Dadian asked Liu Yishi to invite his senior, Monk Guangji 廣濟23, to subdue the monsters. The monsters saw the notice and planned to seize Han Yu. Dadian advised Han Yu to let his servant, Li Wan 李萬24, pose as him. Li Wan was seized. Dadian and Guangji jointly repelled the monsters and rescued Li Wan and the merchant. In addition, Han Yu was going to build a pontoon to prevent crocodiles from eating people. Before the project, they needed to get rid of crocodiles. The subsequent plot is unknown.25 In this script, Han Yu was an ordinary person and excessively relied on Monk Dadian. The legend of Han Yu and the Xiangzi Bridge can be dated back to the Ming dynasty: “the aged said, sir Han Changli implored deities of the river; the river dried up for several days, and therefore the construction was able to start.” (故老相傳，昌黎韓公乞神於江，江為涸數日，因得而經始焉)26. The legend told in the 1980s included more details. Han Yu planned to build a bridge across the Crocodile River. Since its current was fast, Han Yu sought help from Han Xiangzi 韓湘子 (one of the Eight Immortals) and Monk Guangji. Han Xiangzi, with the other Eight Immortals and Monk Guangji, took charge of building a half of the bridge (Chaozhoushi Minjian Wenxue Santao Jicheng Bianweihui 1988, pp. 137–38). Currently, the bridge is known by the names Xiangzi qiao 湘子橋 and Guangji qiao 廣濟橋. In history, the bridge was first built around 1171 and named Jichuan 濟川; in 1435, the bridge was rebuilt and renamed Guangji 廣濟 (Rao 2009b, pp. 8, 13). In the front of the Xiangzi Bridge, the Temple of Han Xiangzi (Han Xiangzi Miao 韓湘子廟) was built in the Qing dynasty (Lin [1857] 2000, p. 25). Moreover, Han Xiangzi was secondarily worshipped in the Temple of Han Wengong nearby (Lin [1857] 2000, pp. 3–4). From the nineth century, an uncle–nephew relationship between Han Yu and Han Xiangzi began to develop and led to the creation of many literary works (Clart 2008, pp. 493–504; Bian 2013, pp. 152–59; Xiang and Wu 2018, pp. 109–17).

The lore of Han Yu and Han Xiangzi became the subject matter of popular literature and evolved into a set theme: deliverance (dutuo 度脫). The popular plot was that Han Xiangzi became an immortal through cultivating himself and returned to deliver his uncle Han Yu, aunt, and wife. An excellent example was the Newly Complete Songbook on Giving Winter Clothing, which was published by Wansheng Ji 王生記 in Chaozhou city before 1949. This songbook was a prosimetric text that was transmitted primarily among Chaohzou women. Its storyline began that Han Xiangzi, the reincarnation of a white crane with cultivation achievements, was reborn as the son of Han Yu’s elder brother. When Han Xiangzi was ten, his parents died, and Han Yu began to raise him like a son (since Han Yu had no children at that time). Han Yu had great expectations of Han Xiangzi: he could pass the imperial civil exam and extend the family line. Han Xiangzi, however, wholeheartedly sought the Way and cultivated himself under the instruction of his master immortal Zhongli Quan 鍾離權. Han Yu scolded Han Xiangzi and forced him to give up cultivation. Han Xiangzi ran away from home and jumped into a river. He was guided by his master and became an immortal. Han Xiangzi came back to deliver his relatives and spent most of his energy delivering Han Yu. Han Xiangzi arranged the event of Buddhist relics and instructed Emperor Xianzong to relegate Han Yu to Chaozhou. After Han Yu accomplished his tenure in Chaozhou, Han Xiangzi delivered Han Yu so that he could cultivate himself. Through cultivation, Han Yu received the jade decree (yuzhi 玉旨) to revive his heavenly office. The decree revealed that Han Yu previously was the Great General of Juanlian (Juanlian da jiangjun 捲簾大將軍) and was penalized for breaking the glazed lamp by being reincarnated to teach Chaozhou people. Overall, this storyline was adapted from the Ming novel the Complete Story of Han Xiangzi (Han Xiangzi Quanzhuan 韓湘子全傳). This novel was a great summa of Han Xiangzi lore, both from literary literatures and popular traditions; its earliest version can be dated to 1623 and was hitherto the most complex and developed version of Han Xiangzi lore, exerting a profound impact on the Han Xiangzi literature of the Qing dynasty (Yang 2007, pp. XV–XXIII). The Chaozhou songbook possibly originated in the late seventeenth century, and the publisher Wangsheng Ji commenced the printing of songbooks in the second half of the nineteenth century (Xiao 2009, pp. 18, 57, 65). By comparing the two literary works, the author of Songbook on Giving Winter Clothing abridged many plots related to Han Xiangzi’s cultivation and focused on how Han Xiangzi delivered Han Yu. The author supplemented the activities of Han Yu in Chaozhou, adding the new figures Monk Dadian and Zhao De, and deleted bantering plots to maintain a good image of Han Yu. By contrast, the image of Han Yu was secularized in most popular literature of the Qing dynasty beyond Chaozhou (Wang 2009, pp. 20–60; Bian 2014, pp. 152–56; 2015, pp. 101–6). In these works, Han Yu frequently chose to become the tutelary god (tudi shen 土地神) since he enjoyed sacrifices of meat and wine. Among a few official bureaus in Beijing, Han Yu was worshiped as the tutelary god from the seventeenth century (Wang 2009, pp. 52–4).

This popular literature had an influence on Chaozhou morality books (shanshu 善書) created in the first half of the twentieth century. The modern period (1840–1949) witnessed the rise of the spirit-writing (fuluan/fuji 扶鸞/扶乩) movement as a response to crises. From the nineteenth century, spirit-writing cults sprang up throughout China. These cults were driven by a millenarian sense of mission, regarded moral exhortation as their very purpose of being, and were a product of the nineteenth-century movement of religious synthesis (Clart 1996, pp. 15–17). They devoted themselves to transmitting eschatological ideas as a way of saving the world from kalpa (jie 劫). Consequently, thousands of morality books, or specifically spirit-written books (luanshu 鸞書), were revealed and composed by deities by means of spirit-writing. In Chaozhou, the spirit-writing movement began to rise from the late nineteenth century and developed in the context of disasters, political chaos, and the transmission of foreign culture and religions. The movement reached its prime in the first half of the twentieth century and is represented by many spirit-written books recording their thoughts and activities (Li 2023a, pp. 56–97, 122–55; 2023b, p. 429). In the more than thirty extant spirit-written books we collected, Han Yu descended as a deity and gave exhortations. He, however, appeared infrequently (only twice), which contradicted his significant reputation in Chaozhou. In his two appearances, Han Yu revealed his own experience to inspire and exhort Chaozhou people to cultivate themselves and achieve moral reform. First, Han Yu was relegated to Chaozhou because he did not believe in Buddha. He educated Chaozhou people and removed crocodiles with the help of Han Xiangzi. Han Yu realized the preciousness of Buddhism and Daoism and visited Monk Dadian three times. Han Yu repented the fact that he had refuted Buddhism and sought hollow wealth and rank (Chongkan Jiujie Jindeng Quanbu 1915, pp. 34a–35a). In another spirit-written book, Han Yu revealed that Han Xiangzi delivered him many times, but he failed to wake and persisted in seeking senior rank and great wealth. After suffering setbacks in officialdom and on the path of banishment, Han Xiangzi successfully delivered Han Yu at Bull Pass (Languan 藍關). Han Xiangzi invited Han Yu to live in a temple and incarnated as Han Yu to fulfil his responsibilities in Chaozhou. Three years later, Han Xiangzi took Han Yu to cultivate himself and became a deity (Quanhua Xinbian 1922, pp. 45b–46a). Although Han Yu descended as a deity to exhort people, his lifetime during the Tang dynasty was almost described as a negative example to stimulate people to cultivate themselves instantly.

As a deity, Han Yu was not ranked highly among the people, and belief in him was rare.27 Local officials and the literati spared no efforts in raising the position of Han Yu and worshipped him in many temples and academies. These promoting actions failed to resonate with the people.28 Without the support of local officials and the literati, almost all of these temples and academies came to an end. After 1949, the authorities ceased funding and all academies were closed down or transformed into modern schools. Only two temples were exceptional. The ancestral Temple of Han Wengong in Chaozhou was rebuilt in 1984 and redeveloped as a tourist attraction. Another Han Wengong Ci in Huilai was assigned to farmers after 1949 and was reconstructed as Hanwen Miao 韓文廟 by villagers and believers in 2010. In this reconstruction, it was merged with the Temple of Wenchang nearby and was supported by the spirit medium of Han Yu. In our fieldwork,29 only four temples were discovered:

-

the Han Wengong Ci in Longmenguan 龍門關, Linxi 磷溪 town, Xiangqiao 湘橋 district, Chaozhou,

-

the Han Wengong 韓文公 in Hubian 湖邊 village, Haimen town, Chaoyang district, Shantou,

-

the Han Wengong Zhi Ci 韓文公之祠 in Hemei 河美 village, Dongli 東里 town, Chenghai district, Shantou,

-

a niche inside the Jinzhou Gumiao 金洲古廟, in Jinzhou village, Waisha 外砂 town, Chenghai district, Shantou,

-

a shrine inside the Lingshan Si 靈山寺, in Tongyu 銅盂 town, Chaoyang district, Shantou.

The first temple was destroyed in 1956, but worship here has continued to the present. Legend has it that Han Yu dug ditches to improve irrigation and farming in Longmenguan.30 As a reward, villagers built the Han Wengong Ci. Historically, this temple was possibly established in the late Ming dynasty and acted as a management agency for irrigation works among eight villages31. Each village took turns to manage the temple for a year and preside over the ceremony to Han Yu on the nineth day of the nineth lunar month. After the ceremony, the management was transferred to the next village (Li 1999, pp. 151–53). The second was small and built before 1949, beside the Temple of the Large-Lake God (Dahushen Miao 大湖神廟). In his term, Han Yu offered sacrifices to Dahushen in Chaoyang and wrote three sacrificial articles that prayed for rain and shine (Lin [1572] 1963, juan 15: 2a–3a). In the sixteenth century, the Temple of Mercy and Blessing (Huifu Miao 惠福廟, renamed Dahushen Miao later) was viewed as the place that Han Yu visited and prayed for weather. Local officials willingly followed in his footsteps. The Chaoyang magistrate Huang Yilong successfully prayed for rain many times and initiated the rebuilding of Huifu Miao (Lin [1572] 1963, juan 10: 9a). When and why the worship of Han Yu began in Hubian are unknown. It is possible that Han Yu was worshipped as a secondary deity in the Huifu Miao temple first, and that a new temple was then built. Worship here possibly started before the eighteenth century. In an inscription dated 1718, Han Yu is called Changli Hanye 昌黎韓爺32, and is used to emphasize the orthodoxy of Dahushen Miao with regard to the protection of temple estates.33 The Han Wengong Temple is currently being rebuilt and extended. The statue of Han Yu has been put in a room nearby (see Figure 2). The third temple is also small and was built before the middle of the nineteenth century. It is located in Laoxiang 荖巷, which is in countryside that was once planted with betel (lao 荖). Around 1850, the betel was replaced by mandarin oranges since the habit of chewing betel nuts changed. During the Republic, it was said that Han Yu taught Chaozhou people to eat betel in order to resist miasma, and that villagers built a temple devoted to Han Yu out of gratitude. In the temple, the statue of Han Yu holds a piece of betel (Chen 2005, pp. 6, 15). The temple was revived in 1988. The above three temples devoted to Han Yu are small in scale and similar to the tutelary temple. In another two temples, Han Yu was worshipped as a secondary deity. In Jinzhou village, the Ancient Temple of Jinzhou (Jinzhou Gumiao) is devoted to the Eldest King of Three Mountains, as the most important deity (dalaoye 大老爺), and more than ten deities as secondary deities. On the right side, six small wooden statues are in a wooden niche. The statues of Han Yu and Han Xiangzi are slightly larger and set in the middle (see Figure 3). Local villagers currently know little about the worship of Han Yu and do not have any specific ceremony or ritual for Han Yu. Existent inscriptions show that the temple was rebuilt in 1922 and revived in 1992. The last is a shrine inside the Temple of Numinous Mountain, which was first built by Monk Dadian. After his death, Dadian became the primary figure of worship in the temple. The shine is beside the shrine of Patriarch Dadian and is devoted to Patriarch Sanping (Sanping Zushi 三坪祖師, also known as Monk Guangji). Han Yu is a secondary deity in the shrine (see Figure 4). It is currently unknown when the worship of Han Yu emerged in this temple.34 It was said that Han Yu visited the Temple of Numinous Mountain in order to meet Monk Dadian and left his clothes as a parting gift since he failed to meet Dadian. During the reign of Chenghua 成化 (1465–1487), villagers built the Pavilion of Leaving Clothes (Liuyi Ting 留衣亭) on the left of the temple, and the Chaoyang magistrate Wu Gu 吳穀 ordered them to create the statue of Han Yu in the pavilion in memory of the friendship between Han Yu and Dadian (Lin [1572] 1963, juan 10: 8b). The pavilion has been repaired and reconstructed many times (see Figure 5).

5. Official Support and Popular Religion: Preliminary Conclusions

The development of the Han Yu belief can be summarized into three aspects. First, the Han Yu temples were built in the prefectural seat and most county seats over a period of nearly a thousand years. In the year 999, Chaozhou controller-general Chen Yaozuo first built a temple devoted to Han Yu in the center of Chaozhou. This temple was typical of orthodox sacrifices and was continuously supported by local officials, particularly the supreme governors of Chaozhou. From the Song dynasty to the Republic, the temple was relocated twice and was renovated or rebuilt more than twenty-eight times. Local officials attached great importance to the Han Wengong Temple and rebuilt it once destroyed. Its continuity became a kind of political achievement and a reflection of local developments. From the sixteenth century, the Han Yu belief entered a new stage and was transmitted to county seats. This transmission was slow, and only seven temples were established in three hundred years. Second, these Han Yu temples laid a foundation for the belief in academies. In 1243, the Chaozhou prefect Zheng Liangchen founded the first academy that offered sacrifices to Han Yu, which started another form of the Han Yu belief in Chaozhou. It was from the seventeenth century that many academies were established and offered sacrifices to Han Yu; in addition, the worship of Han Yu was performed in preexistent academies. The new development of temples and academies was related to national polices that were affected by Confucian fundamentalism and centered around the orthodoxy of sacrifices. Lastly, the worship of Han Yu came into being among the masses, but its spread was considerably limited. Only several small temples or shrines were discovered. Although local officials and the literati spared no efforts in supporting the Han Yu belief, Han Yu failed to develop into a powerful and influential deity in Chaozhou.

As shown in the article, local officials and the literati supported the rise of the Han Yu belief in Chaozhou. The Han Yu belief was a typical official (or orthodoxy) belief promoted by local officials. We know that they usually and mainly developed orthodox sacrifices in opposition to “illicit sacrifices”. From the Song dynasty onward, the position of Han Yu reached a peak, and Han Yu himself became a cultural symbol and cultural resource. Local officials followed Han Yu to govern Chaozhou and viewed him as a role model. They established and developed the Han Yu temples to express their sense of admiration and accomplish political achievements. The Han Yu belief was an orthodoxy and became an excellent way to educate Chaozhou people. From the sixteenth century, local officials began to construct temples in affiliated counties. In the eighteenth century, temples were built in most counties. The development of the Han Yu temples relied on constant official support, and therefore the belief was able to continue without miracles. In the meantime, Han Yu was depicted as a pioneering figure in the history of Chaozhou education and became a significant deity among the literati. The worship of Han Yu in academies was an extension of the Han Yu temples. Most academies were built or began to offer sacrifices to Han Yu after the middle of the eighteenth century. The worship of Han Yu in academies was caused by Han Yu’s own position as an outstanding figure in the domain of literature and Neo-Confucian teachings. Han Yu was a mentor for the literati and was transformed into a deity of imperial civil examinations, but this transformation was not so successful.

Among the masses, the image of Han Yu became increasingly secularized. As an official, Han Yu helped the Chaozhou people. In many stories, Han Yu’s contribution was based on the help of his nephew Han Xiangzi and Monk Dadian. As a deity, Han Yu was low in rank, like a tutelary god. Only a few temples were built, and these were small in scale. Local officials and the literati raised Han Yu’s popularity and promoted the belief, but the belief was never widespread in the Chaozhou region. This demonstrates that local officials and the literati focused on different aspects of the Han Yu belief. They emphasized that Han Yu was both an admirable official and outstanding mentor. They were never concerned with miracles and always stressed the orthodoxy of the Han Yu belief. For example, local officials replaced the wood statues of Han Yu and Zhao De with wood tablets in the middle of the Ming dynasty since the statues were not consistent with Confucian rites (Guo [1585] 2003, p. 21). When unsuitable behaviors and activities emerged, they criticized and rectified them. What they neglected and what they rectified were what the masses were really interested in. Meanwhile, what they were concerned with and endeavored to achieve somewhat hampered the spread of the Han Yu belief among the masses.