Journal of the American Oriental Society 135.1 (2015) 71 Lechery, Substance Abuse, and . . . Han Yu? Timothy M. DAVIS Brigham Young University This article examines the role of anecdote and casual literary criticism in the post- Tang defamation (or defense) of Han Yu’s character. Several scholar-oicials from the Song, Yuan, and later eras criticized Han Yu’s moral inconsistency in their col- lections of “miscellaneous notes” (biji) and “remarks on poetry” (shihua). Specii- cally, Han Yu is condemned for over-indulging in amorous relations with young female musicians and for pursuing immortality through alchemical means. I dis- cuss the critical reception of a few key compositions authored by Han Yu and his contemporaries in order to place his alleged activities in their historical context, explore the contested process by which he became a cultural icon, and clarify the various ways that later literati shaped his image and used it for their own purposes. By the Northern Song 北宋 (960–1127) dynasty, Han Yu 韓愈 (768–824) had become a “Confucian cultural hero” whose literary corpus and posthumous prestige inluenced all those interested in the relationship between literature and the transmission of the moral Way. 1 Both reform-minded intellectuals and those who favored traditional approaches for manag- ing the empire’s challenges felt obligated to deine themselves in relation to Han Yu’s grow- ing legacy. 2 While most literati in the centuries following the Tang 唐 (618–907) readily acknowledged Han Yu’s exceptional skill in producing striking works of poetry and prose, the evaluation of his personal conduct yielded more ambivalent responses. Several literati from the Five Dynasties 五代 (907–960), Song 宋 (960–1279), and later eras criticized Han Yu for moral inconsistency in their collections of anecdotes, “brush jot- tings” (biji 筆記), and “remarks on poetry” (shihua 詩話). Others, maintaining his inno- cence, sought to delect such attacks. In this article, I trace the trajectory of these responses in order to shed light on the contested process by which Han Yu became a cultural icon in the post-Tang era and to better understand the diferent ways that later literati shaped his image and employed it for their own purposes. The primary evidence for Han Yu’s alleged licentious behavior and hypocritical indulgence in mineral-based elixirs is derived from a few carefully selected literary works. Foremost among these seemingly incriminating texts are the following: A preliminary version of this essay was presented at the Western Branch AOS meeting held in Scottsdale, Arizona, 2 November 2012. I am indebted to Anna Shields, who read the manuscript with impressive care and whose com- ments and constructive suggestions on earlier drafts were extremely valuable. I would also like to acknowledge the insightful critique of an anonymous reviewer. 1. On the contending intellectual positions articulated by Song scholar-oicials as they sought to establish the ideological foundations of an empire governed by classical cultural patterns (wen 文), including contested inter- pretations of Han Yu’s guwen legacy, see Peter Bol, This Culture of Ours: Intellectual Transitions in T’ang and Sung China (Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 1992), 148–211; For the term “Confucian cultural hero,” see Anna M. Shields, “Gossip, Anecdote, and Literary History,” in Idle Talk: Gossip and Anecdote in Traditional China, ed. Jack W. Chen and David Schaberg (Berkeley and Los Angeles: Global, Area, and International Archive, Univ. of California Press, 2014), 110. 2. See Ronald C. Egan, Word, Image, and Deed in the Life of Su Shi (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Univ. Press, 1994), 198–99.