Cheng Yan passed the jinshi examination in 895. The Tang zhiyan, a collection of anecdotes about the civil service examinations, states that he was of humble birth—a severe disadvantage in the Tang examinations, due to the crucial importance of patronage and connections—and that he was one of only two truly outstanding graduates in his cohort. The other was Chen An’s (see source 3.2) nephew Huang Tao (ca. 840-911). Nothing is now known about Cheng Yan’s subsequent career. A seven-scroll edition of his collected works circulated in the eleventh century, but only seven of his prose pieces are now extant due to their inclusion in Song anthologies.

The similarity between this essay’s rhetorical strategies and those of Chen An’s “Huaxin” is striking. The commonality between the two essays’ arguments is too pronounced to be coincidental. It is likely that Cheng Yan’s essay was inspired by Chen An’s; if so, it is also likely that Cheng read “Huaxin” only after Huang Tao published Chen’s collected works in late 902. Whereas “Huaxin” uses a hypothetical debate over Lu Jun and Li Yansheng as a device for framing its argument, “Neiyi xi” refuses to reveal its agenda by naming names more specific than “Hua” and “barbarian.” Cheng Yan subverts conventional understandings of Chineseness and barbarism, but makes no attempt to substantiate that subversion by revealing the identities of its objects of condemnation and praise, the “barbarians of the Central Lands” and the “Hua from the barbarians of the four quarters.” This suggests that “Neiyi xi” was written as a satirical essay and not as a genuine call to arms and that its reader was expected to recognize the target of its political satire based on the events of the time. If the essay was written after late 902, that target was almost certainly the warlord Zhu Wen (or Zhu Quanzhong; 852–912), who seized power over the Tang imperial court in 903-904 and usurped the throne in 907.

For a detailed analysis of this essay, see Shao-yun Yang, The Way of the Barbarians: Redrawing Ethnic Boundaries in Tang and Song China (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2019), Chapter 3.

~~~~~

There have long been people from the barbarians (Yi) of the four quarters who came here,
their speech passing through several rounds of indirect translation before it could be understood. They come out of admiration for the humaneness, moral duty, loyalty, and trustworthiness of the Central Lands of the Hua. Although their bodies originate from foreign lands, they are able to direct their hearts toward the Hua as swiftly as a galloping horse. Therefore, I do not call them barbarians.

There have long been people in the Central Lands who stubbornly resist the emperor’s transforming influence, forgetting and abandoning the virtues of humaneness, moral duty, loyalty, and trustworthiness. Although their bodies have a Hua origin, they have instead banished their hearts into exile among the barbarians. Therefore, I do not call them Hua. When I say that they have banished their hearts into exile among the barbarians, it is not that the empire banished them. Rather, they have banished their own hearts into iniquity. How could it be just a matter of calling people Hua because they have the name “Hua,” or calling people barbarians because they have the name “barbarian”?

Some people who are Hua in name are barbarians at heart. Some people who are barbarians in name are Hua at heart. From this we know that people who live in the Central Lands but abandon humaneness, moral duty, loyalty, and trustworthiness are barbarians of the Central Lands, and there is no need for the barbarians of the four quarters to invade us [from outside]. Since they rebel against the Central Lands, arrogantly usurp and reject the emperor’s authority, and abandon humaneness, moral duty, loyalty, and trustworthiness, they cannot even be counted as human beings. Are they not then barbarians of the Central Lands? People from the barbarians of the four quarters who turn inward [to the Central Lands] and delight in our humaneness, moral duty, loyalty, and trustworthiness, desiring to be counted as human beings—are they not Hua from the barbarians of the four quarters?

Remember these words of mine! Those who are barbarians in name are, nonetheless, not barbarians, and those who are Hua in name are instead not equal to those who are barbarians in name.