Except for compiling a genealogy to help reinforcing consciousness of membership, the three lineages also had some kinds of collective activities that identified them as a corporate group. With documents available in the three genealogies, these collective activities may be discussed below.
Ancestral worship was one of the important collective activities of any lineage.
Individual lines might separately worship their direct ancestors; however, a joint ancestral hall for a lineage was usually established long after the death of the first ancestor. For example, three sub-branches of the Heng-yang Wei, resided at Yu-t’ang 畬堂, proposed to build a joint ancestral hall in 1816 and completed it in 1817; a lag of 616 years after the death of their founding ancestor. In 1866, the Wei lineage used a corporate fund to purchased an estate with buildings in five courtyards in Heng-yang city and made it into a family shrine (chia-miao 家廟) for the entire lineage. The Ch’ing-ch’uan Li lineage constructed the main part of their ancestral hall in 1707, a lag of 276 years after the death of their founding ancestor; and it took another hundred more years to complete the supplementary parts to the right and left of the main building in the 1820s and in 1856. The Shao-yang Li lineage completed a joint ancestral hall for its elder branch in 1802, a lag of 414 years after the death of their first ancestor; and in 1899 the hall was rebuilt. It is not clear whether there was a joint ancestral hall for the younger branch or one for the entire Shao-yang Li lineage. These evidences suggested that collective ancestral worship was an activity that a lineage performed only when descendants were already quite large in number and it took times.
Moreover, to construct a joint ancestral hall required members of a lineage to share expenditures. For example, the Heng-yang Wei ancestral hall “spent more than one thousand tales” to complete construction in 1817. In addition to fees allocated to males and private lands (ting-fei丁費, t’ien-fei田費), an amount of 458,340 cash was contributed by 127 individual members. It is notable that individual contributions ranged from 100 to 119,600 cash with the largest amount contributed by a twenty-second generation member, Wei Chin魏晉 (1759-1831), who was a Chu-jen in 1779 and 100,000 cash of his contribution was made when he served as a
magistrate in Cheng-p’ing鎮平, Honan, in 1819.28
It was not clear how much money was spent in constructing the Ch’ing-ch’uan Li ancestral hall, but it was said that when the ancestral hall was first built there were quite a number of wealthy members in the lineage, yet only the main hall was built because those who were in charge of the affair would like to set a model for later generations to follow.29 The Shao-yang Li’s elder branch ancestral hall completed in 1802 used more than 500 tales and the rebuilding in 1895 used 1,130,000 cash. In both occasions, many individual members contributed to help constructions.30
In addition to constructing the ancestral hall, the lineage also had some kinds of corporative funds. For example, the Heng-yang Wei and the Ch’ing-ch’uan Li had their corporate funds known as kung 公 (public), while the Shao-yang Li lineage had some funds known as hui 會 (association). It was known that the three Wei sub-branches at Yu-tang each had a fund raised from rents of public land (kung-tsu 公 租). In 1816 when the ancestral hall was built, these public funds were pooled together. Moreover, the three sub-branches also set up an agreement that each member participating in annual sacrifice should contribute 60 cash three days in advance of the ceremony. Furthermore, as the sacrifice was joined, they agreed to set up a fund of 30,000 cash for helping performing services as local headmen, such as Pao-cheng保 正 and Chia-chang甲長, so that a previous practice of taking these services in turn could be abolished.31 When the Wei lineage shrine was established in 1866, a public fund (kung-t’ang公帑) was set up with 12 columns (chu柱), each consisted of certain sub-branches and each was allotted with 200,000 cash.32 After paying the price of estate with 1,200,000 cash, the balance amount was used in money lending and in the early Kuang-hsu period (1875-1908) a shop house to the left of the shrine was purchased with 169,000 cash. A note dated in 1882 said that rents collected from two shop houses in the front and one to the left of the shrine were used for reparations of these houses and the shrine. As for the expense of annual sacrifice at the shrine, during the first 24 years from 1866 to 1889, it was shared by the 12 columns; from 1890 onwards, an amount of 12,000 each would be provided by the public fund and the column in duty of the year should be responsible for extra expenses. Managers were elected to take charge of the public fund and its accounting. The incumbent for mangers was five years and the account should be checked publicly on the date of
28 Heng-yang Wei-shih tsung-p’u, “Tz’u-t’ang pei-chi 祠堂碑記” and the biography of Wei Chin in chuan 19.
29 Hsiang-tung T’ao-ch’iao Li-shih tsung- p’u, “Tz’u-t’ang –chi 祠堂記”.
30 Hunan Shao-i Li-shih tsu-p’u, “Jung-Hua erh-kung tz’u-t’ang chi 榮華二公祠堂記”.
31 Heng-yang Wei-shih tsung-p’u, “Ho-ssu ho-Ch’ai ho-yueh 合祀合差合約”.
32 Among the 12 columns, 6 belonged to the three sub-branches of the first branch residing at Yu-t’ang.
This suggested that the Wei lineage was in fact quite differentiated among its branches and sub-branches due to the number of males each had contained and the wealth each had owned.
sacrifice (the 21st of the lunar tenth month) at time of transference.33
The Ch’ing-ch’uan Li had a corporate fund affiliated with the ancestral hall (Tz’u-kung祠公) which contained several pieces of land purchased by the name of the ancestral hall or contributed by certain members of the lineage. This Li lineage corporate fund was managed by six persons; two of them were in charge of the accounting and four of them the expenditures. It was agreed that if any fault was found with the management, those who were in charge should be dismissed at once.34 The Ch’ing-ch’uan Li lineage also had a corporate fund affiliated with the chartable school which also consisted of several pieces of land contributed by the lineage members.35 Moreover, from a biography of a lineage member, named Li Ao李鰲 (1827-1881), we could gather that a public fund was set up for male births and sacrifice (jen-ting chi-ssu kung 人丁祭祀公) in a particular line.36
The Shao-yang Li lineage had a hui set up mainly for the purpose of compiling genealogy and some others for sacrifices. Most of these hui held land estates.37 Although it was not clear how these estates were managed, the Li lineage rules regulated that these estates should not be sold by any individual and some fellowships were provided from these hui to help poor yet smart members in taking examinations.38
It is notable that money lending was a common method of managing the lineage public funds. It was not clear how much interest rate was charged by the Wei lineage shrine public fund just mentioned above, however, from other funds of smaller scale we could gather the level of interest rate. For example, a certain sub-branch of the Wei lineage sold out a piece of public mountain land in 1785 for an amount of 22,000 cash and after lending for one year the amount was increased to 26,500 cash, thus the compound interest rate per month was 1.5%.39 Another fund of 8,000 cash collected from four lines in 1825 for the purpose of sacrifice was put into lending and the amount was increased to 34,000 cash after eight years, thus the compound interest rate per month was 1.5%.40 Moreover, there were other public funds which were increased through lending although details were not enough for estimating the interest rate.41 Even those lines moved to Chu-ch’i竹谿 in Hupei had set up a public fund and managed it through lending since 1812 for the purpose of building a branch
33 Heng-yang Wei-shih tsung-p’u, “Heng-ch’eng chia-miao kung chi 衡城家廟公記”.
34 Hsiang-tung T’ao-ch’iao Li-shih tsung- p’u, chuan: “Tz’u-kung Chiu-kui 祠公舊規”.
35 Ibid., chuan 2.
36 Ibid., “Hu-pang shien-sheng hsing-ludh 虎榜先生行略”.
37 Hunan Shao-i Li-shih tsu-p’u, chuan 6.
38 Ibid., chuan 7.
39 Heng-yang Wei-shih tsung-p’u, “Yuan-shan-ch’ung hsin-tsu-shan shan-tien chi 元山沖新祖山山田 記”.
40 Ibid., “Chi-han-kung ssu-t’ien chi 季含公祀田記”.
41 Ibid., “Tzu-hsueh-kung kung-chi 子學公公記”; “San-t’an hsueh-kung ho-yueh 三灘學公合約”.
ancestral hall.42 These evidences demonstrated that money lending was a common method of managing public funds and the interest rate was about the same level regulated by the Ch’ing government.43
It was not clear how the Shao-yang Li lineage managed their hui. Perhaps it was operated similarly to mutual financing associations (ho-hui 合 會 ) in Chinese society,44 as some of the Shao-yang Li lineage hui had limited number of participation.45 It is quite certain that this method of mutual financing association was practiced by the Wei lineage. For example, it was said that the corporation fund of a certain sub-branch had accumulated its money through lending since 1822. Once they had tried to buy a piece of land but the fund was not enough, so that they raised money through mutual financing association (chu-chin-ch’eng-hui醵金成會) for a supplement.46
Besides for ancestral worship, corporate funds were also raised for the purpose of education and philanthropy activities. For example, the Wei lineage’s sub-branch at San-t’an had a fund accumulated to more than 300,000 cash in 1882, it was agreed to use this amount as a school fund.47 In 1880-1881, members of sub-branches at T’ang-fu contributed lands for a charitable school.48 In 1893, the Wei lineage corporate estate for the charitable school and philanthropic hall was accumulated up to 4,316 shih of land.49 Moreover, in 1894 an amount of 500 taels was contributed by a member to set up a public fund for storing grain which would be loaned out to the lineage members at an interest rate of 1% such as the community granary did.50 It is notable that this particular member, named Wei Lin-hsien 魏疄先 (1832-1898), had served under Tseng Kuo-fan曾國藩 (1811-1872) during the campaign against the Taipings and later was in charge of affairs related to the government salt monopoly in Yang-chou. He used his earnings to purchase land gradually in Heng-yang and the total amount was equivalent to more than 900 tan of rent. After his death, his sons used his legacy of land equivalent to 562 tan as a permanent sacrifice land.51
Compared with the Wei lineage, the corporate activities of the Ch’ing-ch’uan Li
42 Ibid., “Chu-ch’i hsien tz’u-t’ang pei-chi 竹谿縣祠堂碑記”.
43 Lien-shang Yang, Money and Credit in China: A short History (Cambridge, Mass., 1952), p. 98.
44 Ibid., p. 75.
45 Hunan Shao-i Li-shih tsu-p’u, chuan 6: “Chi-ssu-chih 祭祀志”.
46 Heng-yang Wei-shih tsung-p’u, “tsu-hsueh-kung kung-chi 子學公公記”.
47 Ibid., “San-t’an hsueh-kung ho-yueh 三灘學公合約”.
48 Ibid., “T’ang-fu i-hsueh-kung chi 唐福義學公記”.
49 Ibid., “I-hsueh T’ung-jen liang-kung pei-chi 義學同仁兩公碑記”. It should be noted that in Human, the unit of land was usually counted in terms of rent by tan 擔 or shih 石 rather than in terms of mou 畝. From some corporate lands of the Ch’ing-ch’uan Li lineage, we could gather that the rrent was about 80% of the shoots (yang 秧)that were planted to a piece of land. For example, a piece of land planted with 10 tan of shoots and its rent was 8 tan. See Hunan Shao-i Li-shih tsu-p’u, chuan 2.
50 Heng-yang Wei-shih tsung-p’u, “Chi-ku-kung chi 積穀公記”.
51 Ibid., “Chih-t’ien-kung ssu-t’ien chi 祉田公祀田記”.
and the Shao-yang Li lineages were rather small in scale. The Ch’ing-ch’uan Li lineage set up a charitable school with a rent of 100 tan and a small charitable estate of 10 tan by 1858.52 From a list of contributions to this Li lineage charitable school, a total amount of 180,400 cash and 60.3 tan was collected.53 The Shao-yang Li genealogy did not include any special document related to lineage collective activities except for compiling genealogy and ancestral sacrifices. However, from biographies of individual members we could gather that some collective activities also existed.
For example, it was said that a man of the 18th generation, named Li Jung-kun 李榮 崑 (1822-1885), was very fair in managing the lineage granary and corporate hui.54 Another man, named Li Tse-chang李澤長 (1740-1816), contributed his earning from trading to purchase land equivalent to 100 shih of rent for establishing a hui for branch sacrifice and provided fellowships to some brilliant youths.55
In short, the three lineages all had some corporate properties and performed some kinds of collective activities that the members identified themselves as a group.
These collective activities were made possible partly due to the fact that the lineage members had already grown to quite a large number and partly because there were at least some wealthy, generous, and eminent members who played the role of leaders in these activities. The lineage corporate activities would indeed benefit its members to some extent. It would be more important, if the local community as a whole could be benefited due to functioning of lineages and their eminent members. For this aspect of interactions between lineage and community, a few more words should be added.
A lineage could not isolate itself from the community. The family or lineage instructions (chia-hsun 家訓, tsung-kuei 宗規) usually included principles not only valuable for the lineage as an individual group but also for its relations to the society and the state. For example, the three Hunan lineages all had included in their lineage instructions that the land tax should be paid in due time, that neighbors should be kept friendly, that everyone should not be idle and jobless, and that female infanticide should be prohibited. Although it is hard to tell how effective these instructions would influence the behavior of the lineage members, it should not be taken just as being mere paper talks. Moreover, it is notable that short biographies included in the genealogies often stressed those who were generous in supporting activities, such as famine relief, road construction, bridge building, and other charitable deeds, that were beneficial for the local community.
52 Hsiang-tung T’ao-ch’iao Li-shih tsung- p’u, “I-hsueh-chi 義學記”; I-t’ien- chi 義田記”.
53 Ibid., “I-hsieh chuan-hiang ming-mu 義學捐項名目”.
54 Hunan Shao-i Li-shih tsu-p’u, chuan 14.
55 Ibid., chuan 14.