Reappropriating the communal past: lineage tradition revival as a way of constructing collective identity in Huizhou, China

The paper situates the relationship among history, heritage, and collective memory in contemporary China, where national strategies since the 2000s (e.g., the search for the origins of Chinese civilization, revival of Confucianism, and policies emphasizing protection of cultural heritage) seek to link past places and narratives to contemporary legitimacy, stability, and identity. While the state avoids explicit identity politics and promotes a harmonious discourse of seeking commonality while preserving differences, heritage is multivocal and means different things to different groups. The study asks: (1) What role does cultural heritage play in constructing local society in China and in resolving the dislocation of individuals within society as a whole? (2) How can traditional history and collective memory be integrated with contemporary development needs and manifested through heritage empowerment? Using Huizhou as the context, the paper argues that revived lineage worship in Huangdun serves as a platform to reinvent group intimacy and reconstruct a notion of the new 'Huizhou people' based on lineage surnames and regional cultural identity. It explores how reappropriating lineage traditions and reusing heritage enable reconstruction of community that transcends spatial categories, align with official discourse, provide social and economic benefits, and yet generate potential tensions between folk initiatives and official authority.

The literature indicates that heritage authenticity is socially constructed and negotiated, enabling selective romanticization of memories for contemporary needs and reflecting power and discourse shifts. Heritage often develops in a top-down manner to capture nostalgia (Harrison), but remains grounded in collective memory (Samuel), where individual, collective, and historical memories interact (Halbwachs) and are anchored in lieux de mémoire (Nora). Heritage is created for contemporary consumption, linking past stories and places with new meanings (Lowenthal; Ashworth). It both enables and challenges community construction, requiring integration of diverse interpretations and equitable participation (Bauman; Sayer; Fraser). The 'invention of tradition' can reshape history and build consensus (Hobsbawm & Ranger), and in China, long-standing practices of rebuilding and reshaping sites emphasize inheritance in change (Stille) and reveal a micro-ethical ecology of folk vs. central governance (Svensson). Local and official actors ascribe different meanings to heritage tied to their demands (Sørensen & Carman); local-rooted initiatives can foster pride and healing (Madsen) and promote state–society interactions (Zhu & Martínez; Martínez). Understanding China's long-term historical consciousness (Harvey) and linking 'local' dimensions to national identity (Wen) is critical. Huizhou lineage studies show historically powerful, flexible lineage networks shaped by elites (Beattie; Hazelton; Zurndorfer; McDermott; Esherick & Rankin; Sato), although lineage declined in the 20th century. Recent rural heritage conservation policies (e.g., traditional villages program) and heritage politics (Blumenfield & Silverman; Park; Harvey) have endorsed lineage revitalization. Contemporary discourse idealizes Huizhou's Confucian orthodoxy and merchant–lineage success, aligning with Confucian revival (Billioud & Thoraval; Hwang). Huizhou ancestor worship was inscribed as national intangible cultural heritage (2014), and official media link lineage worship to Neo-Confucianism and local regulation (Guangming Daily), reflecting state needs for confidence and effective grassroots management while returning to traditional discourse.

Research site: Huangshan District, Anhui Province (Huizhou region), noted for Hui architecture and settlements (UNESCO sites Xidi and Hongcun). Design: Single-case, qualitative case study of Huangdun village examining lineage worship revival and identity construction, and reconciliation between official and local claims. Fieldwork: 2020–April 2023. Primary data: multiple field investigations and non-participatory observations of three lineage worship rituals in 2023; 16 semi-structured, open-ended interviews with purposively selected participants across roles: A (villagers), B (village committee staff), C (lineage ceremony participants), D (local activists/experts). Interviewees varied in age, insider/outsider status, and motivations (economic, emotional, social). Observations and interview insights were integrated narratively, with some non-quoted content incorporated in analysis. Secondary data: historical documents, policy texts, images, local chronicles, government reports, and media reports to contextualize events and trace the evolution of lineage worship revival. Ethics: Approved by institutional ethics committees; informed consent obtained. Data availability: original recordings and documents available upon reasonable request due to privacy/ownership restrictions.

• Heritage reconstruction as identity infrastructure: Discovery and reconstruction of a historically significant stone archway ('Luo min su ben', linked symbolically to Neo-Confucian masters and Qing imperial seals) and rebuilding of the SanFuzi Ci (Hall of the Three Masters) created symbolic anchors connecting Huangdun to Confucian orthodoxy and Huizhou cultural prestige. These projects received government financial support and publicity, catalyzing further intangible heritage activities. Villagers and local cadres reported direct benefits, including approximately 10 million CNY in municipal subsidies for conservation and village infrastructure upgrades (e.g., road repaving), and anticipated tourism and small-business opportunities.
• Revitalization of lineage rituals and translocal networks: Since a 2007 revival by the Cheng lineage after a 64-year hiatus, annual ancestor worship events have expanded to multiple lineages (Cheng, Zhu, Huang), attracting members nationwide and overseas (e.g., Singapore, Malaysia, Canada) and prominent figures (entrepreneurs, former officials, notable scientists). Concrete investments include: Cheng lineage spending >1 million CNY on ancestral tomb renovation (2013) and purchasing >20 mu (≈1.3 ha) for a cemetery; Huang lineage purchasing land (~300,000 CNY) for cemetery rebuilding (2019); Zhu lineage raising 178,000 CNY to restore ancestral tomb and holding its first post-PRC ritual at the rebuilt SanFuzi Ci (April 13, 2023). The Cheng lineage’s 2023 ritual drew ~800 participants.
• Discursive alignment with official ideology: Ritual narratives explicitly tie lineage flourishing to national stability, foreground Neo-Confucian virtues (filial piety, reciprocity) and patriotism, and celebrate historical bureaucratic exemplars (e.g., Cheng Lingxi). This framing echoes national policies on preserving outstanding traditional culture and fosters tacit approval from authorities despite provincial-level ambivalence ('no objection, no support, no participation').
• Inclusive, festive practices and broadened belonging: Contemporary rituals in Huangdun differ from patriarchal, hierarchical precedents—now incorporating celebrations, banquets, and wider participation (including women and non-lineage surnames). Participants report pride, belonging, networking, and curiosity-driven engagement (especially among youth), with ceremonies functioning as 'cultural carnivals' that construct translocal communities and a reimagined identity of 'Huizhou people' beyond strict kinship and geography.
• Elite networking and economic channels: Lineage events facilitate connections among influential elites (officials, entrepreneurs, scholars), supporting genealogy tourism and potential capital investment in Huizhou. A local official (D2) emphasized leveraging genealogy culture for contemporary economic and social development.
• Tensions and risks: Concerns include marginalization of smaller lineages/ordinary individuals, the potential for lineage power to evolve into local political influence, and implicit conflicts between elite-driven civic organization and official preferences for flattened control. Authorities’ ambiguous stance leaves 'grey areas' in practice; youth engagement remains mixed.

The findings show that heritage empowerment in Huangdun serves as a vehicle for reconstructing collective identity by re-signifying tangible (archway, SanFuzi Ci) and intangible (rituals, genealogies) elements to align local pride and lineage legitimacy with state-endorsed cultural orthodoxy. This addresses the research questions by demonstrating how heritage mediates individuals' sense of belonging within broader social orders and how historical memory is integrated with contemporary development through policy resonance and economic opportunities (tourism, infrastructure, investment). The reimagined rituals—festive, inclusive, and translocal—expand the notion of community beyond lineage bloodlines and locality, fostering a broader 'Huizhou people' identity. Simultaneously, the process reflects a negotiated space where folk initiatives borrow official discourse (patriotism, morality) to gain tacit support, while officials utilize lineage traditions to disseminate ideology and advance rural revitalization. However, elite dominance, potential exclusion, and the risk of lineage-based power complicate governance objectives, revealing a mutually beneficial yet tension-filled relationship between folk society and the state. The case thus nuances authorized heritage discourse critiques by highlighting bidirectional accommodation rather than unilateral domination.

Lineage revival in Huangdun constitutes a multi-system process that enhances the built environment, generates local economic gains, constructs cultural industries, and reshapes group identity. Through strategic alignment with national cultural policies and discourses of stability and loyalty, folk actions have achieved official acquiescence, enabling ritual networks to channel social and economic benefits to participants while also benefiting non-lineage locals via infrastructure and tourism spillovers. The case underscores heritage/tradition reuse as social construction and cultural reshaping: tangible and intangible elements are co-constructed, and identity recognition via expansive lineage networks provides transcendental security and pride. Although contemporary rituals diverge from historical precedents, their authenticity is less pivotal than their role in producing a universalizing, negotiated identity and collective memory that 'heals' present uncertainties. The experience demonstrates how historical traditions are interpreted alongside contemporary socialist values, encouraging humility, discipline, and harmony, and positioning lineage contributions as consistent with nation-building. Future research should continue monitoring how lineage reconstruction under traditional culture revival and heritage schemes mediates folk–official coordination, manages risks of regionalism and elite capture, and impacts grassroots governance and inclusivity over time.

Single-case focus on Huangdun in Huizhou limits generalizability. The study relies on qualitative methods (non-participatory observation and 16 semi-structured interviews) and secondary sources, which may reflect participant and researcher perspectives. Youth engagement appears limited, and lineage activities are presently dominated by elites and nonlocal influential actors, with weak links to local management and democratic decision-making. Ambiguous official regulations create operational 'grey areas.' Due to privacy and ownership, original recordings and interview data are not publicly released, constraining external verification beyond reasonable-request access.