Shī gù 詩故
Old Readings on the Classic of Poetry by 朱謀㙔 (Zhū Móuwěi, zì Yùyí 鬱儀, d. 1624)
About the work
A 10-juǎn late-Míng Shī commentary by the Míng imperial-clan member Zhū Móuwěi. Methodologically the work takes the first sentence of the xiǎo xù as its principal lemma — broadly the same procedure as Sū Zhé’s Shī zhuàn (KR1c0006) — and supplements with the older xùngǔ tradition. The title gù 故 (“old readings / commentary”) echoes the Hàn shū Yìwénzhì’s register of the lost Lǔ gù 魯故 25 juǎn, Qí Hòushì gù 齊后氏故 20 juǎn, Qí Sūnshì gù 齊孫氏故 27 juǎn, Hán gù 韓故 36 juǎn, and Máo Shī gù xùn zhuàn 毛詩故訓傳 30 juǎn — Yán Shīgǔ glossing gù as “stating the work’s meaning.” The doctrinal orientation is accordingly Hàn-school, frequently divergent from Zhū Xī’s Jí zhuàn.
The Sìkù editors single out two characteristic novel readings:
(1) On Xiǎo xīng (Zhào nán): Zhū Móuwěi reads the small-stars as palace attendants on duty (xièyù 暬御 rù zhí) — a zōngshì-tradition palace-life reading rather than the xù’s “wives’ jealousy” line.
(2) On Sī gàn (Xiǎo Yǎ): Zhū Móuwěi reads the ode as composed by Duke of Zhōu on Chéngwáng’s establishment of the Luò camp — a politically specific reading in place of the standard “house-warming” line.
The Sìkù editors note that these “occasionally tip into forced readings,” but praise the broader project: “Zhū Móuwěi’s reading was extraordinarily broad and his learning had real foundations; cross-checking sources, he could often produce fresh readings — not the empty Classic-glossing of the late Míng.” Their telling closing note is institutional: since Hú Guǎng’s Wǔjīng dàquán (1415, see KR1c0035) made examination-success and Classic-research two separate activities, ordinary scholars had no incentive to do textual work — but Zhū Móuwěi, ensconced in his princely fief and exempt from the examination route, was structurally free to research the textual remains and elucidate the ancient meaning. “From this one can know in outline why the canonical learning waxed and waned.”
Tiyao
Your servants etc. respectfully present: Shī gù 10 juǎn, by the Míng Zhū Móuwěi. Móuwěi zì Yùyí, seventh-generation grandson of Níng Xiànwáng (Zhū Quán). With the rank of zhōngwèi he administered the Shíchéngwáng establishment. His career is recorded in the Míng shǐ Zhū wáng zhuàn. This work uses the first sentence of the xiǎo xù as the principal [lemma], roughly the same pattern as Sū Zhé’s Shī zhuàn, supplemented with the older readings to corroborate. Its main current follows the Hàn learning, hence often divergent from Master Zhū’s Jí zhuàn. The titling as gù has its meaning. Mid-ode he occasionally proposes new readings — e.g. taking Xiǎo xīng as palace attendants on duty, or Sī gàn as the Duke of Zhōu’s ode on Chéngwáng’s Luò encampment — these are not without forced extension, but his learning has foundations: cross-checking and corroborating, he often produces new readings on his own, not the back-handed plagiary of received words. He is not what mere empty-Classic-glossers can be compared to. Qiánlóng 42, 3rd month, respectfully collated. Chief Compilers: Jì Yún, Lù Xīxióng, Sūn Shìyì. Chief Editor: Lù Fèichí.
Abstract
The Shī gù is the principal late-Míng zōngshì (imperial-clan) Shī commentary, exemplifying a strand of late-Míng scholarship that the Sìkù editors found scarce: serious philological-evidentiary work by educated elites on the Shī-canon. Zhū Móuwěi’s combination of doctrinal independence (Hàn-school orientation rather than Zhū-school orthodoxy) with broad evidentiary practice (the gù-naming explicitly invokes the lost Hàn Shī-tradition titles) places the work as a forerunner of the high-Qīng kǎozhèng Shī-scholarship. Composition is bracketed by Zhū Móuwěi’s mature pre-1624 career; precise self-dating is not extant. The work circulated narrowly during the late Míng — the Sìkù version is the Zhèjiāng Wú Yùchí 吳玉墀 family copy.
Translations and research
No translation. Zhū Móuwěi as a Míng imperial-clan scholar-bibliophile is treated in studies of the Níng-fān 寧藩 (Níng-princely-establishment) cultural circle — see Zhāng Zhāo 張兆, Míngdài zōngfān wénhuà yánjiū (Bĕijīng: Wén jīn, 2008); on his philological work specifically, see Hé Yùmíng, Míngdài Shī jīng xuéshǐ lùn. On the broader phenomenon of Míng princely-establishment scholarship: Craig Clunas, Empire of Great Brightness (Reaktion, 2007), pp. 78–112.
Other points of interest
The tíyào’s structural argument — that the Wǔjīng dàquán split yìngjǔ (taking exams) and qióngjīng (exhausting the canon) into separate activities and so degraded ordinary canonical learning, while Míng princes (no need to take examinations) preserved a more authentic philological practice — is an unusually frank Sìkù social-history claim about late-Míng scholarship. It also reflects the editors’ broader institutional indictment of the Dàquán (cf. KR1c0035).