Jiànkāng shílù 建康實錄
Veritable Records of Jiànkāng by 許嵩 (compiler)
About the work
A 20-juǎn annalistic synthesis covering the Six Dynasties (Liùcháo 六朝) — Wú 吳, Eastern Jìn 東晉, (Liú-)Sòng 宋, Qí 齊, Liáng 梁, and Chén 陳 — all of which had Jiànkāng 建康 (modern Nánjīng 南京) as their capital. The work runs from Sūn Quán 孫權’s establishment of Wú in Xīngpíng 興平 1 (194 CE) down to the final extinction of Chén in Zhēnmíng 禎明 3 (589). Composition is fixed to the late 750s by the author’s own computational reckoning, which terminates in Zhìdé 1 (756). The text is structured year-by-year biānnián with embedded biographies attached to each subject’s death-notice — an idiosyncratic and somewhat inconsistent format which the Sìkù tíyào faults as “impure” but which preserves a great deal of material lost from the standard zhèngshǐ. Particularly important for the topography of Jiànkāng (土地山川城池宮苑), for which the tíyào notes the author “specifies their locations to preserve antiquities.”
Tiyao
Submitted by your servants, etc. The Jiànkāng shílù in twenty juǎn was compiled by Xǔ Sōng 許嵩 of the Táng. Xǔ signed himself “of Gāoyáng” 高陽 — that is, his clan-seat, of his actual life nothing can be ascertained. The book records in detail the affairs of the Six Dynasties from Wú Dàdì 吳大帝 down to the Last Lord of Chén, four hundred years in all, with the HòuLiáng 後梁 appended; all six dynasties had Jiànkāng as their capital, hence the title. Its computational tally terminates in Zhìdé 1 (bǐngshēn) of the Táng — so the author was a contemporary of Sùzōng. The author’s own preface says: “Now I rectify the standard biographies and gather the lost; I record the doings of rulers and ministers; some matters are detailed, some abridged; the writings observe what is essential and need not exhaust everything; for territories and rivers and walls and palace gardens, each is identified by location, to preserve the antiquities; matters of unusual report whose wording is disconnected I append as notes, to enlarge the reader’s knowledge — that he may peruse without weariness, and condense without losing.” Plainly his rule of organisation aims at typological narration of the rises and falls in their main outlines, with annalistic recording of events, but he gives particular care to gǔjī 古蹟 (antiquities). For all officials before the Jìn, he uses the shílù (veritable-records) style and appends them under the death-notices; from the Sòng onwards, he reverts to the zhèngshǐ practice of separate biographies — so the format is impure. There are sometimes also duplications and contradictions, and the labelling of names and titles is rather like the Shìshuō xīnyǔ — labels assigned at will, with no fixed rule. By shǐfǎ (the canons of historiography) this is particularly improper. Yet the citations are broad and many lie outside the zhèngshǐ; from Táng times, all who have investigated Six-Dynasties relics regularly cite this work as evidence. Thus Zhāng Yànyuǎn 張彥遠 in his Lìdài mínghuà jì cites it in evidence on the painters Cáo Bùxīng 曹不興, Gù Kǎizhī 顧愷之, and Lù Tànwēi 陸探微; Zhèng Wénbǎo 鄭文寶 in his NánTáng jìnshì cites it on Yuánwǔhú 元武湖; Liú Xīzhòng 劉羲仲’s Tōngjiàn wènyí records that the Sòngshū “Annals of Gāozǔ” misdates the solar eclipse of Jǐngpíng 2; Liú Shù 劉恕, when working on the Tōngjiàn chángbiān, fixed the eclipse to the guǐsì new moon of the second month of that year — both relying on this work for their proof. Again, on the matter of the cypress and pine trees of Fùzhōushān 覆舟山 and Jiāngshān 蔣山 producing tree-sap (mùlǐ, popularly called “sparrow sugar” 雀餳) under Chén’s Last Lord — which the Chénshū omits — Wáng Gǒng 王鞏 in his Jiǎshēn zálù also relies on this book. The episode of Xiè Shàng 謝尚 telling Cài Mó 蔡謨 that he had not read the Ěryǎ carefully and had nearly died of “encouraging study” 勸學 — (note: 勸學 is the first chapter of the Xúnzǐ, and “the crab has six legs and two pincers” 蟹有六跪二螯 is from that chapter) — the Jìnshū mistakenly writes 勤學 (diligent study); Yáo Kuān’s 姚寬 Xīxī cóngyǔ corrects the slip on the authority of this work. Again, Péi Zǐyě 裴子野’s Sòng lüè 宋略, considered an excellent history in its day and one Shěn Yuē 沈約 himself thought he could not match, has not survived. The Zīzhì tōngjiàn preserves several of its lùnzàn but most are fragmentary; whereas the present work uses Péi’s Sòng lüè wholesale as its template for the LiúSòng dynasty and preserves perhaps a tenth of his lùnzàn — this too is something that lovers of antiquity should consult. The Xīn Tángshū monograph places this work in the zashǐ 雜史 category — perhaps reasonably, since the matter does not concern a single dynasty and the jìzhuàn heading is not adopted. Cháo Gōngwǔ’s Jùnzhāi dúshū zhì places it in the shílù category — not free of the error of being misled by the title. Mǎ Duānlín’s Jīngjí kǎo puts it under qǐjūzhù 起居注 — a much more egregious mismatch. Even Zhèng Qiáo’s Yìwén lüè 藝文略, in his biānnián category, organises by dynasty, but here lists this work under LiúSòng, parallel with the Sòng chūnqiū and Sòng jì — an even worse mistake. Examining its content: only Wú is a “usurping state,” but the Sānguó zhì is already in the zhèngshǐ, so the proper place is in bièshǐ 別史 — where we have set it. Third month, Qiánlóng 46 (1781). Chief compilers, etc.
Abstract
Xǔ Sōng 許嵩 (fl. 756–762, Táng) compiled the Jiànkāng shílù in the late 750s as a year-by-year synthesis of the Six Dynasties whose common capital was Jiànkāng. The work is a particularly important secondary source because it preserves substantial citations from late Six-Dynasties histories that have not survived independently — most notably Péi Zǐyě’s 裴子野 Sòng lüè 宋略 (the principal source for juǎn 11–14 on LiúSòng), Sūn Yán 孫嚴’s Sòng shū, and lost Wú-period materials — together with citations from local gazetteers of Jiànkāng of which nothing else remains. The author’s own preface (preserved in the WYG witness) explicitly identifies his interest in the topography of Jiànkāng and the preservation of gǔjī 古蹟. The first eight juǎn cover Wú (down to 280); juǎn 9–11 cover Eastern Jìn (317–420); juǎn 12–14 LiúSòng (420–479); juǎn 15–16 Qí (479–502); juǎn 17–18 Liáng (502–557); juǎn 19–20 Chén (557–589). The HòuLiáng 後梁 (555–587, the rump Liáng court at Jiānglíng) is appended. The work was classified by Cháo Gōngwǔ as shílù (misled by the title), by Mǎ Duānlín as qǐjūzhù (yet more wrongly), by the Xīn Tángshū as zashǐ, and finally by the Sìkù as bièshǐ — the last is the standard placement. Modern editions: Zhāng Chěnshí 張忱石, Jiànkāng shílù (Zhōnghuá shūjú, 1986; rev. 2009) — the standard punctuated and collated edition. Wilkinson (Chinese History) does not single out the work, but it is the first-tier reference for any Six-Dynasties topic touching Jiànkāng.
Translations and research
- Zhāng Chěnshí 張忱石, ed. 1986. Jiànkāng shílù 建康實錄. 2 vols. Běijīng: Zhōnghuá shūjú. (Standard punctuated edition; revised reprint 2009.) Includes a substantial editorial preface on textual history.
- Wáng Yuán-jūn 王元軍. 1990. Xǔ Sōng Jiànkāng shílù yánjiū 許嵩《建康實錄》研究. Master’s thesis, Wǔhàn dàxué.
- Cáo Wénzhù 曹文柱. 1989. “Jiànkāng shílù zài Liù-cháo shǐ yánjiū zhōng de jiàzhí” 《建康實錄》在六朝史研究中的價值. Lìshǐ wénxiàn yánjiū 1: 145–158.
- No substantial Western-language secondary literature located.
Other points of interest
The work is the locus classicus for many anecdotes about the Wáng 王 and Xiè 謝 great families of Eastern Jìn, often quoting otherwise lost passages from Liú Yìqìng 劉義慶’s circle and from Six-Dynasties anecdote literature parallel to but distinct from the Shìshuō xīnyǔ. It also preserves the WYG-edition imperial colophon by the Qiánlóng emperor (御題) on the contrast between the splendour and brevity of Six-Dynasties Jiànkāng and the Hóngwǔ–Yǒnglè reunification at Nánjīng under the early Míng.
Links
- Wikipedia: Jiankang shilu (Chinese only)
- Wikidata Q11075131
- ctext: 建康實錄