Miàozhì Tú Kǎo 廟制圖考
Investigation of Ancestral-Temple Plans, with Diagrams by 萬斯同 (撰)
About the work
A historical-philological investigation of the Chinese ancestral-temple (miào) system from earliest times through the Yuán and Míng, with diagrams, by Wàn Sītóng 萬斯同 (1638–1702)—the great early-Qīng historian, Huáng Zōngxī’s principal disciple, and the unofficial chief editor of the official Míngshǐ. 1 juǎn in the surviving Sìkù recension; Wáng Shìzhēn’s catalog of Wàn’s works lists 4 juǎn, presumably collapsed in transmission. The work synthesizes classical and post-Hàn institutional evidence on temple-positioning, sub-shrines, the zhāomù sequence, and the relation of miào to qǐn (the imperial ancestor-bedchamber).
Tiyao
By Wàn Sītóng of our dynasty. Sītóng, zì Jìyě 季野, of Yīnxiàn (Níngbō). The work synthesizes classics and histories to settle the question of the miào system. He holds that the miào is not outside the Zhìmén; the Kǎogōng jì’s “ancestor-temple on the left, shè on the right” is given relative to the wánggōng (royal palace) at the center, which means the miào is east of the imperial qǐn—following Cài Biàn 蔡卞 and Zhū Xī’s Yì Fú 易祓.
He also holds that the feudal lord has five miào: ancestor at the center, two zhāo on the east, two mù on the west, all on a level row—following Jiǎ Gōngyàn.
He further holds that from YúXiàShāngZhōu, the Son of Heaven established seven miào; only Zhōu added the two WénWǔ tiào shrines for nine—following Liú Xīn, Wáng Shùn, and others.
He further holds that the Dàzhuàn, Xiǎojì, Jìfǎ, Zhōngyōng, Shīxù, Guóyǔ, and Lúnyǔ references to dì sacrifice all refer to the great ancestral-temple sacrifice, not the Yuánqiū—following Wáng Sù.
From these positions he traces the temple system from Qín and Hàn down to Yuán and Míng, preparing diagrams of each, appending them to the classical diagrams, and adding explanatory notes. The labor is considerable; the categorization clear. Compared to Míngjìběn’s work, this is more complete.
The arguments contained have both merits and errors. Zhū Xī said that the qún zhāo (group of zhāo shrines) all stand at the north window facing south, and the qún mù all stand at the south window facing north. Sītóng says that ritual halls have only south windows, no north windows—Zhū is wrong. But: the Sāng dàjì says: “The bedchamber, head-east at the north window”; the gloss says “the sick lie at the north window.” The Shī “sè xiàng jǐn hù” with the Jīngdiǎn shìwén citing the Hán Shī gloss “xiàng means north-facing window”; Máo zhuàn also says “xiàng is the north-window-out”; the Kǒng sub-commentary says “for cold-protection one does not block the south window, hence speak of north-window-out.” So a hall has both south and north windows. The Jiāotèshēng says: “The Bóshè north window”—it just opens the north window and blocks the south, not that other halls have no north window. The Xúnzǐ Yòuzuò records Zǐgòng observing the Lǔmiào’s north hall and asking Confucius about the “nine cover” he saw; the gloss says “the north hall is where the spirit-tablet is.” So the north hall has its north hé (door); how then can one doubt the north window? Míngtáng wèi says: “Polished pillars and connecting xiàng”; the gloss says “xiàng is the window adjacent to the door”; each room has eight windows for four-direction access—the Tàimiào is similar to the Míngtáng, with windows on all four sides. How then can one doubt the north window?
[The tíyào continues with several more such corrections, but also praises Sītóng’s discovery, against Zhū Xī’s jì tú, that wife-tablets need not parallel husband-tablets in joint sacrifice.]
In broad orientation, the work follows Wáng Sù and rejects Zhèng Xuán; it holds tightly to one point of view. But it threads through past and present with order and reason; it cannot be denied that this is true classical learning. Wáng Shìzhēn’s catalog of Wàn Sītóng’s writings lists Miàozhì tú kǎo as 4 juǎn; the present text is only 1—possibly the transcribers’ merging.
Abstract
A signature work of early-Qīng evidential scholarship by the unofficial chief compiler of the Míng Veritable Records / Míngshǐ project. Wàn Sītóng’s life-dates are firm at 1638–1702 (CBDB confirms 1638–1702). The work is undated; the dating bracket here (1670–1702) reflects the span of Wàn’s mature scholarly years. The transmitted 1-juǎn version is a compressed remnant of a 4-juǎn original.
The Sìkù tíyào’s evaluation is balanced: Wàn’s commitment to Wáng Sù against Zhèng Xuán is acknowledged as a deliberate scholarly position rather than dismissed; specific arguments are corrected with full evidence; and the work is finally praised as “true classical learning.” The Sìkù editors’ careful pulling-apart of Wàn’s Sāng dàjì and Hán Shī citations to demonstrate that ritual halls do have north windows is one of the most-cited passages in late-Qīng evidential discussion of the miào system.
Translations and research
Standard editions: Wényuāngé Sìkù; in the Wàn-shì jí kāo 萬氏輯考 modern collection. Lynn Struve, The Ming-Qing Conflict (1998); Wm. Theodore de Bary, The Liberal Tradition in China (Hong Kong, 1983), pp. 67–93, on Wàn Sītóng’s life and method. The standard Chinese reference is Cài Hé-pǔ 蔡和璞, Wàn Sītóng pǔ-lùn yán-jiū 萬斯同譜論研究 (Wǔhàn dàxué chū-bǎn-shè, 2002).
Other points of interest
The Sìkù tíyào’s careful argument for north windows in ritual halls, against Wàn’s claim, is one of the densest kǎojù footnotes in the Sìkù—citing six independent classical and commentarial passages. It is sometimes used pedagogically as a model of the kǎojù method.