蘭亭考

Lántíng kǎo 蘭亭考

An Investigation of the Orchid Pavilion [Preface]

by 桑世昌 (Sāng Shìchāng, fl. ca. 1190–1210), with editorial revision by 高似孫 (Gāo Sìsūn, 1158–1231)

About the work

A 12-juan critical compendium on the Lántíng xù 蘭亭序 (Wáng Xīzhī’s 王羲之 famous calligraphy of 353 CE) and especially the Dìngwǔ 定武 stone-cutting tradition. Originally compiled by Sāng Shìchāng under the title Lántíng bóyì 蘭亭博議 in 15 juan, with a preface by Gāo Wénhǔ 高文虎 (Bǐngrú 炳如); the present 12-juan recension was produced by Gāo’s son Gāo Sìsūn (cf. KR2n0004) at the Zhèdōng Yúsī 浙東庾司 cutting, who removed two chapters: the Jízì 集字 (collected-character) section and the Fùjiàn 附見 (appended sightings) section, the latter dealing with later imitations of the Lántíng xù and with Wáng Xīzhī’s Yuèyì lùn 樂毅論 — both of which Gāo judged tangential. Chén Zhènsūn, in Shūlù jiětí KR2n0005, records both editions and laments that Sìsūn also “tried to cut for compactness” and so distorted the original — even Sāng’s preface was rewritten and lost some of its literary quality.

The work systematically reviews the Lántíng xù under the categories of: (i) provenance and transmission of Wáng Xīzhī’s autograph; (ii) the Dìngwǔ stone-cutting and its transmissional vicissitudes; (iii) Tang and Sòng colophons and notices; (iv) calligraphic principles (bāfǎ 八法); etc. The Sìkù editors note minor inconsistencies — different chapters give incompatible accounts of the Lántíng autograph’s transmission and of the Dìngwǔ stone’s history — but the overall result is the indispensable Sòng-era Lántíng compendium.

Tiyao

[Translated and condensed from the Sìkù tíyào]

The old recension attributed to Sāng Shìchāng of the Sòng. Shìchāng was a Huáihǎi man whose family lived for generations at Tiāntái; nephew of Lù Yóu. According to Chén Zhènsūn’s Shūlù jiětí: “Lántíng bóyì in 15 juan, by Sāng Shìchāng.” Yè Shì’s Shuǐxīn jí also has a Lántíng bóyì postscript that says: “Calligraphy after the Lántíng — for thousands of years above and below, no equal — and the Dìngwǔ stone-cutting is now the great topic of the age. Mr. Sāng’s book truly will earn his name.” Shìchāng was practised in many things, especially poetry. His “Tìshì” (occasional verses) include lines like ‘green sky bordering the moat of bamboo, red illuminating the houses of mountain flowers’ — coloured paintings.

The Shūlù jiětí also lists Lántíng kǎo 12 juan, with the note “the same book; the Zhèdōng Yúsī cutting, with substantial deletions from the original.” The original 15 chapters became 13, with the Jízì and Fùjiàn (the latter dealing with later collected-character poems and inscriptions, and with Wáng Xīzhī’s other writings, especially Yuèyì lùn) removed.

The book was originally titled Bóyì; Hàn Hóngnèihàn Wénhǔ 韓內翰文虎 Bǐngrú wrote the preface. When it was cut, his son Sìsūn took the lead in editing — quite right to drop those two — but the other deletions for compactness often lose the sense or distort the meaning, and most damagingly Sāng’s own preface was rewritten with the head-and-tail clipped, so the prose flows broken. To do this to one’s father’s friend’s book is highly strange.

We have not seen the Bóyì original and cannot adjudicate Chén Zhènsūn’s complaint. But the book was made for Wáng Xīzhī’s Lántíng xù: collected-character pieces have nothing to do with Wáng, and Wáng’s other writings have nothing to do with Lántíng — Sìsūn’s cut therefore conforms to the proper limit, and Chén must accept it.

The various views are not fully consistent. Some say: at the Liáng disaster the Lántíng original went out [of court] and was held by Zhì Yǒng 智永 in the Tianjiā era of Chén; some say: the Wáng family transmitted it down through seven generations to Zhì Yǒng — these are different accounts of the original’s transmission. Some say: at the ShíJìn disaster the stone was abandoned at Zhōngshān, then in the early Sòng went to Lǐ Xuéjiū 李學究; Lǐ died, his son took rubbings and sold them; later defaulted on official taxes; Sòng Qí 宋祁, prefect of Dìngwǔ, paid the public coffers and bought the stone, kept it in the storehouse — and again: a wandering scholar took the stone around and died at a courtesan-house; an actor presented it to Sòng Qí — and again: Tang Tàizōng gave rubbings to commanders, only the Dìngwǔ used jade-stone re-cut, hence “Dìngwǔ-edition”; Xuē Shàopéng 薛紹彭 saw the kitchen-storehouse using it as a meat-press and substituted another. These are different accounts of the Dìngwǔ stone’s transmission.

In the Tuīpíng chapter the work argues that since Wáng Xīzhī was born in guǐhài of Tài’ān 2 (303), he was 51 at xiūxì — refuting Lǐ Sìzhēn’s Bǐzhèn tú 筆陣圖 claim that Wáng wrote the Lántíng at age 33 — quite right. Yet earlier, citing Wáng Zhì 王銍’s view that Liú Sù 劉餗’s account is correct, then again on Gāo Sìsūn’s family library catalogue noting Xiāo Yì’s 蕭翼 SùYúnmén liútí 宿雲門留題 two poems “had not the censor undertaken this trip, how would such words exist?” — the work simply records old quotations without firmly adjudicating.

The Bāfǎ chapter uses Shūyuàn jīnjīng 書苑禁經 paragraphs and assigns them all to Lántíng — not as fine as Jiāng Kuí’s Xìtiè piānbàng kǎo. Hence Zēng Hóngfù KR2n0020 and Táo Zōngyí 陶宗儀 KR2n0027 all use Jiāng’s text rather than this. But Sāng’s citation-coverage is broad, and his apparatus on Sòng colophons is exceptional; the original Bóyì is lost; the present text still allows the xìtiè (Lántíng-stone) lineage to be traced. Chén Zhènsūn’s strictures cannot now disqualify the work.

Abstract

The Lántíng kǎo is the most comprehensive Sòng critical study of the Lántíng xù and a primary reference for the Dìngwǔ stone-cutting tradition. Sāng Shìchāng compiled the original Lántíng bóyì in 15 juan; the present 12-juan recension is Gāo Sìsūn’s edited version (the original Bóyì is lost). The catalog meta gives “fl. 1208” for Sāng; Yè Shì’s preface to the Bóyì is dated 1208; Gāo Sìsūn’s editing was thereafter, by terminus ante quem of his 1231 death. The dating window is set notBefore 1200 and notAfter 1220 here.

The work’s contributions:

1. Comprehensive coverage of Lántíng xù and Dìngwǔ connoisseurship and history, drawing widely on Sòng colophons.
2. Conflicting-evidence preservation. Sāng records multiple incompatible accounts of the Lántíng autograph’s and the Dìngwǔ stone’s transmission, providing material for later evidential adjudication.
3. Evidence on Wáng Xīzhī’s age at the Lántíng gathering. Sāng’s reckoning that Wáng was 51 at the 353 Lántíng (refuting the Bǐzhèn tú’s claim of 33) is the standard Southern Sòng position.

The work is regularly cited by Yú Sōng’s Lántíng xùkǎo KR2n0023, Zēng Hóngfù’s Shíkè pūxù KR2n0020, Cáo Shìmiǎn’s Fǎtiè pǔxì KR2n0021, and Táo Zōngyí’s Gǔkè cóngchāo KR2n0027.

CBDB 18170 records Sāng but supplies no dates.

Translations and research

No English translation. Studies:

• Lèi Dérùn 雷德潤 et al., Lántíng xué 蘭亭學, modern Chinese standard work on Lántíng xù scholarship.
• Patricia Ebrey, Accumulating Culture (Washington UP, 2008), on Sòng Lántíng connoisseurship.
• Robert E. Harrist Jr., The Landscape of Words (Washington UP, 2008).
• Eugene Wang and others on Tang Lántíng practice.

Other points of interest

The Sìkù editors’ criticism of Gāo Sìsūn’s editorial intervention — “to do this to one’s father’s friend’s book is highly strange” — is a small but pointed example of Confucian propriety in editorial practice. The original Bóyì is one of the more lamented Sòng Lántíng losses.

Links

• Wikipedia (中文): https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/蘭亭考
• Wikidata: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q15914161