Shíjīng kǎoyì 石經考異
Critical Examination of Variants in the Stone Classics
by 杭世駿 (Háng Shìjùn, 1696–1773)
About the work
A 2-juan critical re-examination of Gù Yánwǔ’s Shíjīng kǎo KR2n0038, filling out and adjudicating points Gù had not fully resolved. Háng’s structure: juan 1 with 15 sections — (1) Yánxī shíjīng 延熹石經, (2) Shūbēi xìngshì 書碑姓氏 (carving signatories), (3) shūdān bùzhǐ Cài Yōng 書丹不止蔡邕 (more than just Cài Yōng wrote them), (4) sānzì yīzì 三字一字, (5) Zhèngshǐ shíjīng fēi Hándān Chún shū 正始石經非邯鄲淳書 (the Wèi sānzì not Hándān Chún’s), (6) Wèi Wéndì diǎnlùn 魏文帝典論, (7) HànWèi bēimù 漢魏碑目, (8) Suíshū Jīngjízhì zhèng wù 隋書經籍志正誤, (9) Hóngdūxué fēi Tàixué 鴻都學非太學, (10) Wèi Tàiwǔ wú kèshíjīng shì 魏太武無刻石經事 (Tuòbá Tāo did not cut stone classics), (11) Gùkǎo tuōluò BěiQí èr tiáo 顧考脫落北齊二條 (Gù’s two omissions), (12) Tang Yìwénzhì zài shíjīng yǔ Suí zhì bù tóng 唐藝文志載石經與隋志不同, (13) Tang shítái xiàojīng 唐石臺孝經, (14) Tang shíjīng 唐石經, (15) Zhāng Cān Wǔjīng wénzì 張參五經文字. Juan 2 with 3 sections: (1) Shǔ shíjīng 蜀石經, (2) Sòng Kāifēng shíjīng 宋開封石經, (3) Sòng Gāozōng yùshū shíjīng 宋高宗御書石經. Háng’s research is exemplary in evidential method.
The work has prefaces by Lì È 厲鶚, Quán Zǔwàng 全祖望, and Fú Yuánjiā 符元嘉. Lì’s preface praises specific advances: distinguishing five vs. six vs. seven jīng in the various stone-classic cuttings; yīzì / sānzì attribution settled; the 25 vs. 48 stelae count; the Tángdōng / Tángxī arrangement; Yè-to-Cháng’ān vs. Biàn-to-Yān transfer paths; Hóngdūménxué not being the imperial Tàixué; and the Wèi sānzì not being Hándān Chún’s calligraphy. Quán Zǔwàng’s preface usefully cites the Wèilüè, Jìnshū, and Suízhì to argue that Hándān Chún was not uninvolved in the stone-classic cutting (qualifying Háng’s strong claim) and the Wèishū Cuī Hào and Gāo Yǔn biographies to argue that Wèi Tàiwǔdì did engage in lìjīng activity (qualifying Háng’s claim that Tuòbá Tāo did not cut stone classics). Wāng Zuò 汪祚, Zhào Xìn 趙信, and Fú Zēng 符曾 contributed further notes; the work is ultimately a multi-author critical compendium centred on Háng’s research.
The Sìkù editors note that Háng missed the Suìchūtáng shūmù KR2n0003’s record of the Shǔ stone classics — listing Lúnyǔ, the Nine Classics, Mèngzǐ, and Ěryǎ — one jīng fewer than Cháo Gōngwǔ KR2n0002 and Zēng Hóngfù KR2n0020 record. A “méijié-zhīqián zhīshī” (lapse before one’s own eyebrows).
Tiyao
[Translated and condensed from the Sìkù tíyào]
Compiled by Háng Shìjùn of the present (Qing) dynasty. Shìjùn is also the author of Xù Fāngyán (already catalogued).
This compilation, taking up Gù Yánwǔ’s Shíjīng kǎo — which still had unsupplied gaps and unsettled adjudications — corrects and supplements them, producing 2 juan.
[List of 15 + 3 sections as summarised above.]
The evidential research is all very accurate and refined. There are prefaces by Lì È, Quán Zǔwàng, and Fú Yuánjiā.
Lì’s preface says the work distinguishes the wǔjīng / liùjīng / qījīng count by evidence; settles the yīzì / sānzì attribution; analyses the 25-stele vs. 48-stele count; clarifies the Hall-East / Hall-West arrangement; analyses the Yè-to-Yān / Biàn-to-Yān transfer paths; refutes that the Hóngdūménxué was the imperial Tàixué; refutes that the Wèi sānzì is Hándān Chún’s hand. He further cites Hé Xiū’s Gōngyáng zhuàn commentary as evidence that the Hàn stone classics are yīzì and Kǒng Yǐngdá’s Zuǒzhuàn shū as evidence that the Wèi stone classics are sānzì — supplementing Háng’s evidence further.
Quán’s preface cites the Wèilüè, Jìnshū, and Suízhì to show that Hándān Chún was not uninvolved in the stone-classic cutting; cites the Wèishū Cuī Hào and Gāo Yǔn biographies to show that Wèi Tàiwǔdì did indeed engage in lìjīng — preserving these as cross-checks against Háng’s strong claims.
Wāng Zuò, Zhào Xìn, and Fú Zēng all add their notes; together listed in the book. With several scholars’ joint research compounding into one work, beyond simply one person’s reading. Overall the Kǎoyì is more comprehensive than Gù’s Kǎo — there is reason for that.
But Yóu Mào’s Suìchūtáng shūmù lists the Shǔ stone-cutting as Lúnyǔ, Nine Classics, Mèngzǐ, Ěryǎ — one jīng fewer than what Cháo Gōngwǔ and Zēng Hóngfù record. Háng should have addressed this. He happened not to. A lapse before one’s own eyebrows. Evidential research is hard.
Abstract
The Shíjīng kǎoyì is the most comprehensive Qing-era critical work on the Chinese stone-classics tradition and the third pillar (with Gù Yánwǔ’s Shíjīng kǎo KR2n0038 and Wàn Sītóng’s Wànshì Shíjīng kǎo KR2n0039) of Qing stone-classic studies. The catalog meta dates 1696–1773 are Háng Shìjùn’s lifespan; the work is from his post-1736 bóxué hóngcí career, set notBefore 1730 / notAfter 1773 here.
The work’s contributions:
- Comprehensive 18-section structure. Hàn through Sòng coverage, with each contested issue treated systematically.
- Multi-author collaborative scholarship. Prefaces and notes by Lì È, Quán Zǔwàng, Fú Yuánjiā, Wāng Zuò, Zhào Xìn, Fú Zēng — making this a near-unique Qing case of full-collaborative jīnshí monograph.
- Specific evidential discoveries. Hóngdūménxué is not the imperial Tàixué; Wèi sānzì is not Hándān Chún’s calligraphy.
- Standardised dialectical method. Háng’s strong claims are tempered by Quán Zǔwàng’s qualifying notes — exemplary scholarly self-correction.
The Sìkù editors’ identification of Háng’s lapse on the Shǔ stone-classics juan-count (the Suìchūtáng shūmù-derived counter-evidence) is itself a useful piece of evidential scholarship.
CBDB 30301 confirms Háng Shìjùn 1696–1773.
Translations and research
No English translation. Studies:
- Hummel (ed.), Eminent Chinese of the Ch’ing Period, s.v. “Hang Shih-chün”.
- Endymion Wilkinson, Chinese History: A New Manual, on Qing stone-classics.
- Tsuen-Hsuin Tsien, Written on Bamboo and Silk (Chicago, 2nd ed. 2004), on stone-classics historiography.
- Lǐ Xián 李憲 et al. on Qing collaborative jīnshí.
Other points of interest
The collaboration between Háng and his preface-and-note-writers (Lì È, Quán Zǔwàng, etc.) is unusually documented for a Qing jīnshí monograph and provides a clear window onto Hangzhou-Zhèjiāng jīnshí networks of the 1730s–1750s. Lì È’s principal author-list is the same as the NánSòng yuànhuà lù 南宋院畫錄 and Sòngshī jìshì compilation circle.
Links
- Wikipedia (中文): https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/杭世駿
- Wikidata: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q15914156