野客叢書

Yěkè cóngshū 野客叢書

Collected Writings of the Rustic Guest

by 王楙 (Wáng Mào, 1151–1213; Chángzhōu 長洲 antiquarian, zì Miǎnfū 勉夫). The appended Yělǎo jì wén 野老紀聞 in 1 juan preserves the notes of his father (a disciple of Chén Chángfāng 陳長方).

About the work

A long Southern Sòng antiquarian bǐjì 筆記 in thirty juan, composed at intervals over roughly seven years between Qìngyuán 1 (1195) and Jiātài 2 (1202) — Wáng Mào’s first preface bears the earlier date and a second author’s note the later — and finally collated for circulation in his Chángzhōu studio, Bùqī táng 不欺堂. The work belongs squarely to the great Southern-Sòng tradition of evidential reading-notes (kǎozhèngtǐ bǐjì 考證體筆記) on classical and historical texts, and is consciously written against Hóng Mài’s 洪邁 Róngzhāi suíbǐ 容齋隨筆: Wáng Mào faults Hóng Mài repeatedly for unacknowledged borrowings and aims to establish his own independent voice. The Sìkù editors place it between Shěn Kuò’s 沈括 Mèngxī bǐtán 夢溪筆談, Huáng Cháoyīng’s 黃朝英 Xiāngsù zájì 緗素雜記, and the Róngzhāi suíbǐ — without any sense of inferiority. The 30-juan parent work is followed by an appended Yělǎo jì wén 野老紀聞 (1 juan) of the author’s father, which preserves yíshì 遺事 of the Yuányòu literary circle (Huáng Tíngjiān 黃庭堅 etc., to whom the family had access through the great-grandfather Wáng Bóhǔ 王伯虎). Catalogued under Záxué zhī shǔ 雜學之屬 of the Zájiā 雜家 division (subdivision zákǎo 雜考).

Tiyao

We respectfully submit that Yěkè cóngshū in thirty juan, with the appended Yělǎo jì wén in one juan, was composed by Wáng Mào of the Sòng. Mào, zì Miǎnfū, was a man of Chángzhōu; out of devotion to his mother he declined office, and shut himself in to write — contemporaries called him “Master of Book-Lecturing” (Jiǎngshūjūn 講書君). The book consists wholly of textual collations of variant readings between transmitted texts; it carries an author’s preface dated the inaugural year of Qìngyuán (1195), and a second self-note dated the second year of Jiātài (1202) which says “this book has, since the changing of the era to Qìngyuán, been thrice rewritten; later observation of other books has revealed occasional unconscious agreements, and I have been unable to avoid making excisions” — and so on. He clearly intended to constitute a school of his own, and the book repeatedly faults Hóng Mài’s Róngzhāi suíbǐ for unacknowledged copying; yet entries like the “thousand-foot pine of Hé Qiáo 和嶠” and “Zhōu Yǐ’s 周顗 ānú huǒgōng 阿奴火攻” are themselves taken from Huáng Cháoyīng’s 黃朝英 Xiāngsù zájì, and the entry on “ash-and-nail” (huīdīng 灰釘) Wáng Mào himself notes was independently treated in the Yìyuàn cíhuáng 藝苑雌黃 — clear evidence that the deletions had not been thoroughgoing.

His citations are extensive and not free of minor blunders. Examples: Ōuyáng Xiū’s 歐陽修 Shī běnyì 詩本義 says no one before Máo Cháng 毛萇 took Zōuyú 騶虞 to be a beast — Mào cites the Liùtāo 六韜 to refute it; Zhào Qí’s 趙岐 preface to the Mèngzǐ says Mèngzǐ had no zì — Mào cites the Kǒng cóngzǐ 孔叢子 to refute it; Yán Shīgǔ’s 顏師古 Hàn shū notes locate the yùshù 玉樹 in Gānquán — Mào cites the Hàn Wǔ gùshì 漢武故事 to refute it; Fù Yì’s 傅奕 Qǐng zhèng fófǎ biǎo 請正佛法表 says Buddhism entered China under Hàn Míngdì — Mào cites Liú Xiàng’s 劉向 preface to the Liè xiān zhuàn 列仙傳 to refute it; Dù Fǔ’s 杜甫 line “bǐjià zhān cōngyǔ 筆架沾忩雨” originally describes a real scene, yet Mào emends 沾 to 占 and cites the Kāiyuán Tiānbǎo yíshì 開元天寶遺事 in support — without realizing all of these are late forgeries unsuitable as evidence.

For Yǔ Xìn’s 庾信 Āi Jiāngnán fù 哀江南賦 line “Jìn Zhèng mí yī, Lǔ Wèi bù mù 晉鄭靡依魯衛不睦” — which is a deliberate inversion of a Zuǒ zhuàn phrase — Mào takes the inverted reading as the original. For Huáng Tíngjiān’s 黃庭堅 verse-note citing the Wūsūn princess’s pípá 烏孫公主琵琶, Mào back-attributes the source to the Pípá fù preface by Fù Yuán 傅元, even though Shí Chóng’s 石崇 Wáng Míngjūn cí 王明君詞 explicitly takes the Wūsūn princess as its model — and Mào turns around and uses the Míngjūn case to refute the Wūsūn case. For Qín Guān’s 秦觀 line “dùjuān shēng lǐ xiéyáng mù 杜鵑聲裏斜陽暮” Mào is correct that 暮 has not been corrupted, but wrong to argue it should be 曙 (to avoid Yīngzōng’s 英宗 temple-taboo) — for “evening sun” (xiéyáng) cannot be paired with “dawn” (shǔ). For Zhāng Hù’s 張祐 Níngwáng zhī shī 寧王之詩 — which is plainly a retrospective composition — Mào takes it as eyewitness, and to reconcile it with Hù’s lifedates fabricates the claim that Hù lived through eleven reigns and was over a hundred and twenty years old. (One could equally well argue that Lǐ Shāngyǐn 李商隱 wrote his Jiǔchéng gōng 九成宮 poem at an even greater age!) Other slips: the entry on Máo Yíng 茅盈 — which appears in the Shǐ jì Qín běnjì commentary — Mào instead follows Liáng Sūn Wéntāo’s 梁孫文韜 inscription making him a Hàn man, and chides Sūn for using a temple-name; the Héguānzǐ author was actually Liǔ Zōngyuán 柳宗元 (so identified by tradition), but Mào names Hán Yù 韓愈; the Pánzhōng shī 盤中詩 was by Sū Bóyù’s 蘇伯玉 wife, but Mào ascribes it to Fù Yuán 傅元 (note: Mào here relies on Chén Yùfù’s 陳玉父 corrupted edition of the Yùtái xīnyǒng 玉臺新詠; Yán Yǔ’s 嚴羽 Cānglàng shīhuà 滄浪詩話 cites the original Yùtái very clearly); the line “mǎi shí dé yún ráo 買石得雲饒” is from Yáo Hé’s 姚合 Wǔgōngxiàn shī 武功縣詩, but Mào ascribes it to Wáng Jiàn 王建; “yúliáng qī mǔ 餘糧棲畝” is a Huáinánzǐ phrase, but Mào dates it to Zuǒ Sī 左思; the use of 准 for 準 is in Lǚ Chén’s 呂忱 Zìlín 字林 (note: the Zìlín is now lost; the entry survives via citation in Guō Zhōngshù’s 郭忠恕 Pèixī 佩觽), but Mào speaks loosely of “Táng inscriptions” — these are all single lapses of judgment, and one need not go out of one’s way to apologize for them.

The remainder is for the most part close and accurate; we may place it between the Mèngxī bǐtán 夢溪筆談, the Xiāngsù zájì 緗素雜記, and the Róngzhāi suíbǐ without shame. Appended at the end is the Yělǎo jì wén 野老紀聞 in one juan, the work of Mào’s father — who left no name but is known from Mào’s prefatory remark to have been a disciple of Chén Chángfāng 陳長方. It records mostly Yuányòu circle anecdotes and reproduces (in its jiě Mèngzǐ jì rù qí lì 解孟子既入其苙 entry) Cháo’s 晁氏 Kè yǔ 客語 reading. Mào’s great-grandfather Bóhǔ 伯虎 had been on terms with Huáng Tíngjiān 黃庭堅; Tíngjiān’s poem in answer to Bǐngzhī’s Yùbǎn jiān 玉版牋 contains the line “wáng hóu xū ruò yuán pō zhú 王侯鬚若緣坡竹” (note: this matter is treated under the Ránnú 髯奴 entry of the present book) — and so the father’s hearing of family lore and Yuányòu anecdotes was direct. As to placing his father’s book at the end of his own — this follows the precedent set by the Shāngǔ jí 山谷集 receiving the Fátán jí 伐檀集 as appendix; but the Fátán jí was added by later editors, not by Tíngjiān himself, and so we now catalog them separately to clarify the case. The present appendage was made by Mào himself, and so we cannot lay the burden on others; we therefore preserve his arrangement, while noting the lapse — Chūnqiū praise-and-blame each rest on the author’s own intent, and so do we.

The original book is in thirty juan, as stated in the author’s preface. The Bǎoyán táng mìjí 寶顏堂秘笈 of Chén Jìrú 陳繼儒 prints only twelve juan, and most of the close-grained passages have been excised; we therefore catalog the original recension and decline to retain so much as a title-listing for Chén Jìrú’s mutilated text, appending here a refutation of its failings.

Respectfully revised and submitted, first month of the forty-fourth year of Qiánlóng [1779].

General Compilers: Jǐ Yún 紀昀 (note: 均 in the original is a typographical slip for 昀), Lù Xīxióng 陸錫熊, Sūn Shìyì 孫士毅. General Reviser: Lù Fèichí 陸費墀.

Abstract

Wáng Mào 王楙 (1151–1213) of Chángzhōu 長洲 (modern Sūzhōu) was one of the more independent and combative reading-note writers of the Southern Sòng. Never an examination graduate (he declined office from filial duty toward his mother), he spent his adult life as a private scholar, and was nicknamed Jiǎngshūjūn 講書君 by his contemporaries. His one major work, the Yěkè cóngshū 野客叢書 in 30 juan with a 1-juan father’s appendix, was composed in successive layers between 1195 and 1202, with the latest revisions made at his Chángzhōu studio Bùqī táng 不欺堂; the dating bracket adopted here (notBefore 1195, notAfter 1213) reflects the period from the first preface to the author’s death, with the substantial composition concluded by 1202.

The work is a kǎozhèng 考證 bǐjì on the model of Shěn Kuò’s 沈括 Mèngxī bǐtán, Huáng Cháoyīng’s 黃朝英 Xiāngsù zájì, and Hóng Mài’s 洪邁 Róngzhāi suíbǐ — though Wáng Mào is sharply critical of Hóng Mài and writes in something of an antagonistic dialogue with the Suíbǐ. Topics range across the Confucian classics, the standard histories, the Wén xuǎn 文選 and the great Táng poets, Yuèfǔ 樂府 and Yùtái xīnyǒng 玉臺新詠 traditions, and a great deal of Sòng poetry (especially the Huáng Tíngjiān circle, with whom the Wáng family had personal connections through Wáng Mào’s great-grandfather Wáng Bóhǔ 王伯虎). The Sìkù editors, while pointing out a respectable list of errors of attribution and dating, conclude that the work deserves a place alongside the Mèngxī bǐtán, the Xiāngsù zájì, and the Róngzhāi suíbǐ “without shame.”

The appended Yělǎo jì wén 野老紀聞 (1 juan) preserves the notes of Wáng Mào’s father (who left no recorded name, but who was a disciple of Chén Chángfāng 陳長方); the bulk of its content is yíshì of Yuányòu literati, including direct family reminiscence of Huáng Tíngjiān. The Sìkù editors disapprove of the appending in principle but preserve it in fact, since it was the author’s own arrangement.

The text was widely circulated in the abridged 12-juan version of Chén Jìrú’s 陳繼儒 Bǎoyántáng mìjí 寶顏堂秘笈, but the Sìkù recension restored the full 30-juan original. Both Wáng Mào and the Yěkè cóngshū are routinely cited in Sòngshǐ and Sòngcí studies as a primary witness for late-twelfth-century literary opinion in the Wú region.

Translations and research

No complete European-language translation exists. The work is, however, frequently mined and cited in modern Chinese Sòng-cí and bǐjì scholarship.

• Wáng Wén-jǐn 王文錦 (punct.), Yěkè cóngshū fù Yělǎo jì wén 野客叢書 附 野老紀聞 (Zhōnghuá shūjú, Tángsòng shǐliào bǐjì cóngkān 唐宋史料筆記叢刊, 1987; rev. ed. 2007). The standard punctuated critical edition.
• Zhū Yìxuán 朱易安, Fù Xuáncóng 傅璇琮 et al. (eds.), Quán Sòng bǐjì 全宋筆記, ser. 5 (Dàxiàng chūbǎnshè, 2012), includes the Yěkè cóngshū and the Yělǎo jì wén with collation notes.
• Cài Zhèn-chǔ 蔡鎮楚, Sòngdài wénxué pīpíng yánjiū 宋代文學批評研究 (Yuèlù shūshè, 1999), treats Wáng Mào’s poetry-criticism in context.
• Cited extensively in studies of Sòng bǐjì historiography (Liú Yèqiū 劉葉秋, Lìdài bǐjì gàishù 歷代筆記概述, Zhōnghuá shūjú, 1980; rev. ed. 2003) and in Wén xuǎn / Yùtái xīn-yǒng textual scholarship (e.g., Liú Yùnhǎo 劉躍進, Yùtái xīn-yǒng yánjiū 玉臺新詠研究, Zhōnghuá shūjú, 2000).

No Western-language monographic study has been devoted to Wáng Mào.

Other points of interest

The Sìkù tiyao’s catalogue of Wáng Mào’s misattributions — Yáo Hé as Wáng Jiàn, Sū Bóyù’s wife as Fù Yuán, Wáng Mào’s textual basis in the corrupted Chén Yùfù 陳玉父 edition of the Yùtái xīnyǒng — is itself a small textbook in the philological perils of citation-based reading-notes, and is cited as such in modern handbooks of kǎozhèng method.

Links

• Sìkù quánshū zǒngmù tíyào 四庫全書總目提要, Zǐbù · Zájiā lèi 2 · Zákǎo zhī shǔ, Yěkè cóngshū entry.
• Wikidata: Q11188395 (Yeke congshu).