Cízōng 詞綜
The Complete Anthology of Cí edited by 朱彝尊 (編)
About the work
The Cízōng 詞綜 is the founding scholarly anthology of the Zhèxīpài 浙西派 of Qīng cí-criticism — the school that Zhū Yízūn 朱彝尊 (1629–1709) institutionalized in the late Kāngxī era and that dominated the Qīng cí-canon for more than a century afterward. 30 juǎn. Compiled by Zhū with the editorial assistance of his Tóngxiāng student Wāng Sēn 汪森, the volume draws on 500+ TángSòngJīnYuán cí-poets via specialist personal collections (60 of them in Máo Jìn’s 毛晉 Jígǔgé Liùshí jiā cí) and many manuscript sources lent by leading Kāngxī-era connoisseurs (the volume’s fāfán 發凡 explicitly names Zhōu Liànggōng’s son Zhōu Xuěkè, Huáng Yútài 黃俞邰, the Sòngjiāng Wú Yújí 吳玉吉, etc.). The editorial principle is the Zhèxī-formula: Jiāng Kuí 姜夔 is the head of the orthodox line, with Zhāng Jí 張輯, Lú Zǔgāo 盧祖臯, Shǐ Dázǔ 史達祖, Wú Wényīng 吳文英, Jiǎng Jié 蔣捷, Wáng Yísūn 王沂孫, Zhāng Yán, and Zhōu Mì as auxiliaries. Xiǎolìng are modeled on the pre-Biàn-jīng (Northern Sòng) masters; màncí on the Southern Sòng. The categorical model is yǎzhèng 雅正 — exactly the editorial principle of Zēng Zào 曾慥 in his Yuèfǔ yǎcí KR4j0065 and of Zhōu Mì in his Juémiào hǎocí.
Tiyao
Cízōng, 30 juǎn. Edited by the Xiùshuǐ (Jiāxìng) man Zhū Yízūn of the present dynasty; revised in Tóngxiāng by Wāng Sēn. The cí selected are of more than 500 men, Táng to Yuán. Beyond personal collections and existing anthologies, the editor has gathered pieces of value from bàiguān yějì (unofficial histories and miscellany) — many of which appear nowhere else. The volume corrects errors in tune-name, jùdòu, and biographical-and-career data found in other anthologies. The principle of selection is also one of discernment: Zhū worked at tiáncí himself, and held that the orthodox line in cí runs through Jiāng Kuí with Zhāng Jí, Lú Zǔgāo, Shǐ Dázǔ, Wú Wényīng, Jiǎng Jié, Wáng Yísūn, Zhāng Yán, and Zhōu Mì as auxiliary lights. For xiǎolìng the model is the pre-Biàn-jīng masters; for màncí the Southern-Sòng masters. Cí must conform to yǎzhèng; Zēng Zào of the Sòng accordingly compiled Yuèfǔ yǎcí; Tóngyángjūshì 鮦陽居士 compiled the Fùyǎ jí; both are praised for their critical caution, and Zhōu Mì’s Juémiào hǎocí is uniquely well received and collected. The editorial principles are precise, and the selection accordingly disciplined; Cízōng easily surpasses the Huājiān jí / Cǎotáng shīyú line. — Qiánlóng 45 / 1780, 9th month.
Abstract
The Cízōng was first cut in Kāngxī 17 / 1678; an expanded Cízōng bǔyí 補遺 and the Mǎ Cízōng (additional supplements) followed across the next decade and a half. The WYG admits the consolidated 30-juǎn form. The volume’s textual sources are recorded in the editor’s fāfán 發凡 (preserved in _000.txt and partly translated above): chiefly the late-Míng Máo Jìn Liùshí jiā cí 六十家詞 plus several dozen specialist manuscript sources lent to Zhū by leading early-Kāngxī collectors (Sòng Mùzhòng 宋牧仲, Chéng Róngruò 成容若 [Nara Singde], Xú Jiànān 徐健菴, Cáo Yáng 曹堯 etc.). The volume’s editorial canonicity for the Zhèxīpài — codified in the four-line formula naming Jiāng Kuí as orthodox head — is what makes the Cízōng the most theoretically influential Qīng cí anthology, and the source from which Lì È 厲鶚 and Wāng Sēn (its principal Qīng heirs) extend the line into the Qiánlóng era.
Translations and research
- Yán Dí-chāng 嚴迪昌, Qīng cí shǐ 清詞史 (Jiāng-sū gǔ-jí, 1990) — extended treatment of Cí-zōng and the Zhè-xī-pài foundation.
- David R. McCraw, Chinese Lyricists of the Seventeenth Century (Hawaii, 1990) — places Cí-zōng in the Qīng cí revival.
- Wang Wei-yi 王偉勇, Qīng-dài cí-xué pī-píng shǐ.
- Stuart Sargent, “Tz’u,” in Mair, ed., Columbia History of Chinese Literature.
Other points of interest
The Cízōng preface’s four-line Zhèxī-formula — “Jiāng Kuí is the head of the orthodox; Zhāng Jí, Lú Zǔgāo, Shǐ Dázǔ, Wú Wényīng, Jiǎng Jié, Wáng Yísūn, Zhāng Yán, and Zhōu Mì are its auxiliary lights; whoever gets past these may rarely enter the gate” — is one of the most cited and most contested theses in late-imperial cí-criticism. The contrary Chángzhōupài (Zhāng Huìyán’s school, early 19th century) would explicitly position itself against it.