Editor's note: Mr. Fu Shen, a famous calligraphy and painting connoisseur and calligrapher, passed away in Fuyang, Hangzhou in the early morning of April 16, 2024, at the age of 88. Mr. Fu Shen is committed to the appraisal of Chinese calligraphy and painting, as well as the study of ancient Chinese art history and Chinese calligraphy, including the study of Huaisu's "Self-Sequence Post" in the Tang Dynasty, Mi Fu's "Yanshan Ming" in the Song Dynasty, Huang Gongwang's "Fuchun Mountain Residence Map" in the Yuan Dynasty and Zhang Daqian in modern times, which has attracted great attention from the academic community. The death of Mr. Fu Shen is a great loss to the Chinese calligraphy community, and Mr. Fu Shen in the special issue of "Chinese Calligraphy" confirms that the Taipei Palace Museum's 'Self-Narrative Post' is a Northern Song Dynasty Ying Manuscript - From the "Liuri Half-volume Edition" on the "Self-Narrative Post" is not written by Huaisu himself" to express his condolences.
There has been a long-standing controversy over the authenticity of Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post". Since the beginning of the 20th century, from the "Song Dynasty Pseudo-Script" held by Zhang Heng, Qi Gong, and Xu Bangda to the "Ming People's Linben Theory" held by Li Yuzhou in Taipei, Fu Shen has put forward his own new viewpoint based on the photographs of the fragments of Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post" circulated in Japan, combined with his own research over the years, that the ink blots of the "Self-Narrative Post" collected by the National Palace Museum in Taipei, China, are actually the "Reflection Script" of the Northern Song Dynasty, and put forward his own new viewpoint.
Confirm that the "Self-Narrative Post of the Forbidden City" is written by the Northern Song Dynasty - from the "Liuri Half Volume" on the "Self-Narrative Post" is not written by Huaisu himself (I)
Fu Shen I. Introduction
The famous relics from the Qing Palace in the National Palace Museum in Taipei, China, Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post", with its round lines, flying glyphs, complementary poetry content, wonderful Song and Ming inscriptions, long history, far-reaching influence of the past dynasties, but also through modern photocopying and amplification technology and media publicity, has been deeply rooted in the hearts of the people, etc., together to shape its immortal image.
However, in the 70 years since the 1930s, and especially in the 20 years since the 1980s, many scholars have participated in the debate on the authenticity of the Self-Narrative Post. In particular, in the past two or three years, the academic circles in Taiwan, China, have been boiling over and debating hotly, so the calligraphy circles have also been enthusiastic about whether the "Forbidden City Ink Book Self-Description" is true, is it fake, is it a copy of the Ming people, is it a copy of Wen Peng, and so on, and they do not think it is strange or angry!
The main purpose of the initial debate was to not agree with the three arguments of "copying and copying", "copying by Wen Peng", and confusing the relationship between the ink book and the engraved copy, and put forward the arguments that the "Self-Narrative Post" is a "manuscript" and "not copied by Wen Peng", that "the Song and Ming Dynasty people are all true", and that the "Forbidden City Edition" is the mother copy of the "Shuijingtang Edition". As for the authenticity of the "Self-Narrative Post", there is no conclusive conclusion, and it is only said that the "manuscript" has the possibility of "authenticity", but it does not rule out the possibility of "copy" and "imitation", and believes that the future high technology can only distinguish the fake and cannot distinguish the authenticity. Finally, it is proposed that the dating of the "Forbidden City" is proposed, and its lower limit is the end of the Northern Song Dynasty. Although such a conclusion was not satisfactory, at that time it was indeed believed that the question of the authenticity of the "Forbidden City" would be a permanent "unsolved case", which belonged to the category of ancient calligraphy and painting that could never be solved.
However, to the author's personal expectations, because Ma Chengming's brother provided a fragment of the "Self-Narrative Post" (hereinafter referred to as the "Liuri Half-Volume") copied in Japan 70 years ago, the author was invited to invest in new research, and the author himself was surprised to find that this piece belongs to the limited exhibition level in the Forbidden City, and everyone in the calligraphy and cultural circles knows about it, and even the internationally famous "The Forbidden City Ben Huaisu Self-Narrative Post" ink scroll actually has a "twin case" problem with the "Liuri half-volume", but this "twin case" Since it is impossible to distinguish between the good and the bad and many other factors, it cannot be explained by the general "one true and one false" or "both are true", but the reproduction of "both fakes" in the same hand, so the "Forbidden City Edition" is not only impossible, but also absolutely not Huaisu's own handwriting! The fact that such a conclusion has come to in the course of research is at least a great shock to the author, and even in the author's personal state of mind, he is quite hesitant to make this research conclusion public? Credibility and irreversibility, so as not to rashly create unnecessary turmoil and encirclement and suppression, and also undermine the public's longing and reverence for this famous relic that still holds "Huaisu's true relic"! However, the author has repeatedly scrutinized and thought that he has mastered irreversible arguments and material evidence, so he can only risk the world's greatness and "let the evidence speak"! However, denying that it is Huaisu's own handwriting does not completely deny its value, except for the more than 10 priceless inscriptions at the back of the volume, mainly through the "Forbidden City Book" Only then can we imagine a more wonderful and comfortable volume of Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post", and use it to construct the wild grass history of the Tang Dynasty! This is enough to constitute the importance of the "Forbidden City" and the status of a national treasure!
As soon as this article comes out, there will be objections. The author expects that readers will be able to give advice, whether they have a positive or negative opinion on the author's inferences. Because in ordinary debates, only the voice of the opposing side will be heard, and the opposing side will be thought to be the majority, which will produce incorrect and undesirable misleading truths about the facts.
2. Song and Yuan Dynasty circulated several copies of Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post"
There is a historical reason why the Forbidden City's Self-Narrative has been debated for more than 20 years: that is, there are many copies circulating in the records and accounts since the Song and Yuan dynasties.
I have no way of knowing that Huaisu wrote one or several copies of the "Self-Narrative Post" in his lifetime, but in the Northern Song Dynasty to the Yuan Dynasty, Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post" was quite recorded by connoisseurs, so there are many copies of various texts, and its actual situation can only be glimpsed from the following written materials to get a glimpse of the complex situation of his biography.
(1) At least five copies of the Northern Song Dynasty
According to Mi Fu (1051-1107) records, first in its "Treasure Chapter to be Interviewed" heard: "Tang Seng Huaisu "self-description" in the court Fenglang Su liquid. Later, he turned to Su Mi and witnessed the original: "Huaisu's "Self-Description" was in Hubei Province, and the previous paper was broken and did not exist, and his father Shun Qin made up for it. [1] This clearly indicates that there is a notebook before Su Shunqin's supplement.
According to Mi Fu's "Book History" there is another copy of Su Yi: "Su Yi copy Huaisu "self-narrative post", taste back to the Yu family, now to my friend Li Rong, just like the real handiwork. [2] It is known that there was a copy of Su Yi handed down at that time.
Mi Fu personally saw Su Shunqin (1008 - 1048) supplement book in Su Xu, this biography engraved in the book, only according to the Southern Song Dynasty Chunxi time stone, in the Qing Jiaqing six years (1801) Xie Xi had translated the "Qilan Tang Post" has Shun Qinba, so people today call the "Qilan Tang Ben" for Su Mi, the facts, yet to verify.
According to the inscription of Zeng Wei in the second year of Shaoxing (1132), there were three copies of the "Self-Narrative Post" handed down at that time:
One is in Shuzhong Shiyang (Yang) Hugh family, Huang Luzhi is also a fish note; one is in Feng Dang's family, and then returns to the top; one is in Su Zimei's house, this is also.
At least the original inscription by Zeng Wei was a family collection of Su Zimei (Shunqin).
Another one is mentioned in the inscription of Wen Zhengming's Bashui Mirror Hall:
"Huang Changrui's Dongguan Yu Treatise has a question about Tang Tongsuo's self-description, and it is also the animal of Tang Jixian in Yunnan. "Huang Changrui is Huang Bosi (1079-1118), also a native of the Northern Song Dynasty, and Tang Tongsu is Tang Yu. However, the original text of Cha Huang Bosi has "This volume is genuine, how can it be that Jiangnan Jixian has accumulated books?" is a question sentence, which shows that this book does not have the seal of the Southern Tang Dynasty, so it is known that it is another book.
Summarizing Mi Fu, Zeng Xu, Huang Bosi's words, I learned that there were at least the following books in the Northern Song Dynasty:
1. Su Shunqin supplemented the book, passed on the eldest son Su Mi (Mi Fu witnessed).
2. Su Yi copy (Mi Fu has been hidden).
3. Shuzhong Shi Yang Xiu (Zeng Wei recorded, Huang Tingjian made several copies of the book according to this).
4. Feng Dangshi (Beijing) book, into the Northern Song Dynasty (Zeng Xu).
5. Tang Yu (No. Tongsuo) book (there is an inscription by Huang Bosi, according to the text).
The above is only the information found so far, so it is known that there were at least five of the above books in the Northern Song Dynasty.
☆ Lines 65 to 94 of "The Forbidden City's Self-Description" are from the same hand as the "Flowing Sun Half Volume" ☆ "The Flowing Sun Half Volume" only has these three pages and 30 lines, which are the same hand as the "Forbidden City", which is the "twin book". From the 1935 Japanese volume co-Luo edition reprinted, so the background color is very different from the "Forbidden City Edition" ☆ The ancestral copy of the "Qilan Tang Edition" and the above two ink blots are the same hand, combined into the "triplet book" (2) Yuan algebra book "Self-narrative Post"
Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post" seems to have become more complicated in the Yuan Dynasty, and there are records of Wang Yun and Yuan Juan successively. What Wang Yun saw and heard was as follows:
1. Wang Yun (1227-1302) There are three books recorded in "Bashou Linhuaisu's Self-Narrative Post", one true and two false:
a. There are several copies of Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post". Liu Yushi Wen Jiyun: "Xiwu from the ancestral river Dongjun collection of the best, after Su Cai Weng Bayun: 'The former paper is broken, the person is framed, and it is a supplement, and it is not ashamed of its chaff', there is Du Qigong's inscription cloud. ”
b.“ After crossing to the north, the view of Jincheng Han Hou and the secret house received, with no Su, Du Ergong inscription, it seems that it is not the real pen of Changsha. ”
c. "To the Yuan Xinhai (1271) autumn and September obscurity, Yu Yao Gong showed the Taibao Liu Gong (Bingzhong) family collection post, the first thirty-three characters are also Yun Zimei to make up for the death. ”[3]
According to Article A, this book has both Su Caiweng (Zimei) and Du Qigong (Yan) questions. That is, the ancestor of Chunxi carved stone and the Su and Du Erbai of the Taipei National Palace are called two books, which seems to be not true. Article C also has Su's supplementary book, and only Wang Yun recorded more than one Su's supplementary book when he knew the Yuan.
2. Yuan Juan (1267-1327) also recorded several copies in "Ba Huaisu's Self-Narrative Post":
The ink of "Self-Description" has Su Zimei's supplementary words, and there are several copies of it. ...... However, what Zimei makes up is the same, and it is impossible to know, and those who are good at it will never be able to follow first. [4]
The most strange thing about the several books that Yuan has seen is that they all have Su Zimei's words, and it is difficult to distinguish the advantages and disadvantages!
Then there is the Yuan Ren Hu Yishu (1227-1295) "Title Huaisu Self-Narrative Post" has clouds:
Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post", Yu saw five or six books, and the post book was like a stroke. [5]
The above Song and Yuan Dynasty people remembered, are all ink books (engraved books for the time being, such as the Bianjing Inner Mansion will be used as a supervisor to carve stones, etc.), it is incredible that several books have Su Zimei supplemental books! or see five or six books, such as a hand! The author has said in the book "Calligraphy Appraisal - Clinical Diagnosis of Huaisu's Self-Narrative Post" (hereinafter referred to as "Calligraphy Appraisal"):
If the three books have Su Shunqin's supplements, then it is just as the author said: in order to practice the first six lines, Su repeatedly copied them in order to supplement the book to force Xiao, which was the by-product of the time. [6]
Today, nearly 700 years ago from Yuan Juan in the Yuan Dynasty, I have no chance to see the Su supplement book that Yuan saw. In the surviving Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post", in the well-known "Forbidden City Ink Book", there is no shortage of six lines and 34 characters on the first paper of the frontispiece (the former Wang Yun miscounted 33 characters), although there is no Su Zimei at the back of the volume, it is generally believed that Su Zimei is a supplementary book, but it has yet to be confirmed. According to this, the "Water Mirror Hall Edition" engraved by Sun Mubai and Shen Mingyi has been discussed by scholars. [7]
The "Qilan Tang Ben Self-Narrative Post" is well-known for Mr. Qigong's introduction and discussion, which was reproduced by the Qing dynasty Wumen Xie Xi in the sixth year of Jiaqing (1801) according to the Chunxi (1174-1189) stone engraved by Tang Jingchuan (1507-1560) in the Song Dynasty, which retains the famous Su Shunqin supplementary script:
This master "self-description", the previous paper is untouchable, and the servant is written to make up for it, and he is extremely ashamed. On September 14, the eighth year of Qingli, Su Shunqin personally dressed and made up for it.
If this inscription is indeed the original of Chunxi's mother when he carved the stone, it is generally believed that this is the original inscription of Su's supplementary book. (Because Qi Gong once remembered that the people engraved the "Chunxi Secret Pavilion Continuation" there is no Southern Tang Dynasty and Su Shun Qinba) if it is linked with Mi Fu's record, it can be said that its mother is the original Su Miben, that is to say, "Qilan Tang Ben" is a re-engraved copy of Su Miben.
It is said that if Su Zimei's supplementary book is the original, then in addition to the first six lines of supplementary books, the subsequent "Self-Narrative Post" from the seventh line should be the true work of Huaisu in Su Zimei's eyes, but which one is really Su Zimei's supplementary book and Su Zimei's supplementary book? Is this one still alive? What kind of book is it handed down?
3. The Half-Volume of the Flowing Sun and its History
At the end of his article "On Huaisu's Self-Narrative Post" when introducing the "Self-Narrative Posts of the Chilan Tang Books", Mr. Qigong lists other books of the "Self-Narrative Posts" that he knows, one of which is: "Japanese Photocopied Half-Volume Ink Print"[8] (hereinafter referred to as "Liuri Half-Volume" or "Liunipa". ）
After the same book Qi Lao above, there is also Hu Yunfu's article "Introduction to Tang Huaisu's Cursive Self-Narrative Post", which is also mentioned at the end of the article:
Another half volume is in the possession of a Japanese collector, and there have been photocopies. [9]
It can be seen that Qi and Hu both know about this book, and have even seen this book. It was not until May 22, 2005 that I went to the Fubon Building in Taipei, China, to visit the preview of Christie's Spring Auction, and when I finished reading the albums and handscrolls that had not been screened, Ma Chengming, director of Christie's Chinese Painting and Calligraphy Department, showed me a photocopy of the volume. The photocopy is a 1935 replica and is a fine copy of the collector of that year. The external signature should be the handwriting of the Japanese sinologist Nagao Jia (1864-1942).
At first glance, he was amazed at the degree to which the shape of this scroll was similar to the "Forbidden City's Self-Narrative Post", and immediately implored the famous brother to make a copy of it after returning to Hong Kong for research purposes. The spring auction was completed, and the famous brother really lived up to the trust and sent a photocopy, and the following is the preliminary experience of comparison and research. Before publication, the famous brother sent a CD-ROM of the photocopy, so that readers could be provided with the best plates.
(1) There are only three pages and thirty lines in this volume, and two lines of the Southern Song Dynasty
Although this volume is called "half a volume", only three pages remain, the eighth, ninth, and tenth papers of the same (Forbidden City Edition), from the sixty-fifth line to the ninety-fourth line, a total of 30 lines and 178 characters, accounting for a quarter of the whole volume of 126 lines and 701 words, the beginning and end are missing, and the length of the paper is only one-fifth of the original volume of 15 pages. The inscription at the back of the volume, the remnants of Teng Zhongyin and Ni Zuyi, the remnants of the late Southern Dynasty, are not found in the "Forbidden City Edition", and for discussion, see the following "History of the Circulation of the Half-Volume Version of the Flowing Day".
(2) The "Liuri Half-Volume Edition" is actually the "Authentic Manuscript" in the "Huaisu Cursive Compilation"
In 1992, in the book "Huaisu Cursive Compilation" published by Beijing Ancient Books Publishing House, after the first book of "Shuijingtang Engraved Self-Narrative Post", there was a fragment marked as "Tang Huaisu's Self-Narrative Post: True Writing" (hereinafter referred to as "Authentic Writing"). Since the author noticed in his humble book "Calligraphy Appraisal" that the paper and seams of the book are the same as those of the "Ink Book of the Palace Museum", two pages of illustrations were printed as circumstantial evidence that the paper format and seams of the original work were changed in the Shuijingtang engraving. [10] Later, after comparing it word by word, line by line, it was added:
From the dot painting, knotted characters and ink books of the handwriting, although the three copies are very similar, the obvious water mirror hall engraving is more consistent with the ink book of the Forbidden City, and the rubbing's "Authentic Manuscript" has many differences, which may be based on another ink carving. ...... It should also be one of the by-products of Su's. [11]
When Ma Chengming's brother sent a copy of the "Liuri Half-Volume", after a rough comparison, it was found that the seams were the same as the "Forbidden City Ink Book", and immediately remembered the above-mentioned "Authentic Manuscript", and initially thought that the "Liuri Half-Volume" was the mother copy of the "rubbing" (the authentic manuscript), so he made a comparison again, and found that the "Authentic Manuscript" with white characters on a black background was not a traditional hand-engraved rubbing, but a reprint of the negative of modern photography and photography, and the black and white flipped, although it looked like a rubbing, it was not a carved rubbing. The reasons for this are as follows:
1. The handwriting strokes of the two books of "Flowing Sun Half Volume" and "Authentic Handwriting" are too similar, and there are no knife marks in the flying white.
2. Although the ink damage of the "Flowing Sun Half Volume" is small, it is also delicate on the "Authentic Copy", which is beyond the scope of engraving.
3. It is customary to reduce the engraving or move the pressing collection seal, but although the printing of the "Authentic Copy" is not clear enough, the number of positions of all the stitching seals is no different from that of the "Liuri Half Volume", and all the seals are on the handwriting.
4. There are some relatively recent collection seals at the beginning and end of the "Flowing Sun Half Volume", which are all the same as the "Authentic Manuscript", and there is no shortage of one.
5. In the "Huaisu Cursive Compilation", there is also a black-on-white version of "Huaisu Xiaocao Qianwen: Authentic Manuscript", which is exactly the same as the original manuscript in Lin Boshou's collection, and is actually reprinted from modern photographic negatives, not the traditional engraved rubbing.
6. The only difference between the two books is that the last line of the "Authentic Copy" is missing, which may be the layout arrangement, so that one line does not occupy another page.
To sum up, when the Beijing Ancient Books Publishing House published the book "Huaisu Cursive Compilation", it was printed in black and white with a photocopy of the "Liuri Half Volume", which does not mean that this original ancient carved version. It can also be seen that Qi Gong, Hu Yunfu and the Ancient Books Publishing House in Beijing all knew or had seen photocopies of this first-class fragment of the "Self-Narrative Post", which may have been due to the fragment, or as the author thought when he first saw it, it was just another "facsimile" of the "Forbidden City Edition", so no further comparison was made.
"Liuri Half-volume" of the Southern Song Dynasty Ni Zuyi (1228), Teng Zhongyin (1219) inscribed for the fourth grandson of Huang Tingjian. It is known that this book was originally in the possession of Huang Tingjian, and it is related to the Northern Song Dynasty's "Shi Yang Xiu Ben" (3) The circulation history of the "Liuri Half Volume".
From the inscription of a Japanese collector and connoisseur attached to the end of the photocopied reproduction of the "Half-Volume of the Flowing Sun", it is known that it was made in Japan in 1935. At the end of the volume, only the two Legends of the Southern Song Dynasty remain, the former is Ni Zuyi, and the latter is Teng Zhongyin, and the names of both are not found in the "Biographical Materials of the Song Dynasty", but both provide important information and both have dates, and it is known that the two Legends have been reversed successively, so the following discussion follows the chronological order:
Teng Zhongyinba: Nine lines in the line, the full text of the first record is as follows:
Su Shi Changsha people, his book is hidden in the Xiushui Valley Mr. family. Jiading Ji Mao Shen Dong, Mr. Fourth Sun Cunzhi brought to You Yuelu, Tan Teng Zhong because of the view in Chu Village, and the gathering of sighs is so.
In the twelfth year of Jiading (1219) in the reign of Emperor Ningzong of the Song Dynasty (reigned 1195-1224), the author of this volume pointed out that the important collector of this volume was Huang Tingjian (1045-1105), the most important successor of Huaisu Wild Grass in the Song Dynasty. There is a temple on the mountain since the Jin and Tang Dynasties, there is Li Yong Yuelu Temple tablet still exists in the world, there is the Yuelu Academy founded by the Northern Song Dynasty under the mountain, when a group of people settled in this place in Chu Village, Huang will Huaisu this volume (at that time or the whole volume) show Xiangtan Teng Zhongyin, and then wrote this inscription. When I wanted Teng's inscription, there were still other predecessors inscriptions, so I felt that "the gathering and dispersion of things", but unfortunately there is no trace of it today!
Ni Zuyiba: Fifteen lines of small lines:
Huaisu grass saints are all picked up from the words of praise of the public at that time, or a couplet, or four sentences, or prose. During this period, the most well-known person was Dai Yu Shi Shulun. Mi Bao Jin Shu Shi Yun: Su Taijian, who participated in politics, was encountered, and Taizong made the first book of the country to collect calligraphy and painting of the third class, and gave a lot, and the home of the minister was unsurpassed. Youyun: Su Shi since participating in politics and Ziqi, Qi Shunqin, Shunqin Zizi (Yan) Ji IV good things have a fine view, but also Zhang Yanyuan's comparison, this post has Jianye Wenfang seal, this Li old things, others such as the descendants of Pei Liuxiangyin, the descendants of Xu Guo, the record of martial arts, and the four generations of Xiangyin are all Su's also. The authentic work is more than 300 years old, the paper and ink are still new, and there are not many houses that have been circulated. In addition to playing, the scroll is too resting! Shaoding changed the Yuan Dynasty to Mengxia in the middle of the rest, and Ni Zuyi was in the Xijiang official residence.
There is no other information about Ni Zuyi at present, the year "Shaoding changed the yuan" to 1228 A.D., in the ninth year after Teng's Ba, the location is in the "Xijiang official house", it is not recorded who owned this volume at that time, it may still be in the hands of the fourth grandson of the valley.
In addition to affirming the "Jianye Wenfang seal" for the old collection of the Southern Tang Dynasty, the other seals belong to the Su family, which should be the first record of the above four seals to be affirmed for the Su family's Tibetan seal, unfortunately the second word of the "martial arts record" is damaged, if the original trace is indeed the word "gong", then this is the earliest record of the interpretation of the seal. However, if the seal of "Shunqin" is not mentioned, it may be omitted or unreadable. Youyun: "The authentic work is more than 300 years old, and the paper and ink are still new. I don't know how to calculate, because the year "Shaoding changed the yuan" to 1228 A.D., from 777 A.D. when Huaisu wrote the "Self-Narrative Post", it has been 450 years, (if it is 300 years, it can only go to the Southern Tang Dynasty), presumably Ni miscalculated.
The calligraphy of the two babas, Teng's more free and easy, slightly closer to Mi Fu; Ni's book is obviously from Huang Tingjian, the shape is similar, both are typical of the Southern Song Dynasty calligraphy, although at present there is no other calligraphy of the two to compare, but from the natural demeanor, the style of the times and the quality, it can be determined that this is the two authentic handwritings.
This volume was originally in the collection of Huang Tingjian's family, and it would be more interesting if there was an inscription in the valley style of the fourth grandson of the valley. What's even more regrettable is that according to the habit of the Yellow Valley, there should be a tail, whether he uses the exquisite small block of Li Gonglin's "Five Horses", or the ups and downs of Basu Dongpo's "Cold Food Post", it is more important to see how he comments on this book!
On the main page of this volume, there are also some collection seals, the frontispiece has a large and a small remnant half seal, and there is "□'s family collection", and at the end of the volume, there are also "Shuntai Seal", "Jiang's" and "Rare Books". And the "Shuyun Dao people" between the two babas, except for the "Shuntai" is the Japanese collector Ishikawa Setsudo, the other seals have not yet found out who belongs to them, so since the Southern Song Dynasty, the history of this volume in the three dynasties of the Yuan, Ming and Qing dynasties in China is unknown. However, we are glad that this fragment made it to Japan in the 20th century, providing us with an important message.
This volume, which has only 30 lines, is only one-fifth of the entire volume of the "Self-Narrative Post" in terms of paper length, and it is unknown whether it was separated and hidden for descendants after his death in the valley. It is strange that since the middle of the Southern Song Dynasty, there have been no inscriptions of the Yuan, Ming and Qing dynasties, and the reason for this is unknown!
(4) The Half-Volume of the Flowing Sun is by no means a reproduction of a close one
The fact that this volume was circulated in Japan at the latest in the early 20th century proves that it is by no means a copy of the Forbidden City Text.
First of all, judging from the style of the external signature of this copy volume, it seems that it is due to the Japanese sinologist Nagao Jia (Yushan, 1864-1942), who graduated from the Imperial University of Liberal Arts in Tokyo and later served as a lecturer. In 1903, he moved to Shanghai and joined the Commercial Press, where he was the chief editor. In 1914, he returned to Kyoto, lectured, wrote, and spent his whole life lecturing, writing, and squandering, and wrote the book "Chinese Calligraphy and Painting"[12], but this volume was not mentioned in it. In addition, in order to reduce the printing cost, the three Japanese people who typeset in lead characters are as follows:
1. In the 34th year of the Meiji era (1901), the collector Ishikawa Setsudo (Shuntai 1842-1931) said that this volume was "not at all cool" with the copy of Wen Zhengming and Zhang Jianfu, so it was determined that this book was the mother copy of the Shuijingtang book.
2. Meiji Renyin (1902) and Gu Tiechen (1822-1905) were the festival halls.
3. Showa Koshu (1934) purchased this volume for Waikawa Uchiyama Matsuyo, when Ishikawa Setsudo had passed away, so he sighed "The reason for the circulation, you can't get it and hear it!"
Nagao Yushan also used this volume as a calligraphy, "that is, to conspire with each other, and pay the glass version (i.e., the Koluo version) as a copy...... When the book was published, it was Showa Yihai (1935), and the "Yanagi Bunko" waist round Zhu Wenyin was stamped on it. In addition, from the above three volumes, it is known that the "three paper scrolls" had been circulated to Japan in 1901 at the latest, when the Qing Dynasty was at the end of the Qing Dynasty, 24 years before the establishment of the Palace Museum, so the "Palace Museum Self-Narrative Post" was by no means visible to outsiders, so Ishikawa Sedo's misjudgment that the copy in his hand was the mother copy of the "Water Mirror Hall Edition", so that any doubts that the "Flowing Sun Half Volume" was copied by the pseudo-author in the early 20th century based on the Yanguang Room photocopy or the 1934 Koro version that the Palace Museum had released since 1926! Finally, there are two inscriptions of the authentic writings of the Southern Song Dynasty that have not been found in the "Forbidden City" at the back of the volume of "Flowing Japan", which not only cannot be copied, but are also important auxiliary evidence that the lower limit of "Flowing Japan" is the Song book! The second inscription is by Gu Tiechen (later known as Ruyi Shanren), a famous Japanese collector, who exhibited his treasured Zhiyong's famous relic "True Grass Thousand Texts" when the "Ancient Dharma Texts Exhibition" was held in Kyoto, Japan in 1879, and the post was first known to the world. Twenty-three years later (1902), Gu Tiechen wrote this "Self-Narrative Post" at the age of eighty. In short, "Streaming Japan" is by no means something that can be copied by anyone close to you.
The Koro edition of the Flowing Sun Half-Scroll and the lead type at the back of the volume are the third edition, written by Japanese connoisseurs in 1901, 1902 and 1935, among which Gu Tiechen has Tochinaaga's "True Grass Thousand Character Text" (5), "Flowing Sun Half-Volume" and "Shiyang Xiuben"
Teng Zhongyinba, who wrote the "Half-Volume of Liuri", shows that this volume is in the possession of Mr. Valley's family, but in Huang Tingjian's information, it is not found that he has a "Self-Narrative Post". In "Tiaoxi Yuyin Conghua", an important event in the development of cursive writing in the Yellow Valley was influenced by Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post":
Fu Weng tasted the words: Yuan You (1086-1093) Shen, and Zizhan (Su Shi), Mu Father (Qian Xian) Fan Bao Fan Monk's House, because of the straw paper, Zi Zhan was rewarded, and Mu Father did not say a word. asked why, but Yun: I am afraid that the public has not seen the authentic works. Ting Jian was upset. Shao Sheng (1094-1098) depreciated Guizhou, got the true "self-description" in Shi Yang's house, contemplating for a few days, suddenly satisfied, the pen felt supernatural, looking back at what was done the day before, ridiculous. Then he knew that Father Mu's words were not false, and he hated him too much to see. [13]
This also confirms the (self-described) volume, Zeng Xuanyun:
Tibetan true self-description, there are three legends: one is in Shuzhong Shiyang (Yang) to retire home, Huang Lu straight to the fish to the number of people is also.
Huang Tingjian also attached to the "Self-Narrative Post" in "Bahuaisu Thousand Character Text":
To taste Huaisu's "self-description", cursive thousands of Yu, with the pen are like the iron to draw the wood, this thousand words with the pen is not real, by no means made by Su, the inscription at the end of the book is not Jun Mo book, but this book can not be abandoned, Yaqi is not out of reach. [14]
It can also be seen that Gu has a very high opinion of Huaisu's "Self-Narrative Post", and thus sets a standard for him to identify other Huaisu's works. It's just a pity that none of the several "Self-Narrative Posts" in the valley have been handed down, but I can clearly see the influence of the "Self-Narrative Post" from the grass of the "Lian Po Lin Xiangru Biography" volume and the "Zhu Shangza" volume. Due to the distinctive personality of the Yellow Valley, it should not be difficult to distinguish it from the original with the several copies of the fish note, which are handed down to the world. In other words, this "Flowing Sun Half-Volume" will definitely not be the descendants of the valley who mistakenly take the original version of the valley as the authentic work of Huaisu.
However, is this volume obtained by the valley in his later years, so it has not been written down, and then passed on to his descendants? Otherwise, is this volume the "Shuzhong Shi Yang Xiu Ben"? It is the original that the valley once borrowed, and then Shi Yang Xiu gave his love to the Yellow Valley? Since then, it has become the heirloom of the valley? Because a careful taste of the above record says that the valley: "Dezang Zhen's "self-description" is in Shi Yangxiu's house", and it is not just a matter of seeing and appreciating or imitating it, this sentence can be interpreted as: "Shi Yangxiu is originally obtained from the Yellow Valley", then "Flowing Japan" may be the original After the fourth generation, only three pieces of paper and two books remained, which survived to Japan in the early 20th century, and after the catastrophe of World War II, it is not clear whether it survives at present, and the fragments of other paragraphs are also missing.
Incidentally, Mr. Xu Bangda mentions another inkblot in "Huaisu's Self-Narrative Post Identification of Forgeries":
More than 30 years ago, Jin Bosheng, the owner of the Beijing Essay Zhai, said that he had to Huaisu to describe a volume without an inscription, and then sold Zhang Daqian for 10,000 yuan, thinking it was a genuine work, but he had never heard of Zhang's self-Taoism, and he had never found it again, so he wondered whether this statement was true?[15]
The book is untitled, and the cloud is "more than 30 years ago", which refers to the events of the late 1940s, and should have nothing to do with this "Flowing Sun Half-Volume". But with this in mind, perhaps one day it will appear, adding a comparative data.
Fourth, "Liuri Half Volume" and "The Forbidden City's Self-Description" are both "Yingshu" twins
This half-volume version of the Flowing Sun was photoprinted and distributed in Japan around 1935 and is known to the previous generations of scholars in China. In 1992, for the Beijing Ancient Books Publishing House, this volume was flipped in black and white and printed in white on a black background, which made people mistakenly think that it was another inscription, and also caused the author to discuss it in the book "Calligraphy Appraisal".
A closer look at the handwriting of the "Flowing Sun Half Volume" shows that the speed of the pen, the change of ink color, and the flying white brush pen are all natural, and the "Forbidden City Ink Book" is also definitely a pen to write. Although the shape of the two books is absolutely similar, and the position of the line is also very close, but when using the transparent photocopy to overlap and calibrate, the position of the two books and the turning point of the strokes are to a certain extent, and even it is almost impossible to find any single word whose ink color is thick and dry and the turning position can be completely consistent with the so-called "Authentic Writing" in the above "Huaisu Cursive Compilation", so there is no problem of mutual hooking or "copying" between the two books, and judging the actual relationship between the two, it should be based on the "Yingshu" written quickly by the same ancestral book reflecting the original text"Twins.
(1) The two books are the "twins" of "Reflection"
The 30 lines of the Half-Volume Version of the Flowing Sun are exactly the same as those of the Forbidden City, that is, from the size of the glyphs of each character to the beginning and end of each line, the number of words and the oblique side of the lines are exactly the same, so it can be inferred that the beginning and end of this "half-volume" should also be exactly the same as the Forbidden City, including the six lines of the frontispiece (the so-called Su Shunqin Supplement), and the year at the end of the volume is also the same year, month and day. Originally, it was expected that this "twin" could easily distinguish from the advantages and disadvantages that the "Forbidden City Edition" was the mother copy of "Flowing Japan", but it backfired!
The author compares the two books word by word, line by line, and also compares the three pages (ten lines each) paper by paper, and the degree of similarity between the two books is surprising. However, if from a microscopic point of view, from each point to each word, it is indeed possible to distinguish that these are two separate "manuscripts", because almost all of them are written with a single stroke, not by hooking, so the thickness and length of each stroke, the angle of turning, the size of the pressure, and the thickness of the ink are slightly different.
Example A: The first two lines of the Flowing Sun Half Volume (right) and the sixty-fifth and sixty-sixth lines of the Forbidden City (left) (the slash "/" represents the broken line):
Clouds: Running snakes and walking / Sudden two spins / (full of wind)
Readers are requested to pay attention to the difference in thickness, length, curvature, thickness, stroke distance or mutual position of the two in the red circle on the plate. On the whole, the ink used in "The Forbidden City" is relatively dry, especially the three words "Shower Swirl", and there is almost no dry pen in the same line of "Flowing Sun Half Volume". The word "into" is bifurcated in the "Forbidden City", and the pen in the "Flowing Sun Half Volume" is thicker and not bifurcated, etc.
When the above two lines of handwriting are overlapped and compared with transparent slides, it can be found that the glyphs, the threads between the characters, the whole line, and the relationship between the lines are basically the same.
Example B: The seam of the second paper is between the 74th and 75th lines of the Forbidden City (right), and the two stitches and positions of the two books are different from the corresponding two lines of the Flowing Sun Half Volume (left).
Zhu Chushi Yaoyun: The pen / the next only look at the shock current
The two lines of the Half-Volume of the Flowing Sun are widely spaced, but the lines of the single line can overlap and coincide. Comparing the two books word by word, the two books have their own advantages and disadvantages, and the word "Xia" in the "Liuri Half-Volume" is missing a little above the top, which should be a broken paper; the first point of the word "excited" is more clumsy; and the words "place, remote" are better.
Example C: Lines 98 to 91 of the Forbidden City (right) and three lines of the Flowing Sun Half Volume (left):
Li Li has no half ink / drunk to the letter / two or three lines after waking up
The word-by-word comparison survey is the same, and the three lines and their positions are basically the same, except that the eighty-eighth line of the "Flowing Sun Half Volume" is more abundant in ink, and the "Forbidden City" is obviously dry;
The two books are similar in ink thickness: because they are both fast scripts, and there are many consecutive words, that is, after each dip in ink, the numbers must be written in succession, and the ink has a natural change from thick to dry. From a macro point of view, the two books of thick and dry changes are basically the same, especially the flying white strokes in the larger characters also have a corresponding effect, even if the careful investigation, although the two brushes are obviously different, but the author can control the two books of thick and dry to be so similar, it is really incredible! This also makes the author feel that these two books are not only from the same hand, but also written with the same branch or the same product of the brush, otherwise the thickness of the hairspring and the dry pen after each dip in ink will not be so similar. In addition to the above-mentioned 88 lines, lines 77 and 92 are also slightly different from the dryness of the Forbidden City in terms of ink, such as the small character "Dai" in line 92.
Although the above groups are sampling examples, they are still fully representative. After a careful examination of the two copies, it was found that both were manuscripts, and their similarity was too close to each other, and it was impossible for them to be written by their own bare hands, and it was difficult to distinguish between them in terms of quality, so it should be a "reflection" of the same manuscript with the same hand and the same pen, that is to say, the "Forbidden City Edition" and the "Flowing Sun Half Volume" are both "clones" and "twins" from the same maker.
"Huaisu's Self-Narrative · The first and last parts of the "Authentic Manuscript", from the calligraphy and collection of the seal are known as the black and white reversal print of the "Liuri Half Volume", non-engraved rubbing, published in the "Huaisu Cursive Compilation" (2) The two paper panels, seams and riding seams are all the same
1. The similarities and differences between the seams and the position of the seam marks of the two books
These 30 lines correspond to the eighth, ninth, and tenth pages of the "Forbidden City Edition", measured according to the photocopy, the paper height is 28cm, the width of the first paper is 53.6cm, the width of the second paper is 54.6cm, and the third paper is 53.5cm. The position of the seams is exactly the same as that of the Forbidden City. There are two complete rows of riding seam seals, but there is a row of only half a seal at the front and back ends, as shown in the figure: in addition to the position of the "Jianye Scholar's Seal" seal, the position of the two copies are at the bottom, and the position and combination of the remaining four seals are slightly different from the Forbidden City.
The order of the seals in the Liuri Half-Volume is different from that in the Forbidden City, the first seal above each seam of the fragment is all "the descendants of the six phases", and the third seal of each seam is all "the record of martial arts"; the other three seals: "Shunqin", "Four Generations of Xiangyin" and "Descendants of Xu Guo" are irregularly used in the position of the second and fourth seals. The second seal of each seam of the Forbidden City is all "Shunqin", and the first and third seals of each seam are "descendants of Peiliuxiangyin" and "descendants of Xu Guo". In short, the order of the two copies is not exactly the same.
2. The two copies of "The Seal of Jianye Scholar's Office" and the five seals of the Su family are the same set of seals
From the above comparison, it is known that the two books have the same five seals of the Southern Tang Dynasty and the Su family. The author then carefully surveyed the two seals, and the most important thing is to find that they are actually the same set of seals.
The purpose of the seal is to clarify the relationship between the two seals. If the seals on the two books are different, only in terms of the authenticity of the seals, although it is not excluded that "both are fake", there is also the possibility of "one true and one fake". If so, there is a genuine handwriting, or there is a possibility that there is an authentic handwriting. If the seals on the two copies are the same, there is a possibility that "both copies are genuine" or "both copies are fake", but there is also a possibility that "the seal is genuine and the seal is fake".
The method of comparing seals is to photograph the seams of the two books on a transparent projection screen, and compare the same seals on top of each other. Because they are all incomplete "riding seam prints", the middle line is cut unequal and the splicing is staggered, only the left half or right half of each print is stacked on another book, carefully compare every detail: such as the distance of the horizontal painting, the arc of the turn, the position of the vertical painting, etc., the rough details of the lines are different due to the amount of ink and the size of the pressure, but the lines of each seal can overlap and match. And these seals are not small seals, and the Southern Tang Dynasty seals are very large, which can be accurately compared. This row of five sewing seals, because the "Forbidden City Edition" has been remounted many times and has been cut more, and the "Flowing Japan" has been cut less, so the seals are wider and more complete, which helps to show that the two copies have their own independent circulation and re-mounting process after the production is completed, so it can be determined that there is no possibility of copying each other by hand in ancient times, but the same set of seals are used for two copies. This observation is related to the judgment of the authenticity of the two calligraphies, and for further discussion, see the two sections of "The Identification Law of Calligraphy and Painting Polymorphic Texts" and "The Printing and Decoding of the Southern Tang Dynasty and Su's Collections".
5. The ancestral book of "Qilan Tangben" and the Forbidden City and Liuri Er's ink book are "multicellular books"
Among the inscriptions of the "Self-Narrative Post" of the past dynasties, the Northern Song Dynasty inscription (Zhao Mingcheng's "Jinshi Lu") and the Chunxi inscription of the Southern Song Dynasty have not yet been handed down. The mother copy of the Ming "Water Mirror Hall Edition" and its reprinted version have been confirmed by the author to be the ink copy of the National Palace Museum in Taipei, China, so they can be ignored. At present, the most important engraved copy is the Qing Dynasty Xi Zeng's "Qilan Tang Ben", because it preserves the only Su Shunqin supplement book inscription, so its ancestor is considered to be Mi Fu personally seen Su Mi Ben. "Qilan Tang Ben" is based on the Southern Song Dynasty Chunxi carved copy of the copy, and we can only see its photocopy, neither know its cut and the condition of the original stone, nor do we know how the original Chunxi carved changed the line of the parent book, as Li Yuzhou said: "After two carving processes, the change is still unknown." [16] Therefore, the relationship between the handwriting and the rough lines can only be compared with the "Forbidden City Edition" and the "Liuri Half-Volume Edition". Since the results of the above comparison of the two ink books were copied by the same author according to the same parent copy, and the two are very similar to each other, the two are referred to as the "Two Ink Books" below to compare them with the "Qilan Tang Version". From the following evidence, it can be confirmed that these copies are all "multicellular".
(1) The handwriting of the three books is similar to that of the line
A closer examination of the penmanship of each character in the three books is very similar, and it can be assumed that they are from the same hand, but if you compare the knots and lines of the three books in detail, if you compare them with the overlapping of transparent slides, it is easy to know that these are three different manuscripts. Although I don't know the loyalty of Chunxi's engraving to the parent line, and what changes Xie Xi made when he turned the engraving, there are always some differences in the arc, length and angle of the strokes, the thickness of the pen and the thickness of the flying white, so it is certain that these three books are independent of each other. [17] However, the parent copy on which the "Chilan Tang Ben" is based is very similar to the "Second Ink Version", and it is judged that it is from the same author.
As far as the thickness of the strokes is concerned, the overall "Qilan Tang Ben" is thinner, and the line spacing is wider or narrower than that of the "Second Ink Version", and the two are not completely consistent, but the size of each line of characters, the implicated hairspring of the upper and lower characters, and the coherence and oblique lines of the lines can basically match, but the relationship between the left and right lines is somewhat different from the "Two Ink Books", and the author believes that the reason for the difference is mainly caused by the two copies (Chunxi first engraving and Qing Dynasty re-engraving) and cutting. As a result of careful word-by-word comparison, due to the degree of similarity between the two, the author is convinced that the ink copy of the ancestor of the "Qilan Tang Ben" is from the same ancestor as the "Second Ink Copy", and it is based on the same original manuscript, otherwise the lines of each line will not almost overlap, and the thickness of the strokes of each word, as well as the threads and corrections between the characters, will not make the same gesture. However, if we carefully compare the details of many characters, such as the sixty-six lines of "enter", the sixty-eight lines of "light", the sixty-nine lines of "ancient pine", and the one hundred and fifteen lines of "come", the words are based on the differences in the original writing, rather than the errors of the copying and engraving, so we can know that the ancestor of the "Qilan Tang Ben" is by no means the "Forbidden City Ink Book", nor is it the "Liuri Half Volume", that is to say, the results of the mutual investigation of the three books, the following three copies: 1 "The Forbidden City Ink Full Volume", 2 "Liuri Ink Half Volume", 3 The ancestor of the "Qilan Tang Book" - It is a "multi-cell book" of "mass production" and "reflection" with the same hand, and there is no mother-child relationship.
(2) The two books are written together, reloaded, and supplemented on the same day, same month, and year in the same year
1. The two books were dated on the same day, month and year in the same year: the chronology at the end of the volume of the "Qilan Tang Ben" and the "Forbidden City Edition" is the same as "the eighth day of the tenth month of the Great Calendar!" Although there is no year at the end of the volume in "Flowing Japan", it can be reasonably surmised that the dates should be exactly the same. On the same day, Huaisu actually "copied" three volumes of the same line, the same rhythm, the same size, and the 700-word "Self-Narrative Post", is it possible?
2. The two books were reloaded in the same year and month: these two books entered the Southern Tang Dynasty at the same time, and at the same time they needed to be reloaded in February of the fourth year of the Shengyuan Dynasty, and they were both in charge of Shao Zhou, the deputy envoy of the study, and Wang Shaoyan, the deputy envoy of the Chongying Palace.
3. The two Su and Li inscriptions were inscribed on the same day, the same month and the same day in the same year: on the same day as the "September 5th of the third year of Dazhong Xiangfu", they entered the collection of Su Qi, the father of Su Shunqin, and inscribed them on the same day;
4. Two books were supplemented by Su Shunqin at the same time: the first six lines of the three volumes were also eroded, and they were supplemented by Su Shunqin on the same day as the "September 14th of the eighth year of the Qingli calendar"! Is there such a coincidence in the world?[18]
Therefore, from the above points, it can be proved that all the books are "multiple cell books" of the same hand.
The right "Forbidden City Edition" and the left "Liuri Half Volume" are written in the same hand, for example, lines 74 and 75, the riding seam seal is the same set of seals, and the position is slightly different (3) The two books are in the same place
The author has also found that one evidence that can concretely prove that the "Forbidden City Edition" and the "Qilan Tang Edition" are from the same parent copy is the words "Yanwen" and "mistakenly inverted" in the "Self-Narrative Post". I can understand that when the calligrapher writes lengthy poems quickly, there are occasional mistakes, including redundant words (derivations) or missing words, as well as upside-down words, the same calligrapher writes the same character many times, not only the size of the glyph, the cursive knot, the line of the correct will be different, and the mistakes will not be exactly the same, but I can see that the "Forbidden City Edition" and the "Qilan Tang Edition" have a completely identical error, which can be seen in lines 44 and 45, first the two lines of the commentary are truthfully copied below, with a slash "/" to represent the broken line:
Yi, beyond the ancient and modern, and the model / Kai fine law is detailed, especially / (true).
The long sentence in the center: "and the model is fine" is not comprehensible, because there are derivative texts and inverted words, and the "Forbidden City Edition" has a small dot "√" on the right side between the two words "Jingfa", which is one of the general symbols made by the calligrapher for the upside-down characters, and the two "Water Mirror Hall Editions" of Kansun Muben and Shen Mingyi's book are also impressive. And the last word "mold" in the forty-fourth line may be a multi-written derivation, although there is no mark next to the word, but from the point of view of the text, if the word "mold" is omitted and not read, it will be more smooth:
And the Kai Jing method is detailed, especially (true).
If Huai Su wrote more than one book of "Self-Description" in his life, some of them must be correctly written as above, but the text and paragraphs of these two lines of "Qilan Tang Ben" are completely consistent with "Forbidden City Ben", but the engraver of "Chelan Tang Ben" does not know, and the important inverted mark next to the word "Jingfa" (referring to "√") is omitted when remodeling. From this, it can be seen that the ancestral book of "Qilan Tang Ben" is not another one, but from the same parent book as "Forbidden City Ben".
Cha Wenpeng attached the "Commentary on the Self-description Post" after the self-description post of the "Water Mirror Hall Carved Edition", which was also directly recorded according to the Forbidden City book: "Beyond the ancient and modern and exemplary√ the law is detailed and special (true)." ”
Wen Peng's Xiaokai commentary is also very careful to make a small "√" in the upper right corner of the word "law" to show the opposite tone with the previous word "fine". (The marks in this commentary, the "Forbidden City Edition" and the "Shen Mingyi Edition" are very clear, but the "Sun Mu Edition" is missing.) ）
Regarding the grammar or miswriting of this sentence, Zhu Guantian has researched as follows:
"Model Refinement Detail", "Wenyuan Yinghua", collection and "Refinement of Style"...... As for the "fine and detailed method" written as "the fine law of the model is detailed", it is not logical to understand the literature and science. [19]
In order to confirm whether the "Forbidden City Self-Narrative Post" is wrong, the author has made a more extensive search,[20] and found that the interpretation is "model and detailed", and the word "law" is omitted from the following books: Song Chensi's Shuyuan Jinghua (Volume 18), Ming and Tang Shunzhi's "Barnyard Compilation" Volume 83, Ming Zhao Qimei's Iron Net Coral Volume 1, and Qing Bian Yongyu's "Examination of Shigutang Calligraphy and Painting" Volume 8, the Qianlong period of the Qing Dynasty, the continuation of the Shiqu Baoji, the subsequent "Records of the Forbidden City Calligraphy and Paintings" and the "Forbidden City Law Book", as well as the commentary of the "Shuijingtang Ben Self-Narrative Post" attached to the "Huaisu Cursive Script Compilation" published by the Beijing Ancient Books Publishing House. ”[21]
As for recording this sentence as exactly the same as the "Autobiography Ink Version": the "model model is finely detailed" is as follows: Song Zhu Changwen's "Ink Pool Edition" volume 4 (including: the four library versions of Wenyuan Pavilion and the Ming edition in the collection of the National Central Library in Taipei are the same), Qing Jiaqing's "Quantang Wen", etc. However, there is a copy of the Qing Yongzheng Zhu edition in the above-mentioned "Ink Pool Edition", which is included in the punctuation version of the "Complete Book of Chinese Calligraphy and Painting", but it is interpreted as "the regular method is detailed", which also proves from the side that there is a mistake in the ink book, and the above two books only copy the original ink text, and do not pay attention to the correction of the wrong symbols in the original text, resulting in the meaning of the text.
However, what kind of interpretation should be used to correct it? We should investigate the source of the original text, because we know the essence of Huaisu's "Self-Description", which is a collection of poems given by Huaisu at the time, and check the above paragraph, the original text is from Yan Zhenqing's "Huaisu Venerable Master's Cursive Song Preface", which is more than 200 words long, and is a full quotation from Huaisu, so as long as you trace Yan Zhenqing's original text, you can know where the ink book is wrong.
Today, the article "Preface to the Cursive Song of the Venerable Master Huaisu" is included in the following books: Yan Zhenqing's "Yan Lu Gongwen Collection" Ming Magazine Volume 12, which is included in the "Four Series of Initial Editions", Yan Zhenqing's "Yan Lu Gongji" Volume 12 "Siku Quanshu" Edition, Song Li Fang et al. ed. "Wenyuan Yinghua" Volume 737, Qing Jiaqing Shi edited "Quantang Wen" Volume 337, check the original text of Yan Zhenqing recorded in the above four books, this sentence is "Detailed in the Kaifa".
In addition, when recording the original text of "Huaisu's Self-Narrative Post", this sentence is also interpreted as "the law is detailed", and there are Qing Wusheng's "Daguanlu" and the modern punctuation version of the above-mentioned "Mochi Edition". From the above investigation, it is known that: a. all those who interpret the "model model fine method details" directly record the original text of the "Huaisu Self-narrative Post" and ignore the mark that it is reversed; b. those who interpret it as "model model fine details" mistakenly take the "√" mark in the upper right corner of the word "law" in the ink book as "Yanwen" (superfluous words); c. all those who interpret it as "regular law is detailed" are based on the original text of Yan Zhenqing. Huaisu said to himself, since this whole paragraph is recorded in Yan Zhenqing's "Huaisu Venerable Master's Cursive Song Preface", then, of course, this sentence is also based on Yan's original text. After this understanding, it is not difficult to be sure that the sentence in the "Forbidden City Self-Narrative Post" is indeed miswritten and reversed.
Regarding this kind of reading, we can also use Dong Qichang Ding Wei (1607) Dong's "Lintang Monk Huaisu's Self-Narrative Post" [22] as a supplementary evidence. Although Dong wrote this sentence according to the original, he made this sentence "and the model is fine", but in the end of the volume, Dong's dialect discusses the Tang cursive script: "The taste is self-narrated and there are clouds in the Chinese language: although Xu's posture is upside down, he is detached and uninhibited, and "the style is detailed and detailed, especially for the truth." It can be seen that Dong Qichang's understanding of this sentence also comes from the original text in "Yan Lu Gongwen Collection" and "Wenyuan Yinghua".
In the full text of the "Commentary on the Self-Narrative Post" published by Mr. Qi Gong on the basis of the publication of the "Qilan Tang Ben" by Mr. Qi Gong in Beijing Normal University Press, the above sentence is appended in parentheses, and it is believed that the word "mo" is "Yanwen" (i.e., a redundant word miswritten):
And the mold (mold character derivation) Kai Jing method details (the fine method should be the essence of the law, the original mistake) [23]
And the model is detailed (here the word is wrongly derived, and the word law is wrongly reversed). [24]
It can be seen that the correct reading of this sentence is different from the writing order and number of words in the "Forbidden City Ink Book" or "Qilan Tang Book", which proves that these two books are not different ancestral books, but from the same source. [25] Otherwise, it would not be possible to be exactly the same in a mistaken or upside-down place!
However, if there are no superfluous characters in the preceding paragraph, the text of each line will change and the layout will be different from the forty-sixth line, but from the sixty-fifth line to the ninety-fourth line, the layout of the Liuri Half Volume is exactly the same as that of the Forbidden City and the Qilantang The previous paragraph has the same error as above.
From the "derivative text" and "inverted characters" in the "Self-Narrative Post", it can not only be compared that the "Forbidden City Edition" and the "Qilan Tang Edition" are really from the same series, that is to say, the ancestral copy of the "Qilan Tang Edition" and the two ink copies belong to the same "multiple births".
Brief summary:
As a result of the mutual investigation of these three books, not only the handwriting and lines are the same, but also the books are incorrectly written in the same place, and the three long scrolls were reloaded in the Southern Tang Dynasty at the same time on the same day, and then they were inscribed by Su Qi and Li Jianzhong on the same day, and finally entered Su Shunqin's collection and supplemented on the same day. Therefore, it also confirms Qi Gong's original speculation about the ancestor of the "Qilan Tang Ben", Su Jiaben: "Probably the Su Jiaben is still a facsimile. ”[26]
Commentary: "Green Sky Nunnery" and "Shu Zhongben" are also in the same series
According to this clue, when we investigated another engraved copy, the Lutian Nunnery Edition[27], we found that the lines, characters, and errors in the lines 44 to 45 of the book were exactly the same as those of the above two copies, and the first six lines of the volume were also the same as those of the Forbidden City and the Qilantang Text. These details show that the "Green Sky An" and the above two books are the same ancestral book, or even directly from one of the two books, it is impossible to have another ancestor, this is what the author can assert! It can also prove that this post did have measures to change the line when copying or engraving the post, and at the same time once again prove the clumsy chronology of the "Green Tian'an Ben": "The first year of the Tang Dynasty (766) June is hopeful", not only the style of the book is not the same, but also eleven years earlier than the original, in terms of time and age are unreasonable, it can be seen that it is a forgery.
The so-called "Shu Zhongben Self-Narrative Post" [28], there are still ink circulation, the book is smaller, there are no extra-large characters in the whole volume, so the line is different from the above-mentioned books; At the end of the volume, he deliberately advanced the date by one year to cover his ears and eyes, hoping that the viewer would think that it was another authentic work written the year before the Forbidden City.
☆ Picture left 2 "Liuri Half Volume" and picture right 2 "Forbidden City Edition" are the same hand, for example, the eighty-ninth, ninety, ninety-first three lines, the "Forbidden City Edition" "come" word fork is "double strokes" ☆ Picture left 1 "Qilan Tang Ben", the word is not bifurcated, and the "Liuri Half Volume" ☆ Picture right 1 "Qilan Tang Ben" The ancestor and the second ink book are out of the same hand 6, the identification law of calligraphy and painting "multiple copies".
In the above discussion, we have determined that the relationship between the ancestral texts of the Forbidden City, the Liuri Half-Volume and the Qilan Tang Manuscript is a "polycellular version", and before further understanding and confirming the true identity of the "Forbidden City Edition", we will discuss the law of the polycellular version.
(1) The original example of "multiple copies" in the same paragraph and manuscript
The same calligrapher and painter can produce multiple authentic works of the same manuscript when creating. This is due to various creative factors and motivations, such as:
1. Calligraphers and painters are dissatisfied with the first work, and repeat it again and again until they are satisfied, such as Wang Xizhi when he wrote "Lanting Collection".
2. It is also common for calligraphers and painters to create the same subject they love many times in their lives, such as later generations writing "Lanting Collection", "Thousand Character Text", "Red Cliff Fu" and so on.
3. The same work is often "re-ordered" in the 20th century painting and calligraphy exhibition sales, which is the market demand.
4. Gongbi painting, especially figure painting, is not easy to create, painters often leave a base draft (the ancient "powder" and the mural "sample"), and the future painting is often based on the old manuscript hook drawing, such as Zhang Daqian's Yang Concubine parrot, but each decorative details and color are different, not to mention Fu Baoshi's Xiang Concubine and Lin Fengmian's freehand lady painting, etc., each has a small difference.
Since the production of multiple authentic works of the same calligrapher and painter in the same manuscript is not strictly required to be presented as accurately as reproduction, it will not be the same between the copies as the printed matter, and there will inevitably be natural differences between each copy, and the degree of difference depends on whether the fine work and freehand are or not, or the size of the book and the script and the speed of writing between the characters and the body of the book, the more free and fast the writing and the longer the work, the greater the difference must be. However, in such an example of "multiple copies of the same paragraph and the same manuscript", it should be difficult to distinguish between the advantages and disadvantages in terms of penmanship and quality, so these "multiple copies" can still be judged to be genuine works of the same hand.
(2) The law of authenticity in the work of the same paragraph of "multiple cells".
The above is an example of "multiple copies of the same paragraph and the same manuscript" are all genuine, but there are often more examples in calligraphy and painting where "one is true and more than fake" (there are also situations where two or more copies are false when the original work has not yet appeared), and this situation often occurs on the freehand reproduction of multiple copies of the same manuscript (different from the semi-mechanical reproduction of "woodcut watermarks", which often also creates the illusion of "authenticity" to ordinary people), and the characteristics of this "multiple copies" are: "multiple copies" The similarity and similarity between them are like printing and copying, especially in freehand paintings or large-line grass works with a high degree of freedom, if you find works that follow the same trend and can almost overlap, or when there is the same date and the same paragraph, it is almost certain that there is a copy of the forgery.
If the reader has a consensus on the above principles, when we are faced with a "twin" or "multiple" case, in addition to the special case of exposing the work originally written in "Jiaoxuan" as authentic works on both the upper and lower floors, the following procedures can generally be derived:
1. Among the "twins" or "multiple cells" in the same paragraph, only one copy can be true at most, that is, "one true and one false" or "one true and more false".
2. However, it cannot be ruled out that the original work has not yet appeared, that is, the same "twin" or "multicell" of the current model is all "mass-produced" replicas, and there is no original work.
The above two situations are what Mr. Qi Gong said: "When the same three pieces appear at the same time, there is no doubt that at least two of them are facsimiles, or even all three are facsimiles." ”[29]
3. In the same "twins" or "multiples", if it can be proved that they are of the same hand, these works are all copies of "cloning". If you can distinguish between superior and inferior in quality or technique, it is obviously second-hand, if there is only a difference between "fake and good things" and "fake and shoddy things", it is still a situation where both are fake. If one is chic and free, and is of the same level and style as other genuine works, and the other is retarded tracing, it is possible to distinguish the original from the copy.
Generally speaking, when there is a "twin case" or "multiple case" of the same paragraph, the so-called "not afraid of not knowing the goods, only afraid of comparing the goods!", so it seems that it is easier to distinguish the advantages and disadvantages from the authenticity. However, the appraisal of most works does not have such a comparative opportunity. Even if twins or multiples are found, we need to beware of complicated situations. Here are some examples: A is the authentic work, B is the copy of A, and C is the copy of B, there will be at least the following three situations: when only one of the three copies appears, there is no way to compare; when there are two copies of A, B, or A and C, it is easy to get the correct answer; if three copies appear at the same time, it is easy to solve the problem; if only two copies of B and C appear, whether B and C are from the same hand or both copies, in fact, "both are fake", but there are always advantages and disadvantages in between, it is easy to mislead into the judgment of "one truth and one falsehood". However, the difficulty and paradox is that when judging, it is not actually known which of the above situations is the case, or whether there is no problem of copies at all! Therefore, the cautious connoisseur, even when facing a single work, should always beware of the existence of copies of it to reduce "misjudgment".
(3) The decoding role of seals in "twins" or "multi-cells".
The judgment of the authenticity of calligraphy and painting inevitably involves subjectivity, and it is not easy to reach a consensus, but the similarities and differences and authenticity of seals are more mechanical and easy to reach a consensus, so they often have a key role in decoding.
It is not necessary for the original author to copy or clone his own work, so in a "twin" or "multicellular" work, only the author's "genuine seal" should be on the original work, which is different from the author's seal and the collection seal on other copies.
Since before photoengraving was applied to the reproduction of genuine seals, all forged seals were manually imitated and engraved, and in the process of copying, there must be more or less differences with the genuine seals, providing us with clues to distinguish the authenticity. Therefore, when we find that the seals on the two works are identical and the same seal, the answer is: both are genuine, or both are fake. Its authenticity depends on the authenticity of the work, the work is true and the work is fake. Therefore, if the work is a "clone", then under normal circumstances, the seal is also a "clone", but due to the fact that "the seal of the person is dead" and there is also the possibility of "genuine seal and fake stamp", the "true seal" cannot be judged to be "authentic". In addition, the original authentic calligraphy and painting without a seal have also been squeezed by later generations and stamped with a false seal, so we should also be careful not to "forge it" based on "fake seal". Therefore, the authenticity of the calligraphy and painting itself is still the main factor in determining the authenticity of the painting itself. [30]
On the contrary, if the two seals are "cloned" or "pseudo-covered", it can be supplemented by the fact that the "twins" or "multi-cell" calligraphy and painting works are also "clones", and there is no possibility of "one true and one false" or "one true and more false", but must be "both fake" or "all three", because if one of the "multiple copies" is "true", then the seal has at least two types of "one true and one false", or even three different seals; if there is only one type of seal in the same "twin" or "multi-cell", then two or more copies are both fake. [31]
(4) The issue of "multiple copies" in different paragraphs and the same draft
This is different from the same paragraph, although it is also "twins" and "multiple cells", but they may all be true, such as Song Guang and Dong Qichang's "Self-Narrative Post", both of which are true. However, it should be guarded against counterfeiters from falsely signing the names of Song and Dong, or falsely signing the money of another small famous person, making it difficult for people to compare and investigate, and the slightest negligence of the connoisseur will become a misidentification. However, this case is not relevant to this article, so it will not be discussed in detail.
The seam position of the "Forbidden City Edition" and the "Flowing Sun Half Volume" is the same, and the position of the riding seam seal is slightly different
It has been confirmed above that the ancestral texts of the Forbidden City Edition, the Liuri Half-Volume Edition, and the Qilan Tang Manuscript are the same "multi-cell version", and it is now necessary to further understand the real relationship between these three texts in order to clarify the true identity of the Forbidden City Edition.
(1) Decoding consensus
In the previous section, the author also discussed the identification law of the same "multiple births", among which the most concerned is whether there is a mother-child relationship in these multiple births, that is, a true and false relationship? or these three are only "siblings" and do not exist in the mother's parent? that is, all three are false? How to determine the relationship between them, we must first have the following consensus.
I can understand that when Huaisu (737-800) was about 40 years old (777), he collected many poets to sing his wild grass poems into a 700-word "Self-Narrative" Later, until his death in the twenty-three years, there may be more than one book, but the vast majority of those genuine works are written in a straight book, not only fast when writing, but also with their emotional ups and downs and the amount of alcohol and fluctuation, from two or three centimeters to more than ten or twenty centimeters, so the difference between each book is bound to be significant, even if there is time and mood to write two or three books on the same day, there is absolutely no size or cursive method of each word from beginning to end in these two or three books, and the thread of the upper and lower connected words. The number of words in each line and the oblique line can overlap if they match.
For example, "Huaisu" appears three times in the whole volume of the Forbidden City,[32] and its size and writing style are also different, not to mention the laid-back personality of Huaisu, every time he writes a book, although not necessarily after drinking, it is also in the moment of high spirits, and even most of the occasions when there are onlookers, with the rhythm of writing, the stimulation of the content of the poem, the interaction of the audience, the difference between pen, ink and paper, etc., because the timing, mood and scene of creation cannot be replicated, so the written works are absolutely impossible to match. In other words, it is impossible and unnecessary for Huaisu to "copy" or "clone" his own work, and if it is "cloned", it must come from someone else! This is the same principle as the identification of signatures in "Forensics":
"When the same person signs in two different situations, the handwriting and stroke characteristics may be the same, but there is no one who can match every stroke", and if so, "it may become a major disadvantage of tracing." [33] On the contrary, it is easy to see.
From the point of view of the limit of the similarity between the parent and the imitation, due to the difference in the times, the difference in tools including paper, pen and ink, as well as the difference between the writer's pen habits and the atmosphere of the times, can cause a gap between the parent and the parent book, and this gap is different from the difference between the same person writing multiple books, which should be distinguishable. And the similarity of these three "multiple births" has exceeded the limit of the mother-child relationship, and they must be twin brothers.
(2) The decoding of the "multi-cell book" of the "Self-Narrative Post".
1. When the "mad monk" Huaisu "walked like a whirlwind" after drinking, he wrote every 700-word "Self-Narrative Post", which is definitely a one-time work that cannot be repeated, and Huaisu himself will never and does not need to copy the "Self-Narrative Post" written by himself.
2. The most similar of the three books is the "Forbidden City Edition" and the "Liuri Half-Volume Edition", which are absolutely similar to the extent of the works of later generations, but the same person writes on the same paper with the same manuscript, with the same penmanship, and with the same brush, so that the two "Self-Narrative Posts" can be quickly written with a vertical pen.
3. The three volumes are all written on the eighth day of the tenth month of the great calendar.
Both the "Forbidden City Edition" and the "Qilan Tang Edition" have Huaisu's self-titled writing date, month, and date, but they both have "the eighth day of October in the Great Calendar", so it is not impossible for the 700-character large volume to be written in two volumes on the same day, but it is very unlikely; even if he writes two volumes on the same day, when he writes the second volume, he will not reflect the first volume and tend to "write it word by word"; as for the "Flowing Sun Half Volume" although it has lost its beginning and end, to the extent that these 30 lines are so similar to the "Forbidden City Edition", the last sentence of the book must also be the same year, month, and day. Even if Huai Su thought that the first volume was a comfortable work, and wanted to write another volume, in such a rapid process, he would not be so patient to write his own work to such a coercive degree! This is the psychology and practical experience of a calligrapher that any calligrapher can experience. Ordinary people still don't "copy themselves" like this, but will the "mad monk" do?
4. The three volumes have Su Zimei's supplementary characters.
What's more, there are many books recorded by the Song people, and the several books seen by the Yuan people have Su Zimei's supplementary characters, as well as five or six books that they have seen, such as a hand. According to common sense, there are so many "Self-Narrative Posts" that are like a hand, and the "Forbidden City" and "Qilan Tang Book" have the so-called Su Zimei supplement, so the frontispiece of "Liuri Half Volume" must be the same.
5. The three volumes have the same miswritten book, the same superfluous words, and the same upside-down characters in the same place! This is by no means a coincidence, but is based on the relationship of reproduction of the same ancestral text.
From the perspective of calligraphy, there are no significant advantages and disadvantages between these three books, and the similarity is too great, so it is not the relationship between the ancestor and the Linben, but the relationship between the three as twin brothers of the same ancestor.
The calligraphy of the eighty-third and eighty-fourth lines of the "Forbidden City Edition" on the right and the "Liuri Half-volume Edition" on the left are "twin books", and the riding seam seals of the Su Shunqin family are the same set of seals, and the positions are slightly different (3) The Southern Tang Dynasty and the Su collection seals are decoded
Another major "physical evidence" of the same hand in the Forbidden City and the Half-Volume of the Flowing Sun is that the same set of seals was used in the Southern Tang and Northern Song Dynasty collections. Because, if there is a mother-child relationship between the two copies, at least there must be a difference in the seal of the imitation.
The Liuri Half-Volume has two complete columns of riding seals and two and a half columns of seals at the beginning and end (see Figure 10 on the back cover), including the "Seal of Jianye Scholars" from the Southern Tang Dynasty and the five seals of the Su family: "Descendants of Pei Liuxiangyin", "Descendants of Xu Guo", "Four Generations of Xiangyin", "Records of Martial Arts" and "Shunqin". The left and right halves of the "Ink Book of the Forbidden City" were photocopied on a transparent projection film, and the left and right halves of the "Flowing Sun Half Scroll" were overlapped and compared (because the seams were remounted and cut differently, resulting in different widths of each seal), and it was found that the six seals were identical, which was an important password for decoding. Because they are all specific "physical evidence", there is no difference in subjective judgment.
According to the above comparison, the three volumes discussed by the Zhiwu people all have the "seal of Jianye Wenfang" of the same party in the Southern Tang Dynasty, which is surprising! How could it be that three copies of the "self-description" of "multiple births" were collected at the same time in the Inner Library of the Southern Tang Dynasty?[34] Of course, this is impossible!
Since it is impossible for the Southern Tang Dynasty to collect these three "multi-cell books" "Self-Narrative Posts" written on the same year, month, and day at the same time, and to reload them on the same day, is it really possible for this side to "seal of Jianye Scholar's Office"?
Since this "seal of Jianye Wenfang" is fake or falsely covered, is it still possible that these two Huaisu ink books "Self-Narrative Post" are genuine?
When the author wrote the book "Calligraphy Appraisal", he believed that "there is no solution at present" for the authenticity of the Southern Tang Dynasty seal:
The auxiliary evidence related to the authenticity of the ink scroll of the Forbidden City, in addition to the inscriptions of Shao Zhou and other inscriptions at the end of the post, the most important thing is the seal of the Southern Tang Dynasty Inner Mansion and the seal of the Jianye Scholar's Office". However, there is no more reliable seal to compare this seal...... Authenticity has not been established. Therefore, the authenticity of this seal and the authenticity of the Forbidden City's "Self-Narrative Post" have become interdependent and insoluble circular arguments. [35]
Originally, the "seal of Jianye Scholar's Room" was handed down to the Forbidden City's "Self-Narrative Post" as the standard, and there is no other better book to compare, which is similar to the seal of the "lone book", and it is very difficult to determine its authenticity. Now that it has been discovered that this seal also has the problem of "twins" and "multiple cells", it can be logically judged to be false. Even under high-tech testing, it seems that the color of the clay seal can be distinguished from the five seals of the Su family, but there is still no clear conclusion. Even though archaeological data were found one day to prove that this seal is true, but after the appearance of the polyphonic version of the "Liuri Half Volume", there is a solution, and I can be sure that the Southern Tang Dynasty seal on the ink scroll of the Forbidden City cannot be the "original owner of the seal" at that time, but was sealed by the copyist, so it still belongs to the category of "true seal and fake" in the identification law.
The following two more evidence to prove that this is a "false seal": in fact, in the Northern Song Dynasty is indeed someone who falsely engraved the "seal of Jianye Wenfang", Mi Fu said in the "Book History":
Tang Yun Huang Zhu paper Bo Gao Qianwen two, and Diao about the family two together is the twilight of the true handiwork, each distinguish six or seven words, Diao's after the Li lord Xu Xuanba, for the pseudo-carved Jianye study of the seal of the seal, even the seam printed broken words, every see sighs.
The above is Mi Fu told us that in the Northern Song Dynasty there is a case of false engraving of the "seal of Jianye Wenfang" cover in Zhang Xu's works, which is a record evidence.
Moreover, the author finally found another party, the "seal of Jianye Wenfang" (see the second engraved rubbish in Figure 10) that can be compared. That is in the "Bao Jin Zhai Fa Ti" in the "Wang Xianzhi Contemptuo Yang Book Post" [36] before and after each side. The author knows: a. It is not possible to use the seal "engraved" in the Dharma as a benchmark. b. It is difficult to ascertain that the seal on the king's post is genuine. However, there is another collection seal of the Southern Tang Dynasty Inner Mansion on this post: "Jixian Yuan Imperial Book Seal", and there is an inscription of Ouyang Xun during the Tang Zhenguan period after the post, which seems to be more credible from the overall point of view. Although the two are very similar, the style of the whole print, the self-description post is more neat, especially the horizontal stroke, all of which are straight parallel lines, which are similar to the seal script style on the "Nine Stacks" of the Northern Song Dynasty, such as the "Rui Si Dong" in the time of Huizong and the seal script style on the "Interpretation of the Mountain Tablet" written by Xu Xuan, while all the lines of the "Bao Jin Ben" are softer and irregular, and the style is more ancient. In addition, the difference between the right half of the word "Jian" in the second seal and the horizontal connection or not of the lower one, the three strokes at the bottom right of the word "Wen", the two strokes below the word "Fang", the two strokes at the top of the word "Zhi", etc., and the continuity of the upper and lower strokes of the word "Yin" and the position of the notch, etc., are obviously different. In addition, the word "room" in the second book of "Ink Book Self-Description", the upper right corner of the "household" part is "", which is an unusual seal method that derails. These differences are due to differences in the original prints, not to distortion in the engraving. In addition, since the "Seal of Jianye Scholar's Office" is a seal of the Treasure Seam, why is it missing this seal on the first seam of the "Forbidden City Edition"? It should be the mistake of the copyist. Therefore, after the cross-verification of the above details, it is pointed out that the "seal of Jianye Scholar's Room" on the "Self-description of the Forbidden City" is not the original seal carved by the Inner Mansion of the Southern Tang Dynasty, but the imitation of the Northern Song Dynasty.
In the past, "since there is no effective way to distinguish between the seal of the 'Jianye Scholar' and the seal of the Su family, we can only make assumptions and inferences. [37] Now that we have the seal on the Liuri Half-Volume to compare, knowing that there is a "twin" problem, and comparing it with the two seals in the Baojin Zhai Fati, we can make a reasonable and logical judgment that this seal is false without waiting for the help of more advanced technology. (See below: "Response to the High-tech Test Results of the Forbidden City Huaisu's Self-Narrative Post")
Su's five seals: "Descendants of Pei Liuxiangyin", "Descendants of Xu Guo", "Four Generations of Xiangyin", "Martial Arts Records" and "Shunqin", these five seals have also been compared one by one, and they have been confirmed to be the same set of seals. As far as the Su family, or Su Shunqin's personal seal is concerned, it was originally a collection seal in terms of attributes, but in the same way, the Su family actually collected at least two or even three copies of the "Self-Narrative Post" written on the same day and also transmitted from the Southern Tang Inner Mansion, is it possible?
From another point of view, if the collector's seals on the two inkblots are not the same set of seals, but two different sets of seals, then different inferences can be made from the logic of authenticity: that is, there is the possibility of "one truth and one falsehood". However, now, it looks like the same set of seals from the seals, which excludes the possibility of genuine seals.
To sum up, due to the appearance of the "Liuri Half-Volume", the "Forbidden City Self-Narrative Post" shows that these three long scrolls are "copies" of "mass production" in terms of the similarity of the handwriting, the same date of writing, Su Shunqin's supplementary characters and erroneous books, and the same set of collection seals.
The right "Forbidden City" and the left "Qilan Tang Ben" ancestral frontispiece have the same Su Shunqin supplement, so it is the "twin" annotation: [1] Mi Fu "Baozhang to be interviewed", including "Chinese painting and calligraphy". Shanghai: Shanghai Painting and Calligraphy Publishing House, 1993, vol. 1, pp. 960-961.
[2] Mi Fu "Book History", including "Song and Yuan Dynasty Calligraphy Treatises". Taipei: World Book Company, first edition 1962, p. 47.
[3] a, b, and c are from Wang Yun's "Bashou Lin Huaisu Self-Narrative Post", which includes volume 71 of the "Autumn Stream Collection" and volume 1201 of the "Four Libraries of the King James Dynasty". Taipei: The Commercial Press, Taiwan, 6986, p. 66.
[4] Yuan Juan's "Bahuaisu Self-Narrative Post", including volume 47 of the Qingrong Jushi Collection, and volume 66 of the new edition of the book series. Taipei: Xin Wenfeng Publishing Company, 1985, p. 32.
[5] Hu Yishu's "Purple Mountain Collection", volume 14, includes the 1196th volume of the "Four Libraries of the King James Dynasty". Taipei: The Commercial Press, Taiwan, 1986, p. 256.
[6] [10] [11] [28] [32] [35] [37] Fu Shen, "Calligraphy Appraisal and Clinical Diagnosis of Huaisu's Self-Description". Taipei: Art Collection, October 2004, pp. 256, 161-162, 256, 140-142, 151, 218, 271.
[7] Fu Shen, "Shen Mingyi's Self-Narrative Post, Explaining the Doubts of the Forbidden City's Ink Book, That is, the Mother of the Water Mirror Hall", included in Collection of Ancient Art, 151-152. Taipei: Collection Magazine, April and May 2005, this article discusses several papers related to Li Yuzhou.
[8] [9] "Tang Huaisu's Cursive Self-Description". Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press, 1995, pp. 73, 75.
[12] Long Tail Rain, "Words of Chinese Painting and Calligraphy". Tokyo: Chikuma Study, 1965. According to the following information, we have received the help of Weng Yuwen, a student from the Institute of Art History of National Taiwan University. For information on Gu Tiechen, see "The Collected Works of Yujiro Nakata". Tokyo Nigendu, 1984, vol. 3, p. 718.
[13] Hu Tsai compiles the second collection of Tiaoxi Yuyin Conghua, vol. 32, p. 654. Volume 78 of the New Edition, Taipei: Xin Wenfeng Publishing Company, 1985, p. 564.
[14] Huang Tingjian's "Valley Collection", vol. 10, including "Jingyin Wenyuan Pavilion Siku Quanshu". Taipei: The Commercial Press, Taiwan, 1986, p. 18.
[15] Xu Bangda, "Huaisu Self-Narrative Post Identification of Forgery", included in the total seven and five issues of "Book Spectrum". Hong Kong, 1987, p. 68.
[16] Calligraphy Education, November 2004, p. 2.
[17] Qi Gong, "On Huaisu's Self-Narrative Post", in Tang Huaisu's Cursive Self-Narrative Post, pp. 72-73.
[18] The "Forbidden City Edition" has a "supplementary book" but no Shun Qinba, and the "Liuri Half Volume" is missing from beginning to end, but since it is a copied "compatriot book", it stands to reason that there should be a supplementary book at the frontispiece and a date of the same day.
[19] Zhu Guantian, "Tang Dynasty Calligraphy Evaluation". Zhejiang: Zhejiang People's Fine Arts Publishing House, 1991, pp. 212, 213.
[20] Part of this search was done with the help of Gao Ming-yi, a doctoral student at the Institute of Art History at National Taiwan University, and in the process of writing this article, it was also consulted by his classmate Ho Bi-ki.
[21] "Huaisu Cursive Compilation". Beijing: Beijing Ancient Books Publishing House, p. 187.
[22] Tainan Kang Yiyuan's original rubbing.
[23] [24] [26] "Tang Huaisu Cursive Self-Narrative Post". Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press, 1995, pp. 18, 59, 69.
[25] Due to the loss of the previous paragraph, it is not known that the book has the same inverted characters, but from the similarity of each line between the two books, and if there is no more "model" character like the "Forbidden City Edition" in the previous text, the broken lines and sentences of each line will be changed from the forty-fourth line onwards, but the thirty lines of the half-volume version from the sixty-fifth line are all the same as the "Forbidden City Edition", and it can be inferred that the "Liuri Half Volume" must also have the same erroneous book.
[27] "Green Tian'an Ben", see Huaisu Self-Narrative Post, Taipei: Huifengtang Publishing House, 1995.
[29] Zhu Guantian quoted Qigong's words. "Tang Dynasty Calligraphy Evaluation". Zhejiang: Zhejiang People's Fine Arts Publishing House, 1992, p. 232. For the original text, see Qi Gong's "On Huaisu's Self-Narrative Ink Book", including "Cultural Relics". Beijing: Cultural Relics Publishing House, December 1983, p. 80.
[30] The seal is material, so it is true that some people have lost their seals, but if the real seal is used by others and is used on the forgery, it is reasonable to say that this is also a "counterfeit seal of counterfeit use".
[31] When discussing the issue of "multiple births" in calligraphy and painting works, this section also refers to three related papers by Lin Jinzhong: (1) "Zhao Zhiqian's Multiple Births Identify Calligraphy", China Calligraphy Quarterly, No. 38. Taipei, November 2002, pp. 29-76. (2) "Zhao Zhiqian's Multiple Birth Works Identification Painting", Journal of Plastic Arts. Taipei: National Taiwan University of Arts, December 2002, pp. 39-67. (3) "Zhu Baiwen's "Zhao Shushu" Seal with Facts Identification", Journal of Art, No. 67. Taipei: National Taiwan Institute of Arts, February 2001, pp. 1-16.
[33] Luo Yi'an, "Criminal Forensics". Taipei: Ming Book Office, 1995, pp. 208, 210.
[34] The seal of the "Qilan Tang Ben" must have been copied or re-engraved precisely, and the character "Fang" was incorrectly engraved, but the mother copy clearly had the "seal of Jianye Wenfang", but the seal on the seam was omitted and not engraved, but the similarity of calligraphy and inscription, the seal should also be exactly the same as the "Forbidden City Book".
[36] "Bao Jin Zhai Fa Ti Ti", including the eighth volume of the Complete Works of Chinese Fa Ti. Wuhan: Hubei Fine Arts Publishing House, 2002, pp. 148, 151.
This article is excerpted from "Chinese Calligraphy", No. 8, 2012 "Huaisu Cursive Special Series"