著者

宮崎 洋一

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2017, no.27, pp.15-28,86-85, 2017-11-30 (Released:2018-03-23)

---

I have been examining Yan Zhenqing 顔真卿 of the Tang from the perspective of the reception of works of calligraphy in later times, and in my article “Sō-Gen jidai no ʻGan Shinkeiʼ” 宋元時代の「顔真卿」(“ʻYan Zhenqingʼ in the Song-Yuan period”; in Kokusai shogaku kenkyū / 2000 国際書学研究/2000, Tokyo: Kayahara Shobō 萱原書房, 2000), focusing on the Song-Yuan period, I examined accounts of Yan Zhenqing in abridged histories, his ancestral temple (Yan Lu Gong ci 顔魯公祠 ), his calligraphic works recorded in historical sources, and their assessment. In this article, I take up the assessment of his works, focusing in particular on the three phrases “silkworm heads and swallow tails” (cantou yanwei 蚕頭燕尾), “sinews of Yan, bones of Liu,” and zhuanzhou 篆籀 (seal script), and adding some new materials, I reexamine their usage during the Song and consider their dissemination and changes in their usage from the Ming period onwards.  As a result, I clarify the following points. (1) Usage of the expression “silkworm heads and swallow tails” to describe the characteristics of Yan Zhenqingʼs calligraphy appears from the Northern Song, although this characterization was rejected in contemporary treatises on calligraphy; from the Ming period onwards it came to be used to describe the distinguishing features of the style of calligraphy in which he excelled, and in addition there are examples of its use from the Song period to comment on his clerical script (lishu 隷書). (2) The phrase “sinews of Yan, bones of Liu” referred to the calligraphic skills of Yan Zhenqing and Liu Gongquan 柳公権 and was not an assessment of Yan Zhenqingʼs calligraphy; although some instances of “sinews” being linked to Yan Zhenqingʼs calligraphy appear from the Southern Song and extend to the Ming, they are few in number, and examples of the use of this phrase in its initial meaning are also found from the Ming period onwards. (3) There are examples of the use of the term zhuanzhou in the Song, but it is questionable whether it was used in its present-day sense of explaining the provenance of Yan Zhenqingʼs calligraphy; examples of its use in its current meaning appear in the Yuan period and increase from the Ming period onwards. In addition, I point out that background factors in these changes in the usage of these terms and their entrenchment may have been the existence of the Yanshi jiamiao bei 顔氏家廟碑 and other works in regular script, references to which increase rapidly from the Ming period onwards, and the fact that there were few Song rubbings of Yan Zhenqingʼs works that might serve as benchmarks and people were seeing many rubbings from the Ming period onwards.

著者

田村 南海子

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2012, no.22, pp.81-94, 2012

---

Kojima Seisai 小島成齋 (1796-1862) is referred to as one of the four great calligraphers of the <i>bakumatsu</i> 幕末 period, but there is much about his calligraphy and achievements that remains unclear. I have been conducting research on his works of calligraphy and his views on calligraphy, and in this article I focus on his signatures and seals added to completed works and the manner in which they were applied as part of an investigation into his calligraphic works.<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;First, I take up thirty-seven dated calligraphic specimens among publications and inscriptions and forty-two dated works bearing seals, and I carefully investigate the seal impressions of thirty-one seals used by Seisai, their wording and measurements, and the frequency with which they were used. I further undertook examinations of seals that were used especially frequently, and I determined that seals bearing his surname, his given name Chikanaga 親長, and his literary name Shisho 子祥 (島, 親長, 島親長, 子祥氏) may be considered to have been used from the age of seventeen to his early twenties when he was studying under Ichikawa Beian 市河米庵 (1779-1858); the seal 庫司馬印 is a seal carved in imitation of the <i>Qianziwen</i> 千字文 in cursive script by Huaisu 懷素 and may be supposed to have been used during his fifties; and the seals 源氏子節 and 源知足章 may be regarded as representative seals of his later years in view of the fact that both of these seals have been affixed to works mounted on hanging scrolls dating from when he was sixty-seven. Since there also exist forgeries of these last two seals, I point out that works attributed to Seisai may include forgeries, but the elucidation of further details will be a task for the future.<br>&nbsp;&nbsp;Next, I examined a distinctive method of affixing seals used by Seisai, namely, that of first writing his name or literary name and then affixing his seal on top of it. In view of the fact that similar examples can be found in the works of the Song-period Ouyang Xiu 歐陽脩, Su Dongpo 蘇東坡, Huang Tingjian 黄庭堅, and Mi Fu 米〓 and in Japanese works of calligraphy, I infer that Seisai followed this method because he regarded it as a traditional style of affixing seals. This can be understood as an example of his basing himself on revivalist thought and taking the Chinese classics as his norm in seals and methods of affixing seals too, just as he did in works of calligraphy in which he followed classical works. I believe that this examination of Seisai's use of seals will be useful for inferring the dates of his undated works too.

著者

永由 徳夫

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2018, no.28, pp.29-42,103, 2018-10-31 (Released:2019-03-29)

---

This article tries to construct “A History of Japanese calligraphic theories.” When observed from the perspective of the history of calligraphic theories, calligraphic theories in Japan have three distinctive periods: “budding of calligraphic theories” in the early Heian period, “establishment of the theory of Jubokudo” from the late Heian to the Nanbokucho periods, and “prosperity of the theory of Karayo” in the Edo period. In the process of writing the article titled “An Introduction to the History of Japanese Calligraphic Theories” based on these three periods, the following three themes were identified:1. Systematization of calligraphic theories in the Mid-Ancient/Middle ages centered on the theory by the Sesonji family2. Relevance between calligraphic theories in the Mid-Ancient/Middle ages and those in the Early-Modern age3. Relationship between the theories of Wayo and Karayo in the Early-Modern age  This article addresses the first theme—systematization of calligraphic theories in the Mid-Ancient/Middle ages centered on the theory by the Sesonji family. Focusing on Yakaku Shosatsusho written by the 8th head of the Sesonji family Yukiyoshi Fujiwara and its supposed source text Yakaku Teikinsho written by Koreyuki Fujiwara, the 6th head of the family, this article discusses the differences between the two texts and illustrates the nature of Yakaku Shosatsusho as a plainer version of the calligraphic theory by the Sesonji family. In contrast, Shinteisho by Tsunetomo Fujiwara or the 9th head of the family, remained a mere list of formalities and old practices, revealing the situation that the familyʼs calligraphic theory had fallen into formalization. It is inferred that the stereotypical view of Japanese calligraphic theories such as “humble books of hijisodens preaching family calligraphy with a list of formalities and old practices” originates mainly from their emasculation following Shinteisho.  The author intends to continue dealing with other themes such as the relevance between calligraphic theories in the Mid-Ancient/Middle ages and those in the Early-Modern age, as well as relationship between the theories of Wayo and Karayo in the Early-Modern age, to complete “A History of Japanese calligraphic theories” from the perspective of “Identifying the aesthetics of the Japanese people.”

著者

柳田 さやか

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2015, no.25, pp.109-123,175, 2015

---

As part of an inquiry into changes in the modern concept of "art," in this article I examine the scope of "art" and the position of calligraphy in the Ryūchikai 龍池會, which was founded in 1879 as the first Japanese art association (and was later renamed Japan Art Association). Prompted by the Ryūchikai's treatment of calligraphy as art, in 1882 Koyama Shōtarō 小山正太郎 published an essay entitled "Calligraphy Is Not Art" ("Sho wa bijutsu narazu" 書ハ美術ナラス). But following a careful examination of the official organs of the Ryūchikai and Japan Art Association, it has become clear that already prior to the publication of this essay there were differences of opinion among members of the Ryūchikai about whether or not to include calligraphy in "art." Furthermore, while a small number of early pieces of calligraphy were exhibited as examples of old works in exhibitions sponsored by the Ryūchikai and Japan Art Association, no requests were made for exhibits of new pieces of calligraphy, and it was confirmed that in effect there was a strong tendency to exclude calligraphy from "art." <br>&nbsp;&nbsp;In response to this state of affairs, calligraphers led by Watanabe Saō 渡邊沙鷗 established the Rikusho Kyōkai 六書協會 within the Japan Art Association with the aim of having calligraphy treated in the same way as painting. But the Japan Art Association instructed them to disband four years later, and so the calligraphers decided to resign from the Japan Art Association. The following year they established their own Japan Calligraphy Association and actively campaigned to have calligraphy exhibited at art exhibitions sponsored by the Ministry of Education and at other exhibitions and expositions. The Rikusho Kyōkai merits renewed attention as a pioneering group that aspired to have calligraphy recognized as a form of "art" and held exhibitions of only calligraphy on a continuing basis.

著者

澤田 雅弘

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2017, no.27, pp.1-14,86, 2017-11-30 (Released:2018-03-23)

---

It can be inferred at first sight that there is a close relationship between the version of the Shiqi tie 十七帖 held by the Art Museum of the Chinese University of Hong Kong (hereafter Hong Kong version) and the Mitsui 三井 version, but there is no generally accepted theory about the relationship between these two versions. Wang Zhuanghong 王壮弘 has asserted that the Mitsui version is a reproduction of the Hong Kong version, while Wang Yuchi 王玉池 considers both to have been produced from the same woodblocks, with the Mitsui version having further “developed” the characteristics of lifting the brush between strokes (duanbi 断筆) and regularity of brush strokes. He Biqi 何碧琪 also considers both to have been produced from the same woodblocks and suggests that the differences between them arose because the Mitsui version was “retouched” or “re-inked.”  The main new findings obtained through the investigations described in this articles are as follows. (1) In view of the fact that not only do the scratches and cracks coincide in both versions, but the grooves of the carved strokes that happen to have been preserved in the rubbings also tally, it is obvious that both were produced from the same woodblocks, and the view that the Mitsui version is a reproduction of the Hong Kong version is wrong. (2) Some of the reasons for the differences that have arisen between the strokes in both versions lie in each version, but most of the differences are due to the ink and whitewash that were applied to the Hong Kong version. (3) The lifting of the brush between strokes, which stands out in the Mitsui version, is all the more noticeable because of measures taken to reduce it in the Hong Kong version, and claims by Chinese scholars that the Mitsui version has marred the intent of the original woodblocks are untenable. (4) Among Japanese scholars it has been argued that, while the lifting of the brush between strokes in the Mitsui version is unnatural, it was deliberately trace-copied to clarify the brushwork or else is a reflection of the intent of the original woodblocks, but this is a misconception based on a dearth of information about the Ueno 上野 version with which the Mitsui version has been compared, and the lifting of the brush between strokes can be widely seen in other versions too, notwithstanding differences of degree and frequency, and is by no means a reflection of aims peculiar to the Mitsui version. (5) The lifting of the brush between strokes is a technique that can be seen already around the time of the Western Jin, and since it may be considered to represent one aspect of Wang Xizhi's 王羲之 universal calligraphic techniques, the lifting of the brush between strokes in the Mitsui version preserves to a high degree the state of the original woodblocks and one aspect of Wang Xizhi's calligraphy.

著者

大鹿 まゆみ

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2008, no.18, pp.61-71, 2008-09-30 (Released:2010-02-22)

著者

柴田 光彦

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1998, no.8, pp.77-85, 1998-09-30 (Released:2010-02-22)

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1995, no.5, pp.55-96, 1995-06-30 (Released:2010-02-22)

著者

萱 のり子 輪島 裕介 土田 耕督 河内 利治 下野 健児

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2015, no.25, pp.125-162, 2015

著者

木下 政雄

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1991, no.1, pp.125-137, 1991-06-30 (Released:2010-02-22)

著者

横田 恭三

出版者

ASSOCIATION FOR CALLIGRAPHIC STUDIES

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

no.8, pp.57-75, 1998

著者

大橋 修一

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2013, no.23, pp.1-8, 2013 (Released:2014-04-17)

---

There is a book called The Truth about Cao Cao's Tomb (Henansheng Wenwu Kaogu Yanjiusuo 河南省文物考古研究所 [Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology], ed., Cao Cao mu zhenxiang 曹操墓真相, 2010; Japanese translation: So So bo no shinso 曹操墓の真相, 2011). This book covers the excavation of a tomb at Xigaoxue 西高穴 village that is considered to be Cao Cao's tomb and also discusses matters such as the truth about Cao Cao's death as recorded in historical sources. The Japanese translation is accompanied by a contribution by Watanabe Yoshihiro 渡邉義浩, who writes as follows: "The reason that I half believed that tomb no. 2 at Xigaoxue might be Cao Cao's tomb when I heard the first report lay in the location where it was discovered and the scale of the tomb. Why, then, did I half doubt it? The reason lay in the stone stele reading '魏武王常所用挌虎大戟', which the authors of this book have from the outset continued to cite as the prime evidence that tomb no. 2 at Xigaoxue is Cao Cao's tomb." With regard to this stele, Watanabe further writes: "I had the impression that the characters were not very well written, and I wondered whether Cao Cao would have had his name written in such a poor hand. For this reason I was half in doubt."  In this article I essay a rebuttal of Watanabe's view regarding this point. This is because, in the history of calligraphic styles used at the time, the characters on this stele are written in one of the most typical styles used in inscriptions, a transitional style that emerged in the shift from the Han clerical script to the Wei clerical script. More specifically, the style of brushwork known as "wavy momentum" (boshi 波勢), a distinctive feature of the contemporary Han clerical script, has disappeared, and the characters on the stele are drawing closer to the style known as Wei clerical script, underpinned by stylistic harmony. By analyzing in detail the clerical script of the final years of the Later Han as it changed from the Han clerical script to the Wei clerical script, I demonstrate that this stele is written in a calligraphic style representative of the time when Cao Cao lived.

著者

杉村 邦彦

出版者

ASSOCIATION FOR CALLIGRAPHIC STUDIES

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

no.18, pp.3-16, 2008

著者

尾川 明穂

出版者

ASSOCIATION FOR CALLIGRAPHIC STUDIES

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2010, no.20, pp.11-25, 2010

---

In this article I trace changes in Dong Qichang's 董其昌 perceptions of the reception of old techniques on the basis of his dated writings dealing with calligraphic and painting theory up until his mid-fifties. 1 confirm (1) changes in his perception of a change from the faithful transmission of old techniques to innovations in old techniques, and I then ascertain when (2) his viewpoint of differences according to historical periods and (3) his differentiation of the relative merits of early calligraphers appeared in his perception of innovations in old techniques. Further, with respect to the theory of Northern and Southern schools of painting, said to have been put forward by Dong Qichang, I suggest when he may have proposed this theory and ascertain that it does not conflict with my conjectural results regarding the above changes in his view of innovations in old techniques. I also take up for consideration passages in his writings that show evidence of his theory about the distinctive character of the calligraphy of particular periods, verifying their reliability in light of the circumstances regarding the above changes in his perceptions, and I further examine the question of whether he regarded the calligraphy of the Tang 唐 or the Song 宋 as superior, a question about which there has been no consensus in the past.<br>   The results of my investigations were as follows. It is to be surmised that the changes concerning (1) occurred between the ages of 37 and 44 with regard to calligraphy and at the age of 42-43 with regard to painting. I was able to confirm that the emergence of his viewpoint regarding (2) occurred at the age of 48 or later in the case of calligraphy and at the age of 51 in the case of painting. The differentiation of (3) can be seen at the age of 48 for both calligraphy and painting and would seem to have been discussed from this time onwards. Changes in his view of innovations in old techniques occurred at roughly the same time in his theories about both calligraphy and painting, and this would suggest that his views of calligraphy and painting were inseparable. As regards his proposal of a theory of Northern and Southern schools of painting, I surmise that this took place in the third month of his 45th year. This is not inconsistent with changes in his above view of innovations in old techniques and may be considered to guarantee the validity of my conjectures regarding both. With regard to his theory about the distinctive character of the calligraphy of particular periods, having ascertained in light of their dates and content that the writings in question are indeed by Dong Qichang, I take the view that, at least when he proposed this theory, he rated the calligraphy of the Tang dynasty more highly than that of the Song dynasty.

著者

杉浦 妙子

出版者

ASSOCIATION FOR CALLIGRAPHIC STUDIES

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

no.12, pp.33-43, 2002

著者

大西 克也

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2014, no.24, pp.93-103, 2014 (Released:2015-04-11)

著者

福田 哲之

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2008, no.18, pp.17-30, 2008-09-30 (Released:2010-02-22)

著者

横田 恭三

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1998, no.8, pp.57-75, 1998-09-30 (Released:2010-02-22)

著者

成田 健太郎

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2012, no.22, pp.13-26, 2012 (Released:2013-06-02)

---

Zhang Huaiguan 張懷〓 was a leading theoretician of calligraphy in the Tang, and in the Shuduan 書斷, his representative work, he develops his own theories about calligraphic styles and calligraphers on the basis of copious references cited from many written sources. Therefore, in order to gain an understanding of the Shuduan, it is essential to clarify his use of sources.  In this article, taking into account past research, I carefully examine the actual use of sources in the Shuduan, and I educe the following general rules: (1) facts that are found in general (non-calligraphic) works possessing an established scholarly reputation, are widely shared, and are publicly recognized are used without citing the author's name or the book's title; (2) when utilizing the views of predecessors in discussions about matters regarding which there is no generally accepted view, the author's name is given in the case of works about calligraphy and the book's title in the case of non-calligraphic works; (3) criticism about works of calligraphy is utilized by giving only the author's name; (4) popular traditions about calligraphy that fall under (1) are utilized without giving the author's name or the book's title; and (5) popular traditions and manuals of calligraphy that are hardly worth consulting in scholarly terms are not utilized.  This writing stance can be characterized as an orientation characteristic of orthodox calligraphic studies, which pursued the elegant and eschewed the vulgar, and from this there is also gained a perspective that divides calligraphic treatises over the ages into orthodox treatises that are worth consulting for their scholarlymerits and popular treatises that are not. But it is also a fact that there are a small number of passages in the Shuduan for which, contrary to this basic orientation, popular treatises may have been utilized. Furthermore, when one traces the history of the reception of the Shuduan in later times, it becomes clear that it drew closer to popular treatises in the way in which it was read, and its image eventually changed from its original image of an orthodox treatise on calligraphy to the exact opposite of a treatise with a popular coloration.

著者

大庭 脩

出版者

書学書道史学会

雑誌

書学書道史研究 (ISSN:18832784)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.1998, no.8, pp.3-27, 1998-09-30 (Released:2010-02-22)