|
|
|
| A New Study of the Age of Pingjiang Map Inscription |
| Xia Jun |
| Department of History (Zhuhai), Sun Yat-sen University, Zhuhai519082, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract “Pingjiang Map” is the earliest existing Song Dynasty city map in China, which has extremely high historical value and cultural relics value. However, the inscription does not contain the date and the person who painted it, which has led to disputes among scholars throughout the ages. Since the Qing Dynasty, scholars have done a lot of work to record and interpret the Pingjiang Map Inscription, especially represented by Wang Jian’s The Study of Pingjiang City of the Song Dynasty. Wang Jian inferred the age of inscription based on the age of the building drawn on the map, and according to the building drawings built before the spring and summer of the second year of Shaoding, there were no new building drawings after the autumn and winter of the second year of Shaoding. He believed that the Pingjiang Map Inscription was engraved in the second year of Shaoding, and was drawn by Li Shoupeng, the county guard. Wang Jian’s statement has a profound impact and has become a foregone conclusion. This paper first examines the logic and historical data of the argumentation, combined with the Chorography of the Suzhou of the past dynasties, and analyzes the argumentation process of the existing conclusions, and finds that there are obvious omissions in the basis of Wang Jian’s argument, thus overturning the conclusion. On this basis, the Pingjiang Map Inscription has both textual and material attributes, and the two are mutually reinforcing, complementing each other, and together constitute an important basis for inferring the age of the inscription. The specific research method is that according to the inscription process, the text must be made first, and then the stone must be engraved, so the upper limit can be inferred according to the text, and then the lower limit can be inferred by the stone carving process. According to the age of the drawn/undrawn buildings in the Pingjiang Map, supplemented by the chorography of the Song and Ming Dynasties, such as Zhengde’s Gusu Chronicles and Hongwu’s Suzhou Mansion Chronicles, it is judged that the content of the Pingjiang Map includes the buildings in the winter of the second year of Shaoding at the latest, so as to determine the upper limit of the age of the Pingjiang Map Inscription. Then, through the examination and revision of the writing date of the “Wuxue Futian Ji” (《吴学复田记》), which clearly recorded the Pingjiang Map Inscription, the inscription date was limited to the August of the third year of Shaoding. In addition, combined with the records of Wu County Chronicles, the complete historical process of the Pingjiang Map Inscription from drawing to stone carving has been clearly sorted out, presenting the complete process of Wu County Chronicles→the Pingjiang Map→the Pingjiang Map Inscription from compilation of local chronicles to the drawing of the map and then to the stone carving of the map. In the end, it was concluded that Li Shoupeng presided over the drawing of the Pingjiang Map when he left office in the November of the second year of Shaoding, and organized the recruitment of carvers to make stones, which went through a complicated stone carving process, and was actually completed before the August of the third year of Shaoding after his departure. This paper not only corrects widely influential statements, but also more accurately deduces the age of the Pingjiang Map Inscription, and completely reconstructs the production process of the Pingjiang Map Inscription, which provides an excellent case for studying the context of the compilation of local chronicles and local chronicles inscription in the Song Dynasty prefectures and counties. At the same time, using the textual and material arguments of the inscription, the inference of the inscription age undoubtedly provides a new research path for the work of inscription chronology.
|
|
Received: 08 August 2024
|
|
|
|
1 陈正祥：《中国地图学史》，北京：商务印书馆，1979年。
2 曹婉如等编：《中国古代地图集（战国—元）》，北京：文物出版社，1990年。
3 国家文物局主编：《中国文物精华大辞典·金银玉石卷》，上海：上海辞书出版社，1996年。
4 叶德辉：《郋园山居文录》，见《叶德辉集》第2册，北京：学苑出版社，2007年。
5 张维明：《宋〈平江图〉碑年代考》，《东南文化》1987年第3期，第109-112页。
6 李遇孙：《金石学录》，见新文丰出版公司编辑部编：《石刻史料新编》第二辑第17册，台北：新文丰出版公司，1977年。
7 孙星衍：《寰宇访碑录》，见新文丰出版公司编辑部编：《石刻史料新编》第一辑第26册，台北：新文丰出版公司，1977年。
8 吴式芬：《捃古录》，见《续修四库全书》第895册，上海：上海古籍出版社，2002年。
9 宋如林等修、石韫玉等纂：《（道光）苏州府志》，清道光四年（1824）刻本。
10 李铭皖等修、冯桂芬等纂：《（同治）苏州府志》，台北：成文出版社，1970年。
11 程祖庆：《吴郡金石目》，见新文丰出版公司编辑部编：《石刻史料新编》第三辑第35册，台北：新文丰出版公司，1977年。
12 顾震涛：《吴门表隐》，南京：江苏古籍出版社，1999年。
13 吴秀之修、曹允源纂：《（民国）吴县志》，台北：成文出版社，1970年。
14 王謇：《宋平江城坊考》，南京：江苏古籍出版社，1999年。
15 程章灿：《石刻刻工研究》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2008年。
16 叶德辉：《观古堂诗集》，见《叶德辉集》第1册，北京：学苑出版社，2007年。
17 范成大：《吴郡志》，台北：成文出版社，1970年。
18 卢熊：《（洪武）苏州府志》，台北：成文出版社，1983年。
19 王鏊：《（正德）姑苏志》，见上海书店出版社编：《天一阁藏明代方志选刊续编》第12册，上海：上海书店出版社，1990年。
20 李孝聪：《中国古代舆图的编绘、类型、收藏与研究利用》，见杭州文史研究会编：《杭州文史》第5辑，杭州：杭州出版社，2016年，第89-91页。
21 李焘：《续资治通鉴长编》，北京：中华书局，2004年。
22 张津等纂修：《（乾道）四明图经》，见中华书局编辑部编：《宋元方志丛刊》第5册，北京：中华书局，2006年。
23 永瑢等：《四库全书总目》，北京：中华书局，1965年。
24 叶昌炽：《语石》，上海：上海书店出版社，1986年。
25 汪前进：《〈平江图〉的地图学研究》，《自然科学史研究》1989年第4期，第378-386，394页。
26 国家图书馆善本金石组编：《历代石刻史料汇编》，北京：北京图书馆出版社，2000年。
27 曾枣庄、刘琳主编：《全宋文》，上海：上海辞书出版社，合肥：安徽教育出版社，2006年。
28 张栻：《新刊南轩先生文集》，杨世文点校，见《张栻集》第3册，北京：中华书局，2015年。
29 郑虎臣编：《吴都文粹》，见《影印文渊阁四库全书》第1358册，台北：台湾商务印书馆，1986年。
30 程章灿主编：《宋才子传笺证（南宋后期卷）》，沈阳：辽海出版社，2011年。
31 朱长文：《吴郡图经续记》，见《影印文渊阁四库全书》第484册，台北：台湾商务印书馆，1986年。
32 脱脱等：《宋史》，北京：中华书局，1985年。
33 徐松辑：《宋会要辑稿》，刘琳、刁忠民、舒大刚等校点，上海：上海古籍出版社，2014年。
34 陈公亮、刘文富纂修：《（淳熙）严州图经》，见《续修四库全书》第704册，上海：上海古籍出版社，2002年。 |
|
|
|
2024, Vol. 54 
