|
|
|
| Bronze and Stone as Art: Connoisseurship Dimension of Northern Song Bronze and Stone Culture and Its Inner Fabric |
| Chen Wenbo |
| School of Humanities, Central South University, Changsha 410083, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract In the early 20th Century, Wang Guowei observed that Northern Song literati’s interest in bronze and stone antiquities encompassed two intertwined orientations: research and connoisseurship. However, recent academic inquiry has predominantly focused on the “fascination with research”, with relatively scant attention paid to the equally far-reaching “fascination with connoisseurship”. This study demonstrates that, contrasted with the academic pursuit of “verifying classics and supplementing histories”, Northern Song literati’s interest in bronze and stone antiquities was more commonly manifested as artistic appreciation, specifically through appreciative handling of bronze and stone artifacts, inscriptions and their rubbings during leisurely retreats and lyrical excursions—alongside profound recognition and experiential understanding of their ornamental and recreational properties. Descriptions of bronze and stone antiquities connoisseurship experience in Northern Song poetry and prose indicate that literati of the time perceived the artistic allure of these objects as stemming primarily from two sources: the aesthetic properties of the artifacts themselves and the aesthetic properties of their inscribed calligraphy. As a category of bronze and stone antiquities, bricks and tiles played a nearly identical role to ancient bronzes in the cultural lives of Northern Song literati. Among these, Tongque terrace tiles and their derivatives, particularly inkstones, were the most representative and highly prized varieties. Therefore, Northern Song literati’s attitudes towards these objects significantly reflect their understanding and perception of the relationship between the sense of historicity and aesthetic beauty embodied in bronze and stone antiquities. In essence, the aesthetic properties of ancient antiquities exhibit supervenience, being dependent upon, or even determined by their contextual properties—the rich historical memories they carried. Within the cultural atmosphere and intellectual context of “returning to the Three Dynasties”, visual elements signifying “archaic intentionality”—such as forms, patterns, weathering marks, and patina of antiquities—held immense appeal for Northern Song literati, whose ideological foundation and class identity were rooted in Confucianism. These elements profoundly stimulated their diverse imaginations of the historical contexts to which the artifacts belonged, allowing them to derive pleasure from the spiritual communion with ancient sages. The artistic value of inscription calligraphy formed another focal point of Northern Song bronze and stone antiquities connoisseurship. In Jigulu Bawei, Ouyang Xiu articulated a groundbreaking aesthetic perspective on calligraphy: by accommodating diverse stylistic orientations, he positioned masterworks and anonymous epigraphic traces within a unified evaluative framework, subjecting both to equal critical scrutiny. This concept profoundly influenced Northern Song calligraphic theory, prompting literati to consciously appreciate the artistic charm inherent in anonymous epigraphic writings. Simultaneously, the widespread availability of rubbings allowed a vast array of epigraphic inscriptions—varying in nature, appearance, and authorship—to share the same visual medium with canonical calligraphic works, revealing their distinctive calligraphic value. Consequently, these inscriptions became invaluable resources for Northern Song literati in reconstructing calligraphic genealogies and developing personal calligraphy styles. This study explores the connoisseurship dimension of Northern Song antiquarian culture from multiple perspectives, revealing the dynamic interplay among artistic sensibility, historical consciousness, and cultural identity during the 11th Century. It elucidates the historical significance of “fascination with connoisseurship”, while providing a fresh conceptual lens through which to examine: the evolution and diffusion of antiquarian vogue from the Southern Song onward; the emergence of Stele School Calligraphy in the Qing Dynasty; and the trajectories of traditional Chinese artistic concepts.
|
|
Received: 17 March 2025
|
|
|
|
1 蔡絛：《铁围山丛谈》，冯惠民、沈锡麟点校，北京：中华书局，1983年。
2 王国维：《宋代之金石学》，见谢维扬、房鑫亮主编：《王国维全集》第14卷，杭州：浙江教育出版社，2010年，第315-321页。
3 吕大临：《考古图》，见廖莲婷整理校点：《考古图（外五种）》，上海：上海书店出版社，2016年。
4 陈芳妹：《青铜器与宋代文化史》，台北：台大出版中心，2016年。
5 吴曾：《能改斋漫录》，刘宇整理，见上海师范大学古籍整理研究所编：《全宋笔记》第5编第4册，郑州：大象出版社，2012年。
6 北京大学古文献研究所编：《全宋诗》，北京：北京大学出版社，1998年。
7 翟耆年：《籀史》，见《丛书集成初编》第1513册，上海：商务印书馆，1935年。
8 王明清：《挥麈录》，田松清校点，上海：上海古籍出版社，2012年。
9 欧阳修：《欧阳修全集》，李逸安点校，北京：中华书局，2001年。
10 黄庶：《伐檀集》，詹八言编校，九江：九江师专古籍整理研究室，1987年。
11 黄庭坚：《黄庭坚全集》，刘琳、李勇先、黄蓉贵点校，北京：中华书局，2021年。
12 李清照：《李清照集校注》，王仲闻校注，北京：中华书局，2020年。
13 美］艾朗诺：《美的焦虑：北宋士大夫的审美思想与追求》，杜斐然、刘鹏、潘玉涛译，上海：上海古籍出版社，2013年。
14 赵明诚：《金石录校证》，金文明校证，北京：中华书局，2019年。
15 胡仔：《苕溪渔隐丛话后集》，廖德明校点，周本淳重订，北京：人民文学出版社，1993年。
16 苏易简：《文房四谱》，见朱学博整理校点：《〈文房四谱〉外十七种》，上海：上海书店出版社，2015年。
17 何薳：《春渚纪闻》，张明华点校，北京：中华书局，1983年。
18 黄鉴笔录、宋庠重订：《杨文公谈苑》，李裕民整理，见上海师范大学古籍整理研究所编：《全宋笔记》第8编第9册，郑州：大象出版社，2017年。
19 田晓菲：《赤壁之戟：建安与三国》，北京：生活·读书·新知三联书店，2022年。
20 厉鹗：《宋诗纪事》，陈昌强、顾圣琴点校，杭州：浙江古籍出版社，2019年。
21 张志烈、马德富、周裕锴主编：《苏轼全集校注》，石家庄：河北人民出版社，2010年。
22 李溪：《清物十志：文人之物的意义世界》，北京：北京大学出版社，2022年。
23 邓淞露：《古物：宋代的诗歌与审美心态》，《安徽大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》2021年第3期，第43-53页。
24 王国维：《古雅之在美学上之位置》，见谢维扬、房鑫亮主编：《王国维全集》第14卷，杭州：浙江教育出版社，2010年，第106-111页。
25 赵希鹄：《洞天清录》，钟翀整理，见上海师范大学古籍整理研究所编：《全宋笔记》第7编第2册，郑州：大象出版社，2015年。
26 曾枣庄、刘琳主编：《全宋文》，上海：上海辞书出版社，2006年。
27 苏辙：《苏辙集》，陈宏天、高秀芳点校，北京：中华书局，1990年。
28 司马光：《司马温公集编年笺注》，李之亮笺注，成都：巴蜀书社，2009年。
29 Sibley F.， “Aesthetic concept，” The Philosophical Review， Vol. 68， No. 4 （1959）， pp. 421-450.
30 Walton K.， “Categories of art，” The Philosophical Review， Vol. 79， No. 3 （1970）， pp. 334-367.
31 欧阳修、宋祁：《新唐书》，北京：中华书局，1975年。
32 米芾：《书史》，吴晓琴、汤勤福整理，见上海师范大学古籍整理研究所编：《全宋笔记》第2编第4册，郑州：大象出版社，2006年。
33 张鉴：《墨妙亭碑目考》，见新文丰出版公司编辑部编：《石刻史料新编》第3辑第35册，台北：新文丰出版公司，1982年。
34 徐文平：《宋代古金石铭文法帖刍论》，《新美术》2021年第6期，第73-81页。
35 赵学艺：《刘敞〈先秦古器记〉考》，《文献》2022年第4期，第10-22页。
36 陈文波：《黄庭坚与北宋后期的金石鉴藏世界》，《文艺研究》2021年第12期，第129-142页。
37 陈文波：《“字中有笔”续探》，《中国书法·书学》2018年第4期，第145-152页。
38 宋伯仁：《梅花喜神谱》，上海博物馆藏宋刻本。
39 Moser J.，Nominal Things： Bronze in the Making of Medieval China， Chicago： The University of Chicago Press， 2023.
40 翁同龢：《跋〈大观帖〉》，波士顿美术博物馆藏稿本。
41 陈硕：《〈夏承碑〉研究》，成都：四川人民出版社，2024年。
42 张廷银、朱玉麒主编：《缪荃孙全集·诗文》，南京：凤凰出版社，2014年。
43 叶昌炽：《语石》，姚文昌点校，杭州：浙江大学出版社，2018年。 |
|
|
|
2026, Vol. 56 
