Journal directory listing - Volume 61 (2016) - Journal of NTNU: Linguistics & Literature【61(2)】September

Collection History of Boyuan Tie with an Analysis and Commentary on the Authenticity of Chi-Chang Dong’s Postscript Author: Jen-Bang Wang (Department of Language and Literacy Education, National Taichung University of Education)

Vol.&No.:Vol. 61, No. 2
Date:September 2016


The present study used literary research, contextual analysis, and comparative study to analyze the collection history of Boyuan Tie and argues that Yu-Pu Tao’s standpoint lacked evidence that Boyuan Tie was still unknown before Shiqu Baoji’s initial version was finished. Moreover, the author expresses reservations about Tao’s uncertain estimation that Boyuan Tie would have been in the Qing Palace in the 10th year of Qianlong, or the following January. This study found that before the book was finished in Oct., 1745, Boyuan Tie was recorded and held in the imperial study room, and then moved to the San Hsi Tang no later than Oct. 29th in the 10th year of Qianlong. Specifically, Boyuan Tie was held in the Qing Palace before Nov. 22th, 1745.
Chih-Yin Yao, Chih-Jin Huang, Min-Chung Yu, Di Mu, and Wei-Chung Huang all mentioned that the postscript of “Yang Min-Shih” is different from that in She Xian, Shiqu Baoji, and Yu Qing Zhai Fa Tie held in the Qian Shou Tang, Tainan. The author argues that “Yang Min-Shih” was influenced by the Xian Chi calligraphy style of the late Ming Dynasty and the wide and broad concept of copy promoted by Chi-Chang Dong. Thus, the two “Yang Min-Shi” are the same person.
Regarding the debate over whether Ting Wu, Sin-Yu Wu, and Shing-Yu Wu are the same person, Di Mu and Wei-Chung Huang both claimed that Ting Wu is Sin-Yu Wu. But the present author argues that Ting Wu is not Sin-Yu Wu, Shing-Yu Wu, or Zen Wu. The author estimated that Ting Wu kept Boyuan Tie for no more than eight years, differing from Yu-Pu Tao’s estimation of “only for nine years.” In addition, the author believes that it is more credible that Boyuan Tie was first owned by Ting Wu and then by Sin-Yu Wu, differing from Di Mu’s view that it was fi rst owned by Sin-Yu Wu and then Ting Wu.
Finally, by comparing the postscripts of Yu Qing Zhai Fa Tie, Lan Cao Tie, and Huang Ting Ching Tie held in the Qian Shou Tang in Tainan, as well as other postscripts of Dong’s works, the author found traces of deliberate technique in the calligraphic version of Dong’s postscript. “Chang An” in the calligraphic version of Dong’s postscript indicates Beijing, the capital of the Qing Dynasty, not the “Jing Lin” mentioned by Di Mu, nor the “Chang An” mentioned by Wei-Chung Huang. Moreover, comparing Dong’s postscript in The Master Wuyong Scroll and The Zi Ming Scroll versions of Dwelling in the Fu-Chun Mountains by Kung-Wang Huang of the Yuan Dynasty confirmed that the postscript of Chi-Chang Dong in the calligraphic version of Boyuan Tie in the palace museum in Beijing is an imitation.

Keywords:Boyuan Tie, authenticity, Dwelling in the Fu-Chun Mountains, Chi-Chang Dong’s postscript

《Full Text》 檔名

  1. 【唐】房玄齡等:《晉書•志第五》(北京市:中華書局,1974)。
  2. 【清】黃宗羲原撰,全祖望補修:《宋元學案》(北京市:中華書局,1986)。
  3. 【清】靳治荊等纂修:《歙縣志》(臺北市:成文書局據清康熙年間刊本影印,1985)。
  4. 【清】顧復:《平生壯觀》(上海市:上海古籍出版社,2011)。
  5. 上海博物館(編)。《中國書畫家印鑑款識》(北京市:文物出版社,1996)。
» More
APA FormatWang, J.-B. (2016). Collection history of Boyuan Tie with an analysis and commentary on the authenticity of Chi-Chang Dong’s postscript. Journal of National Taiwan Normal University: Linguistics & Literature, 61(2), 59-102.
Chicago FormatWang, ​Jen-Bang. “Collection History of Boyuan Tie with an Analysis and Commentary on the Authenticity of Chi-Chang Dong’s Postscript.” Journal of National Taiwan Normal University: Linguistics & Literature 61, no. 2 (2016): 59-102.