104
CHUANG SHEN
logue seems to be smaller than that found in Pan's catalogue. All in all, the lack of record of paintings and calligraphies listed in the table of contents in the text of a catalogue is the second type of deficiency in compilation found in the art catalogues of the Kwang-tung collectors.
B. Carelessness in Proof-reading
The deficiency in proof-reading is the second type of deficiency in the art catalogue of the Kwangtung collectors. We may begin by examining Wu Yung-kuang's Hsin-ch'ou hsiao-hsia-chi. The carelessness in the proof-reading of this catalogue can be seen in the two following examples. In the 51st year of the K'ang Hsi era (1712), Wu Shêng completed the 20 chüan of his famous catalogue Ta-kuan-lu. It is not known whether Wu Yung-kuang had read Wu Shêng's Ta-kuan-lu with care or not; however, after acquiring Ni Tsan's Yu-po-t'an-hua-t'u, he had made use of the entry of this painting in Ta-kuan-lu to collate with the inscriptions attached to the painting. Moreover, he mentioned the name of Wu Tzu-min?
+ in his own colophon. Therefore, having known the literary name of Wu Shêng as Tzũ-min, Wu Yung-kuang could hardly be ignorant of Wu Shêng. Yet in his Hsin-ch'ou hsiao-hsia-chi, he was so careless as to record Wu Shêng's name wrongly. In chüan 5 of his catalogue, after entering Ch'iu Ying's Yü-tung hsien-yüan-tu玉洞仙源 he added,
Wang Shêng's12 Ta-kuan-lu has also recorded Shih-fu'sTX Yu-tung hsien-yüan-t'u1
12
+
In chüan 4 of Hsin-ch'ou hsiao-hsia-chi, Wu Yung-kuang had already mentioned that the compiler of Ta-kuan-lu was Wu Tzŭ-min11, yet in chüan 5 of the same book, he recorded the compiler of Ta-kuan-lu as Wang Shêng12. It is thus apparent that the mistake of calling Wu Shêng as Wang Shêng could not be due to Wu Yung-kuang's ignorance. Rather, it resulted from a mistake in his own handwriting, or from a mistake made while cutting the blocks for painting. Moreover, according to Ku Fu's P'ing-sheng chuang-kuan13 there was a calligrapher by the name of Wang Shêng active in the Southern Sung period. Thus, if the reader of Hsin-ch'ou hsiao-hsia-chi has complete faith in Wu Yung-kuang, would it not be very likely for the compiler of Ta-kuan-lu to be taken as a Sung figure of the mid 13th century instead of a Ch’ing figure of the mid 17th century?
104
CHUANG SHEN
logue seems to be smaller than that found in Pan's catalogue. All in all, the lack of record of paintings and calligraphies listed in the table of contents in the text of a catalogue is the second type of deficiency in compilation found in the art catalogues of the Kwang- tung collectors.
B. Carelessness in Proof-reading
The deficiency in proof-reading is the second type of deficiency in the art catalogue of the Kwangtung collectors. We may begin by examining Wu Yung-kuang's Hsin-ch'ou hsiao-hsia-chi. The care- lessness in the proof-reading of this catalogue can be seen in the two following examples. In the 51st year of the K'ang Hsi era (1712), Wu Shêng completed the 20 chüan of his famous catalogue Ta-kuan-lu. It is not known whether Wu Yung-kuang had read Wu Shêng's Ta-kuan-lu with care or not; however, after acquiring Ni Tsan's Yu-po-t'an-hua-t'u, he had made use of the entry of this painting in Ta-kuan-lu to collate with the inscriptions attached to the painting. Moreover, he mentioned the name of Wu Tzu-min?
+ in his own colophon. Therefore, having known the literary name of Wu Shệng as Tzũ-min, Wu Yung-kuang could hardly be ignorant of Wu Shêng. Yet in his Hsin-ch'ou hsiao-hsia-chi, he was so careless as to record Wu Shêng's name wrongly. In chüan 5 of his catalogue, after entering Ch'iu Ying's Yü-tung hsien-ylian- tu玉洞仙源 he added,
Wang Shêng's E Ta-kuan-lu has also recorded Shih-fu's TX Yu-tung hsien-yuan-t'ul
12
+
In chuan 4 of Hsin-ch'ou hsiao-hsia-chi, Wu Yung-kuang had al- ready mentioned that the compiler of Ta-kuan-lu was Wu Tză- min'', yet in chuan 5 of the same book, he recorded the compiler of Ta-kuan-lu as Wang Shêng12, It is thus apparent that the mistake of calling Wu Shêng as Wang Shêng could not be due to Wu Yung- kuang's ignorance. Rather, it resulted from a mistake in his own handwriting, or from a mistake made while cutting the blocks for painting. Moreover, according to Ku Fu's P'ing-sheng chuang- kuan13 there was a calligrapher by the name of Wang Shêng active in the Southern Sung period. Thus, if the reader of Hsin-ch'ou hsiao-hsia-chi has complete faith in Wu Yung-kuang, would it not be very likely for the compiler of Ta-kuan-lu to be taken as a Sung figure of the mid 13th century instead of a Ch’ing figure of the mid 17th century?
No comments yet.
Private notes are available after approval.