Regional Differences of Writing in the *

BIN Dongchoel

Abstract

This article discusses the issue of regional differences in writing style during the Warring States period (Zhanguo 戰 國 , 467-221BCE). Models of regional Scripts developed by Chinese scholars generally consider distinctive Scripts in terms of “the five regions,” which are the Scripts of the states of 燕, 齊, 楚, 秦 and the Three 晉. While these models divide Warring States writing into the five regional Scripts in terms of orthography and provenance in general, this classification does not represent a more complicated reality of the interactions among the states, especially in calligraphic Manner. In this respect, I review the models of regional Scripts developed by Chinese scholars, and then investigate stylistic differences between Warring States regions using archaeological sources to show a different picture of the reality of Warring States writing. Bronze inscriptions from Zhongshan 中山, far to the north, show a calligraphic Manner reminiscent of the Chu Manner in the south. Bird- and-insect Script, which was prevalent over a wide area of the south, appears to have spread far to the north, including the states of Jin, Qi, and Yan. While the influence of the calligraphic Manner of the south may have extended to a wide range of the north, it seems evident in the case of Chu manuscripts that Chu scribes combined an artistic exploitation of their own tradition with the influence of tradition from the northern China. Differences in regional norms seem to be apparent in the evidence provided by bronzes, and, therefore, might be expected to serve as a guide to understanding the evolution of ink practice in manuscripts. However, as we see the case of the Houma mengshu texts, written c. 500 BCE in a Jin brush style that was very close to brush style found in Chu c.

* BIN Dongchoel: Senior Researcher, Academy of Asian Studies, Dankook University ([email protected]) 98 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

300 BCE., our current data of scribal practice is not sufficient for fully understanding the similarity over time and space.

Keywords: bronze inscriptions, calligraphy, scribal tradition, early China, Warring States period, Chu manuscripts BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 99

In this article I discuss regional differences in writing style during the Warring States period, based on resources available to date. Prior to the standardization of Chinese writing after unification (221 BCE), examples of writing in the Warring States period show evidence of regional differences in Script and Manner.1 My purpose is to introduce a prevalent model of regional calligraphic practice that has important implications for my analysis of Chu ink calligraphy, but that because of disparities between ink calligraphy and inscriptions on durable materials has an uncertain bearing on late Warring States manuscript evidence.2 Before we analyze Warring States writing, it is necessary to be clear about what we mean by “regional differences.” In considering regional differences in Script, we might think of two general issues: orthographic and stylistic. Orthographic issues relate to graphic variations in lexically identical words whose character forms exhibit significant differences in structure, as opposed to general shape, or Manner, of linear execution. Orthography, or “proper writing,” is generally a matter for philological criticism, and does not fall within the scope of my investigation of calligraphic issues in the period in question. In other words, how the structure of a character appears in a specific time and region is not the concern of my analysis of Script in this period. My focus is on the stylistic analysis of calligraphically executed Scripts. In this respect, I will review whether it is viable to use the models of “regional Scripts” developed by Chinese scholars, and to what degree these models can clarify the issue of regional divisions in calligraphic Manner. I will then investigate stylistic differences between Warring States regions using information drawn from archaeological sources such as bronzes, stone, weapons, and manuscripts. From these sources, it is possible to

1 The terms “Script” and “Manner” are specifically designed for my analysis of early Chinese calligraphy. A Script refers to a particular developmental phase in the history of calligraphy concerning the evolution of such features as shape, line, and sometimes structures. Within the scope of one Script, we may suppose many different stylistic variants, caused either by different hands or by different calligraphic traditions. What may be called a “style” or “stylistic variant” within a Script, I call instead a “Manner.” 2 The formats and functions of ritual bronze vessels are inherently conservative, formal, and public. When it comes to the issue of the functions for ink calligraphy as opposed to those of bronze inscriptions, we might consider bureaucratic documents written in ink, for example, the Houma 侯馬 mengshu 盟書 (covenant) texts and Baoshan 包山 legal documents that had no display purpose and were not crafted with any public in mind. However, for other Chu manuscripts, like the Shangbo and Guodian manuscripts, we really do not know what the functions of the texts were. We do not know whether these were reading texts or grave texts, how they may have been used as reading texts (if at all), or even what sort of audience they were written for. 100 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016 draw stylistic comparisons in Script among Warring States or particular regions, delineate the influences between and among the regions, and outline “Chu style.”

1. Former Views on Regional Differences in Warring States Writing

1) Xueqin

The first useful treatment of writing styles of the Warring States period was set out by the Chinese historian Li Xueqin 李學勤. In his 1957 article, “Zhanguo shidai de Qinguo tongqi” 戰國時代的秦國銅器 (Bronzes of Warring States era Qin), Li assigned the styles of Warring States period characters to “five different regions” by employing the concept of “states,” i.., Qin, the Three Jin (that is, the states of , , and ), Qi, Yan, and Chu.3 Such a division, according to him, was based on stylistic as well as orthographic features of the characters, although did not clearly demonstrate what these features were.4 In a later three-part article, titled “Zhanguo timing gaishu” 戰國題銘概述 (Survey of Warring States inscriptions), Li applied the term “five regions” to Warring States writings on durable materials, such as bronzes, weapons, seals, and pottery, and to some manuscripts.5 Here, Li paid attention to some key words, e.g. official titles, place-names, and personal names, tracking the provenance of each inscription and, as a result, attributing the written form to one of the five regions. The following example illustrates his approach to the provenances of inscriptions by identifying the state’s name:

[L]et us investigate weapons made in the state of Han 韓. According to the Bamboo Annals (Zhushu jinian 竹書紀年), which was compiled in the state of Wei 魏 [of the Warring States period], Han’s capital city was in 鄭. Therefore, the people of Han themselves called their state Zheng. For this reason, the following examples belong to the state of Han. . . .6

3 Li Xueqin, “Zhanguo shidai de Qinguo tongqi,” 38. 4 Li Xueqin, “Zhanguo shidai de Qinguo tongqi,” 38. In the article, Li mentions “fengge” 風 格 and “jiegou” 結構 (style and structure) as criteria for the classification of Warring States bronze according to the “five regions,” but does not describe the features of the bronze inscriptions in these terms. Li briefly describes only the characters of the state of Qin: “the Qin script was the ancestral form of xiaozhuan 小篆.” 5 Li Xueqin, “Zhanguo timing gaishu (shang)” 戰國題銘概述 (上), 50-54; Li Xueqin, “Zhanguo timing gaishu (zhong)” 戰國題銘概述 (中), 60-63; and Li Xueqin, “Zhanguo timing gaishu (xia)” 戰國題銘概述 (下), 58-60. 6 Li Xueqin, “Zhanguo timing gaishu (xia),” 60. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 101

The character “zheng” 鄭, which is the name of the state, is a clue to identify the provenances of the inscriptions that Li lists following this analysis. Apart from the names of states, some other clues, like official titles and personal names, are also important in tracking provenances of inscriptions. In this regard, let us look at a specific example given by Li:

In the thirteenth year Prime Minister Yi wrought this [by the agency of] Master Craftsman of Xianyang, Tian, Major Craftsman Qi, and Craftsman Kui. 十三年，相邦義之造，咸陽工幣(師)田，工大人耆，工樻｡7

Li notes that we know that Xianyang 咸陽 is a place-name in the state of Qin. According to Li, “xiangbang” 相邦 is the title of an official whose status can be comparable to “Minister,” and the character “yi” 義 is a person’s name. Based on literary sources that describe persons appointed as Minister in the state of Qin, Li deduced that the person’s name, Yi, refers in this case to 張義, who was appointed as Minister during the reign 8 of King Huiwen 惠文 of Qin (337-311 BCE.). Li’s analysis of inscriptions is based on historical and cultural contexts. There is little consideration of orthography or calligraphy in his approach to writing styles in the Warring States period. Nevertheless, Li’s classification of the writing materials of the Warring States period according to the concept of “five regions” became a stepping-stone to later studies in which other Chinese scholars, such as Tang Yuhui 湯余惠 and He Linyi 何琳儀, focused mainly on the issue of Warring States orthography.

2) He Linyi

In comparison with Li Xueqin’s studies on Warring States writing, the later work done by the Chinese paleographer He Linyi was much more expansive and detailed. He considered more varied kinds of written materials, such as bronze vessels and weapons, stone, seals, pottery, and coins; he also considered character structure, text format, and style, as well as tracking the provenances and dates of the materials. Although He borrowed Li’s five classifications of “state-based” writings for his methodological approach, He’s reference to “five regions” in classifying writings of the Warring States period is not equivalent to

7 Li Xueqin, “Zhanguo shidai de Qinguo tongqi,” 39. 8 Li Xueqin, “Zhanguo shidai de Qinguo tongqi,” 38-40. The example chosen here is one of a number that suggest the existence of early craft “workshops.” According to Li, the xiangbang 相邦 served as a top supervisor, the gongshi 工師 was a chief of state laborers, and the remaining titles belong to bronze craftsmen of lower rank. In other inscriptions on similar weapons, we find titles listed in hierarchical order as we do here, including in each instance a xiangbang and gongshi. This form of inscription, whose text includes the makers’ titles and names in hierarchical order, is not seen before the Warring States period. 102 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016 the regional boundaries of the states. In other words, his classification of “five regional Scripts” is a more broadly region-based division, although he names the regions by their principal states. Therefore, in some cases, the scope of a regional Script includes areas of different states. This occurs in the cases of Qi, Jin, and Chu Scripts. For He, “Qi Script” refers to an eastern style dating from the middle of the . “Bronze inscriptions of Qi” thus represents not only Script deriving from the state of Qi, but also that found on objects from neighboring states, including 魯, Zhu 邾, Ni 倪, Ren 任, 滕, Xue 薛, 莒, Qĭ 杞, 紀, and Zhu 祝. The scope of Jin Script covers not only the Three Jin, but also the states of Zhongshan 中山, 東周, Western Zhou 西周, 鄭, and Wei 衞. In the case of Chu Script, different states under the cultural influence of the state of Chu 楚, such as 吳, 越, 徐, 蔡, 宋, and small states around the Han 漢 and Huai 淮 rivers, represented the Script from the middle of the Spring and Autumn period. There are, on the other hand, two cases of regional Scripts (Qin and Yan Scripts) that cover only the writing of one particular state.9 A substantial portion of He’s research centered around the orthographic aspects of characters, but he offered some insights into the issue of calligraphic Manner, suggesting that there were stylistic influences between region-based Scripts.10

3) Qiu Xigui

Qiu Xiqui’s most useful tool for discussion of the Scripts of different states of the Warring States period is the distinction of “formal [S]cript” and “popular [S]cript.” The two Scripts use different character forms for the same word.11 Within a state or community, these two Scripts were used during the same period, but selected for different purposes. The “popular [S]cript” was a kind of routine Script used “for simplicity and convenience” in day-to-day matters, whereas the “formal [S]cript” was “the standard [S]cript which was used for more serious occasions.”12 To account for the

9 He Linyi, Zhanguo tong lun dingbu 戰國文字通論訂補, 85-201. 10 See He Linyi, Zhanguo wenzi tong lun dingbu, 88. For example, characters on the Ju Hou gui 莒侯簋 (Table 5 and Fig. 1), which belong to the Qi Script, are a typical case of the stylistic influence of the Chu Script on the Ju Script (discussed in more detail below). 11 For his distinction between the two Scripts, Qiu compares animal bone inscriptions unrelated to divination with ordinary oracular inscriptions. The former are different from the latter and close to bronze inscriptions in terms of style. Here a stylistic comparison is considered to distinguish the formal Script from the popular Script. Although he is not explicit about his criteria, Qiu seems to consider both the stylistic and structural aspects of characters in distinguishing between the two Scripts. See Qiu Xigui, Chinese Writing, 63-64. 12 Qiu Xigui, Chinese Writing, 63. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 103 circumstances of the Scripts of the states, Qiu’s focus is mainly on the contrast between Qin Script and the Scripts of the eastern states.

In terms of the relationship between the conventional and popular forms, there was also a distinct difference between Qin [S]cript and the [S]cripts of the eastern states. The graphic shapes of the popular form used in the eastern states normally differed greatly from the traditional conventional forms; moreover, on account of the extremely widespread use of popular forms, the traditional conventional forms were all but routed by popular forms. By contrast, the popular [S]cript of Qin emphasized transforming the lines comprising the conventional forms into squares and angles and into level and straight lines, so that there is usually a clear connection between them. … [W]hen compared with the traditional conventional forms of the late Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn periods, the graphs in common use in the eastern states during the Warring States period had been greatly distorted, almost beyond recognition, whereas in the case of Qin [S]cript, the conventional forms in use there, which followed an older tradition, still held an important position in Qin 13 during this same period.

Qiu’s claim is generally appropriate, in that the Script of Qin is quite distinct from those of the eastern states. Comparisons of bronze inscriptions from Qin with bronzes from the eastern states certainly provide enough evidence of the differences in style and character form between the Scripts of the two regions. However, Qiu’s application of the formal (conventional or traditional) and popular forms to Warring States writing remains somewhat obscure, given that a number of counter cases do not support it. Qiu provides two different circumstances under which either the formal Script was already replaced by the popular Script or they were both in use simultaneously. If we follow Qiu’s distinction between the formal and popular forms, the former are used in bronze inscriptions, in general, and the latter in Chu bamboo manuscripts. In reality, we see more complicated cases. For example, some bronze inscriptions from the state of Chu, e.g., the Zeng Ji Wuxu hu 曾姬無卹壺 (Fig. 2) and the Chu Wang Xiong Han ding 楚王酓(熊) 忎(悍) 鼎 (Fig. 3), are very close to Chu bamboo manuscripts in terms of calligraphic style. In the other direction, one of the Qinghua manuscripts, whose calligraphic style is very different from those of other manuscripts that apparently have the same provenance, was written in a style which closely resembles the formal Script. Compare the Baoxun text and others of the Qinghua manuscripts (see Table 1 below).

13 Qiu Xigui, Chinese Writing, 78-79. A terminological issue needs to be addressed. Qiu’s analysis suggests that there were two “Scripts” in use in Qin—traditional and popular (perhaps forerunners of and clerical Scripts). When he contrasts “Qin Script” with the Scripts of the Six States, he seems here to be comparing the popular Scripts. The discussion below will examine it in more detail. 104 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

Table 1. Comparisons of selected characters from the Baoxun 14 and other Qinghua manuscripts

自 念 大 身

As Galambos points out (below), even for character forms of the same word written on the same medium, we find notable differences between the formal and popular forms, as, for example, in the following range of forms for the character ma 馬:15

By Qiu’s definition, the characters are in the category of popular Script, but it would seem difficult to designate precisely which form is the popular Script for the word 馬. Would the different character forms all have represented the popular Script as Qui defines it, or only some of them? According to Qiu’s definition, we may presume two different forms of Script were in use in the same period and region, regardless of writing materials used: the old traditional Script and the more contemporary Script. However, we find varying levels of disparity among identical characters in each form, making it hard to distinguish the formal from the popular form. Suffice it to say that it seems unclear how Qiu’s distinction between formal and popular forms might be applied to Warring States Scripts as a whole. With regard to the classification of writings from the Warring States period, Qiu’s approach is similar to those of the scholars discussed above. Qiu has stated that the Script of Qin is quite different from those of the Six States, and at the same time, that the Scripts of the Six States themselves differ markedly from one another. Among the Scripts of the Six States, Qiu treats the Scripts of the states of Han, Wei, and Zhao (the “Three Jin”) as one unit on account of their relative closeness. Therefore, Qiu’s regional division of writings of the period basically adopts the Scripts of the five regions, designated on the level of states: i.e., Qin, Chu, Qi, Yan, and the Three Jin.16

14 Li Xueqin, Qinghua Daxue cang Zhanguo zhujian 清華大學藏戰國竹簡, vol. 1. 15 Galambos, Orthography of early Chinese writing: Evidence from Newly Excavated Manuscripts, 110. 16 Qiu Xigui, Chinese Writing, 86-87. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 105

In sum, Chinese scholars who have discussed writing of the Warring States period according to differences in character form generally share the opinion that writing dating from the period can be classified into the Scripts of “five regions,” that is, the Scripts of the states of Yan, Qi, Chu, Qin, and the Three Jin. This classification of the five regional Scripts was first determined by Li Xueqin, whose research was basically paleographic and historical. Li’s research focused on the provenances of inscriptions, classifying them into the Scripts of “five regions.” With the advantage of additional sources of writings and new discoveries, He Linyi expanded on and confirmed Li’s approach to the five regional Scripts, each region conceived on the basis of the most powerful states. Qiu Xigui’s classification of the Scripts of Warring States is similar to those of his predecessors. It is, however, questionable to assume that dividing Warring States writing into five regional Scripts, in terms of orthography and provenance, clarifies the stylistic or calligraphic differences between the five regional Scripts. As we will see, a typology of different calligraphic styles at the level of these “five regions” does not seem to represent the reality of Warring States calligraphy.

2. Stylistic Differences in Warring States Calligraphy

Stylistic differences of Script across various regions are expected to tell us something about conventions and aesthetic renderings specific to region and text type. This stylistic analysis will cover the following calligraphic issues: different Scripts (e.g. general bronze Script vs. “bird-and-insect Script” in the bronze inscriptions), different Manners in the same Script, different hands in the same Manner or text, alignment and spacing in columns, and the use of brush and ink. Roughly defined, the local calligraphic features of the Warring States Scripts are noticeable in three different regions that can be designated as northwestern, northeastern, and southern areas. 17 The identification of different calligraphic trends that stem from such broad regional divisions requires more information in order to differentiate detailed scribal traditions of the period in question. Eastern style. First of all, bronze inscriptions from different states of the northeast region, including for instance the state of Qi, mark a similar calligraphic Manner, which can be called “Eastern style.” The inscription on

17 According to Qiu Xigui, beginning in the Spring and Autumn period, region-based calligraphic Manners gradually appeared in bronze inscriptions. Qiu identifies three regions taking on distinctive traits: (1) the northwestern region as a single state, that is, the state of Qin; (2) the northeastern region including several states within the borders of modern , e.g. Qi and Lu; and (3) the region encompassing a number of southern states, such as Chu, Xu, Wu, etc. See Qiu Xigui, Chinese Writing, 70-71. 106 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016 the Qi Hou yu 齊侯盂, which came from the state of Qi, is a typical example of this Manner (Table 2 below).

Table 2. Selected characters from the Qi Hou yu18

作 朕 子 中 姜 萬 永 用 之

The visual design of each character on the inscription fits in a vertically elongated rectangle. Strokes are long and slender. Decorative design features were given with great care to the characters.19 For instance, the third graph, representing zi, has a long stroke that goes down and ends with a smooth turn to the left. The fifth graph, jiang, also has two long parallel lines that make gentle curves from left to right. In the graph for yong 用, the long vertical line contrasts strongly with the two short vertical lines on both sides. This kind of calligraphic mood20 in Qi inscriptions dates from the middle of the Spring and Autumn period. The new calligraphic mood that can be glimpsed from the inscription on the Qi Hou yu seems to have been widely adopted throughout the northeast region. Different bronze inscriptions from the state of Qi and its neighboring states represent similar features of the calligraphic mood. Let us examine another inscription from the state of Qi (Table 3).

Table 3. Selected characters from the Man fu21

齊 敢 康 經 皇 永 用

18 Jicheng no. 10318. 19 Here, a design or compositional feature does not decorate the character, but is part of it. It is the same design principle that is seen in the character zi 子—turning the hook at the bottom of the vertical stroke into a flexed horizontal stroke, upon which the character balances itself. 20 This is a particular aesthetic effect that this inscription achieves, using curving lines to create a kind of dynamic balance. 21 Jicheng no. 4595-4596. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 107

The characters seen above are part of the inscription on the Chen Man fu 陳曼簠, which is considered a work of the early Warring States period.22 Each character provides the visual design of a vertically elongated rectangle, as seen in the Qi Hou yu inscription. In regard to the strokes, straight lines are more noticeable than curved ones. They are slender but provide a sense of firmness. Their sharp tips are dominant at the endings of all but the horizontal strokes. A very similar calligraphic Manner is seen in the following characters from the inscription on the He gui 禾簋 (see Table 4), which dates from the reign of Qi Kang Gong 齊康公 (404-386 BCE).

Table 4. Selected characters from the He gui23

隹 月 己 禾 肈 作 皇 母 彝

The inscription has long and slender characters, as seen above in the Qi Hou yu and the Chen Man fu, and the tendency to fit a character into an imaginary elongated rectangle is still apparent. The configurations of some graphs seem intentionally designed to enhance the visual effects of elongated rectilinear alignment. For example, in apparent resonance with the upper right corner of the second graph yue, the third graph, ji, which immediately follows, forms ninety-degree angles at the points where the lines turn, reinforcing the rectangular shape of the graph space. In an approach of this nature, complex graphs such as zhao 肈 and yi 彝 require more vertical space to compensate for horizontal compression. For the sake of harmony with such vertically extended complex characters, characters with simple components exaggerated verticality in their general configurations for aesthetic, rather than functional purposes. For example, the first graph, whose formal transcription is 隹, denoting the word wei 唯, shows an elongated downward line. In the second graph yue, the vertical stroke goes far enough down to match the size of the other characters, and then turns left with a gentle curve so that it is as long as the upper horizontal line. In the seventh graph , the component “wang” 王 has a long, overstretched vertical line that reaches down to the bottom horizontal line. This character has almost the same visual design as that in the Chen Man fu, above.24 In addition, strokes with

22 He Linyi, Zhanguo wenzi tong lun dingbu, 99; Ma Chengyuan, Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan 商周青銅器名文選, 4: 577. 23 Jicheng no. 3939. 24 The wang part is much more tall and slender in the He gui huang character, and the vertical 108 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016 pointed tips are noticeable in the first, fourth, fifth, and ninth graphs, similar to those in the inscription on the Chen Man fu. The stylistic tendencies of the inscriptions from the state of Qi were shared by neighboring states. The state of Ju 莒, which was located south of the state of Qi in modern Shandong Province, is a case in point. A typical example is the inscription on the Ju Hou gui (Table 5 below, and Fig. 1).

Table 5. Selected characters from the Ju Hou gui

隹 月 丙 侯 吉 作 君 中 妣

The “long and slender” feature can still be found in the graphs above. An imaginary elongated rectangle marks the configurations of the graphs, especially the third, fourth, sixth, and seventh graphs, where angled lines are noticeable. The second graph yue shows a long vertical line slightly curved at the ending, like the identical character on the He gui. He Linyi states that characters of the state of Ju are included in the Qi branch of Script, and points to the inscription on the Ju Hou gui as a typical case. Furthermore, according to him, the inscription may have been influenced by the calligraphic mood of Chu inscriptions.25 The calligraphic similarities between the states of Qi and Ju are clear. However, when it comes to stylistic features in calligraphy, the influence of the Chu Script on the Ju Script demands a more detailed investigation of the calligraphic Manners of the two states, because the feature of long strokes that He pointed out is apparent in both the Chu Script and the Qi Script. Considering that the state of Ju was conquered by the state of Chu in the early Warring States period (431 BCE), it may be possible to assume that the cultural influence of the state of Chu with regard to calligraphy had already spread to the northeastern region. One particular feature in the graphs of the inscription in question would support He’s view. If we examine the first and last graphs in Table 5, transcribed respectively as 隹(唯) and 妣, we can see simplified bird images in them. The left part of

element is not centered. However, the huang characters in the two inscriptions appear to have a similar visual design of their differences. 25 He Linyi states that the Ju Hou gui inscription is more noticeable in the characteristic of being long and thin in character form, which may have been the influence of Chu Script. In addition, the inscription seems to have been made before the state of Chu destroyed the state of Ju in 431 BCE. See He Linyi, Zhanguo wenzi tong lun dingbu, 88. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 109 the first graph is highly decorative, and in the upper part we see the image of a bird’s head. However, there is no doubt that the pictographic feature of a bird image was incorporated in the original pictographic form of the character (which initially denoted a short-tailed bird). Therefore, in this case, it seems difficult to demonstrate that the making of the bird image for the graph was unambiguously decorative and that for this reason the Manner can be identified as a kind of bird-and-insect Script. However, the character “妣” was not originally involved with any pictographic image of a bird; nevertheless, the stroke on the right-hand side of the graph shows the shape of a bird, which leads to the conclusion that the simplified bird image may have been created under the influence of the bird-and-insect Script. In addition, consider that in the Eastern Zhou period, simplified bird images were used for characters throughout various regions in both the north and south of China, including the state of Yan, located northwest of the state of Qi, far to the north of the state of Ju.26 In this overall perspective, He’s view of the relationship between Chu Script and Ju Script seems plausible, but in need of further evidence and examination. Another case of characters employing simplified bird images can be found in the far north of China. A ding and two hu vessels, from the tomb of King Cuo of Zhongshan, were excavated in in 1979.27 Each of these artifacts features long inscriptions whose purpose was to commemorate the king’s merit and record important political events. In this regard, Wu Hung points out that the Zhongshan inscriptions seem to hearken back to Western Zhou traditions.28 However, the calligraphic Manner of the inscriptions is a considerable distance from the convention of Western Zhou bronze inscriptions, reflecting innovations in Warring States calligraphy. Let us examine one of the inscriptions, the Zhongshan Wang Cuo da ding 中山王 大鼎 (Table 6 below).

Table 6. Selected characters from the Zhongshan Wang Cuo da ding29

下 宗 人 烏 爲

26 Bin Dongchoel, “Calligraphy and Scribal Tradition in Early China,” 143-158. 27 Zhongshan was a Northern state located between Yan and Zhao, and its people were of northern nomad descent. Clearly, by the end of the fourth century BCE (the date of these inscriptions) they were fully Sinicized, but the geographic location of Zhongshan rules out any direct Chu influence. 28 Wu Hung, “The Art and Architecture of the Warring States Period,” 692. 29 Jicheng no. 2840. 110 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

The inscription features vertically long characters with thin strokes which, however, do not look weak. Instead, they provide an impression of a mixture of firmness and smoothness with well-combined straight and curved lines. The first character, xia, shows a contrast between two horizontal strokes and one vertical stroke. The horizontal strokes are relatively thick, modeled on the hidden brush-tip, whereas the vertical stroke is thin and sharp, modeled on exposed brush-tip ink calligraphy. The second graph, representing zong, provides a perfect symmetry of design in which the roof-shaped stroke is angled with straight and curved lines, providing a sense of firmness. The third graph ren shows pointed tips at the endings of the strokes. The first, second, and third graphs, mainly composed of straight and angled lines, give the impression of firmness, whereas the fourth (wu 烏), fifth (wei 爲), and sixth (yuan ) graphs, composed of curved lines with many small details, are delicate and supple. The pictographic and decorative features in the fourth, fifth, and sixth characters are remarkable. The fourth graph employs a simplified bird image. Although the pictographic image of a bird was an original element of the character (which bore the meaning “crow”), the visual design of the graph is entirely different from contemporary ones representing the same word, indicating that it was related to bird-and-insect Script. The lower part of the fifth graph looks like the long tail of an animal. If we consider the fact that the character wei was, according to the Shuowen jiezi, originally related to the pictographic image of a female monkey,30 it seems likely that the visual design of the graph was intended to represent such an image by the decorative lines. In the sixth graph, which represents yuan (a watery abyss), we see an S-shaped water image inside the two lines to either side. The calligraphic Manner of this inscription is so unique to the region that it can be distinguished from those of neighboring states in the Central Plain. This new Manner of bronze inscriptions may be related to Chu influence. Wang Jingxian has stated that the Zhongshan Wang Cuo da ding and other vessels from the tomb all have long inscriptions in the same Manner that look “elegant and graceful” but reveal “a sense of firmness and strength,” and that “they represent a new style of bronze inscription that may reflect a Chu influence.” 31 However, the “sense of firmness and strength” that Wang perceives is a product of sharp angled lines, characteristic of bronze inscriptions from the state of Qi, indicating that the Zhongshan inscriptions may reflect the additional influence of Eastern style calligraphy. Apart from the inscriptions from the Zhongshan kingdom, other states of the Central Plain of China in the Warring States period, such as the

30 Ding Fubao, Shuowen jiezi gulin 說文解字詁林, 03b: 1210b-1211a. The character wei 爲 was certainly originally a combination of a hand/claws and an animal, although the bone form gives the animal as an elephant. 31 Wang Jingxian, “An Ancient Art Shines: Calligraphy from the Shang through the Han Dynasties,” 83-85. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 111

“Three Jin” states of Zhao, Wei, and Han, seem to have shared their calligraphic similarity of Manner in bronze inscriptions to some degree.32 On the other hand, inscriptions in this region had been stylistically diverse since the mid- and late Spring and Autumn period, so it is difficult to define them as a single Manner. For example, the inscription on the Zhao Mengjie hu 趙孟庎壺, which dates from the late Spring and Autumn period, is largely similar in Manner to what we have seen in the Eastern style. The characters from the inscription are artistically well-balanced, and the feature of long and slender strokes is evident (Fig. 4), which is reminiscent of bronze inscriptions from the state of Qi. The inscription on the Jin Gong dian 晉公奠 (Fig. 5), also late Spring-Autumn in date, is similar to the Houma mengshu (covenant) texts in terms of its calligraphic Manner.33 It is probably safe to say that bronze inscriptions from the Central Plain in the Warring States period show some differences in Manner compared to those from the state of Qi. When compared with the vertically long characters that we have seen in the Zhao Mengjie hu, the characters in inscriptions made in the Three Jin region during the Warring States period are relatively short, closer to the Script of Qin in size (see, for example, the inscription on the Ai Chengshu ding 哀成叔鼎,34 early Warring States in date, in Fig. 6), although we may find a few exceptions to this practice of using characters with shorter verticals, as provided by the shi jiu nian ding 梁十九年鼎35 inscription from the state of Wei in the late Warring States period (Fig. 7), which more closely resembles Qi style calligraphy. Northwestern style. Inscriptions from the state of Qin are particularly distinguishable from those of other regions in terms of calligraphic Manner. Qin inscriptions of the Spring and Autumn period are stylistically similar to those of the mid- and late Western Zhou.36

32 He Linyi, Zhanguo wenzi tong lun dingbu, 115; Zhu Fenghan, Zhongguo qingtonqi zonglun 中國青銅器綜論, vol. 1, 652-653. 33 Zhu Fenghan, Zhongguo qingtonqi zonglun, vol. 1, 644. The Houma mengshu (covenant) texts, which date from the early fifth century BCE, are records of political alliances between lineages in the state of Jin. Characters of the texts were written in ink brushwork on jade pieces and stone tablets, and show a striking similarity to Chu brush calligraphy on manuscripts. 34 The Ai Chengshu ding was dedicated to Ai Chengshu, who was descended from Duke Kang of the state of Zheng (Zheng Kang Gong 鄭康公, ca. 396-75 BCE). In 375 BCE, the state of Zheng was destroyed and occupied by the state of Han. Considering the contents of the inscription, in which Ai Chengshu made a sacrifice to Duke Kang of Zheng, we can infer that the inscription was cast after the downfall of the state of Zheng; see Zhao Zhenhua, “Ai Chengshu de mingwen yu niandai” 哀成叔鼎的銘文與年代, 68-69. According to He Linyi, the characters in the inscription are very close to those appearing in bronze inscriptions from the state of Han; see He Linyi, Zhanguo wenzi tong lun dingbu, 116. 35 The inscription on the Liang shi jiu nian ding records that following the king of Wei, Wu Zhi 亡智 traveled in a circuit around the state. Many inscriptions from the state of Wei, including the Liang shi jiu nian ding, give information on the units of measurements of volume or capacity. See Qiu Guangming, “Shilun Zhanguo rongliang zhidu” 試論戰國容量 制度, 66; He Linyi, Zhanguo wenzi tong lun dingbu, 129. 36 As Martin Kern points out, archaeological evidence from the area of Qin in the Eastern 112 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

Both bronze and stone inscriptions dating from that period manifest this Manner. Let us first examine some characters of the Shigu wen 石鼓文, a set of Spring and Autumn period inscriptions from Qin engraved on stone (see Table 7 below).37

Table 7. Selected characters from the Shigu wen38

君 子 之 馬 㠯 其

The visual design of an imaginary square frame marks each character above, in which the long vertical lines which are so prominent in the inscriptions of the eastern states presented earlier do not appear. The columns of the inscription are orderly, and the characters in each column are uniform in size and arrangement, which is reminiscent of the inscriptions of the mid- and late Western Zhou period. The beginnings and endings of strokes are round, indicating that the hidden brush-tip technique was employed for preliminary writing on stone. The imaginary square frame for characters is also found in Qin bronze inscriptions of the same period. See the following characters on the Qin Gong gui 秦公簋 (see also Fig. 8):

Table 8. Selected characters from the Qin Gong gui39

皇 高 㠯 才(在) 天

Zhou period, as provided by bronze paraphernalia for instance, fully evidences that the state of Qin in this period inherited the practices and cultural values of the Zhou legacy to a similar degree as other eastern states, even though those states regarded Qin as “semi- barbarian”; see Kern, The Stele Inscriptions of Ch’in Shih-Huang: Text and Ritual in Early Chinese Imperial Representation, 63. 37 The inscriptions date tentatively from the fifth century BCE. For a discussion of dating the Shigu wen, see Mattos, The Stone Drums of Ch’in, 75-112. 38 The pictures are taken from Guo Moruo, Guo Moruo quanji kaogu bian 郭沫若全集考古編, vol. 9. 39 Jicheng no. 4315. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 113

The graphs look square and squat, and their strokes were modeled on the hidden brush-tip. If we take a close look at the rubbing in Fig. 8, we see traces of a square form around each character, indicating that each character was likely stamped separately on the mold.40 Compared with examples from the Spring and Autumn period, the Script of Qin from the Warring States period did not change much. However, the feature of “being square” in character form is even more remarkable in tally inscriptions, for instance, in the inscription on the Xinqi hufu 新郪虎符, below.41

Table 9. Selected characters from the Xinqi hufu42

右 之 新 乃 士

Some stroke ends, e.g. those of zhi and shi, are squared off in a Manner that closely resemble exposed-tip brushstrokes in ink brush calligraphy, and the characters are composed of angled strokes rather than curvilinear ones. With the addition of these features, the characters look even more square than those of the Qin Gong gui, above. In the extreme case of the character shi 士, the frame is a horizontal rectangle. The Scripts of the eastern states changed enormously during the Warring States period, whereas Qin Script more gradually evolved in Manner and character form. As a result, the differences between the Script of Qin and those of the eastern states became more and more pronounced.43 Certainly, Qin Script was slow to change and conservative in Manner, especially with regard to the inscriptions on durable materials such as stone and bronze. There are no marked changes in the Qin Script on stone and bronze before or after the Qin unification. However, even with the gradual

40 Wang Jingxian claims that “bronze inscriptions of this period were already using a forerunner of movable type, a technique crucial to the invention of printing”; see Wang Jingxian, “An Ancient Art Shines: Calligraphy from the Shang through the Han Dynasties,” 88. 41 There are other almost identical inscriptions: for example, the Du hufu 杜虎符 and the Yuanling hufu 宛陵虎符. Among these inscriptions, only the Du hufu is provenanced. The Xinqi hufu inscription is unprovenanced. Since the Yuanling hufu has the term “huangdi” 皇帝 in its inscription, it was certainly made after the Qin unification (221 BCE). The Du hufu and the Xinqi hufu were presumably cast prior to the Qin unification. For archaeological information on the Du hufu, see Hei Guang, “’an shijiao faxian Qin guo Du hufu” 西安市郊發現秦國杜虎符, 93-94. For general information on and pictures of tally inscriptions, see Li Xueqin, Eastern Zhou and Qin Civilizations, 235-237; Falkenhausen, “The E Jun Qi Metal Tallies: Inscribed Texts and Ritual Contexts,” 79-123. 42 Jicheng no. 12108. 43 Qiu Xigui, Chinese Writing, 98-100. 114 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016 changes in Script, transformation and deformation in graphic shape was unavoidable.44 Such graphic transformation and deformation is evident in brushwork on other mediums as well: for example, on wood slips. A typical example is the Qingchuan mu du 青川木牘 (Fig. 9), wood slips that were excavated in a Qin tomb in Qingchuan county, Sichuan province in 1979.45

Table 10. Selected characters from the Qingchuan mu du

草 二 道 其 史

Here, the graphic shapes of the characters on the Qingchuan mu du are very close to the lishu 隸書 (clerical) Script, the main calligraphic type during the Qin and Han dynasties. The horizontal stroke of the first graph is almost the same as in lishu Script. Beginning with the exposed brush-tip, it ends with a sweeping tip of the brush, which is similar to the bozhe 波磔 (“wave-slant”) Manner that was typical of the horizontal stroke terminus in lishu. Such strokes are also found in the second and fourth graphs. The fifth character shi is entirely different in shape from the same character form in bronze and stone inscriptions, and has a shape similar to lishu. Furthermore, in comparison with Chu brushwork on bamboo slips of the same period, the calligraphic Manner in the Qingchuan mu du is much closer to that of lishu Script. Southern style. During the Warring States period, the south of China encompassed many different states: Chu, Wu, Yue, Xu, Cai, and Song, as well as some small states between the Han and Huai Rivers. The different states within this broad region shared many aspects of calligraphy under the cultural influence of Chu, forming calligraphic Traditions that can be distinguished from those of the north. However, this regional contrast seems to have deepened gradually. Going back to the earlier period, we find some similarities of calligraphic Manner between the south and the north, especially for bronze inscriptions of the mid- and late Spring and Autumn period. Characters in bronze inscriptions from the south reveal a calligraphic mood46

44 Qiu Xigui, Chinese Writing, 104. 45 For the archaeological report on the Qingchuan mu du, see Sichuan Sheng Bowuguan and Qingchuan Wenhuaguan, “Qingchuan xian chutu Qin geng xiu tianlü mu du” 青川縣 出土秦更修田律木牘, 1-21. 46 The way that characters are put together in a bronze is according to a certain design principle that governs the script, and the calligraphic mood is, in a sense, the attempt to evoke the particular aesthetic response generated by the design of the inscription. Thus, I have chosen to use the word “calligraphic mood” to cover a phenomenon that could be BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 115 similar to that in bronze inscriptions from the northeastern region, i.e. long and slender lines in characters. A typical example is the inscription on the Cai Hou pan 蔡侯盤 (Table 3.11 below).

Table 11. Selected characters from the Cai Hou pan47

天 子 夀 永 王

Here, the graphs are vertically elongated, indicating that the execution of such graphic forms was intentional in an artistic way. Compare the graphs zi (子) and shou (夀) with those of the Qi Hou yu (Fig. 10). They share almost the same visual design in their use of long, narrow lines. As Qiu Xigui points out, during the mid- and late Spring and Autumn period, “a tendency to artfully embellish graphic forms” appeared in some bronze inscriptions from the eastern and southern states with “intentionally executed flowing, sinuous strokes.”48 It is evident that the “long and slender” feature in character design was common to the northeastern and southern states. The “long and slender” feature, typical of bronze inscriptions from the state of Qi, became intensified in the south with the addition of a calligraphic mood we can call “supple and sinuous.” Contemporary bronze inscriptions from the southern states manifest this. Let us examine some characters on the Chu Wang Xiong Zhang bo 楚王酓(熊)章鎛 (See Table 12 below).49

Table 12. Selected characters from the Chu Wang Xiong Zhang bo

又 乍 之 于 永

equally represented by the phrase “design principle.” These two ways of looking at characters are complementary, one being oriented towards the viewer’s response, the other towards the calligrapher’s intent. 47 Jicheng no. 10171. 48 Qiu Xigui, Chinese Writing, 71. 49 King Hui 惠 of Chu bestowed this large bell on Marquis Yi in 433 BCE. See Suixian Leigudun yi hao mu kaogu fajuedui 隨縣擂 鼓墩一號墓考古發掘隊, “ Suixian Zeng hou Yi mu fajue jianbao” 湖北隨縣曾侯乙墓發掘簡報, 13; Ma Chengyuan, Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan, 4: 430-431. 116 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

The “supple and sinuous” feature is in abundant evidence in the above characters. The strokes show emulations of ink brush calligraphy employing the hidden brush-tip, and are more curvilinear than those on bronze inscriptions from the north of China that we have seen above (in this section). The supple and sinuous lines in the strokes are clearly distinguished from the “long and slender” strokes in the bronze inscriptions from the state of Qi. Another striking feature of bronze inscriptions from the south can also be found in Chu bronze inscriptions. A new calligraphic Manner of bronze inscriptions appeared in the region of Chu during this period. In fact, Modeling50 of graphs in this Manner is almost the same as in later Chu ink manuscripts. Let us examine some characters of the inscription on the Chu Wang Xiong Han ding 楚王酓(熊)忎(悍)鼎 (see Table 13 below, and Fig. 3).

Table 13. Comparisons of selected identical characters from the Chu Wang Xiong Han ding, other bronze inscriptions, and Chu manuscripts Chu Wang Bronze inscription Xiong Han Chu manuscript ding

楚

Xiong Zhang zong Baoshan Guodian

兵

Xinqi hufu Baoshan Chu boshu

之

Xiqi hufu Zeng Ji Baoshan Guodian Wuxu hu

爲

Shigu wen Zhongshan Baoshan Guodian Wang ding

50 The term “Modeling” refers to the contour-based shape of characters in the execution of a particular Script or Manner. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 117

The characters of the Chu Wang Xiong Han ding are stylistically different from their counterparts on the traditional bronze inscriptions, and very close to those of Chu manuscripts. This way of applying the Script, which we recognize from later manuscripts, to bronze inscriptions was entirely new and has not been found in bronzes of any region other than Chu, so we are justified in treating it as a Chu calligraphic innovation, absent any contradictory evidence.

3. Early Ink Writings in the State of Jin: The Houma 侯馬 Mengshu 盟書 Texts

The Houma mengshu texts are records of political alliances joined by members of the Zhao lineage, which was one of four warlord clans in the Spring and Autumn period state of Jin, and by others who were members of non-Zhao lineages.51 Unlike most contemporary inscriptions on bronze, which were created by carving or casting, the Houma mengshu texts were written in ink brushwork on jade pieces and stone tablets. What draws our attention is that they show a striking similarity to Chu brushwork on bamboo or wood slips, rather than displaying calligraphic styles close to bronze inscriptions (Table 14 below).

Table 14. Comparisons of some graphs in the Houma mengshu texts, Chu manuscripts, and bronze inscriptions Chu manuscripts Bronze inscriptions Houma mengshu (Baoshan, Guodian, and (Jicheng) Shangbo)

之

BS 18.19 GD Laozi JC 101128 JC 10144 1.9 1.10 A 15.3

而

BS 15.33 SB Cong zheng 17.14 198.4 A 11.18 JC 222 JC 4615

51 A large number of covenant texts were found in the ruins of the state of Jin at Houma during the excavation of 1965-1966. For a comprehensive archaeological report from Houma, see Sheng Wenwu Gongzuodui Weiyuanhui 山西省文物工作委員會, Houma mengshu 侯馬盟書. 118 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

之 所 GD Laozi SB Cong zheng 156.19 156.22 B 5.2 A 9.10

The Houma mengshu shows similarities to Chu manuscripts in Modeling. The graphs for the character zhi 之 in the Houma mengshu show this similarity, but the graphs on bronze inscriptions are different. For the character er 而, we see highly modulated strokes in dynamic brushwork. For the characters zhi suo 之所, the Houma mengshu and Chu manuscripts reflect the same approach in character construction, i.e. “hewen” 合文, in which two graphs, here zhi and suo, are combined into one. While hewen forms do appear on bronzes, no extant bronze inscriptions use a combined form for these two characters; rather, this is a unique feature of brush calligraphy, found so far only in the Spring and Autumn era mengshu of Jin and Warring States manuscripts from Chu. It is remarkable to find similarities in calligraphic Manner between these examples of Jin and Chu brush calligraphy, despite their different time periods and regions. Compared to bronze inscriptions, the brush calligraphy from the states of Jin and Chu provide clear differences in character configuration and style. These changes in Manner may have been a new calligraphic trend beginning from the Spring and Autumn period. That we find a prototype of Chu Manner in the early ink writings in the state of Jin suggests that the stylistic innovation found in Chu brush calligraphy may have already commenced prior to the Warring States period.

4. Conclusion

Chinese historical information from the transmitted texts gives an impression that the whole of Chinese culture derived from northern China. Recent archaeological data have changed this conventional view and proposed instead the idea that Chinese civilization was composed of different cultural elements from various regions, including the south.52 As far as scribal traditions of the period in question are concerned, the pioneering role of the south is noticeable. For example, all the bronze inscriptions from the tomb of King Cuo of Zhongshan, far to the north, share calligraphic features reminiscent of the Chu Manner of the south,

52 Cook and Major, Defining Chu: Image and Reality in Ancient China, 1-2. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 119 namely slender characters with thin, straight and supple, curved lines. And the use of bird-and-insect Script, which was favored over a wide range of the south, also spread out to the north. On the one hand, the influence of Chu culture may have extended to the north. On the other hand, when we see the artistic exploitation of the brush in the Chu manuscripts, it seems to be evident that the Chu scribes combined their unique tradition with the Western Zhou influence of northern China. While my analysis does focus on introducing the regional Script model and illustrating how it can be applied to bronze inscriptions, the example of the Houma mengshu texts undercuts the idea that we can use this as a guide to understanding the evolution of scribal practice in ink manuscripts. Clearly, the Houma mengshu texts illustrate that what we think of as regional Chu brush style c. 300 BCE bears a striking resemblance to regional Jin brush style c. 500 BCE. The question then becomes how much the regional variations in ritual bronze style characters tell us about ink practice at all. While the evidence of bronzes seems to make it very clear that there were differences in regional norms, similarities over time and space between the Chu manuscripts and the Jin mengshu texts make it very likely that our present evidence is not adequate for a full understanding of how developments in bronze calligraphy reflect ink traditions. 120 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

53 Figure 1. Inscription on the Ju Hou gui 莒侯簋

53 Zhenyu, Sandai jijin wencun 三代吉金文存, 2: 875. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 121

54 Figure 2. Inscription on the Zeng Ji Wuxu hu 曾姬無卹壺

54 Ma Chengyuan, Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan, 2: 446. 122 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

Figure 3. Part of the inscription on the Chu Wang Xiong Han ding 55 楚王酓 (熊) 忎 (悍) 鼎

55 Ma Chengyuan, Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan, 2: 430. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 123

Figure 4. The Zhao Mengjie hu56

56 Ma Chengyuan, Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan, 2: 632; Jicheng no. 9678-9. 124 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

Figure 5. Part of the inscription on the Jin Gong dian57

(Transcription after Zhu Fenghan, Zhongguo qingtonqi zonglun, 645)

57 Ma Chengyuan, Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan, 2: 631. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 125

58 Figure 6. Inscription on the Ai Chengshu ding 哀成叔鼎

58 Bowuguan, “Luoyang Ai Chengshu mu qingli jianbao” 洛陽哀成叔墓清理簡報, 66. 126 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

Figure 7. Inscription on the Liang shi jiu nian ding59

59 Ma Chengyuan, Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan, 2: 639. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 127

Figure 8. Inscription on the Qin Gong gui60

60 Ma Chengyuan, Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan, 2: 654. 128 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

Figure 9. Part of the Qingchuan mu du61

61 Ouyang and Fong, Chinese Calligraphy, 95. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 129

62 Figure 10. Inscription on the Qi Hou yu 齊侯盂

■Submitted:2015.12.15/Reviewed:2015.12.16-2016.01.15/Confirmedforpublication:2016.01.20

62 Ma Chengyuan, Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan, 2: 571. 130 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

______

REFERENCES

Bin, Dongchoel. 2008. “Calligraphy and Scribal Tradition in Early China.” PhD diss., Indiana University. Cook, Constance A., and John S. Major, eds. 1999. Defining Chu: Image and Reality in Ancient China. Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press. Ding, Fubao 丁福保. 1988. Shuowen jiezi gulin 說文解字詁林. 20 vols. : Zhonghua shuju. Galambos, Imre. 2006. Orthography of Early Chinese Writing: Evidence from Newly Excavated Manuscripts. Budapest: Eötvös Loránd University, Department of East Asian Studies. Guo, Moruo 郭沫若. 1982. Guo Moruo quanji kaogu bian 郭沫若全集考古編. Vol. 9 of Guo Moruo Quanji 郭沫若全集, edited by Guo Moruo Zhuzuo Bianji Chuban Weiyuanhui 郭沫若著作编辑出版委员会. 18 vols. Beijing: Kexue chubanshe. Falkenhausen, Lothar von. 2005. “The E Jun Qi Metal Tallies: Inscribed Texts and Ritual Contexts.” In Text and Ritual in Early China, edited by Martin Kern, 79- 123. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press. He, Linyi 何琳儀. 2003. Zhanguo wenzi tonglun dingbu 戰國文字通論訂補. Nanjing: jiaoyu chubanshe. Hei, Guang 黑光. 1979. “Xi’an shijiao faxian Qin guo Du hufu” 西安市郊發現秦 國杜虎符. Wenwu 9: 93-94. Kern, Martin. 2000. The Stele Inscriptions of Ch’in Shih-Huang: Text and Ritual in Early Chinese Imperial Representation. New Haven, Connecticut: American Oriental Society. Li, Xueqin 李學勤. 1957. “Zhanguo shidai de Qinguo tongqi” 戰國時代的秦國銅 器. Wenwu 8: 38-40, 53. ___, 1959a. “Zhanguo timing gaishu (shang)” 戰國題銘概述 (上). Wenwu 7: 50-54. ___, 1959b. “Zhanguo timing gaishu (zhong)” 戰國題銘概述 (中). Wenwu 8: 60-63. ___, 1959c. “Zhanguo timing gaishu (xia)” 戰國題銘概述 (下). Wenwu 9: 58-60. ___, 1985. Eastern Zhou and Qin Civilizations. Translated by K. C. Chang. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. ___, ed. 2010-2011. Qinghua Daxue cang Zhanguo zhujian 清華大學藏戰國竹簡. 2 vols. : Zhongxi shuju. Luoyang Bowuguan. 1981. “Luoyang Ai Chengshu mu qingli jianbao” 洛陽哀成叔 墓清理簡報. Wenwu 7: 65-67. Luo Zhenyu 羅振玉, ed. 1983. Sandai jijin wencun 三代吉金文存. 3 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. Ma Chengyuan 馬承源, ed. 1986-1990. Shang Zhou qingtongqi mingwen xuan 商 周青銅器名文選. 4 vols. Beijing: Wenwu chubanshe. Mattos, Gilbert L. 1988. The Stone Drums of Ch’in. Nettetal: Steylar Verlag. Ouyang, Zhongshi, and Wen C. Fong, eds. 2008. Chinese Calligraphy. New Haven & London: Yale University Press. BIN Dongchoel / Regional Differences of Writing in the Warring States Period 131

Qiu, Guangming 丘光明. 1981. “Shilun Zhanguo rongliang zhidu” 試論戰國容量 制度. Wenwu 10: 63-72. Qiu, Xigui 裘錫圭. 2000. Chinese Writing. Translated by Gilbert L. Mattos and Jerry Norman. New Haven: The Society for the Study of Early China and the Institue of East Asian Studies, Univiersity of California, Berkeley. Shanxi Sheng Wenwu Gongzuodui Weiyuanhui 山西省文物工作委員會, ed. 1976. Houma mengshu 侯馬盟書. Shanghai: Wenwu chubanshe. Sichuan Sheng Bowuguan and Qingchuan Xian Wenhuaguan 四川省博物館 青川 縣文化館. 1982. “Qingchuan xian chutu Qin geng xiu tianlü mu du” 青川縣出 土秦更修田律木牘. Wenwu 1: 1-21. Suixian Leigudun yi hao mu kaogu fajuedui 隨縣擂 鼓墩一號墓考古發掘隊. 1979. “Hubei Suixian Zeng hou Yi mu fajue jianbao” 湖北隨縣曾侯乙墓發掘 簡報. Wenwu 7: 13-25. The Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, ed. 2007. Yin Zhou jinwen jicheng 殷周金文集成. 8 vols. Beijing: Zhonghua shuju. Wang, Jingxian. 2008. “An Ancient Art Shines: Calligraphy from the Shang through the Han Dynasties.” Translated by Wang Youfen. In Chinese Calligraphy, edited by Ouyang Zhongshi and Wen C. Fong, 67-131. New Haven & London: Yale University Press. Wu, Hung. 1999. “The Art and Architecture of the Warring States Period.” In The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 BC, edited by Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 651-744. New York: Cambridge University Press. Zhao, Zhenhua 趙振華. 1981. “Ai Chengshu de mingwen yu niandai” 哀成鼎的銘 文與年代. Wenwu 7: 68-69. Zhu, Fenghan 朱鳳瀚. 2009. Zhongguo qingtonqi zonglun 中國青銅器綜論 (a Comprehensive Study on Chinese Bronzes). Shanghai: Shanghai guji chubanshe. 132 Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture Vol. 25 / February 2016

戰國時期書寫的地域性研究

賓 東 哲

中文摘要

本文的主題是關於戰國時期的書體所具有的地域性。中國學者曾以國家為 基本單位而提出戰國時期的文字分類方式,主要是按照燕、齊、楚、秦、三 晉說明戰國時期五個系列的正字法和語源。但這種分類實際上不僅不能反 映戰國時期各個國家的文字特點及其相互關聯性，還不能解釋各國書法的 特點。於是筆者首先槪論中國學者的見解，然後在現成的考古學成果基礎 上重新探討戰國時期文字和書體所包含的地域性差異。令人矚目的是，青 銅時代從中山國到北方之間的銘文早就顯示出一種與南方楚國的書體很相 似的字體。與此相反，當時在南方的各個地域上盛行的鳥蟲書逐漸擴散到 包括晉、齊、燕在內的北方。再言之，南方地域的書風一方面影響到北方 的各個國家,另一方面南方楚國的書體文化又充分吸收北方西周的傳統,並由 此開創一新的書法。有鑒於此，可說，南北方地域的不同書法依照各個地 域的不同傳統和規範而成立。反過來,戰國時期各個不同的地域性在一定程 度上貢獻於不同的書法和字體的發展。但可惜的是,從書法上看,出現在公元 前500年左右的晉的毛筆字，即侯馬盟書和公元前300年左右在楚盛行的書 法很類似。這一點向我們暗示兩個地域之間的文化交流及其綜合可能性。 但現存的有關書法資料很不足，並且筆者的視閾有限，這有待於後日進一 步研究。

關鍵詞: 青銅器銘文，文字學，戰國時期，書法，楚簡