|
|
|
| The Value of Dunhuang Literature Published in Pioneering Stage: A Case Study of Zhensongtang Cang Xichui Miji Congcan |
| Zhou Simin, Zhang Yongquan |
| Research Institute for Ancient Books, Zhejiang University, Hangzhou 310058, China |
|
|
|
|
Abstract In the pioneering stage of Dunhuang Studies, with Luo Zhenyu as the representative, numerous scholars compiled, copied, depicted, and published a great deal of literature, yet this literature has not been fully utilized in today’s Dunhuang academic research. Therefore, taking Zhensongtang Cang Xichui Miji Congcan compiled by Luo Zhenyu in 1939 as a typical example, this paper expounds on the great value of early published literature for Dunhuang academic research today and proposes the issues that should be considered when using such literature.The compilation and publication of Dunhuang documents in the early days did not form a standardized pattern. Congcan was neither cataloged nor titled, thus making it difficult for researchers, including Luo himself, to accurately determine the number and content of the printed manuscripts contained within it. Based on the research of renowned scholars such as Wang Zhongmin, Lin Pinghe, and others, combined with the latest research results of each scroll, we conducted a thorough combing of Congcan and identified 35 kinds of 95 pieces of fragmentary scrolls or fragments: 17 kinds of 69 pieces in Volume 1, 7 kinds of 7 pieces in Volume 2, and 11 kinds of 19 pieces in Volume 3. It is widely known that after the death of Luo, his collected manuscripts were scattered in batches. Through the analysis of elements such as characters, successive content, writing styles, seals, inscriptions and postscripts, etc., of handwritten scrolls, with a comprehensive search of the catalogs published by various collection institutions and the journals and papers published publicly, it was found that 51 of them were eventually collected in the National Museum of China, the National Library of China, the Palace Museum, the Nanjing Museum, the Liaoning Provincial Museum, the Shanghai Municipal Library, the Peking University Library, and other places after nearly a hundred years of circulation.Even for the same manuscript, there are often discrepancies between the images in Congcan and the latest materials publicly released by the institutions. For example, in the two articles published by Wang Su et al., which introduced the basic information of Dunhuang literature collected in the Palace Museum, the four sections numbered New 179084 were once included in Congcan. Upon comparison with Congcan, it was discovered that there were potential modifications to be made to the title, and starting and ending records of the fragments in the articles. In addition, after comparing the former and new images of the same manuscript, it was found that BD14521 published by the National Library of China was incomplete, with the first image missing in the printing, while Congcan was consistent with the one released in the International Dunhuang Project, and was complete. By taking the former and current collectors of manuscripts as clues, and combining the postscripts, titles, seals, and other related information on the manuscripts, it can be seen that in the early transactions, antique dealers and booksellers sought to maximize their profits, and there was a common phenomenon of splitting manuscripts. After splitting, the fragments of similar content tended to be restitched together into booklets or long scrolls for circulation. Some collectors might repair their stored fragments by imitating the original calligraphic style and compose type, rather than blindly supplementing the entire text and pursuing a complete version. This can be regarded as an early thought of reconstructing the fragments to some extent.Meanwhile, due to objective technical limitations and subjective outdated concepts, literature published in the early period is inevitably subject to certain flaws. Some of the copies in Congcan have blurred and distorted edges and some of the copies are not directly based on the original. Furthermore, all of the manuscripts in Congcan are one-sided written, as Luo Zhenyu selectively chose some double-written manuscripts, omitting the side he deemed unimportant.As academic research advances, compared with our predecessors, we have more diverse and convenient ways to obtain various literature. While making full use of convenient databases and high-definition color images, we should also pay attention to the literature published in Congcan and other early periodicals. These printed materials from the early stage may be closer to the original appearance of the manuscripts and may contain some information that is almost impossible to verify but is nonetheless very important.
|
|
Received: 17 January 2023
|
|
|
|
1 辻正博： 「草創期の敦煌学と日本の唐代法制史研究」，高田時雄編： 『草創期の敦煌學』，东京：知泉書館，2002年，149-166頁。
2 方广锠： 《初创期的敦煌学——以收藏题跋为中心》，见《方广锠敦煌遗书散论》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2010年，第117-137页。
3 郝春文、宋雪春、武绍卫： 《当代中国敦煌学研究（1949—2019）》，北京：中国社会科学出版社，2020年。
4 罗振玉： 《贞松堂藏西陲秘籍丛残》，见《罗雪堂先生全集》三编第八、九册，台北：大通书局，1976年。
5 罗振玉： 《贞松堂藏西陲秘籍丛残》，见黄永武编： 《敦煌丛刊初集》第七册，台北：新文丰出版公司，1985年，第219-762页。
6 罗振玉： 《敦煌石室碎金》，见黄永武编： 《敦煌丛刊初集》第七册，台北：新文丰出版公司，1985年，第1-130页。
7 王重民： 《敦煌遗书总目索引》，北京：中华书局，1962年。
8 林平和： 《罗振玉敦煌学析论》，台北：文史哲出版社，1988年。
9 邓文宽： 《北大图书馆藏两件敦煌文献补说》，《北京图书馆馆刊》1996年第4期，第90-91页。
10 王素、任昉、孟嗣徽： 《故宫博物院藏敦煌吐鲁番文献目录》，《敦煌研究》2006年第6期，第173-182页。
11 王素、任昉、孟嗣徽： 《故宫博物院藏敦煌吐鲁番文献提要（写经、文书类）》，《故宫学刊》2006年第1期，第561-581页。
12 华人德主编： 《中国书法全集》第14卷《两晋南北朝写经写本》，北京：荣宝斋出版社，2013年。
13 傅红展编： 《故宫博物院藏品大系·书法编1：晋唐五代》，北京：故宫出版社，2012年。
14 施安昌编： 《晋唐五代书法》，上海：上海科学技术出版社，2017年。
15 李德范校录： 《敦煌西域文献旧照片合校》，北京：北京图书馆出版社，2007年。
16 刘丹、王勇： 《敦煌本〈十诵律〉写本缀合研究》，《敦煌学辑刊》2021年第3期，第61-72页。
17 王春法总主编、张婧乐编： 《敦煌古籍零拾册（唐五代写本）》，合肥：安徽美术出版社，2020年。
18 赵和平： 《〈敦煌写本书仪研究〉订补》，见季羡林、饶宗颐、周一良编： 《敦煌吐鲁番研究》第3卷，北京：北京大学出版社，1997年，第229-258页。
19 黄亮文： 《〈新定书仪镜〉相关问题的探讨——附论其他书仪写卷的缀补》，见郑阿财编： 《敦煌学》第27辑，台北：乐学书局，2008年，第435-457页。
20 山口正晃： 「羅振玉舊藏『新定書儀鏡』斷片の綴合」，『敦煌寫本研究年報』第10號第一分册，2016年，69-87頁。
21 黄永武： 《敦煌丛刊初集》第8册，台北：新文丰出版公司，1985年。
22 王卡： 《敦煌道教文献研究——综述·目录·索引》，北京：中国社会科学出版社，2004年。
23 余欣： 《博望鸣沙：中古写本研究与现代中国学术史之会通》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2012年。
24 杨文和主编： 《晋唐写经·晋唐文书》，见史树青主编： 《中国历史博物馆藏法书大观》第11卷，东京：柳原书店，上海：上海教育出版社，1999年。
25 凌波： 《南博的三十一件敦煌写经卷》，《文物天地》2005年第6期，第34-38页。
26 任继愈主编： 《国家图书馆藏敦煌遗书》第131册，北京：北京图书馆出版社，2010年。
27 周勋初： 《唐钞文选集注汇存》，上海：上海古籍出版社，2000年。
28 辽宁省博物馆编： 《馆藏中国历代书画著录（书法卷）》，沈阳：辽宁美术出版社，2015年。
29 荣新江： 《英国图书馆藏敦煌汉文非佛教文献残卷目录（S.6981—13624）》，台北：新文丰出版公司，1994年。
30 日］池田温： 《敦煌文书的世界》，张铭心、郝轶君译，北京：中华书局，2007年。
31 许建平： 《敦煌经籍叙录》，北京：中华书局，2006年。
32 董作宾： 《大唐同光四年具注历合璧》，《“中央研究院”历史语言研究所集刊》第三十本下册，1959年，第1043-1062页。
33 张婧乐： 《中国国家博物馆藏〈敦煌古籍零拾册〉（唐五代写本）》，《书画世界》2021年第6期，第4-9页。
34 王晶波： 《敦煌占卜文献与社会生活》，兰州：甘肃教育出版社，2013年。
35 张新朋： 《敦煌写本〈太公家教〉残片拾遗》，《社会科学战线》2010年第4期，第47-51页。
36 唐耕耦、陆宏基编： 《敦煌社会经济文献真迹释录》（一），北京：书目文献出版社，1986年。
37 孙继民： 《罗振玉旧藏文书考之一》，见《唐代瀚海军文书研究》，兰州：甘肃文化出版社，2002年，第39-50页。
38 唐耕耦、陆宏基编： 《敦煌社会经济文献真迹释录》（二），北京：全国图书馆文献缩微复制中心，1990年。 |
|
|
|
2023, Vol. 53 
