:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:論東晉墓誌兼及蘭亭論辨
書刊名:故宮學術季刊
作者:華人德
出版日期:1995
卷期:13:1
頁次:頁27-62+左2
主題關鍵詞:東晉蘭亭序王羲之南北朝隸書Eastern TsinPreface to Lan-t'ing PavilionWang-Hsi-chihSouthern and Northern DynastiesLi-shu
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(3) 博士論文(2) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:0
  • 點閱點閱:70
     東晉墓誌大多為僑遷到江左的北方士族而設,僅記諱字、爵里、卒葬時間、姻親 、墓之方位,有些有「刻石(磚)為識」語,不繫銘辭,亦無行誼,還有文辭更簡約的。質 地以磚為多,字跡粗率,只是作為以後遷葬祖塋時辨認棺木的記識,故一任工匠書刻。西晉 、南北朝的墓誌由於設置的意圖不同,在形制、文辭和書刻諸方面均要比東晉墓誌講究。而 東晉北方僑遷來的士族階層卻產生了卓越的書法�橝憿A其中最傑出的代表是二王,他們的成 就之一是變古法,其新體當時還不可能為民間所仿效。蘭亭論辨是從王、謝墓誌的出土而引 發的,認為《蘭亭序》是偽跡的一派,再三將東晉墓誌刻字作為例證,來推定「王羲之書法 必須有隸書筆意而後可」,《蘭亭序》的書體不可能出現在王羲之的時代。這種將工匠的書 刻字跡來作為比較、推測王羲之新體的重要參照物,是不科學的。
     Many epitaph inscriptions from the Eastern Tsin were composed for the northern nobility preparing to move to chiang-nan. The epitaphs are brief, orecording only the surnane, titles, time of death and burial, details of the family of the deceased, as well as the direction which the tomb faced. Some inscriptions on rocks or bricks, even included a line reading "the stone (brick) inscription serves as a marker" with no further details of the deceased. Others are even simpler. Most epitaphs were executed on brick in characteristically crude script, hastily finished by craftsmen as marks of identification for those returning to visit the ancestral graves in the north. Epitaphs of the Western Tsin and Southern and Northern Dynasties, however, are considerably more refined in terms of form, con-tent, and style. Many exceptional calligraphers hailed from the literati community of the Eastern Tsin in the north, two of the more representative figures being Wang Hsi-chih and Wang Hsien-chih. The two calligraphers created an innovative style based on ancient calligraphy, one that would not have been popularized during their time. With the discovery of epitaph inscriptions of the Wang and Hsieh families, many scholars have argued that the Preface to Lan-t'ing Pavilion (Lan-t'ing hsu) can not be attributed to Wang Hsi-chih. These scholars repeatedly cite Eastern Tsin inscriptions as evidence that the clerical style of calligraphy (li-shu) must be a determining characteristic of Wang Hsi-chih's work, hence the Preface to Lan-t'ing Pavilion could not date to Wang Hsi-chih's time. This line of reasoning is faulty as the works of craftsmen can not serve as standard to evaluate the innovative calligraphy of Wang Hsi-chih.
期刊論文
1.中國科學院考古研究所洛陽工作隊(1972)。東漢洛陽城南郊的刑徒墓地。考古,1972(4)。  延伸查詢new window
2.鄒厚本(1979)。東晉張鎮墓碑誌考釋。文博通訊,1979(27)。  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.蔣贊初(1982)。關於長江下游六朝墓葬的分期和斷代問題。中國考古學會第二次年會。文物出版社。  延伸查詢new window
其他
1.宗白華(19650730)。論《蘭亭序》的兩封信。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.虞龢。論書表。法書要錄。  延伸查詢new window
2.王僧虔。論書。法書要錄。  延伸查詢new window
3.宗白華(1977)。論《蘭亭序》的兩封信。蘭亭諭辨。文物出版社。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE