Zhou Rong: The Derivation and Academic Significance of Zhu Xi's "Shiji Zhuan" in the Ming Dynasty

Abstract

The derivative works of Zhu Xi’s “Shiji Zhuan” in the Ming Dynasty can be categorized into four main types. The abridged version primarily involves the deletion of Zhu’s annotations, aiming to facilitate beginners; the selected version takes into account the principles of choosing chapters and verses, balancing the emphasis of the imperial examination and the literary quality of the poems; the annotated version collects various interpretations, either supplementing or dialectically discussing Zhu’s “Zhuan”, objectively promoting the expansion and breakthrough of Zhu’s poetics; the composite version represents a secondary transformation of Zhu’s “Zhuan”, combining various texts of poetry to provide richer scholarly knowledge and examination guidance. The continuous addition and deletion of Zhu’s “Zhuan” text by scholars in the Ming Dynasty, along with their enthusiasm for changing its external form, primarily served the vast class of poetry learners under the imperial examination system. The evolution of Zhu’s “Zhuan” from the Song to the Ming reflects the historical process of the popularization of poetry education in modern times, as well as the complex historical contexts related to the imperial examination teaching, book circulation, and commercial publishing.

Keywords: “Shiji Zhuan” Derivative Literature Ming Dynasty “Shijing” Studies History of Song and Ming Books

Research on the bibliographic studies of Zhu Xi’s “Shiji Zhuan” (hereinafter referred to as “Zhu’s Zhuan”) mainly focuses on version comparison, the process of compilation, etc., indicating that the academic community pays more attention to the “prehistory” of Zhu’s literature, while the “post-transmission”—that is, its reproduction practices in later generations—has received relatively little research. In fact, the compilation and publication of Zhu’s “Zhuan” in the Southern Song was merely the beginning of its dissemination, and its reading and usage in study rooms and bookstores over the centuries is far richer and more colorful.

During the Ming Dynasty, Zhu’s “Zhuan” was widely published by both official and private presses. The editions published in the Ming can generally be divided into two major systems: the twenty-volume and the eight-volume editions, with their version value historically rated low. This article focuses on the grassroots and popular aspects, primarily examining the derivative works of Zhu’s “Zhuan” published during the Ming, especially the various types of popular press literature of that time.

The so-called derivative works of Zhu’s “Zhuan” refer to those that are related to the original work in terms of academic thought or literary form, which can be divided into two major categories: broadly defined derivative works refer to all poetry studies that engage in academic dialogue with Zhu’s “Zhuan”; they may adhere to or deviate from Zhu’s poetic stance and take on diverse forms, including commentaries, notes, sermons, and encyclopedias. Narrowly defined derivative works, however, require that Zhu’s “Zhuan” serves as the basic framework while retaining all or part of its textual elements. To avoid the proliferation of research subjects and facilitate examination from a specific perspective of book form, this article adopts the concept of narrowly defined derivative works.

The derivative works of Zhu’s “Zhuan” in the Ming Dynasty are based on Zhu’s “Zhuan” as the foundational text, making reductions, additions, or transformations of its canonical texts, annotations, or forms, yet most do not deviate from Zhu’s original poetic intent. These works primarily serve as instructional texts for the imperial examination or for enlightenment, and can be categorized into abridged versions, selected versions, annotated versions, and composite versions, exhibiting a rich variety of book types, clear academic hierarchies, and diverse forms of compilation. Currently, there are over fifty existing derivative books of Zhu’s “Zhuan” from the Ming Dynasty (excluding plain texts), which occupy a significant proportion of poetry literature types, and their existence and value cannot be ignored: they are not only an indispensable part of the bibliographic research on Zhu’s “Zhuan”, but also store rich academic information and historical memories. However, the orthodox discourse constructed by elites and classics has created a certain research blind spot, leading to the neglect of these popular poetry books that once had a considerable impact on the public society of the time. Therefore, conducting a dynamic examination of this group of literature, clarifying its bibliographic system, not only helps to change the research paradigm but also enables deeper insights into the more real and complex historical contexts and the paths of modern poetry studies’ evolution.

Abridged Version: Considerations for Beginners

The abridged version is a new work created by summarizing Zhu’s “Zhuan” text, and its volume is usually much smaller than the original book. These books generally belong to the “General Principles of the Five Classics” series, and their editors often believe that annotations are restrictive to thought, fragment the canonical texts, or hinder enlightenment, thus these books primarily adopt a large number of deletions of Zhu’s annotations, reflecting the awareness of “respecting the classics” and providing convenience for beginners. In addition to ordinary abridged versions and revised versions, there are also two special types of abridged versions, namely plain texts and marginal annotations, which are often overlooked, and this section will explore them in detail.

(1) General Abridged Versions and Revised Versions

General abridged versions that simply delete annotations were quite common in the Ming Dynasty. A typical example is the Wulin Huayu edition of “Shijing Yuezhu”, which takes the eight-volume edition of Zhu’s “Zhuan” as the basis for deletion, retaining only Zhu Xi’s “Fu Bi Xing” indicators, poetic stems, and a small number of annotations as core content. Another example is the “Shijing Cuanzhu” published by Xia Zhang of Er Yi Tang, which also deletes the word meanings and extended quotations from the eight-volume edition, retaining mostly annotations that convey the meaning of the poems, reflecting Xia’s editorial philosophy of emphasizing the overall meaning and avoiding cumbersome explanations. These types of books hold a respectful attitude towards the classics, generally not easily altering the original text of the poems, believing that “the Five Classics are established by the most sacred, and lightly adding deletions is not self-aware, nor can it form a complete book.” However, they also adhere to the concept of “the classics should encompass the whole while annotations should be concise”, significantly reducing the cumbersome annotations by later scholars, aiming to make the entire book concise and clear, facilitating initial learning and achieving the effect of “effortless learning with broad results”.

In addition, there is a type of revised version that, while making a large number of deletions, also has a small amount of modifications and supplements. This not only serves the purpose of facilitating beginners but also demonstrates a certain academic consideration. For example, Yang Shoulong’s “Shijing Jizhu Shanshu” is based on Zhu’s “Zhuan” but does not include phonetic annotations and significantly deletes annotations. A close reading of the retained annotations by Zhu reveals subtle modifications, mainly in five situations: first, correcting contradictory annotations by Zhu; second, modifying annotations that deviate from the canonical texts; third, clarifying the relationship between annotations in different chapters; fourth, deleting lengthy historical references in annotations; and fifth, re-evaluating place names mentioned in Zhu’s annotations based on the “Comprehensive History of the Great Ming”. However, overall, the core argument of this book remains aligned with Zhu’s intent, and Yang himself states, “I dare not be a sinner of Ziyang”, with the goal of making Zhu’s “Zhuan” “easy where it is simple and detailed where it is complex”, essentially serving as a teaching text for beginners.

(2) Plain Texts and Semi-Plain Texts

Plain text, also known as the main text, is, in principle, the canonical text without any annotations. Lin Qingzhang pointed out that at the end of the Ming and the beginning of the Qing, there was a scholarly movement of “returning to the original texts”, where scholars engaged in “proper studies” to restore the original appearance of the canonical texts and seek the original meanings of Confucius and Mencius. In fact, this awareness of valuing the original texts and warning against being misled by annotations had already begun to emerge in the fields of reading and book publishing in the mid-Ming Dynasty. The popularity of Yangming’s mind philosophy, the institutional constraints of Cheng-Zhu thought, and the increasingly complicated nature of the transmission of classical texts all contributed to the phenomenon of scholars in the late Ming and early Qing thinking and practicing without relying on annotations, believing that the profound meanings of the sages are not found in annotations. Over-reliance on the annotations of Song scholars has led to a lack of personal experience in understanding, thus advocating the method of mastering the original texts before gradually seeking annotations. In this context, the production of plain texts of the “Shijing” increased significantly due to the expanding readership.

In order to restore the original appearance of the “Shijing”, Zhu Xi re-examined the text of the “Mao Poems” passed down from the Han and Tang dynasties, correcting words, dividing chapters, and adjusting the order. The plain texts of the Ming Dynasty’s “Shijing” mostly align with Zhu Xi’s divisions of chapters and texts, rather than those of the Han and Tang annotated versions, indicating that their foundational text is Zhu’s “Zhuan”. For instance, the edition published by Chen Fengwu in the sixth year of the Jiajing era (1527) and the edition published by Chen Ru in Guangyang are typical representatives.

Moreover, there are also “semi-plain texts” that retain a small number of elements from Zhu’s “Zhuan” based on plain texts. Although their titles include “plain text” or “main text”, they are not purely plain texts. The related books can be seen in Table 1:

Zhou Rong: The Derivation and Academic Significance of Zhu Xi's "Shiji Zhuan" in the Ming Dynasty

Although the books listed in Table 1 do not include large sections of Zhu’s annotations, they not only adopt the text of the “Shijing” as determined by Zhu but also retain, to varying degrees, Zhu’s prefaces, “Fu Bi Xing” annotations, poetic stems, phonetic annotations, etc., and can be regarded as “minimal versions” of Zhu’s “Zhuan”. Most of the phonetic annotations in these books draw from the popular eight-volume or twenty-volume editions of Zhu’s “Zhuan”, and the volumes are either not divided according to the series format or directly divided into four volumes: “Guofeng”, “Xiao Ya”, “Da Ya”, and “San Song”, further enriching the volume division of Zhu’s “Zhuan”.

Unlike elite scholars who articulate the importance of plain text literature from a theoretical perspective, the compilers of these books, while also expressing concerns about the overwhelming annotations obscuring the original meaning of the classics, emphasize the practical advantages of the numerous texts. In summary, there are three main points: first, various annotated versions are extensive and difficult to purchase, while plain texts are easy to read; second, they are included in the comprehensive collections of the Five Classics, allowing for broad access to a wealth of literature; third, plain texts are less prone to errors and are well-printed.

(3) Marginal Annotation Texts

From the perspective of bibliographic derivation, various “Shijing” marginal annotations in the Ming Dynasty are all derived from Zhu’s “Zhuan” annotations, retaining the core elements of the original text, such as chapter and verse, prefaces, and poetic stems, and are presented in a different format. The two main systems of marginal annotation texts for the “Shijing” that were popular in the Ming Dynasty are attributed to Zhu Sheng and Li Shu. The National Palace Museum in Taipei holds two copies of “Shijing” marginal annotations, one a Ming edition of the Fan Jia version and the other a Chen Da Ke edition, both recorded as “written by Zhu Sheng of Ming”, yet the texts themselves do not provide any clues about the editors, making their origins highly questionable. At least ten existing Ming editions of “Shijing” marginal annotations related to Li Shu are known, and later generations attribute the authorship to Li Shu based primarily on the prefaces of Chen Wenzhu’s books. However, Yang Shiqi had already pointed out that Li Shu’s original text had errors by the early Ming period, and Gu Yongxin also believed that “the ‘Shijing’ marginal annotations compiled during the Ming Dynasty are not the original works of Li Shu”. Therefore, the sources of the texts mentioned by Chen may not be credible. However, it can be speculated that the various editions of the Ming inherited the format and some content elements of Li Shu’s original “marginal annotations”, while also exhibiting originality and transformation. If we shift our focus from the original authors to the texts themselves for comparison and verification, paying more attention to the renewal and transformation of related texts during the Ming Dynasty, we can clarify the sources more clearly. By examining the differences in the phonetic annotations accompanying the texts, we can broadly determine which foundational text of Zhu’s “Zhuan” they used, thereby distinguishing between the twenty-volume and eight-volume systems; by comparing the subtle differences in how they trimmed the original work, we can further clarify the relationships among the various books.

Among the twenty-volume system, the earliest known work is the “Five Classics Marginal Annotations” organized and published by Zhu Hongmo during his governorship in Jiangxi in the sixteenth year of the Wanli era (1588). This book includes prefaces by Li Shu, inscriptions by Yang Shiqi, and notes by Ma Li, and the phonetic annotations for the “Shijing” section are generally derived from the twenty-volume edition, with only a small number of similarities with the eight-volume edition. The Ming edition of the Fan Jia version held by the National Palace Museum, while lacking the prefaces of Li Shu and others, has the same content as the Zhu edition, indicating a possible relationship between the original edition and the reprint. There is also a seventeen-volume “Five Classics Marginal Annotations” (referred to as the “Tai Tu Ben”) held by the Taiwan Institute of Chinese Studies, which contains the writings of Li Shu, Yang Shiqi, and Ma Li at the beginning of the “Yijing” section, and the phonetic annotations for the “Shijing” section are the same as those of the Zhu edition, although the annotations have been slightly deleted. In conclusion, the above three books have similar annotations and prefaces, especially the phonetic annotations mostly using the fanqie method, indicating closer proximity to the twenty-volume edition.

In the eight-volume system, the phonetic annotations mostly use the direct phonetic method, evidently absorbing the phonetic achievements of the eight-volume edition of Zhu’s “Zhuan” published during the Ming. The earliest existing work in this system was published by Zheng Rubi during his governorship in Shandong in the twenty-third year of the Wanli era (1595), which had a significant impact. The editions published by Xu Longfeng of Hangzhou, Jin Chang’s Yongwan Hall, and Jin Chang’s Lu Zouyuezi also retain the original text of Zheng’s book “Annotated Five Classics Marginal Annotations”. The edition published by Chen Renxi in the second year of the Chongzhen era (1629) is almost identical to the two editions from Jin Chang’s Shulin, except that its title is “Shijing Marginal Annotations” rather than “Marginal Annotations”. The edition published by Chen Da Ke mentions that its reprinted base text was brought from Shandong by Zhou Yingzhi, who had been responsible for the proofreading of Zheng’s edition, and a comparison of the content reveals that this edition also likely originated from Zheng’s edition. In addition to the editions revolving around Zheng’s published text, there are also works such as Wang Anshun’s edition published in the first year of the Tianqi era (1621), which, after Wang’s deletions, has annotations that are more concise than Zheng’s edition; and the “Five Classics Marginal Annotations” published by the Bibliothèque nationale de France, which is compiled with the “Zhongjing” and “Xiaojing”, with a title indicating that it was edited by Gao Chang’s deletion, and its annotations for the “Shijing” section differ significantly from those of the aforementioned editions.

Based on the above, the relationships among the various texts are illustrated in Figure 1:

Figure 1 The Relationship Diagram of Existing Marginal Annotation Literature Derived from Zhu’s “Zhuan” in the Ming Dynasty

Unlike the general “Shijing” annotated versions that attach annotations after the canonical texts, marginal annotation texts place the phonetic annotations directly beside the canonical text in a smaller font, characterized by simplification, narrow marginal notes, and direct explanation of the texts. For instance, in the first chapter of “Guan Ju”, Zhu’s “Zhuan” explains “zhou” as “a place that can be inhabited in the water”, while the marginal annotation text simply annotates “water land” beside the character “zhou” (see Figure 2), reflecting a similar method of reduction. The prefaces and inscriptions of the various published texts have already stated that this transformation is intended to facilitate beginners’ understanding and recitation: the simplification of annotations aims to avoid the redundancy of ancient annotated texts, achieving clarity and conciseness; the marginal annotation format allows for a clear understanding of key content, connecting the canonical text and facilitating recitation and review. It is noteworthy that the “Shijing Marginal Annotations” are often seen as a “path into the doctrine” or “guide to classical studies” in teaching contexts. With the popularization of classical education and the expansion of the reading market, a large number of unofficial editions also emerged, indicating a clear trend of commercialization.

Figure 2 The Ming Tianqi Year Edition of “Shijing Marginal Annotations” Held by Harvard Yenching Library

Selected Version: Balancing Examination and Literary Quality

The so-called “selected version” refers to texts that not only abridge Zhu’s “Zhuan” annotations but also filter and select chapters and verses according to certain standards, similar to selected editions in anthologies. Currently, there are about eight existing selected versions of Zhu’s “Zhuan” from the Ming Dynasty, and while some works have additional annotations, their unique aspect compared to other texts lies in the “selection”. The phenomenon of selecting poems is closely related to the popularization of the “Shijing” in the Ming Dynasty. With the growth of the literate population, the number of candidates for examinations increased dramatically in the mid to late Ming, and the difficulty of examinations continued to rise, making the study of the “Shijing” a more utilitarian activity, as the “Shijing” fell from the status of a sacred classic to that of a means to gain fame and wealth. Furthermore, the phrase “all six classics are literature” was formally proposed by Ming scholars, and the idea that the “Shijing” and later poetry and prose were both considered “literature” was widely practiced in the literary activities of Ming scholars. Various poetic discussions on the literary quality of the “Shijing” are abundant, with some holding critical opinions, such as Wang Shizhen, who stated, “Poems cannot be without flaws, even the ‘Three Hundred Poems’ have them”, and pointed out that the syntax of the “Shijing” is often too clumsy, direct, abrupt, repetitive, vulgar, and coarse; late Ming scholars like Zhong Xing evaluated the text of the “Shijing” using literary critique, while Qing scholars viewed it as interpreting the “Shijing” through poetic methods, denouncing it as turning a sacred text into trivial works; others, such as Zhang Guoxi, Liu Yixiang, and Huang Tinghu, constructed a more complete poetic history by directly selecting chapters from the “Shijing” into literary anthologies, leading to a trend of discussing the “Shijing” in literary terms. In this context, the “Shijing” began to shed its sacred halo and move towards literary and popularization, while Zhu’s “Zhuan”, as a popular commentary, became the primary target of Ming scholars’ selections.

All existing selected versions are based on Zhu’s “Zhuan”, with their textual appearance not significantly different from the original book, only differing in the selected poems and retained annotations. The selection of poems in these books can be seen in Table 2:

From Table 2, it can be seen that the selected versions emphasize the “Ya” and “Song” sections while downplaying the “Guofeng” section, with the two “Ya” sections particularly emphasizing the “Da Ya”. Further statistics on the specific poems selected reveal that the books collectively selected 79 poems, with a concentrated distribution: the “Ya” and “Song” sections, with 52 poems, become the absolute majority, while the two “Nan” and “Bin Feng” sections rank first in the “Guofeng” with 14 poems each; the ten poems not selected by the books all belong to the “Guofeng” section, including: “Qiu Zhong You Ma”, “Duo Xi”, “Qian Chang”, “Feng”, “Dong Men Zhi Shan”, “Zhen Wei”, “Zai Qu”, “Gao Qiu”, “Dong Men Zhi Yang”, and “Fang You Que Chao”, among which eight are classified by Zhu as “indecent poems”, and the remaining two, “Zai Qu” and “Gao Qiu”, are excluded due to being satirical poems or unclear meanings. The poems selected by all the books indicate what is considered the most important and necessary for study in the “Shijing” by Ming scholars.

Zhu’s “Zhuan” reassigns moral significance and value judgments to the texts of the “Shijing”, broadly categorized into two types: positive and negative meanings. The former may praise sage kings and virtuous ministers, commend the purity of folk customs, or extol moral cultivation, all pertaining to national governance and auspicious speech; the latter may involve indecent love poems or poems lamenting chaos, often confined to personal emotions. Viewed from this perspective, the selected poems in each selected version are concentrated in the “Ya”, “Song”, “Bin Feng”, and the two “Nan” sections, primarily representing the poems with “positive meanings” in Zhu’s “Zhuan”, and this tendency of selection is closely related to the imperial examination system of the Ming Dynasty. Hou Meizhen compiled the examination questions from the “Shijing” for the 1577 provincial examination and sorted out the common and rare poems used in the questions, concluding that the examination favored poems that were auspicious and commendatory, which was a cautious consideration by the examiners due to political risks and the moral influence of governance. The selection of poems in these selected versions aligns closely with the patterns summarized by Hou. Particularly, the ten poems not selected by any version are all listed in Hou’s compilation of “poems from the ‘Guofeng’ section that were never used in the provincial or county examinations”, indicating that as preparatory books for a wide range of students, the primary principle for selecting poems in Zhu’s “Zhuan” was the official examination preferences.

On the other hand, the literary quality of the poems also needs to be considered as an important factor. The emergence of the creative principle of “using classical prose as contemporary literature” during the Ming Zheng and Jiajing periods required that the first round of eight-legged essays skillfully incorporate classical language and historical events to achieve a seamless blend of classics and history. This drove scholars to seek phrases from classical texts and literature, trimming and refining classical sentences and historical anecdotes. The writing of the second and third rounds of essays has always emphasized referencing classics and drawing from various sources to comprehensively showcase the breadth of knowledge of the examinees. Scholars, in order to shape their image as “cultured individuals”, often rely on relevant classics or anthologies to achieve quick success. As preparatory books for the market, the selected versions must consider both the literary and classical qualities of the selected poems to meet the writing needs of scholars. For example, Wang Wenhui viewed classical texts as a resource library for imperial examination essays, stating, “If students in this age do not understand the Five Classics to meet the requirements of the authorities, they are seeking materials from the forests and rivers.” He also pointed out that Yu’s “Shijing Zhuan Xuan” selected the more incisive poems and annotated them. Wang Guobin explicitly stated that his book was designed to serve the writing of examination essays, “collecting the essence and beauty, as long as it benefits the essays of examinees, I will use it as a reference.” He emphasized that this book was not compiled for the purpose of being “special and refined” but rather for being “broad and inclusive”. As for Wang Gantang’s “Newly Published Three Rounds of Preparation for the ‘Shijing'”, the title itself indicates that its potential readers are students preparing for the third round of examinations. Feng Tingzhang’s “Shijing Huizuan” expands its service range from writing examination essays to writing general articles, stating, “Beginners can read through it once; it serves as a reference for gathering and searching, and even a few words can be used for reference among writers.” Thus, as a resource library for writing, the aforementioned standards of “refined” and “beautiful” for selecting poems refer to the literary qualities of the verses, requiring that the language of the poems be elegant, authentic, or beautiful to assist in making the essays stand out. This is another standard in addition to the moral and theoretical principles for selecting poems.

A close examination of the rarely used poems in examinations that were favored by selectors can provide a more intuitive view of this literary quality consideration in selection. Combining Hou’s research, it can be statistically determined that there are eleven poems that were never used in the provincial or county examinations but were selected by all the selected versions: “Ru Fen”, “Jian Xi”, “Kao Pan”, “Heng Men”, “Fei Feng”, “Po Fu”, “Xiao Bian”, “Xiang Bo”, “Liao E”, “Che Xie”, and “Dang”. An investigation reveals that most of these poems are considered to have strong literary qualities, as, except for “Ru Fen” and “Po Fu”, the rest have been selected by one or more of the Ming anthologies that include the “Shijing”. For instance, the verses from “Ru Fen” and “Jian Xi” have been repeatedly cited and praised by Wang Shizhen as exemplars of poetry. Although these poems were excluded from the examination system due to their lack of moral content or emotional grievances, they were recognized and selected by selectors for their artistic, grammatical, rhetorical, or emotional expressions. The frequently selected lines such as “The mountains have hazel, the marshes have ling. Who is thinking? The beautiful person from the West. That beautiful person, oh, that person from the West”, “Alas, parents, labor to give birth to me”, and “High mountains are looked up to, and the path of virtue is walked” are indeed enduring lines in the history of poetry and serve as nourishment for students’ writing. It can be seen that although the imperial examination served as a “guiding stick” defining the broad range of poem selections, the specific selection of poems was also influenced by the teaching stage and the personal preferences of the selectors, with literary quality being an important standard that cannot be ignored. Of course, aside from excluding rarely used poems and those with mediocre literary qualities, repetitive phrases and similar expressions were also often omitted, which will not be detailed here.

In the practice of imperial examinations during the Ming Dynasty, Zhu’s “Zhuan”, due to its inherent limitations in the standards and interpretative systems of Neo-Confucianism, was subject to selection. In the trend of valuing literature, Zhu’s “Zhuan” as a commentary on classical texts exhibited a tendency towards literary selection. Some selected versions dismantled the original work, eager to seek phrases, thus exhibiting characteristics of anthologies, which diverged significantly from the original form of Zhu’s “Zhuan”. However, these selections benefited the literary education and further promoted the literary canonization of the poems and verses of the “Shijing”.

Annotated Version: Expanding and Breaking Through Zhu’s Poetics

The generation of bibliographic annotations inherently features the collection and compilation of entries, and the annotated version refers to derivative works that supplement Zhu’s “Zhuan” annotations by collecting or self-composing entries. Although some annotated versions also make slight reductions to Zhu’s “Zhuan”, the supplementary content is more significant and can reflect the academic trends of the time. The annotated versions represented by “Poetries and Translations” formed a system in the Ming Dynasty, while other annotated versions that diverged from the official academic system were more vibrant; they either supplemented and corrected, or discussed dialectically, collectively contributing to the internal expansion and turning of Zhu’s poetics, and promoting the eventual formation of a rich and mixed system of poetry studies.

(1) The Series of “Poetries and Translations”

As a concentrated embodiment of official ideology and the authority of classical studies, the “Complete Principles of the Four Books and Five Classics” has long served as the main ideological framework governing Ming academic and educational practices. The “Complete Poetries and Translations” (hereinafter referred to as “Complete Works”) is an important component of this official cultural project and reflects the academic orientation that fully leans towards the Cheng-Zhu Neo-Confucian system. Its preface explicitly states, “It is primarily based on Zhu Xi’s ‘Collected Translations'” while also encompassing various opinions, ultimately developing into a major stream in the system of annotated versions of Zhu’s “Zhuan” in the Ming Dynasty. The direct foundational text of the “Complete Works” is Liu Jin’s “Poetries and Translations”, which strictly adheres to Zhu’s “Zhuan” and uses the twenty-volume edition as its blueprint, making the “Complete Works” a derivative work of Zhu’s “Zhuan”. Taking the Yongle Neifu edition of the “Complete Works” as an example, the canonical texts are inscribed in large characters, while Zhu’s “Zhuan” is inscribed in slightly smaller characters and set one line lower, with a dual small character format used for compiling various opinions below Zhu’s annotations, forming a clear three-level structure of classics, annotations, and commentaries, showing a strong tendency towards annotations rather than annotations of the classics. Additionally, texts such as the “Complete Poetries and Translations Diagram” and “Discussions on Poetry Sequences” are attached to enrich the content of Zhu’s original work. According to Yang Jinlong’s statistics, this work includes 4,830 entries of sayings from 98 earlier scholars (including Zhu Xi) and 404 annotations from 60 texts, as well as 718 entries of supplementary or corrected meanings of words, phonetics, and place names. Scholars from the Song and Yuan dynasties constitute the absolute majority in the citation list, and most of the texts cited, such as “Poetries and Translations”, “Translations of Zhu’s Poems”, and “Explanations of the ‘Shijing'”, are works that innovate on Zhu’s “Zhuan”. It can be seen that the “Complete Works”, through political power, promotes Zhu’s “Zhuan”, further consolidating its official academic status, greatly expanding its textual content, and for the first time achieving a comprehensive integration of Zhu’s poetic knowledge system since the Song and Yuan dynasties.

The “Complete Works” series was completed in the thirteenth year of Yongle (1415) and was ordered to be published in academic temples two years later. As a comprehensive work that wings Zhu’s “Zhuan”, it constructed the lineage of Zhu’s poetic studies, but it also shackled the further elaboration of Zhu’s “Zhuan”. In the early Ming, there were still academic works dedicated to Zhu’s “Zhuan”, such as “Interpretation of Poetry”, but such books became rare after the issuance of the “Complete Works”, replaced by an endless stream of reprinted or modified versions of the “Complete Works” from both official and private sectors, indicating that it formally entered a stage of low-quality replication. The “Complete Works” had at least 25 versions during the Ming Dynasty, among which various unofficial editions are quite distinctive. For instance, the edition published by the Luo family in Luling in the first year of the Chenghua era (1465) is one of the earliest existing private editions, whose quality of printing is not high, with the main change being that the names of the cited scholars are circled in parentheses for greater visibility. The reprinted edition by the Shouge Pavilion during the Chongzhen era not only circles the names and phonetic annotations in boxes but also has two fewer lines per half leaf and one fewer character per line compared to the Neifu edition, making it more spacious and clear. Additionally, the “Yetai History Supplement to the Ancient and Modern Poetry Classics” published by the Yushi family during the Wanli era was popular in the late Ming, and this book, attributed to prominent contemporary figures such as Ye Xiangao and Zhang Yicheng, differs from the Neifu edition in terms of title, number of volumes, and line format, but its content is basically consistent. However, Yushi also made many convenient improvements for reading, such as enlarging the font size, circling the names of scholars in boxes, and changing the phonetic annotations below the canonical texts to marginal annotations. It is noteworthy that this book has a blank margin for comments at the top, and some researchers have pointed out that this may be due to the deletion or lack of implementation of collected comments, suggesting that Yushi may have intended to further expand the “Complete Works”.

If the above editions involve only partial adjustments in the reprinting and modification of the “Complete Works”, then Zhang Pu’s “Complete Annotated Poetries” compiled in the late Ming represents a genuine breakthrough in ideological content. Although Zhang aimed to clarify Zhu’s poetic studies, his method involved incorporating ancient annotations from the Han and Tang dynasties: “Now, I list the ‘Complete Works’ alongside, allowing scholars to first observe the ‘Preface’ and then the ‘Discussions’, and to first view the ‘Zhuan’, ‘Jian’, and ‘Shu’ of the original poems, followed by ‘Collected Translations’ and the sayings of various scholars, thus presenting the similarities and differences between ancient and modern, Han and Song.” The entire book adds other content within the basic structure of the abridged version of the “Complete Works”, such as the preface being largely abridged from the “Complete Works”, but also including the “Preface to the Mao Poems” by Kong Yingda and the “Preface to the Poetry Spectrum” by Zheng Xuan. The main text of the poetry interpretation first excerpts the “Preface to the Mao Poems”, followed by excerpts from the text of the “Complete Works”. The aforementioned annotated versions either supplement Zhu’s “Zhuan” with entries from the Song studies or only make formal adjustments without substantial breakthroughs, while Zhang’s work significantly incorporates the ancient poetry discourse, reflecting a clear academic orientation that draws from both Han and Song.

(2) Other Annotated Versions

The textual supplements or modifications within the “Complete Works” system mostly belong to the internal expansion and integration of Song studies of the “Shijing”. Other works that diverged from the official academic system continuously broke through the boundaries of Zhu studies, peaking in the late Ming. These books are based on Zhu’s original work or abridged versions, broadly collecting interpretations of poetry from various dynasties, adding a considerable number of new annotated entries, with representative works as follows:

1. Chen Shen’s “Interpretation of the Mao Poems”: adds “Zigong’s Poetries” and “Zixia’s Poetry Preface” at the beginning of the chapters.

2. Ling Mengchu’s “Poetry Reversal”: extensively cites Xu Guangqi’s “Six Essays on the Mao Poems”, Lu Huaxi’s “Poetry Communication”, Wei Huanchu’s “Paths of the Shijing”, Shen Shouzheng’s “Understanding the Shijing”, Zhong Xing’s “Poetry Critique”, Tang Ruyue’s “Subtle Sayings on the Mao Poems”, and Xu Changji’s “Wings of the Mao Poems”, interspersed with his own opinions.

3. Gu Menglin’s “Summary of the Shijing”: adds the “Mao Poems”, “Zheng’s Commentary”, Lu Deming’s “Explanations of Words”, Confucius’ “Commentaries”, Ouyang Xiu’s “Original Meaning of the Poems”, Su Zhe’s “Collected Translations of the Poems”, Lu Zuqian’s “Notes on the Poetry Academy”, Zhu Xi’s “Sayings”, Yan Can’s “Poetry Collection”, Zhu Gongqian’s “Annotations and Meanings of the Shijing”, Hu Guang’s “Complete Poetries and Translations”, Huang Zuo’s “General Explanation of the Shijing”, Shen Wankun’s “Examination of the Shijing”, Shen Shouzheng’s “Understanding the Shijing”, Xu Guangqi’s “Six Essays on the Mao Poems”, and He Kai’s “Ancient Meanings of the Shijing”, among others, along with his own annotations.

4. Zhu Ruzhun’s “Zhu’s Instruction on Poetry”: adds references to the “Small Preface”, “Mao Poems”, “Erya”, “Explanations of Names”, Zheng’s “Commentaries”, Lu Deming’s “Explanations of Words”, Confucius’ “Commentaries”, Ouyang Xiu’s “Original Meaning of the Poems”, Su Zhe’s “Collected Translations of the Poems”, Lu Zuqian’s “Notes on the Poetry Academy”, Zhu Xi’s “Sayings”, Yan Can’s “Poetry Collection”, Wang Yinglin’s “Poetry Records”, Zhu Gongqian’s “Annotations and Meanings of the Shijing”, Hu Guang’s “Complete Poetries and Translations”, Huang Zuo’s “General Explanation of the Shijing”, Feng Fang’s “Learning of the Lu Poems”, and Feng Fuke’s “Annotations of the Six Families of Poetry”, along with his own annotations. The three books he cites, “Fawei”, “Li Ce”, and “Shisuo”, are no longer extant, making it difficult to attribute authorship.

In addition, there are two special types of annotated versions. One is the layered annotated type, which, compared to the above works, has more than one compiler and spans different eras, with the texts featuring accumulative characteristics. For example, the work “Annotations and Meanings of the Shijing” by the Yuan scholar Zhu Gongqian, completed in the seventh year of the Zhizheng era (1347), was further supplemented by Ming scholar Wang Feng, who extensively compiled various interpretations to enrich Zhu’s “Annotations and Meanings”, and later, Wang’s disciple He Ying further developed the supplementary work, completing the “Annotations and Meanings” in the ninth year of the Zhengtong era (1444). Thus, the text ultimately formed a compilation of the results of three scholars’ annotations. Zhu Gongqian added explanatory texts after Zhu’s annotations, while Wang and He added a large number of entries, aiming to fully elaborate on Zhu’s “Zhuan”. The second type is a higher original evaluation work, such as Zhong Xing’s annotated version of the “Shijing”, which was widely circulated in the late Ming; Zhong claims that this book “generally adheres to the annotations of the Kao Pavilion, slightly guiding the stagnation, awakening the dullness, supplementing the omissions, simplifying the complexities, deepening the surface, and streamlining the convoluted”, indicating a critical stance towards Zhu’s “Zhuan”. The existing collection of the Qitang edition is based on the simplified Zhu’s “Zhuan” while adding a large number of Zhong’s evaluation entries, yet many entries have exceeded Zhu’s ideological framework and exhibit a strong literary color. Zhong’s evaluation style is casual and free, advocating a spirit of questioning rather than being rigidly bound to Zhu’s “Zhuan”, often using Zhu’s sayings as a basis for dialogue with Zhu’s “Zhuan”, representing a special type of annotated version.

Although these works emphasize Zhu’s official orthodox status, they no longer strictly adhere to Zhu’s “Zhuan”, and the content of the texts is continuously expanding, as seen in Zhu Ruzhun’s work, which cites over thirty other works and forms a comprehensive text of 36 volumes, far exceeding Zhu’s original work. The statistics from the cited texts indicate that compared to the mainstream works of the early Ming, the selection range and inclusion characteristics of the late Ming annotated versions have changed significantly:

1. From quoting previous texts to incorporating new works by contemporary scholars. The interpretations and discussions of poetry by scholars of this dynasty have begun to replace the old theories of earlier scholars and occupy the mainstream, with the selection of annotations reflecting this shift in the era, with the works of Huang Zuo, Xu Guangqi, and He Kai being the most favored, as seen in Ling Mengchu’s “Poetry Reversal”, which cites all seven books by Ming scholars.

2. From Zhu studies to other poetry study systems. The derivation of annotated versions drawing on Han and Tang poetry knowledge and emphasizing the examination of names and objects is not surprising during the late Ming, a time characterized by a resurgence of Han studies. Moreover, the fabricated “Lu Poetry” series of works were also widely cited, representing contemporary elements incorporated into Zhu’s “Zhuan” textual system, such as “Interpretation of the Mao Poems” extensively quoting from “Zigong’s Poetries”, and “Zhu’s Instruction on Poetry” referencing “Lu Poetry Studies” and “Discussions on Poetry”.

3. From focusing on academic works to also emphasizing examination texts. The aforementioned works are mostly compiled to serve the imperial examination education, hence their citations include not only more authoritative academic texts but also popular examination preparation books, such as the frequently cited “Paths of the Shijing”, “Understanding the Shijing”, and “Understanding the Shijing” being types of examination lectures.

4. From emphasizing classical studies to also considering literature. The works of Huang Zuo, Zhong Xing, Xu Guangqi, and others have historically been viewed as models for Ming scholars interpreting the “Shijing” in literary terms, with their poetry works often containing later poetry lines, word analyses, and emotional analyses. The concentrated citations of these works in the annotated versions such as “Poetry Reversal” and “Zhu’s Instruction on Poetry” reflect their interest in literary qualities.

The changes in Zhu’s “Zhuan” during the Ming Dynasty and the evolution of its annotations certainly reflect the trends of the time, with the deletion and addition of content indicating the transformation of Zhu’s poetics and the new cultural dynamics of the Ming Dynasty. On one hand, the deletions in the abridged versions of the Ming can be summarized into three main types: first, the deletion of cumbersome word meanings, especially those with textual criticism; second, the deletion of extended references, usually historical citations at the end of the chapters; and third, the deletion of ambiguous or uncertain statements, often Zhu’s academic conjectures or unverified speculations. Similar annotations generally would not be retained. Regarding the deletion of chapters and verses, it relates to repetitive chapters, examination preferences, and literary qualities. It can be seen that after a series of deletions, Zhu’s “Zhuan” in the Ming has shown a tendency towards de-academicization and simplification, aiming to lower the difficulty of understanding and facilitate reading and examination preparation, making learning more targeted.

On the other hand, the additions in the annotated versions of the Ming Dynasty primarily include content related to Han and Tang poetry studies, pseudo-Lu poetry studies, imperial examination education, and literary qualities within the framework of the Song studies of Zhu’s “Zhuan”. From the internal development rules of classical studies, the continuous opening of Zhu’s poetic system reflects a departure from the long-standing dominance of Cheng-Zhu Neo-Confucianism. Especially the Han studies of the “Shijing”, which served as a persistent undercurrent, and the pseudo-Lu poetry studies that emerged in the mid-Ming with a somewhat “heretical” character, ultimately converged into the derivative works of Zhu’s “Zhuan” in the late Ming, completing the integration and flow of several poetry study systems. However, it is worth noting that except for a few annotated versions, the academic nature of other works is generally not strong, mostly consisting of basic compilations of quotes and materials, lacking further textual critique or theoretical elaboration. This is because they were originally compiled for examination purposes, aiming to gather various interpretations for students to reference and collect, and profound academic discernment and abstract theoretical discourse are not beneficial for daily learning, thus their academic levels need not be overly criticized. Existing research indicates that late Ming candidates had diverse knowledge needs seeking novelty and diversity, often breaking through the boundaries of Cheng-Zhu and even incorporating Buddhist and Daoist teachings, making it not uncommon to draw on annotations outside Zhu’s “Zhuan” as new writing resources. The entries related to word meanings, chapter verse analyses, and guidance on eight-legged essay writing, as well as the extensive compilation of examination lectures and reference materials in the annotated versions, directly indicate their utility for examination preparation. In summary, we can discover the characteristics of Zhu’s “Zhuan” in the annotated versions, including diversification of meanings, utility for examination purposes, and the textualization of interpretations.

Furthermore, the publishing industry played an indispensable role in the flow of Zhu’s “Zhuan” literature. The commercial publishing that gradually developed in the Song Dynasty flourished in the Ming Dynasty, especially in the late Ming, where the book publishing field was exceptionally active. Supported by new technologies, publishers produced various teaching materials for the “Shijing” aimed at the examination market through a series of compilation methods and marketing strategies. Zhu’s “Zhuan”, as a malleable public compilation material, was extensively reprinted, revised, and expanded upon by private presses to meet different reading needs, and further collaged and transformed based on its secondary and tertiary derivative literature, continuously producing new works, such as its derivative works “Complete Poetries and Translations”, “Understanding the Shijing”, and “Summary of the Shijing”, which have become popular new sources of materials in the market. This has made the appearance of Zhu’s derivative literature more complex and continually extended the derivation chain. The practical adaptations of Zhu’s “Zhuan” by bookshops are not only reflected in the promotion and dissemination of new interpretative formats such as marginal annotations but also in their efforts to accommodate readers by adjusting font sizes and formats, such as the use of multi-column layouts that encompass a richer body of poetry knowledge, greatly benefiting students’ examination preparations. Some derivative works even appeared in exquisite styles such as Zhu’s annotated versions, multi-colored prints, and portable editions, significantly enriching the book forms of Zhu’s “Zhuan”. However, the disorderly competition and rampant appropriation in the late Ming publishing industry led to a decline in the market quality and increasing homogeneity of Zhu’s derivative works, which is also an important reason why they have been criticized by later generations.

The aforementioned characteristics of the numerous derivative works of Zhu’s “Zhuan” point to the traits of popularization and educational application of classical studies in the Ming Dynasty. The purpose of deletion is to facilitate beginners, while the purpose of addition is to expand knowledge content, and the transformation of forms aims to make reading more convenient, all of which serve the broad class of poetry learners under the imperial examination system. It can be seen that through a series of practical measures, the Ming successfully created a complete system of poetry studies that encompasses both content and form, from lower to higher levels, with these books becoming the main texts for studying the “Shijing” since the Ming and Qing Dynasties, and Zhu’s “Zhuan” also becoming the most solid foundation for poetry studies in the Ming Dynasty. It is not an exaggeration to define the Ming Dynasty as the “Zhu era” from the perspective of imperial examination education.

However, the Ming Dynasty was not an era known for creating poetry studies, but rather a time when poetry studies were widely learned. The study of the “Shijing” during this period exhibited an overall trend of transitioning from profound learning to practical teaching, from the sacred to the mundane. Zhu’s “Zhuan” became a tool for examination and acquisition, and its academic depth and expansion inevitably declined. Historically, the Southern Song was the period when Zhu’s poetics took shape, and Zhu’s “Zhuan” emerged in an academic atmosphere of questioning and transformation, standing out among the many scholarly works of the Song Dynasty through repeated debates and integrations with various schools, aided by his disciples and followers; the Yuan Dynasty was a period of diverse development for Zhu’s “Zhuan”: authors such as Hu Yigui, Liu Jin, and Zhu Gongqian further continued his academic thought, confirming its official academic status during the Zhiyou era, and the derivative literature serving the imperial examination began to appear in the later period; transitioning from the Yuan, Zhu’s poetics in the Ming Dynasty became gradually rigid and stagnant due to the further institutionalization and popularization of Cheng-Zhu thought, with its meanings becoming fragmented due to the arbitrary alterations of derivative works. Yet, this period of Zhu’s philosophical brilliance receding and the loss of intellectual vitality coincided with its most widespread reading and usage. It can be seen that Zhu’s poetics transitioned from a creative ideological system to being fully accepted by the authorities, eventually promoted through political power and basic education, leading to its widespread popularization in the Ming Dynasty and gradually infiltrating into the lower and middle levels of the knowledge market.

The transformation of Zhu’s “Zhuan” from an elite poetry study work to a widely circulated popular study text reflects the different social and cultural characteristics of the Song and Ming Dynasties: the Song Dynasty was an era of creation and initiation, while the Ming Dynasty was an era of learning and usage. This inspires us to consider the internal logic of modern poetry studies from the long-term perspective of the “continuity of Song and Ming”, thereby expanding the horizons and boundaries of related research. The model of “Tang-Song Transformation” has revealed the differences and divisions between Han-Tang and Song classical studies, while the “continuity of Song and Ming” focuses more on the relationship between elitism and populism within the same academic system, examining the evolution process from avant-garde academic insights to general poetry knowledge. This means that we should not only research how the “creative” Song Dynasty invented and generated but also pay attention to how the “common sense” Ming Dynasty inherited and transformed. Specifically, Zhu’s unique divisions of chapters and verses, summaries of poetic stems, and “Fu Bi Xing” indicators, have already been established and popularized as common knowledge in the derivative literature of the late Ming. His theories, such as the “indecent poetry theory”, which were quite distinctive and controversial at the time, were responded to in a compromising manner in the Ming’s examination practices by avoiding or downplaying them. Moreover, his understanding of the “Guofeng” as “street ballads” has already been internalized into the literary knowledge of Ming scholars without their awareness. Besides Zhu’s “Zhuan”, other Song poetry works also share similar experiences, such as the renowned poetry researcher Wang Yinglin from the late Song Dynasty. In the late Ming, the bookseller Hu Wenhui extracted the “Yuhai” volume three-eight “Art Literature: Poetry” section and renamed it “Yuhai Records of Poetry”, and extracted the “Kunkexiwen” volume three “Poetry” section and renamed it “Kunkexi Poetry”, compiling them together with Wang’s “Three Families Poetry” research works “Poetry Examination” and “Geography of Poetry” into “Guzhi Congshu”, which was later widely circulated as a reference book for studying the “Shijing”. Such instances, from lofty academic ideals to mundane realities, from the refined and upright models of classical texts to the accessible and simplified study materials, the dissemination and derivation processes of related works and the historical contexts of different eras, including systems and education, all require further organization and elaboration.

This article was published in the journal “Literature” in the fourth issue of 2024. To save space, footnotes have been omitted. For citation, please refer to the original text.

Zhou Rong: The Derivation and Academic Significance of Zhu Xi’s “Shiji Zhuan” in the Ming Dynasty

Leave a Comment Cancel reply