Everyone knows that "Lanting Preface", known as "the best running script in the world", was written by Wang Xizhi, a great calligrapher of the Eastern Jin Dynasty. However, in 1965, Guo Moruo made an ground-breaking statement: "Lanting Preface" was not written by Wang Xizhi! As soon as this statement came out, the academic community was shocked. How could Guo Moruo, a leading historian, say this? It turned out that everything was because of two documents unearthed in Nanjing. Block epitaph.
As the ancient capital of the Six Dynasties, Nanjing has many family cemeteries of aristocratic families of the Six Dynasties dotted around the city suburbs. The cemeteries of the two major families of the "Wang Xie" in the "Old Wang Xie Hall Qian Yan" are among them. "Wang" refers to Wang Xizhi's family, and "Xie" refers to the family of Xie An, the prime minister of the Eastern Jin Dynasty.
On January 19, 1965, the "Epitaph of Wang Xingzhi and his Couple" was unearthed in Rentai Mountain, Yanziji, Nanjing. According to expert research, Wang Xingzhi is Wang Xizhi's cousin, three years younger than Wang Xizhi, and the two had sex together. "The epitaph of Wang Xingzhi and his wife" is engraved on both sides. One side is the epitaph of Wang Xingzhi. The content is: "The king has tabooed Xingzhi, and the words are crude. Langye Linyi is in Nanrenli..." The other side is the epitaph of Wang Xingzhi's wife, and the content is: "Mingfu Xihe Jiexiu's capital town, Jiqianli, was named Hezhi of the Song family, with the courtesy name Qin Ying, in the 35th year of the Spring and Autumn Period..." It can be seen from the epitaph that Wang Xingzhi died in 341 AD. Judging from the tone of the article, the epitaph may have been written by Wang Xingzhi's brother. The epitaph contains 13 lines, with 10 characters in each line. The characters are square in shape, tight in structure, and the strokes are straight. It is called "square-style official script" by experts. His calligraphy style is sharp and angular, like a knife cutting an axe, and has the distinctive characteristics of being childish and heavy.
On September 10, 1964, "Xie Kun's Epitaph" was unearthed from a ruined tomb in Qijiashan outside Zhonghuamen, Nanjing. According to expert research, Xie Kun was Xie An's uncle and a famous scholar in the early Eastern Jin Dynasty. His epitaph was erected in November 323 AD. The epitaph is 60 cm long, 16.5 cm wide and 11 cm thick. The texture is granite. The Zhiwen has 4 lines, each line has 17 words, and the last line is one less word, totaling 67 words. Unfortunately, when the epitaph was unearthed, a few words were removed by bulldozers. Experts added the following based on the general idea: "The internal history of Yuzhang, the former Jin Dynasty, the Yangxia of Chen Guo, the young brother of Xie Kun, died on November 28th in the first year of Taining... "The font of "Xie Kun's Epitaph" is flat and square, the strokes are stretched and natural, and the closing strokes of the strokes and strokes are turned upward. The carving is exquisite and the writing is vigorous. The style of writing retains the simple atmosphere of Han Dynasty official script.
The two epitaphs of the Wang Xie family were unearthed one after another, which quickly attracted Guo Moruo's attention. He repeatedly compared the two epitaphs with Wang Xizhi's "Lanting Preface", combined with his many years of research experience, and quickly wrote the article "From the Unearth of Wang Xie's Epitaph to the Authenticity of the (Lanting Preface)". The article was published in Cultural Relics magazine and subsequently serialized in Guangming Daily. In this treatise of more than 20,000 words, Guo Moruo made a bold conclusion: "Lanting Preface", known as "the best running script in the world", was not written by Wang Xizhi, but by Wang Xizhi's seventh-generation grandson - Zhiyong. The monk forged it!
As soon as this theory came out, it immediately caused a shock in the academic world. However, due to Guo Moruo's status in the field of history, although many experts disagree with Guo Moruo's judgment, they lack the courage to publicly write articles to argue with Guo Moruo. Only Gao Ershi, a librarian of the Jiangsu Provincial Museum of Literature and History, wrote an article "A Refutation of the Authenticity of (Lanting Preface)". The article cited a large number of documents and legal texts, and pointedly pointed out: "Lanting Preface" was written by Wang Xizhi and is irreplaceable. case.
Shi Shi, a sophomore in high school, is from Dongtai, Jiangsu Province. He is good at cursive calligraphy, and his calligraphy is wild and unrestrained, and has a unique style of his own. The upright sophomore Shi Shi wrote an article criticizing Guo Moruo's arguments and sent it to Guangming Daily. Unexpectedly, the manuscript was returned. So in the second year of high school, he asked his teacher Zhang Shizhao to forward the manuscript to Mao Zedong in order to get fair treatment.
Mao Zedong loved "Lanting Preface" throughout his life and often copied it. He also felt that the "Lanting Preface" was not the authentic work of Wang Xizhi, so he was very concerned about the authenticity of "Lanting Preface". Two days later, Mao Zedong wrote back to Zhang Shizhao, saying that he hoped to start a debate on the authenticity of "Lanting Preface". At the same time, Mao Zedong also wrote a letter to Guo Moruo, proposing: "A lawsuit involving pen and ink is better than nothing."
After Guo Moruo received Mao Zedong's letter, he made an appointment with the editor-in-chief of Guangming Daily on the same day. It is recommended to organize a discussion in a newspaper. Soon, "A Refutation of the Authenticity of (Lanting Preface)" by Shi Shi, a sophomore in high school, was published in the "Lanting Debate" column of "Guangming Daily" on July 23, 1965.
After the publication of this article, which was a "drama against Taiwan" with Guo Moruo, it immediately caused a fierce "Lanting Debate" in the academic world. In just six months, dozens of debate articles were published in newspapers and periodicals across the country. Those who support Guo Wen's view include famous scholars Qi Gong, Zhao Wanli, Shi Shuqing and others; those who support the view of Shi Shi, a sophomore in high school, include Tang Feng, Yan Beiming, Shang Chengzuo and others.
Today, two scholars, Gao Ershi and Guo Moruo, have passed away one after another. The "Lanting Debate" they had back then didn't have a definite result to this day because no one could convince anyone. So, is "Lanting Preface" true or false? Who is right and who is wrong on both sides of the debate?
In fact, Guo Moruo is not the first scholar to doubt the authenticity of "Lanting Preface". During the Qianlong period of the Qing Dynasty, a scholar named Zhao Wei first proposed that Wang Xizhi's calligraphy could not be like "Lanting Preface" and should be more ancient. By the end of the Qing Dynasty, Guangdong calligrapher and painter Li Wentian also had doubts about this. Li Wentian believes that the ancients commented on Wang Xizhi, saying that he was "a dragon leaping over the Tianmen, a tiger lying on the Phoenix Tower, and an iron painting with a silver hook." If it were Wang Xizhi's original work, it should be as clumsy as "Tiger Crouching on the Phoenix Tower." But if you look at the calligraphy of "Lanting Preface", it is so elegant and beautiful. Where can you find such a shadow? However, for more than a thousand years, "Lanting Preface" has been regarded as "the best running script in the world", and people have no doubt about its authenticity. . The doubts of Zhao Wei and Li Wentian in the Qing Dynasty sounded too small at the time and did not attract people's attention.
However, in 1965, Guo Moruo saw two epitaphs of the Wang Xie family unearthed in Nanjing and found that the fonts on the epitaphs were very different from the cursive meaning of the "Lanting Preface" created at the same time. He immediately remembered Zhao Wei and Li Wentian doubted the authenticity of "Lanting Preface". After some research, Guo Moruo believed that "all Jin scripts in the world must be official scripts." From this, he boldly concluded that "Lanting Preface" in running script "is neither Wang Xizhi's original text nor Wang Xizhi's handwriting." On this basis, Guo Moruo further deduced that the articles and ink in "Lanting Preface" were all written by Wang Xizhi's seventh-generation grandson, Monk Zhiyong.
Expert analysis shows that Guo Moruo’s arguments are not rigorous enough. For example, he compared the words on epitaphs and stone tablets of the Jin Dynasty with the fonts in manuscripts. This comparison did not work. Because the ancients used formal calligraphy to write formal texts, and the characters in the manuscripts may have less or even no official script style, so the object of his comparison is wrong. In addition, he boldly suspected that "Lanting Preface" was forged by Zhiyong, which was also an unfounded inference.
However, Guo Moruo's idea is not completely wrong. According to his discussion, if you compare "Lanting Preface" with Wang Xizhi's other running script works, you will see what Guo Moruo said: "the difference in brushwork and fonts" Quite different." Comparing Wang Xizhi's extant running script works, such as "Sangluan Tie", "Confucius Shizhong Tie" and "Ping'an Qiu Zai Feng Ju Tie" together with "Lanting Preface", anyone with a little knowledge of calligraphy can see that Their different characteristics in taste and style. Therefore, "Lanting Preface" is not unquestionable. This issue can continue to be studied, but it should be from a different angle.
The sensational "Lanting Debate", although it did not distinguish who was right and who was wrong, brought a new atmosphere of contention among a hundred schools of thought to the academic world. In March 1973, Cultural Relics Publishing House collected 18 articles on the debate about the authenticity of Lanting and compiled it into the book "Lanting Debate", which brought together many important documents and materials about Lanting. "Left a valuable legacy.