The Shuduan, written by Zhang Huaiguan of the Tang dynasty, is a work that discusses calligraphic styles and calligraphers. In it, Zhang Huaiguan advances the view that Cai Yong of the Later Han created the Flying White Script. However, no supporting evidence for this claim is presented within the Shuduan itself. Moreover, in other works that are known with certainty to have been compiled prior to the “Shuduan,” it is difficult to find any record linking Cai Yong with the Flying White Script. The reasons why Zhang Huaiguan put forward such a theory are unclear, and consequently various interpretations have been proposed over time. This article seeks to disentangle the philological issues surrounding the origins of this theory and to present a coherent interpretation.

  The focus of debate is the Zhuanli wenti, written by Xiao Ziliang of the Southern Qi. According to the annotations appended to Record of the Character “Xiao” in Flying White Script on the Wall by Cui Bei of the Tang-dynasty, the claim in the Shuduan that Cai Yong created the Flying White Script may in fact be traced back to the Zhuanli wenti. However, the existing manuscript of the Zhuanli wenti identifies Emperor Ling of Han as the creator of the Flying White Script, and thus its account diverges. In this article, therefore, attention is directed to two works that closely resemble the Zhuanli wenti in content, namely, Description of Fifty-six Calligraphy Scripts by Wei Xu of the Tang-dynasty, and Gujin wenzi zan by Wei Yi of the Tang-dynasty. Analysis of the tendencies of their contents demonstrated that the above possibility remains persuasive. Furthermore, with respect to the existing manuscript of the Zhuanli wenti, concrete evidence is presented to suggest that the passage concerning the Flying White Script may suffer from textual omission. Taken together, these arguments largely resolve the questions and allow for a consistent explanation regarding both the origin and subsequent development of the theory that Cai Yong created the Flying White Script.

  Zhong Yao's Xuanshi Biao cannot be considered authentic in terms of its calligraphic traces. But what about its text—might it be genuine? This article examines this question.

  Considering the sentiments behind Sun Quan's intention to become a vassal and the main argument of the Xuanshi Biao, which is to advocate the acceptance of his vassalage, and judging from the historical fact that, in the eighth month of Huangchu 2 (221), faced with Sun Quan's proposal of allegiance in the aftermath of Liu Bei's campaign to avenge the death of Guan Yu, Emperor Wen of Wei, Cao Pi, after court debates, resolved to accept it and invested Sun Quan as King of Wu, the Xuanshi Biao would appear to be the memorial (biao) submitted to Emperor Wen by Zhong Yao at this very moment. The debates over whether to accept Sun Quan's submission first took place in the inner court and later expanded to the outer court as well. The Xuanshi Biao presented by Zhong Yao, who was serving in the outer court at that time, was one of the arguments raised during the latter phase of the debate in the outer court.

  What deserves attention are two peculiar points in the text of the Xuanshi Biao: one is that it is not strictly in the official form of biao, and the other is that the form of address is not “his majesty” but “you.” They suggest that the Xuanshi Biao stands as an extension of personal correspondence to Cao Pi, crown prince of the state of Wei and 36 years younger than Zhong Yao, someone with whom he had a close teacher-student relationship. For this reason, it does not strictly follow the formal conventions of biao, but instead shows aspects of a private letter.

  From the above considerations, I conclude that the text of the Xuanshi Biao, with the two peculiar points as well as the subtle expressions of Zhong Yao's careful concern, should not be regarded as a forgery but rather as genuine.

  From the mid-Qing dynasty onward, in the history of seal carving, the individualization of knife methods by the Zhe school, the “Yincongshuchu” of the Deng school, and the “Yinwai qiuyin” of Zhao Zhiqian and Wu Changshuo have been regarded as the main factors in the development of seal-carving expression, while “Yinzhong qiuyin” has been regarded as the basic cultivation that forms the premise for those. Furthermore, Qian Song, who is the focus of this paper, has been seen as a seal artist who inherited the knife methods of the Zhe school, and his position in the history of seal carving has also been discussed within the framework of the Zhe school.

  This paper, focusing on the development of the reception of Han seals within the framework of “Yinzhong qiuyin,” reexamines the style and background of Qian Song's white-character seals, clarifies how these relate to views on seal studies, and further explores what kind of influence Qian Song's seal-carving creations had on later generations.

  As a result, it was clarified that, by the late Qing dynasty, the inheritance of knife techniques within the Zhe school, the reception of Han seals, and the reception of Chen Hongshou, had become essentially homogeneous. It was then pointed out that Qian Song's seal-carving expression, grounded in the acceptance of Han seals, developed into a distinctive style that emphasized a centripetal sense of mass. This represented a departure from the characteristic expressions of the Zhe school. Qian Song's creative method can be regarded as a qualitative transformation of “Yinzhong qiuyin,” overcoming the shortcomings of the traditional “Yinzhong qiuyin,” which had been considered merely a basic discipline of seal-carving expression. Although further development did not occur within the Zhe school, Qian Song's creative practice shared commonalities with Zhao Zhiqian and Wu Changshuo. In establishing a qualitative transformation of “Yinzhong qiuyin” in terms of both seal-carving style and views on seal studies, Qian Song should be remembered as a pioneering figure.

  Naito Konan (1866-1934), known as one of modern Japan's foremost historians of East Asia, also possessed a deep knowledge of Chinese calligraphy. In his writings on the history of Chinese calligraphy, what stands out in particular is his strong assertion of the legitimacy of the calligraphic lineage centered on the calligraphy of Wang Xizhi. This point has consistently been emphasized by later scholars, ever since it was explicitly stated by his student Kanda Kiichiro.

  One aspect of Naito's claim regarding the legitimacy of Wang Xizhi's calligraphy is that it is grounded in his depiction of the long course of its transmission through later generations. Notably, even at the risk of contradicting his own theory of reform in the Tang and Song dynasties, Naito came to a firm recognition of the enduring lifeline of Wang Xizhi's calligraphic tradition from the Song dynasty onward. In this article, I refer to the orthodox lineage of Wang Xizhi's calligraphic succession thus constructed as “Seimyaku,” borrowing Naito's own term.

  This article reexamines the extent to which Naito Konan regarded this concept of Seimyaku as absolute. In doing so, as part of considering the absoluteness of Seimyaku, it focuses closely on whether Naito's various statements concerning Seimyaku were internally consistent, or whether—if not outright contradictory—certain discrepancies can be discerned among them. Where such contradictions or gaps are observed, the article also examines their background and causes, situating them within the trends in the past of historical studies of Chinese calligraphy. Particular attention is given to the relativistic perspective concerning Naito's understanding of calligraphy.

  As a result of this examination, it has become clear that Naito's concept of Seimyaku should rather be situated in a relative position. Furthermore, this very relativity played a role in leading and shaping the plurality of theories in the development of Chinese calligraphy studies of the time.

  This article examines, focusing on the calligrapher Hidai Tenrai (1872-1939), how he responded to the conflicts and debates concerning “kanji” (Chinese characters) in the Japanese script reform debates that unfolded in Japan from the late 19th to the early 20th century. In modern Japan, along with the collapse of the traditional Sino-centric order, the formation of the nation-state advanced, and a consciousness of the “national language” was cultivated. In particular, after the Sino-Japanese War, enthusiasm for “language nationalism” intensified, and Ueda Kazutoshi (1867-1937), a Ministry of Education bureaucrat and linguist, promoted a national language policy that set phonographic writing as its ultimate goal, pursuing revisions to kana usage, the introduction of romaji, and even the abolition or restriction of kanji.

  At the same time, as “the Japanese language” came to take on a nationalist coloring, there were diverse opinions regarding the question of what kind of “script” should be used to write it. From 1919 onward, Hidai held calligraphy training courses in various places, traveling through Karafuto (Sakhalin), the Korean Peninsula, and Taiwan. He argued that kanji were something that the Yamato race ought to protect and promote, and he himself undertook efforts toward the kanji reform. Furthermore, he criticized the “Kanji reform proposals” put forward by Ueda and his disciple Hoshina Koichi (1872-1955), insisting that the basis for kanji reform in Japan should not be the Kangxi Dictionary but rather the model calligraphy collections of the Jin and Tang dynasties.

  Such debates recurred in 1919, 1925, 1931, and 1938, and this article focuses in particular on “Gakusho sentei” (1921) as the main object of examination. Through its analysis, the study seeks to clarify Hidai's views on kanji and his ideas concerning kanji reform, and to reveal the intersection of “script” and nationalism in modern Japan.

  This article examines, beginning with Harada Taikan (原田大観)'s two visits to China in Taisho 12 (1923), how Hakubundo (博文堂) advanced the study of Japanese calligraphy through its publishing projects including business partnerships, and how it came to monopolize the Chinese painting and calligraphy market in Japan, thereby forming a major collection. These issues are considered within the history of modern Japanese calligraphy and collection practices.

  First, Hakubundo's collotype art publications, adopted as textbooks for the calligraphy section of the teacher certification examinations, were disseminated by Onoe Saishu, who was highly influential in the calligraphy world, and thereby contributed to the promotion of research on ancient script styles. In addition, through Hakubundo's business partnerships with China's Fujinshushe (富晋書社) and Yanguangshi (延光室), its collotype art publications were exported to China; however, this should be understood not so much as a pursuit of high profits, but rather as a means of promoting Hakubundo on the Chinese mainland. Moreover, it is particularly important that, through Hakubundo's introduction of Sun Guoting Shupu (『孫過庭書譜』) published by Yanguangshi, a new phase was opened in the study of Chinese calligraphy history based on stylistic analysis of ink strokes, as exemplified by Matsumoto Hosui (松本芳翠)'s research on brush techniques.

  Furthermore, through the acquisition and sale of masterpieces during these visits to China, Hakubundo secured the funds for its reconstruction after the Great Kanto Earthquake. Also, by gaining the trust of former retainers who had served close to the Qing imperial household, which possessed the finest masterpieces of Chinese calligraphy, painting, and rubbings, as well as by obtaining new local collaborators, it went on, from these visits onward, to acquire many outstanding works of calligraphy and painting and to dominate the market.