Zheng Qiao (1104–1162), the ‘Jiaochou lüe’ (Treatise on Collation), and the Retrievalof Lost Books
Maddalena Barenghi Journal of Song-Yuan Studies, Volume 44, 2014, pp. 265-286 (Article)Published by The Society for Song, Yuan, and Conquest Dynasty Studies
DOI:For additional information about this article
Access provided by Staatsbibliothek zu Berlin - Preussischer Kulturbesitz (16 May 2017 13:33 GMT)
 
Journal of Song-Yuan Studies
 󰀴󰀴 (󰀲󰀰󰀱󰀴)
Zheng Qiao (1104–1162), the Jiaochou lüe(Treatise on Collation), and the Retrieval of Lost Books
Maddalena Barenghi
󰁌udwig-󰁍aximilians-󰁕niversität 󰁍ünchen
 
T
he official dynastic histories offer scant information on the life and career of Zheng Qiao
 (󰀱󰀱󰀰󰀴–󰀱󰀱󰀶󰀲). The main source is the
Jiaji yigao
稿
 (Posthumous Collection of Mr. Jiaji’s Writings), a brief collection of poems and epistolary writings dating roughly between 󰀱󰀱󰀴󰀰 and 󰀱󰀱󰀵󰀸, the year he gained an official position. The missives contained within it are of some inter-est as proof of his personal involvement in the retrieval of lost books under the patronage of Gaozong
 (r. 󰀱󰀱󰀲󰀷–󰀱󰀱󰀶󰀲) through the 󰀱󰀱󰀳󰀰s and 󰀱󰀱󰀴󰀰s. Moved by the idea that the efforts of the Song rulers in retrieving and keeping track of lost items had brought unfavorable outcomes, Zheng Qiao lists his achieve-ments in the field of bibliography and offers his personal investigations.
1
 All
󰀱. Zheng Qiao,
 Xian Huangdi shu
獻皇帝書
 (To the Emperor),
Jiaji yigao, Congshu jicheng chubian
叢書集成初編
 (The Complete Collection of Collectanea: First Series) (Shanghai: Shangwu yinshuguan, 󰀱󰀹󰀳󰀵), 󰀲.󰀱󰀱–󰀱󰀲. Zheng Qiao also wrote missives to the Grand Councilor (
Shang Zaixiang shu
 
上宰相書
), to the Board of Rites in 󰀱󰀱󰀴󰀱 (
Ji fang Libu shu
寄方禮部書
), to the Secretary of the Bureau of Military Affairs (
Yu Jing Wei xiong touyu wenshu mishu
與景兄投宇文樞密書
) and other high officials. The present edition of the
Jiaji yigao
lacks both of the preface and the post-face, thus we do not have any information about the date of publication and editors. On the
Jiaji yigao
see Yves Hevrouet (ed.),
 A Sung Bibliography
(Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 󰀱󰀹󰀷󰀸), 󰀴󰀱󰀵–󰀴󰀱󰀶. There is very little information on Zheng Qiao’s life and I will limit myself at mentioning those details that are relevant to the present research and the redaction of the
Jiaochou lüe
, without repeating what is available elsewhere; the studies that either deal substantially with or at least consider his biography are: Thomas H.C. Lee, “History, Erudi-tion and Good Government: Cheng Ch’iao and Encyclopedic Historical Thinking,” in Thomas H.C. Lee (ed.),
The New and the Multiple: Sung Senses of the Past
 (Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 󰀲󰀰󰀰󰀴), 󰀱󰀶󰀳–󰀲󰀰󰀰; Albert B. Mann, “Cheng Ch’iao: An Essay in Re-Evaluation,”
 
󰀲󰀶󰀶 󰁍addalena 󰁂arenghi
the works mentioned in the epistolary writings were lost soon after the Song period, and it was this early material that possibly provided the basis for the redaction of the treatises (
lüe
 
), the twenty topical sections that constitute the most srcinal part of the
Tongzhi
 (Comprehensive Record).
2
 Although transmitted to us as an integral part of the
Tongzhi
, the treatises were published separately in several editions at least until the Ming period
 (󰀱󰀳󰀶󰀸–󰀱󰀶󰀴󰀴)
.
3
 
Four monographs concern bibliographical topics: the
Yiwen lüe
 
 (Treatise on Literature), the
Tupu lüe
 (Treatise on Maps and Tables)
,
 the
 Jinshi lüe
 (Treatise on Stone and Bronze Inscriptions), and the
 Jiaochou lüe
.
4
 Among them, the bibliographical catalogue,
Yiwen lüe
, is probably the most renowned and widely studied.
5
 Each monograph comes
in David C. Buxbaum and Frederick W. Mote (eds.),
Transition and Permanence: Chinese His-tory and Culture, A Festschrift in Honor of Dr. Hsiao Kung-ch’üan
 (Hong Kong: Cathay Press, 󰀱󰀹󰀷󰀲), 󰀲󰀳–󰀵󰀷; Qian Yaxin
 (󰀱󰀹󰀰󰀳–󰀱󰀹󰀹󰀰), Zheng Qiao
Jiaochou lüe
 yanjiu
鄭樵校讎略
 (Study of the
Jiaochou lüe
 of Zheng Qiao) (Shanghai: Shangwu yinshuguan, 󰀱󰀹󰀴󰀸). 󰀲. Zheng Qiao never took the civil service examinations and the submission of a manuscript of the
Tongzhi
 was possibly a mean of seeking patronage from the court. After submitting the manuscript he obtained an official position, a minor post as compiler in the Bureau of Military  Affairs (
shumi yuan bianxiuguan
), junior compiler,
 
rank 󰀸a, see Charles O. Hucker,
 A Dictionary of Official Titles in Imperial China
, (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 󰀱󰀹󰀸󰀵), 󰀳󰀸󰀱–󰀳󰀸󰀲.
Toghtō
 
脫脫
 (󰀱󰀳󰀱󰀴–󰀱󰀳󰀵󰀵) et. al.,
Songshi
 (History of the Song) (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 󰀱󰀹󰀷󰀷), 󰀳󰀶.󰀱󰀲󰀹󰀴󰀴. 󰀳. Wang Yinglin
應麟
 (󰀱󰀲󰀲󰀳–󰀱󰀲󰀹󰀶) records a
Shaoxing Tongzhi ershi lüe
 
紹興通志二十
 (The Twenty Treatises of the Comprehensive Record of the Shaoxing Era). Liu Xun
劉壎
 (󰀱󰀲󰀴󰀰–󰀱󰀳󰀱󰀹) in his
Yinju tongyi
隱居通議
 (General Discussion from the Reclusion) mentions a Xinghua Old Edition (
 Xinghua jiu kan ben
興化舊刊本
). According to his account, during the Yuan period it was easier to find an edition of the twenty Treatises rather than an edition of the
Tongzhi.
 Xu Youfu
 reports that three other editions existed at least until the Ming period; see Xu Youfu,
Zheng Qiao ping  zhuan
鄭樵評傳
 (Biography of Zheng Qiao) (Nanjing: Nanjing daxue chubanshe, 󰀱󰀹󰀹󰀸), 󰀳󰀱󰀱–󰀳󰀱󰀵. 󰀴. The twenty topics roughly follow the
Tongdian
 (General Documents) of Du You
 (󰀷󰀳󰀵–󰀸󰀱󰀲), although Zheng Qiao further splits the eight topics of the
Tongdian
into twenty sections:
shizu
氏族
 (clans),
liushu
 (six arts),
qiyin
 (seven tones),
tianwen
 (astronomy),
dili
 (geography),
douyi
 (capitals),
li
 (ritual),
shi
 (posthumous titles),
qifu
 (equipment and robes),
 yue
 (music),
 zhiguan
 (bureaucracy),
 xuanju
 (examination),
 xingfa
刑法
 (law),
shihuo
食貨
 (food and goods),
 yiwen
藝文
 (literature),
jiaochou
 (collation studies),
tupu
 (maps and tables),
jinshi
 (stone and bronze inscriptions),
 zaixiang
 (omens),
caomu kunchong
草木昆蟲
 (plants and insects). 󰀵. The
Yiwen lüe
 extends to the end of the Northern Song period (󰀹󰀶󰀰–󰀱󰀱󰀲󰀷), and was a revised version of his
Qunshu huiji
群書會記
 (Essential Record of All Books) and
Qiushuque ji
闕記
 (Record of the Search for Missing Books), both lost, which he submitted to the Emperor
 
󰀲󰀶󰀷󰁚heng 󰁑iao and the 󰁒etrieval of 󰁌ost 󰁂ooks
with an introduction aimed at providing practical tips for bibliographical inquiries rather than a standardized general explanation. This article focuses mainly on the
Jiaochou lüe
, a monograph that is possibly a condensed abridgment of the early, but now lost,
Jiaochou bei lun
 (Preparatory Discussion on Collation). It consists of a general discussion divided into topical sections, mostly composed of brief notes, on both the methods for the retrieval of lost items and the system of classification. It is plausible to think that the sections of the work srcinally served different purposes. By analyzing its contents, in what follows I wish to investigate the contribution of Zheng Qiao in the context of the reconstruction of the private and imperial collections promoted by the Song court in the 󰀱󰀱󰀴󰀰s
.
Following the Jin invasion, the remains of the imperial holdings were moved to the south, and in 󰀱󰀱󰀳󰀲 the imperial libraries were rebuilt in Lin’an
 (Hangzhou). Through the 󰀱󰀱󰀳󰀰s and 󰀱󰀱󰀴󰀰s, Gaozong promoted campaigns for the retrieval of lost items and the revival of study traditions of the Northern Song period. Zheng Qiao was mostly concerned with the matter of redacting search lists appropriate for that purpose, particularly given the inadequacy of the
Chong-wen zongmu
 
崇文總目
 (Bibliographic Catalogue [of the Library] in Honor of Literature). A revised version of the general catalogue redacted in the early 󰀱󰀰󰀴󰀰s was published and used by the court as a search list for the retrieval and acquisition of lost books. Contrary to the general assumptions, Zheng Qiao’s criticism of the deficiencies of the catalogue is linked to its function in the attempts to collect items rather than a disquisition on general principles of librarianship. Despite the popularity of the treatises among the literati circles, at an offi-cial level the contribution of Zheng Qiao would remain almost neglected until the second half of the eighteenth century, when the
Siku
editors almost unanimously condemned his work as unscholarly. This attitude subsequently led to an almost complete disregard of his scholarship by the Qing scholars. The main and almost only source of criticism is the
Jiaochou tongyi
 (Comprehensive Meaning of Collation) of Zhang Xuecheng
 (󰀱󰀷󰀸󰀳–󰀱󰀸󰀰󰀱)
,
a general treatise on bibliography included in his
Wenshi tongyi jiaozhu
文史通義
 (Comprehensive Meaning of Literature and History).
6
in 󰀱󰀱󰀴󰀹 (see Piet van der Loon,
Taoists Books in the Libraries of the Song Period
, London: Ithaca Press, 󰀱󰀹󰀸󰀴, 󰀱󰀵). 󰀶. The republican period saw a revival of studies of Zheng Qiao’s scholarship, in particular
 
󰀲󰀶󰀸 󰁍addalena 󰁂arenghi
Redaction and Scope of the
Jiaochou lüe
Since the outset of the dynasty, the Song court committed itself to periodic reorganizations of the Imperial Library. On these occasions, general biblio-graphical catalogues were redacted with the purpose of checking the imperial holdings and documenting the losses, and these lists of books were furthermore diffused through the provinces of the empire to facilitate the retrieval and acquisition of the lost items. A general catalogue was redacted in 󰀹󰀸󰀴 under the commission of Taizong
 (r. 󰀹󰀷󰀶–󰀹󰀹󰀷) to check the library holdings against the early eighth-century Tang general catalogues.
7
 Despite the efforts of Taizong, a great many items were still missing at the beginning of the reign of Zhenzong
 (r. 󰀹󰀹󰀷–󰀱󰀰󰀲󰀲). In 󰀱󰀰󰀰󰀱, the emperor issued a decree for a search of lost books. In the following year, another decree ordered that books stored in the
Longtu ge
 (Dragon Diagram Hall) and the
Taiqing lou
 (Building of Great Purity) be checked against those in the
Chongwen yuan
 
 (Institute in Honor of Literature).
 
The result was the compilation of the
Jingde daqinglou sibu shumu
景德大清樓四部書目
 (Catalogue of the Four Sections of the Building of Great Purity Redacted in the Jingde Era), redacted roughly around 󰀱󰀰󰀰󰀵.
8
 In 󰀱󰀰󰀱󰀵, a fire destroyed most of the imperial libraries, and the books that survived the disaster were moved to the
Chongwen waiyuan
 
崇文外院
 (Outer Institute of the Honorable Literature). During the reign of Renzong
following Gu Jiegang
顧頡
’s (󰀱󰀸󰀹󰀳–󰀱󰀹󰀸󰀰)
Zheng Qiao zhuan
 (Biography of Zheng Qiao) and
Zheng Qiao zhushu kao
 
鄭樵著書考
 (Study on Zheng Qiao’s Scholarship). For obvious reasons Gu was particularly interested in Zheng’s historical and literary writing rather than in his bibliographical studies. In a few, very brief study notes, Gu analyzes Zheng Qiao’s Commentary to the
Erya zhu
爾雅
 (Commentary to the Refined Words) and the
Chunqiu kao
 
秋考
 (Study of the Annals of the Spring and Autumn Period). Gu Jiegang
,
Gu Jiegang dushu biji
顧頡剛讀書筆記
 (Notes of Study by Gu Jiegang) (Taibei: Lianjing, 󰀱󰀹󰀹󰀰). I am inclined to believe that, in general, the appraisal of Zheng’s historical scholarship has not been supported by an objective inquiry of his problematic work. 󰀷. Wang Yinglin records a
Taiping xingguo san guan siku shuji
太平興國三館四庫書籍
 (Books of the Four Repositories and the Three Halls of the Taiping xingguo Period), a catalogue redacted roughly around 󰀹󰀸󰀴, the year when Taizong ordered that its holdings be checked against the
Kaiyuan siku shumu
開元四庫書目
 (Catalogue of the Four Repositories Redacted in the Kaiyuan Era); see Wang Yinglin,
Yuhai
玉海
 (Sea of Jades) (Taibei: Taiwan huawen shuju, 󰀱󰀹󰀶󰀴),
 
󰀵󰀲: 󰀳󰀰–󰀳󰀱/󰀳󰀵–󰀳󰀶. See also Glen Dudbridge,
Lost Books of Medieval China
(The Panizzi Lectures, 󰀱󰀹󰀹󰀹. London: The British Library, 󰀲󰀰󰀰󰀰), 󰀱–󰀱󰀹. 󰀸.
Yuhai
, 󰀵󰀲.󰀳󰀹–󰀴󰀰.
of 23