晚明《詩經》名物學草木類之博物學要素──以日本江戶時期同類著作參

The Botanical Elements of Onomastics Based on Shijing in the Late Ming Dynasty: With Reference to Similar Works from the Edo Period in Japan

中國明中葉以降和日本江戶時期，興起一股《詩經》名物的研究風氣。江戶《詩經》名物學受本草學發，是博物學的先聲。本文以此為參照點，以本草學與博物學交集之植物分類，析論中國晚明《詩經》名物學特點，芻議其知識結構變化涵義。本文比較中國晚明馮復京《六家詩名物疏》、林兆珂《多識編》、吳雨《毛詩鳥獸草木考》、沈萬鈳《詩經類考》、舊題鍾惺《詩經圖史合考》、黃文煥《詩經考》等六家，與日本江戶時期新井白石《詩經圖》、稻生若水《詩經小識》、松岡恕庵《詩經物產考》、江村如圭《詩經名物辨解》、藤沼尚景《詩經小識補》、茅原定《詩經名物集成》等六家，中、日兩國共十二家《詩經》名物學論著，林兆珂《多識編》與沈萬鈳《詩經類考》已提出簡單的植物分類，並有次級分類的觀念。不過深入林兆珂《多識編》與沈萬鈳《詩經類考》的植物分類觀，是以植物於《詩經》譬況的人倫關係或道德涵義為主，自然知識為次要論述。而稻生若水《詩經小識》體系，有「實物觀察」的意義。相較之下，中國晚明的《詩經》名物學，重視前代學者「實物觀察」的紀錄，較少自己實際觀察，主要屬於「文獻考證」的工作。

A trend in research on onomastics based on Shijing詩經emerged during the latter half of China’s Ming dynasty and Japan’s Edo period. Inspired by traditional herbal science, the onomastics of Shijing during the Edo was a forerunner of natural history. Using this as a reference point, this study analyzes the academic features of Shijing onomastics in the late Ming, discussing the implications of the changes in its structure of knowledge. The present article compares twelve onomastic texts: six late Ming Chinese-language writings, namely Feng Fujing’s馮復京(1573-1623) Liujia shi mingwu shu六家詩名物疏(An Elucidation of the Naming of Things in Poetry of the Six Schools), Lin Zhaoke’s林兆珂(1583-1657) Duo shi bian多識編(A Compilation of Many Explanations), Wu Yu’s吳雨(?-?) Maoshi niaoshou caomu kao毛詩鳥獸草木考(A Textual Study of Birds, Beasts, Plants, and Trees in Maoshi), Shen Wanke’s沈萬鈳(?-?) Shijing lei kao詩經類考(Classification Studies of Shijing), Zhong Xing’s鍾惺(?-?) Shijing tu shi hekao詩經圖史合考(A Compiled Study of the Books and Historical Records of Shijing), and Huang Wenhuan’s黃文煥(?-?) Shijing kao詩經考(A Textual Study of Shijing); and six Edo Japanese-language works, namely Arai Hakuseki’s新井白石(1657-1725) Shikyōzu詩經圖(Illustrated Edition of Shijing), InōJakusui’s稻生若水(1655-1715) Shikyōshōshiki詩經小識(Introductory Explanation to Shijing), Matsuoka Joan’s松岡恕庵(1668-1746) Shikyōbussan kō詩經物產考(A Textual Study of Natural Resources in Shijing), Emura Jokei’s江村如圭(?-1732) Shikyōmeibutsu benkai詩經名物辨解(Explanations on the Naming of Things in Shijing), Fujinuma Naokage’s藤沼尚景(?-?) Shikyōshōshiki ho詩經小識補(Supplementary Introduction to Shijing), and Chihara Tadashi’s茅原定(?-?) Shikyōmeibutsu shūsei詩經名物集成(A Compilation of the Naming of Things in Shijing). Of the above, Lin’s Duo shi bian and Shen’s Shijing lei kao both propose a simple classification of flora with a notion of subclassifications. However, an in-depth study of the two texts reveal that the concept of plant classification is based on the metaphorical human relationships or moral connotations of plants in Shijing, with the knowledge of nature being secondary. Inō’s Shikyōshōshiki, in contrast, focuses on“observations of the object.”Yet although late Ming works on Shijing onomastics value the records of the observations by previous scholars, they seldom engage in practical observation but instead concentrate on the textual research of documents.