论“苏黄米蔡”的形成——蔡襄、蔡京之争的关捩  

The Origin of the Title for the Four Great Calligraphers——The Key Point in the Argument on Cai Xiang and Cai Jing

作　　者：韩立平[1] 

机构地区：[1]华东师范大学中文系,上海200241

出　　处：《学术探索》2011年第1期132-136,共5页Academic Exploration

基　　金：中国博士后科学基金第四十七批资助(20100470761)

摘　　要："苏黄米蔡"之"蔡"究属蔡襄还是蔡京,解决这一问题的关捩是还原"宋四家"的形成过程。南宋时期形成了"苏黄米"并举、"米蔡"对举以及推尊蔡襄的批评传统,这是元人提出"宋四家"说的基础。"宋四家"排列次序在元代并不固定,明代始确定为"苏黄米蔡"并引出争议。有宋一代,蔡京从未进入过"宋四家",也不存在所谓以"襄"代"京"的事实。There have been disputes on the title for the Four Great Calligraphers in the Song Dynasty, focusing on whether the ＂Cai＂ of them should be Cai Xiang or Cai Jing. The key point in the solution to the problem lies with a restoration of the origin of the title, the Four Great Calligrapher. In the South Song Dynasty, there appeared a tradition of criticism paralleling Sushi, Huang Tingjian and Mi Fu, contrasting Mi Fu with Cai Xiang, and honoring Cai Xiang, which paved the way for the formation of the idea on the Four Great Calligraphers of the Song Dynasty by the scholars of the Yuan Dynasty. In the Yuan Dynasty, the order of naming of the Four Calligraphers was flexible. In the Ming Dynasty, the order of ＂Su Shi, Huang Tingjian, Mi Fu and Cai Xiang （Jing）＂ became controversial. It is testified that Cai Jing was never ranked among the Four Calligraphers, nor was the fact that Cai Jing had been replaced by Cai Xiang.

关 键 词：宋四家 苏黄米蔡 形成 

分 类 号：I206.2[文学—中国文学]