Throughout Chinese art history, few practices have been as crucial to cultural preservation and artistic development as the traditions of rubbing and copying calligraphy. These methods, refined over centuries, served not only to preserve important works but also to establish artistic lineages and maintain cultural continuity across generations. The intricate relationship between original works, their copies, and the subsequent interpretations of both reveals complex attitudes toward authenticity, preservation, and artistic innovation that differ markedly from Western traditions of art making and collecting.

 

The transmission and preservation of Chinese calligraphy through rubbing and copying represents a complex cultural practice that fundamentally shaped the development of this art form. As Amy McNair's seminal research demonstrates, these practices were not merely mechanical reproduction methods but rather sophisticated systems of cultural preservation that influenced both the "physical life" and "critical life" of calligraphic works.[1] Since the Later Han dynasty (25-220), ink-written calligraphy has been seen as an expression of the writer's personality, making the transmission of these works particularly significant.[2] The rubbing of running script attributed to Mi Fu in this exhibition, featuring his 1085 calligraphy of Cui Hao's poem with Liu Ji's 1337 inscription, exemplifies these traditions' enduring significance.

 

Historical Development and Technical Process

The practice of creating stone engravings and subsequent rubbings emerged as early as the fourth century BCE but gained particular prominence during the Tang and Song dynasties. Beginning in the tenth century, famous works of calligraphy in palace and private collections were systematically copied and engraved in stone.[3] The model-letters tradition (tiepai) formalized this practice through imperial compendia such as the Chunhua ge tie (992) and Daguan tie (1109). These collections served to canonize certain works and styles while establishing a systematic approach to transmission.[4]

 

Authentication and Connoisseurship

The question of authenticity in Chinese calligraphy presents fascinating complexities. McNair's discussion of Song dynasty connoisseurs Mi Fu (1052-1107) and Huang Bosi (1079-1118) reveals sophisticated debates about authenticity that went far beyond simple questions of originality. Their critical evaluations of the Chunhua ge tie, where they questioned nearly half of its attributions, demonstrates the complex relationship between original works and their reproductions.[5] Mi Fu, whose Running Script rubbing we examine, was himself a prominent critic of authentication practices, declaring in 1088 that he had "roughly divided [the letters] into genuine and fake."[6]

​

Social and Political Dimensions

The production of rubbings and copies served important social and political functions. McNair notes that the Song critics' reception of Northern Wei Buddhist inscriptions was heavily influenced by considerations of social class and cultural identity. Ouyang Xiu (1007-1072), a prominent Song dynasty scholar-official, expressed concern about the "vulgarity" of Northern Dynasty stele engravings, particularly their poor grammar and incorrect characters, which he attributed to their "barbarian" origins.[7]

 

Material Culture and Preservation

The physical aspects of rubbing and copying played a crucial role in preservation. McNair describes how the Chunhua ge tie deteriorated within a hundred years, demonstrating the vulnerability of even imperial collections.[8] The durability of stone engravings and the ability to produce multiple rubbings provided a more reliable means of preservation, as evidenced by the survival of Mi Fu's Running Script through late 20th-century rubbings.

 

Contemporary Significance

By the Qing dynasty (1644-1911), attitudes toward stele inscriptions had shifted dramatically. Kang Youwei (1858-1927) and other late Qing scholars began to appreciate anonymous Northern Dynasty inscriptions for their aesthetic qualities rather than their historical or social significance.[9] This shift in critical reception demonstrates how the evaluation of calligraphic works could evolve over time, independent of their original context or authorship.

 

The late 20th-century rubbing of Mi Fu's Running Script exemplifies the enduring relevance of traditional reproduction practices. While modern technologies offer new means of reproduction, the rubbing technique maintains a direct physical connection to historical works that many practitioners and collectors continue to value. The presence of Liu Ji's 1337 inscription adds another layer of historical significance, demonstrating how these works accumulated meaning through generations of engagement and interpretation.

 

Conclusion

The practices of rubbing and copying in Chinese calligraphy represent a sophisticated system of cultural transmission that shaped the art form's development over centuries. Through examples like Mi Fu's Running Script rubbing, we can understand how these practices served multiple functions: preservation of important works, transmission of artistic techniques, establishment of cultural authority, and creation of new artistic possibilities through reinterpretation. McNair's research reveals not just technical processes but fundamental aspects of Chinese cultural attitudes toward artistic creation, preservation, and transmission.[10]

​

Madison Bockenstedt