Remarkable for its monumental presence, this fang zun is a masterpiece of Western Zhou bronzes. Fang zun are rare among all Zhou bronze forms, and even more so are ones with a long documentary inscription of significant historical value. The present fang zun is cast to the interior with a fifty-one-character inscription. The owner’s name is a compound pictogram comprising a jian 柬 and a min 黽, which does not appear to have been associated with a modern pronunciation. Therefore, we will refer to the name of the owner as Jian Min. The inscription records that on the dingchou day of the jishengba 既生霸 lunar phrase of the 9th month, Gong 公 ordered Jian Min to lead his subordinates to conduct a task at the land of Yan 炎. Jian Min reported to Gong that the assignment was successfully completed without any mistakes. Jian Min gratefully lauded Gong’s kindness and virtue. He then made this precious vessel to honor Xin Gong 辛公. This vessel was cast to be used day and night for ancestor rituals and to be treasured eternally by his sons and grandsons for ten thousand years.

This fang zun was first studied by Shimonaka Kunihiko, based on the materials provided by Umehara Sueji, who saw this bronze in Mrs. Walter Sedgwick’s collects ion during his trip to Europe and America between 1953 and 1954. In recent decades, Li Xueqin also published two dedicated articles on this vessel (1990, pp 295-297 and 2016, pp 91-93). In his articles, Li Xueqin associates this fang zun with two other well-known bronze vessels, the Bei Gui 貝黽簋 (fig. 1) from the Palace Museum, Beijing, and the Fan You 繁卣 (fig. 2) from the Shanghai Museum, Shanghai, both of which record Gong as a superior granting rewards and Xin Gong as an ancestor in their inscriptions. Li concluded that Xin Gong, Gong, and the owners of the three bronzes should be from the same family, which was, in fact, a surviving Shang clan in the Western Zhou period. The clan sign from the inscription of the Fan You indicates that their clan name is Huo 或. Li further suggests that all three bronzes should be from the period of King Mu (c. 976-c. 922 BC), the fifth king of the Western Zhou dynasty.

The most critical piece of information from the inscription of the present fang zun is Jian Min's assignment at the land of Yan. A key character, which indicates the type of the assignment, is partially obscured by encrustation, which poses a challenge in its identification, especially from photographs or rubbings s. Based on the published photographs, Li Xueqin identified this character as qi 启. He believed that this character in the given context can be interpreted as 'to explore' and concluded that the inscription of this fang zun documents that Gong ordered Jian Min to Yan to explore and develop the land in order to claim its ownership (2016, p. 92).

A closer examination of the character from the actual bronze, however, reveals that the bottom half of the character appears to be 貝 instead of 口. The character can then be identified as 戶貝. This new discovery is significant, as it entirely changes the meaning of the phrase as well as the previous understanding of the inscription by the academic world. This character is rarely seen in archaic bronze inscriptions. The only other appearance of this character is in the inscription of a bronze zun from the Le Cong Tang collects ion, named Wen Zun 聞尊 (fig. 3). The Wen Zun was first published by Cheung Kwong Yue (2008, p. 10) and has been studied since then by several contemporary scholars. Different theories were proposed on the reading of this character and its meaning (see Dong Shan, 2008, Jiang Shuhong, 2011, and Zhang Chongli, 2012). The current view appears to be that this character should read xu 胥, which can be interpreted as 'to supervise' and 'to manage'. Based on this interpretation, the task that Gong assigned to Jian Min was to supervise and manage the land of Yan.

Yan was one of the locations where King Mu’s father, King Zhao of Zhou was stationed at during his military campaign to conquer the Chujing in the south. According to a t.mes line reconstructed by Li Xueqin (2006, p. 130), in the 9th month of the 15th year, King Zhao started his campaign at Chengzhou (today's Luoyang). In the same month, the king is recorded to have arrived at Yan, which means Yan was likely to be within days of travel distance south of Chengzhou (fig. 4). Li also concluded that Yan should be a location near Luoyang (2016, p. 92). As one of the only few recorded stops along King Zhao's campaign route to Chujing in the south, the land of Yan was unlikely to be in an undeveloped state in the proceeding reign of King Mu. This further proves that Jian Min's assignment to Yan was to supervise and manage an already occupied location, instead of exploring and developing vacant land.

As the eastern capital, Chengzhou was a critical location for the stability of the Zhou empire. After King Wu of Zhou conquered the Shang, he faced the challenge of managing the large number of aristocrats from the previous dynasty. King Wu's solution was to position three of his brothers as the 'Three Guards' to govern the former Shang territory on the east. This soon proved to be ineffective. Upon King Wu's death, the 'Three Guards' joined the rebellion of the Shang prince, Wu Geng, and posed a serious threat to the newly-enthroned King Cheng (fig. 5). The rebellion was eventually suppressed by the young king's loyal regent, Duke of Zhou 周公 (fig. 6). Learning from previous mistakes, Duke of Zhou adopted an alternative strategy in managing the Shang people. He introduced a policy to relocate them close to Chengzhou for more centralized control. In order to motivate the Shang aristocrats, the Zhou court granted land near Chengzhou to the Shang people for them to live and govern. Based on their merit, the Shang nobles could also be selected to serve at the Zhou court as officials.

It is very possible that Gong, as one of the Shang aristocrats, was granted the land of Yan. Chen Yingjie believes that Gong was the leader of the Huo clan (2009, p. 67). Gong appointed his family member, Jian Min, to supervise and manage this land and rewarded him for successfully completing the task. The inscription of the present fang zun has significant historical value as it provides invaluable insights into the lifestyle of the Shang people who lived under the Western Zhou dynasty. It documents an example of benevolence and tolerance towards residents from the previous dynasty during the reign of King Mu. The Shang noble class were not only able to keep their status and customs, but also had great autonomy, including controlling and managing lands and holding rituals for their Shang ancestors.

Related fang zun of this form with a long documentary inscription are extremely rare. Most known examples have a much shorter inscription, and many are preserved in major museums around the world. Compare a similar bronze fang zun cast with a fifteen-character inscription, in the Palace Museum, Beijing, published in The Palace Museum, ed., Gugong qingtongqi / Bronzes in the Palace Museum, Beijing, 1999, pl. 131 (fig. 7). See also the Rong Zi Zun, inscribed with six characters, in the Hakutsuru Replica Handbags Museum, Kobe, illustrated in Shizuka Shirakawa, Hakutsuru eika [Selected Masterpieces of the Hakutsuru Museum], Tokyo, 1978, pl. 10; the Ri Ji Fang Zun with a twenty-character inscription, excavated in Shaanxi in 1963, now in the Shaanxi History Museum, Xi’an, published in Zhang Tianen, Shaanxi jinwen jicheng [Compendium of bronze inscriptions from Shaanxi], Xi’an, 2016, vol. 3, no. 0314; and another, cast with a twelve-character inscription, in the Freer Gallery of Art, Washington, D.C., published in John Alexander Pope et al., The Freer Chinese Bronzes, Washington, D.C., 1967, pl. 18. The only auction example of this type appears to be a bronze fang zun, inscribed with seven characters, offered in these rooms, 18th March 2008, lot 71.

Literature

Li Xueqin, 'Mo zun kaoshi [Examination of the Mo Zun]', Xinchu qingtongqi yanjiu [A study of newly discovered archaic bronzes], Beijing, 1990, pp 295-297.

Li Xueqin, ‘Jimei bowuguan suocang ling gui de niandai [Dating of the Ling Gui in the Guimet Museum]’, Faguo hanxue [French Sinology], no. 11, Beijing, 2006, pp 128-131.

Chen Yingjie, Xizhou jinwen zuoqi yongtu mingci yanjiu [Study of Western Zhou bronze inscriptions relating to vessel functions], vol. 1, Beijing, 2009.

Cheung Kwong Yue, ‘Xinjian Le Cong Tang Wen Zun mingwen shishi [An attempt to interpret the inscription of the newly seen Wen Zun from the Le Cong Tang collects ion]’, Guwenzixue lungao [Essay of ancient paleography], Hefei, 2008, pp 5-10.

Dong Shan, ‘Du Wen Zun min [Reading the inscription of Wen Zun]’, Fudan University Research on Chinese Excavated Classics and Paleography (website), Shanghai, 2008.

Jiang Shuhong, ‘Wen Zun xinjie [New interpretation of the Wen Zun]’, ibid., 2011.

Zhang Chongli, ‘Shi Wen Zun mingwen zhong de hu zi [Interpreting the hu character in the inscription of Wen Zun]’, ibid., 2012.

Li Xueqin, 'Zaishi Jian Min Fang Zun [Another explanation of the Jian Min Fang Zun]', Guwenzi yanjiu [A study of ancient epigraphy], vol. 31, Beijing, 2016, pp 91-93.

本品青銅方尊，氣勢恢宏，肅穆嚴正，西周吉金大宗之作，世之重器無疑。方尊在周代青銅器中甚為稀罕，而鑄有記事性長銘者則更是寥寥可數，具有非常重要的歷史價值。本次上拍的方尊內鑄五十一字銘。作器者的名字為上下結構，上部從「柬」，下部從「黽」，尚未知今時讀音，為方便書寫，今暫稱作器者為「柬黽」。方尊銘文大意為九月既生霸丁丑日，公命柬黽率其僚屬前往一個名叫炎的地方處理公務，結束後柬黽向公覆命，報告任務順利完成，沒有出現紕漏。柬黽稱讚了公的恩德，然後鑄造了這尊紀念辛公的寶器，並日夜用以配祀宗廟，子子孫孫萬年永寶用。

本方尊最先被日本學者下中邦彥著錄研究，當時他的研究資料是由梅原末治所提供。日本考古學家梅原末治於1953至1954年訪問歐美，期間他在 Walter Sedgwick 女士的收藏中看到了柬黽方尊，並對其進行了記錄及拓銘。此後，李學勤教授又陸續發表了兩篇關於柬黽方尊的專文 (1990年，頁295-297，及2016年，頁91-93) ，並在文章裡將柬黽方尊與另外兩件著名青銅器聯繫了起來：其一是藏於北京故宮博物院的貝黽簋 (圖一) ，其二為藏於上海博物館的繁卣 (圖二) 。兩器器銘均提到了公，且均為辛公作器，故其與本品銘的共通之處顯而易見。李學勤另通過銘文中的祭祀習慣以及綴署族銘等方面推斷，辛公、公以及這三件青銅器的作器者應屬同一支延續至西周的殷商遺族，從繁卣上的銘文可知，此氏族名為「或」。李學勤進一步推斷，這三件青銅器均出自西周第五位君主穆王時期。

此方尊銘中最關鍵的文句便是柬黽前往炎地處理公務的部分，但是青銅表面形成的鏽蝕，使得句中關鍵的一個動詞銘頗難辨認，如果僅根據此前所發表的照片或拓片，則是更為不易，故此前各家學者釋文互不相同。李學勤通過照片判斷認為這個銘字是「启」，帶有開闢的意思。因此，李氏釋其銘為公派柬黽開闢炎地，將之收歸己有 (2016年，頁92) 。

然而通過仔細觀察青銅器實物銘文，可發現上述難辨之字的下半部應為「貝」，而非「口」，故此字實應為「戶貝」。此發現具有重要學術意義，因其將改變此文句的釋讀，且將顛覆此前學朮界對本方尊銘文的理解。此字在高古青銅器銘文中甚為罕見，目前已知唯一可見於樂從堂所藏之聞尊銘文 (圖三) 。聞尊首次收錄於張光裕的著論 (2008年，頁10) ，後來亦有多位學者對其進行研究，但大家對此字的考釋仍意見不一 (詳見董珊，2008年；蔣書紅，2011年；及張崇禮，2012年) 。目前意見是此字應讀作「胥」，有監督、管理之意。根據這個解釋，本句銘的釋讀應為柬黽被公派往炎地進行監管的工作。

「炎」曾是穆王之父周昭王伐楚荊時的途經駐地之一。根據李學勤整理的昭王伐楚荊時間排譜 (2006年，頁130) ，昭王於十五年九月率軍在成周 (今洛陽) 。同月，有銘文記載昭王已抵達炎。由此推斷，炎應在成周之南數天步行可達之處 (圖四) 。李學勤也指出，炎應該位於洛陽附近 (2016年，頁92) 。既然炎是相關銘文中昭王進軍路線上唯一幾個駐停地點之一，且又近當時的東都成周，那麼其應該不會是一個尚未開闢之地，到了昭王之子穆王統治的時代，炎也應不會突然變成了尚未開發的狀態。故此可進一步證明，公派遣柬黽去炎地應是為了監管一個已有所屬之地，而非是去探索開闢一處荒蕪之所。

成周作為東都，對周朝統治的穩定發揮了重要作用。武王克殷之後，為了安撫商朝的舊貴族，設置三監，由三位王弟擔任。武王逝後，成王 (圖五) 年少即位，三監聯合紂王之子武庚起兵叛變，為歷史上著名的「三監之亂」。此叛亂後由輔佐成王的周公 (圖六) 東征平息。周公汲取教訓，置東都成周，遷商朝遺民於此，進行集中管理，且為了穩定商人之心，將成周附近的土地分封予殷商貴族，並選拔有能力者出仕周室為官。

此銘文中提及的「公」極有可能就是獲得了炎作為封地的殷商貴族之一。陳英傑認為，公應為或族首領 (2009年，頁67) 。作為一族之長的公，任命族中成員柬黽治理其封地，並於任務完成後對其進行賞賜。柬黽方尊的銘文為後人提供了研究西周商遺民生活的寶貴線索，極具歷史及學術價值。我們從中可見穆王對於商朝貴族的懷柔政策。在其仁政之下，商朝貴族不但得以保存了其原有的氏族身份和祭祀習俗，還可以在封地上享受很大程度的自治，包括自行管理土地、進行賞賜以及祭祀自己的祖先。

與此方尊形制相類且鑄有長銘的青銅器十分珍罕，大部分已知的近例銘文大都較短，而且多數典藏於全球各大博物館之中。參考一方尊例，鑄十五字銘文，藏北京故宮博物院，載於故宮博物院編，《故宮青銅器》，北京，1999年，圖版131 (圖七) 。亦見榮子方尊，藏於神戶白鶴美術館，圖載於白靜川編，《白鶴英華》，東京，1978年，圖版10。另有日己方尊，鑄二十字銘文，1963年在陝西出土，現存於西安陝西歷史博物館，載於張天恩，《陝西金文集成》，西安，2016年，卷3，編號0314。再有一例鑄十二字銘文，藏於華盛頓弗利爾美術館，載於約翰•亞歷山大•波普等，《The Freer Chinese Bronzes》，華盛頓，1967年，圖版18。近年唯一見於拍賣的近例應是一件鑄七字銘文的青銅方尊，上拍於紐約蘇富比2008年3月18日，編號71。

參考文獻

李學勤，〈黑黽尊考釋〉,《新出青銅器研究》，北京，1990年，頁295-297

李學勤，〈吉美博物館所藏令簋的年代〉，《法國漢學》，輯11，北京，2006年，頁128-131

陳英傑，《西周金文作器用途銘辭研究》，輯1，北京，2009年

張光裕，〈新見樂從堂聞尊銘文試釋〉，《古文字學論稿》，合肥，2008年，頁5-10

董珊，〈讀聞尊銘〉，復旦大學出土文獻與古文字研究中心 (網站) ，上海，2008年

蔣書紅，〈聞尊新解〉，同上，2011年

張崇禮，〈釋聞尊銘文中的戶貝字〉，同上，2012年

李學勤，〈再釋柬黽方尊〉，《古文字研究》，輯31，北京，2016年，頁91-93