Can Korean Calligraphers Write Like Wang Xizhi? Controversy on Collating Characters in the Case of the Mujangsa Stele

Wang Xizhi 王羲之 (ca. 303-ca. 361), the paragon calligrapher of the Eastern Jin dynasty, became a canonized figure in Chinese cultural history, particularly after Emperor Taizong of the Tang obsessively collected and reproduced his works. At that time, thus, one main criteria for ideal calligraphy was its resemblance to Wang’s style. In this context, stele inscriptions emerged that were composed by collecting, comparing, and imitating individual characters from Wang’s extant corpus—a practice known as “Collating Characters” 集字. One notable example in Korea is the Memorial Stele for Enshrining the Amitābha Buddha Statue at Mujangsa Temple 鍪藏寺阿彌陀佛造成記碑(801). Controversy has surrounded its calligraphic origins, however. In 1803, the prominent Qing scholar Weng Fanggang 翁方綱 (1733–1818) stated that the stele’s calligraphy was modeled on the Dingwu edition (1041) of the Preface to the Orchid Pavilion. In contrast, his son Weng Shukun 翁樹崑 (1786-1815) and the Korean antiquarian Kim Chŏnghŭi 金正喜 (1786–1856) maintained the traditional view, i.e., the brushwork to Kim Yukchin 金陸珍 (fl. tenth century), a Silla calligrapher. This case study of the Mujangsa Stele examines how the same inscription was interpreted differently by scholars in China and Korea, revealing divergent frameworks of copying, authenticity, and cultural authority. It then turns to ongoing debates among modern scholars, proposing that the two seemingly opposing theories—collation versus Korean inscriber—may in fact be complementary rather than contradictory.