@article{oai:tobunken.repo.nii.ac.jp:00006171,
 author = {相澤, 正彦 and Aizawa, Masahiko},
 issue = {391},
 journal = {美術研究, The bijutsu kenkyu : the journal of art studies},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {In 1495, a painting known as Haboku Landscape (Tokyo National Museum) was presented to Sôen by his master Sesshû when Sôen had completed his studies and was returning to his hometown. Six high ranking priests of the Gozan (five major temples) of Zen added their inscribed poems to the top of the painting, accompanied beneath by Sesshû's preface, and at the bottom, Sesshû's painting of a landscape after Yu Jian.           
     The majority of previous studies of this work have focused on Sesshû's role in this work, with little mention made of Sôen, the recipient. Indeed, how much of Sôen's own thoughts were included in this work? This article focuses on the state of affairs that led to the inscriptions made on Haboku Landscape when Sôen was in Kyoto and what meaning the Haboku Landscape held for Sôen himself.
     In terms of how this work came to have these many inscriptions, up until now it has been generally believed that Sôen visited each one of the six Zen priests and requested a poem inscription. The six men were Gettô Shûkyô, Ranpa Keishi, Ten’in Ryûtaku, Ryôan Keigo, Shôjû Ryûto, and Keijo Shûrin. These six men were all famous poet-priests of the Gozan temples of the day. The same year, 1495, that Haboku Landscape was painted, these six men also inscribed a work today in the Nezu Institute of Fine Arts in Tokyo, namely High Waves off the Estuary of Chien-tang. This Nezu work was also inscribed by a seventh priest, Keirin Tokushô, but what is important is the order in which the six men inscribed the Nezu work; it is exactly the same as the order seen on Haboku Landscape. Three years later, in 1498, the Hokutoshû anthology of poems by the seven men who inscribed the Nezu work was published, with the same order preserved in the listing of the twenty verses by each priest.
     The inscription order was neither in order of age, nor in the order of their Gozan rank. These six men (or seven in the case of one of the works) must have made some mutual agreement to arrange their writing in an order that somehow superceded that of their age or their rank. Such a decision indicates a strong human bond between these men, and indeed they could even be considered a salon of cultured men. Thus, Sôen did not simply consider that any high ranking priest would do, visiting a succession of such men in turn, rather he requested inscriptions by the members of a specific salon.
     Next, the article considers the fact that neither Sôen nor Sesshû would have had the influence necessary to make such a request to this high ranking cultural group, and undoubtedly someone acted as intercessor for the request. A possible candidate for this role of intercessor is Kenko Shộkei, an intimate of the six priests and like Sôen, a Kamakura-based painter-monk who had arrived in Kyoto on his second trip to the capital two years earlier in 1493. A major reason for considering Shôkei in this light is the fact that in 1493 eight men inscribed a painting of Shôkei's studio, the Hinrakusai Study, and six of those eight were the inscribers of the Haboku Landscape. It is unclear how long after 1493 Shôkei remained in Kyoto, but if he stayed until 1495, then given the relationship of influence between Shôkei and Sôen, it would have been perfectly natural for Shôkei to introduce Sôen to the high clerics who had long been his intimates since his first trip to the capital. If that were the case, then it would also be possible to set Sôen's arrival in Kyoto as 1495 so that he may have met Shôkei.
     Further, the fact that Sôen chose to have the same inscribers as those chosen by Shôkei clearly reflects his awareness of Shôkei himself and of Kamakura, and it could also be said to reflect his desire to return to Kamakura. This could be a case of Sôen learning from Shôkei's example. Shôkei is known to have brought a new style of painting, namely that of Xia Gui, to Kamakura, and it is possible that in this Sesshû work Sôen intended to bring a new style of painting, that of Yu Jian, to Kamakura. The Yu Jian style had, of course, been transformed into a Sesshû style, and was a style preferred by Sesshû. The clear, exact brushwork in this Sesshû work makes it ideal as an instructive model work suitable as a presentation piece upon the successful completion of a pupil's painting studies.},
 pages = {59--75},
 title = {「破墨山水図」と宗淵},
 year = {2007}
}