TIO

THE ANALECTS BY THE SCH

te of Confucius, and the other from Ch'i, the State adjoining. Between these there were considerable differences. The former consisted of twenty Books or Chapters, the same as those into which the

o died at the age of 90, and in the reign of the emperor Hsuan (B.C. 73-49) [1]; Hsiao Wang-chih [2], a general-officer, who died in the reign of the emperor Yuan (B.C. 48-33); Wei Hsien, who was a premier of the empire from B.C. 70

was appointed king of Lu [7] in the year B.C. 154, and some time after, wishing to enlarge his palace, h

子大傳

將軍,

韋賢,

中尉

共 (o

ks was issued. There were all written, however, in the most ancient form of the Chinese character [1], which had fallen into disuse, and the king returned them to the K'ung family, the head of which, K'ung

finally arrested, we are told, in his purpose to destroy the house, by hearing the sounds of bells, musical stones, lutes, and citherns, as he was ascending the steps that led to the ancestral hall or temple. This incident was contrived, we may suppose, by the K'ung family, to preserve the house, or it may have been devised by the historian to

o books were wanting in it as well. The last book of the Lu Lun was divided in it, however, into two, the chapter beginning, 'Yao said,' forming a whole Book by itsel

An-ch'ang [4], who die

ed by Ts'ang-chieh, with large heads and fine tails, like the creature from which the

孔安

in 'The Thirteen Ching.' It has been m

昌侯,

ng [1], and commanded general approbation. To Chang Yu is commonly ascribed the ejecting from the Classic the two additional books which the Ch'i exemplar contained, but Ma Twan-lin prefers to rest that circumstance on the authority of the old Lun, which we have seen was without them [2]. If we ha

ien (A.D. 190-220) [4] at the age of 74, and the amount of his labors on the ancient classical literature is almost incredible. While he adopted the Lu Lun as the received text of his time, he compared it minutely with those of Ch'i and the old exemplar. I

fy the reader of the care with which the text of

TIO

THE ANALECTS WERE WRITTEN;

er the heading, 'The Title of the Work,' I have given the re

張侯

Bk. clxx

玄,

孝獻

which they had severally preserved. But this cannot be true. We may believe, indeed, that many of the disciples put on record conversations which they had had with their master, and note

ath-bed by the officer Mang Ching. Now Ching was the posthumous title of Chung- sun Chieh [1], and we find him alive (Li Chi,

of it, as chapters iii, xii, and xviii, carry us down to a time when the disciples had schools and followers of their

ing to their distinguishing characteristics. We can hardly suppose it to have been written while any of the ten were alive. But there is among them the name of Tsze-hsia, who lived to the age of about

y the disciples of Confucius. Much more likely is the view that we owe the work to their disciples. In the

mentary, in loc. --

see the 厤代統紀表

ien; and Book XVI has been supposed to be interpolated from the Analects of Ch'i. Even if we were to acquiesce in these decisions, we should have accounted only for a small part of the Work. It is best to rest in the general conclusion, that it was compiled by the disciples of the disciples of the

seen that the first of these statements contains only a small amount of truth with regard to the materials of the Analects, nor can we receive the second. If one hand or one mind had digested the materials provided by many, the arrangement and the style of the work would have been different. We should not have had the same remark appearing in several Books, with little variation, and sometimes with none at all. Nor can we acc

of Yung,' is, I conceive,

, 記在那裡, 後來有一高手,

e thrown together at rand

not in broken tablets, but complete, and arranged in Books or Sections, as we now have it. The Old copy was found deposited in the wall of the house which Confucius had occupied, and must have been placed there not lat

in addition to 'The Great Learning,' 'The Doctrine of the Mean,' and 'The Works of Mencius,' I have looked over the Works of Hs

e Ana. VII. xxxiii, and in vii. 2, Ana. IV. i; in III. Pt. I. iv. 11, Ana. VIII. xviii, xix; in IV. Pt. I. xiv. 1, Ana. XI. xvi. 2; in V. Pt. II. vii. 9, Ana. X. xiii. 4; and in VII. Pt. II. xxxvii. 1, 2, 8, Ana. V. xxi, XIII. xxi, and XVII.

of our first century, that when the Work came out of the wall it was named a Chwan or Record (傳), and that it was when K'ung An-kwo instructed a native of Tsin, named Fu-ch

子,

those of Ana. XVII. i, but w

thing like the words of Ana. XV. xxx; and on p. 6, part of X

likewise many, especially in the Doctrine of the Mean, in Mencius, and in the Works of Chwang. Those in the latter are mostly burlesques, but those by the orthodox writers have more or less of classical authority. Some of them may be found in the Chia Yu [3], or 'Narratives of the School,' and in parts of the Li Chi, while others are only known to us by their occurrence in these Writings. Altogether, they do not supply the evidence, for which I am in quest, of the existence

ION

RIES UPON T

taries which have been published on this Work. My object is merely to point out how

人間

ons some of the characteristics of Confucius in

asty, and with what industry it has been

K'ung An-kwo on the old Lun Yu has been referred to. That was lost in consequence of suspicions under which An-kwo fell towards the close of the reign of the emperor Wu, but in the time of the emperor Shun, A.D. 126-144, another scholar, Ma Yung [4], undertook the exposition of the characters in the old Lun, giving at the same time his views of the general meaning. The labors of Chang Hsuan in the second century have been mentioned. Not long after h

lection of Explanations of the Lun Yu [7].' It embodied the labors of all the writers which have been mentioned, and, having been frequently reprinted by succeeding dynasties, it still remains. T

南郡太守, 馬融

; 太常, 王肅

; 散騎常侍, 中領軍, 安鄉亭侯, 曹羲; 侍中

is work, printed about the mid

the work is commonly quoted as if i

s, we come to the Sung, A.D. 960-1279. An edition of the Classics was published by imperial authority, about the beginning of the eleventh century, with the title of 'The Correct Meaning.' The principal scholar engaged in the undertaking was Hsing P'ing [2]. The portion of it on the Analects [3] is commonly reprinted in 'The Thirteen Classics,' after Ho Yen's explanations. But the names of the Sung dynasty are all thrown into the

o [9],' have been published in eighty volumes, containing between three and four hundred books or sections. He has nine treatises on the Four Books, or parts of them, and deserves to take rank with Chang Hsuan and Chu Hsi at the head of Chinese scholars, though he is a vehement opponent of the lat

皇侃

論語

論語

論語

論語

毛奇

西河

皇

TIO

IOUS R

ook II. i, 拱 for 共; viii, 餕 for 饌; xix, 措 for 錯; xxiii. 1, 十世可知, without 也, for 十世可知也. Book III. vii, in the clause 必也射乎, he makes a full stop at 也; xxi. 1, 主 for 社. Book IV. x, 敵 for 適, and 慕 for 莫. Book V. xxi, he puts a full stop at 子. Book VI. vii, he has not the characters 則吾. Book VII. iv, 晏 for 燕 ; xxxiv, 子

It forms sections 449-473 of the Works of the Classics, mentioned at the close of the preceding section. A still more comprehensive work of the same kind is, 'The Examination of the Text of the Classics and of Commentari

1798. The author was

授, 四