clusion:-'Our food, our drink, and our clothes are all different from those of the Flowery States; we do not exchange silks or other articles of introduction with their courts; their language and ours do not admit of intercourse between us and them:—what evil is it possible for us to have done?' If it was so with those Jung, it was the same, doubtless, with other tribes as well; and they had, probably, different languages among themselves, or at least different dialects of the same language which would render communication between them difficult. Even where the outlying chiefs or princes claimed connexion with the House of Chow, or traced their first appointment to it, the languages spoken in their States may have been different from that of China proper. I have pointed out how the names of the lords of Woo, both in structure and sound, do not appear to be Chinese. And in the account of Tsze-wăn who had been chief minister of Ts'oo, given in the Chuen on VII. iv., his name of Now-woo-t'oo is explained by reference to the fact that he had been suckled by a tigress, when he was a child and cast away in a forest. The people of Ts'oo, we are told, called suckling now, and their name for a tiger was woot'oo; and hence when the child was grown up, he was known by the name of Now-woot'oo, or Tiger-suckled. It would so happen that the languages of the people, who were not of a Chinese origin, and of their chiefs, would differ for a time; but in the end, the culture and the force of the superior race prevailed to bring the language and other characteristics into conformity with it.

CHAPTER IV.

LIST OF THE PRINCIPAL WORKS WHICH HAVE BEEN EMPLOYED

IN THE PREPARATION OF THIS VOLUME.

SECTION I.

CHINESE WORKS; WITH BRIEF NOTICES OF THEM.

1. In the (See proleg. to vol. I., p. 129):[i] 春秋左傳註疏六十卷, The Ch'un Tsëw and the Chuen of Tso, with Commentary and Explanations; in 60 Books;' [ii] + The Ch'un Ts'ëw and the Chuen of Kung-yang, with Commentary and Explanations; in 28 Books;'

[iii.] **VER=+ The Ch'un Ts'ew and the Chuen of Kuh-lëang, with Commentary and Explanations; in 20 Books.'

The above three Works are of course K'ung Ying-tah's editions. of the labours of Too Yu, Ho Hew, and Fan Ning, on the text of the Ch'un Ts'ëw and the early Commentaries of Tso-she, Kungyang, and Kuh-lëang;-of all of which I have spoken in the first chapter of these prolegomena. K'ung's own explanations are as learned and prolix as in the case of the other Classics. Very little is to be gleaned after him from the books that have come down to us of the dynasties from the Han to the T'ang. I have generally used the edition of the thirteen King by Yuen Yuen; and to the text of the She in it I have referred in the prolegomena to vol. IV., p. 172. The student should use no other, where this is procurable. The above Works all contain Yuen's examination of K'ung's texts (春秋左傳公羊傳穀梁傳註疏挍勘記

4. Compilation and Digest of Commentaries and Remarks on the Ch'un Ts'ëw. the Ch'un Tsew. By imperial authority.' In 40 Books, the first two being occupied with introductory matter. The Work was ordered and its preparation entrusted to a committee of the principal scholars of the empire in 1,699, the 38th year of the period K'ang-he, and appeared in 1,721, the 60th year of the same. I have generally called it the K'ang-he Ch'un Ts'ëw. It deserves the praise which I have bestowed on the imperial editions, in the present dynasty, of the Shoo and the She, though I have been disposed to dissent more

frequently from the decisions of the editors themselves. They drew in preparing it from 134 writers:-3 of the Chow dynasty; 10 of the Han; 1 of the Tsin; 2 of the Suy; 13 of the T'ang; 57 of the Sung; 12 of the Yuen; and 36 of the Ming.

According to their plan, there are subjoined to the text occasionally brief notices of the different readings, the pronunciation of characters, and the matter. Then follow the Commentaries of Tso, Kung-yang, Kuh-lëang, and Hoo Gan-kwoh (styled), for the mnost part in full; but the editors sometimes take it on them to curtail or even suppress them entirely where they think them to be in error. Hoo Gan-kwoh was a scholar and officer of the Sung dynasty (born in 1,074; died in 1,138). His commentary on our classic, in 30 Books, is not intrinsically of much value, but it was received on its publication with great applause by Kaou Tsung, the first emperor of the southern Sung dynasty; and all through the Ming dynasty its authority was supreme. It formed the standard for competitors at the literary examinations. Having given those four Commentaries, the editors draw upon their host of Authorities

, and conclude, when they think it necessary, with their own

decisions (案)

6. There was published in 1,677, at the district city of Keun-shan , department Soo-chow, Keang-soo, a large collection of Works on the Classics, under the title of, taken from the name of the hall or library of the gentleman to whom the books belonged. The expense of publication seems to have been borne by a Manchoo, called Nah-lan Ching-tih, with the style of Yung-joh

. The Collection contains 33 Works on the Ch'un Ts'ëw, all but the last by writers of the Sung and Yuen dynasties. I have had the opportunity of consulting:

[i.] 14, 'Commentaries on the Ch'un Ts'ëw.' In 15 Books; by Lew Ch'ang; styled ; born 1,019, died 1,077. The author had written an earlier Work on the Ch'un Ts'ëw, called The one under notice remained in manuscript, until the publication of the Collection in which we now find it, Still there seems no doubt of its genuineness. Lew draws largely on the three early Commentaries, but decides between them according to his own judgment, having adopted, however, the praise-and-censure theory from Kung-yang and Kuh-lëang.

[ii.] Commentaries on the Ch'un Ts'ëw.' In 20 Books, by Yeh Mung-tih (葉夢得; styled 少蕴, and also called 石林). These last two characters are generally prefixed to the title of

the Work, to distinguish it from the preceding and others. The author was born in 1,077, and died in 1,148. He shows on the one hand his dissent from Sun Fuh and others who wished to discard the three early Commentaries altogether, and not go beyond the text for its explanation, and on the other hand from Soo Cheh, who held to Tso-she and paid no regard to Kung and Kuh.

[iii.], A general Exposition of the Ch'un Ts'ëw.' In 13 Books; by Hwang Chung-yen; styled, a scholar of the Sung dynasty, who seems for some reason or other not to have advanced beyond his first degree. His Work was completed in 1,230. He entirely discards the praise-and-censure theory, and is more than necessarily independent in his treatment of the three early Commentaries.

[iv.], 'Collected Comments on the Ch'un Ts'ëw.' In 11 Books; by Chang Heah ; styled, a scholar of the first half of the 13th century. He had previously prepared a Work on the classic, which he called; and, dissatisfied with the finish of it, he prepared the present one, in which he strove to imitate the style and manner of Choo He on the Analects and Mencius; and hence its name of . It is a useful Work, very perspicuous.

[v.], 'The meaning of the Ch'un Ts'ew Catechetically elicited.' In 20 Books; by Leu Ta-kwei (; styled, and also called, who took his 3d degree in 1,247. The catechetical form enables the author to bring out his views with force; but there is nothing which can be called peculiarly his own. As between the early commentators, he adheres to Tso for the facts, and to Kuh-lëang for the principles, having much to say against Kung-yang, and more against Ho Hew.

[vi.]*'Digest to help in reading the Ch'un Ts'ëw.' In 12 Books; by Chin Shin (; styled F, who lived both in the Sung and Yuen dynasties. He had given to his study the name of, which characters often enter into the title of his Work. He makes constant use of Tso's Commentary, but is an advocate of the views of Hoo Gan-kwoh.

[vii.] 春秋諸國統(The Records in the Chun Tsëw arranged under the States to which they severally belong.' In 22 Books; by Ts'e Le-k'een; styled 1. His preface is dated in 1,319. The peculiar character of the Work is shown in the title. He has placed the notices belonging to Loo before those of Chow; very naturally, it seems to me, but the critics profess to

be shocked by the arrangement. in the handling of subjects.

A good deal of freedom is shown

[viii], 'The meaning of the Ch'un Ts'ew Catechetically elicited.' In 10 Books; by Ching Twan-hëoh; styled, called also, who took his third degree in 1,321. He was much employed in the office of historiography, and composed the Work next mentioned and another on the Ch'un Ts'ëw before he felt equal to this, which is reckoned his chef d'œuvre. It betrays a sceptical disposition in reference to the three early Commentaries, and is particularly rich in adducing the opinions of the Sung scholars.

[ix.] The proper Meaning of the Ch'un Ts'ëw.' In 30 Books; by Ch'ing Twan-hëoh above. This was his earliest Work on our Classic, and shows the same tendencies which are fully developed in "The Meaning Catechetically elicited.' He gives the names of 176 Works and Authors, which he had consulted in preparing for his task.

[x] 春秋諸傅會通,‘All the Commentaries on the Ch'un Ts'ëw in one view.' In 24 Books; by Le Leen; styled 1). The Author's preface bears date in 1,349, towards the end of the Yuen dynasty. The substance of the three early Commentaries, and of their editors, Too Yu, Ho Hew, and Fan Ning, of Kung Ying-tah, Hoo Gan-kwoh, Ch'ing E-ch'uen, Ch'in Foo-leang y

), and Chang Hëah, is all to be found here, with the judgments on their different views of Le Leen himself. It is a Work of great value.

6

[xi.], My Master's Teachings on the Ch'un Ts'ëw.' In 3 Books; by Chaou Fang; styled . First published in 1,348. The author had studied under Hwang Tsih (), famous for his knowledge of the Yih King and the Ch'un Ts'ëw; and here he gives what he had learned from him on the true meaning of those Classics, and the successes and failures of previous commentators.

[xii.] ** The Style and Expression in the Ch'un Ts'ew on similar Subjects.' In 15 Books; by the same author as the above. This is an ingenious attempt to make out the principles by which Confucius was guided in his work of compiling the Ch'un Ts'ëw from the historiographers of Loo. His principal Authorities are Too Yu and his own master Hwang Tsih; but he often differs from them. He did his work well; but we have seen that all conclusions on the subject must be very uncertain.