So the grammatical affinity of those parts of Shang-tzŭ where these particles are found, to a certain type of third century texts is complete, with the reservations indicated in the footnotes to the synoptic table. No other third century text shows such a strong resemblance to our text as that of Han Fei-tzů. It is the only one in which (sub 4°) as a final is also entirely missing. This impression is completely confirmed by a literary analysis: in the notes on my translation I have on twenty-nine occasions had to refer to Han Fei-tzu for the same or similar expressions, and no doubt this number could be increased. Most of these references are to sections the authenticity of which is in doubt; of those admitted as genuine by Hu Shih,1 I have only given references to par. 40, 43, and 45, and of these par. 43 is specially devoted to a criticism of Shang Yang. It may be supposed that much of the two books goes back to a common inheritance of the School of Law, and it is not, therefore, surprising that I have also found occasion to refer twelve times to Kuan-tzů. Von der Gabelentz, in his Vorbereitendes zur Kritik des Kuan-tsi,2 says that he found nothing in the Shang-chün-shu which referred to Kuan-tzů,3 and this is true to the extent that Kuan-tzu is nowhere quoted, but there are certainly parallel expressions and ideas, and I am sure that a minute examination of Kuan-tzu would bring to light a great many more than I have found. In view of the highly complex character

1 Chung-kuo-chế-hsüch-shih-ta-kang, p. 365.

2 Sitzungsberichte der Königlich Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Jahrgang, 1892, p. 145.

of the text of Kuan-tzů,1 which must be a medley of elements of very different dates, it is interesting to find these parallelisms in our text.

To sum up the conclusion to which this examination leads us can be no other than this:-the present Book of Lord Shang is a compilation of paragraphs of different styles, some of which are older than the others; the older ones contain probably the mutilated remnants of the original book that has been lost; the later ones date, on the whole, from the third century. Some, like the 26th, seem to date from the last quarter of that century, and as I have no wish to be dogmatic, I admit the possibility that a paragraph like the 17th, although in the use of particles it shows the third century characteristics, may nevertheless be considerably later, because it is much more verbose than texts of that period usually are. The other paragraphs are, however, valuable, either because they bring us in touch with what were, I believe, the original ideas of the School of Law, or because they show the later phases of its development. We do not know at what date the compilation of the Book in its present form took place; it may have been at the time of the Six Dynasties, as Maspero suggests.2 We may safely admit, with that scholar, that the present book is a "faux", in the sense that it is not the work in its original form; I believe, however, to have shown that we have no right to reject it, as if it were a fake without value.

1 Cf. Maspero, Journal Asiatique, 1927, p. 151, in a review of "G. Haloun, Seit wann kannten die Chinesen die Tocharen oder Indogermanen überhaupt?" (Leipzig, 1926, Asia Major.)

2 Cf. above, pp. 144-5.

APPENDIX I

A LOST PARAGRAPH

In the 36th chapter of the Ch’ün-shu-chih-yao,1 by Wei Cheng 2 (631), the following is quoted as part of the now lost section Liu Fa, "The Six Laws," which had its place before what is now the 14th paragraph. As the Ch'ün-shuchih-yao has been lost 3 in China since the Sung dynasty this section has been left out in all the editions of Shang-tzŭ, and not even in numbering the paragraphs has a place for it been kept. In the early editions, like those of Ch'en Jen-hsi of the Ming dynasty and the Ch'ung-wen ed., no numbers were attached to the paragraphs, but Yen numbered them and left at the end of the book room for the three, which were lost. Wang Shih-jun accidentally followed him in this, but corrects the mistake in a note on p. 2a of his preface.

The portion of the paragraph which has been preserved runs as follows

-

“The ancient Kings established the laws in accordance with the times, they regulated affairs, calculating what deserved attention. Law being fitting for its own time, there is order; affairs fitting in with those things to which attention is given, there is success. So it follows that laws create order when it is the proper time for them, and that affairs obtain success when they are apt. But now the times have changed

1 羣書治要

2 魏徵

3 Cf. p. 133.

and yet the laws are not reformed; what deserves attention has altered and yet affairs are transacted in the old way Thus the laws and the times are contrary to each other and affairs and that, to which attention is given, are different from each other. Therefore, though laws are established, disorder increases; though one acts, giving attention to certain things, affairs fail. Consequently the way of a Sage in administering a country, is not to model himself on antiquity, and not to follow the present, but to establish success in a way which is fitting for the time,1 and to be able to escape whenever one is in difficulties. But now people may change their customs, but the laws are not altered, the. conditions of the state may change their aspect, but in that to which one gives one's attention, one still follows the old way. Now law is the government of the people, and that, to which attention should be given, is the practical side of affairs. If a state fails in its laws it is in peril, and if affairs fail in their practical application they do not succeed; and therefore, if the laws are not fitting for the times and that to which attention is given, does not fit in with practical needs, there has always been peril."

The paragraph is without much interest and certainly does not belong to the oldest part of the Book.

1 Cf. par. 7, p. 228, and par. 8, p. 238.

M

APPENDIX II

LIST OF REFERENCES

In this synoptic table I have assembled all the references to other Chinese books, which I have thought necessary to give in the notes to my translation. Naturally the nature and value of these references differ widely, yet a general idea of various relationships may be obtained by a glance at this list. I only give the paragraphs.