reputation in the time of T'ai-tsung (976-998), Chăn-tsung (9981022), and Zăn-tsung (1023-1063). By imperial command, in association with several other officers, he prepared a work in two Parts, under the title of 'The Sounds and Meaning of Mencius,' and presented it to the court. Occasion was taken from this for a strange imposture. In the edition of 'The Thirteen Ching,' Mencius always appears with 'The Commentary of Châo Ch'i' and 'The Correct Meaning of Shun Shih3. Under the Sung dynasty, what were called 'correct meanings' were made for most of the Classics. They are commentaries and annotations on the principal commentator who is considered as the expounder of the Classic, the author not hesitating, however, to indicate any peculiar views of his own. The genuineness of Shih's Correct Meaning of Mencius' is questioned by few, but there seems to be no doubt of its being really a forgery, at the same time that it contains the substance of the true work of 'The Illustrious Duke,' so far as that embraced the meaning of Mencius and of Chao Ch't. The account of it given in the preface to 'An Examination of the Text in the Commentary and Annotations on Mencius,' by Yuan Yüan of the present dynasty, is-Sun Shih himself made no "Correct Meaning;" but some one-I know not who-supposing that his Work was really of that character, and that there were many things in the commentary which were not explained, and passages also of an unsatisfactory nature, he transcribed the whole of Shih's Work on "The Sounds and Meaning," and having interpolated some words of his own, published it under the title of "The Annotations of Sun Shih." He was the same person who is styled by Chu Hsi "a scholar of Shao-wû 4.” '

In the twelfth century Chú Hsi appeared upon the stage, and entered into the labours of all his predecessors. He published one Work separately upon Mencius, and two upon Mencius and the Confucian Analects. The second of these, 'Collected Comments on the Analects and Mencius,' is now the standard authority on the '太宗,眞宗,仁宗. 孟子音義,二卷一

1

2

-In or about the year 1008, a book was found, at one of the palace gates, with the title of "The Book of Heaven'

(*). The emperor at first was inclined to go in state and accept it, but he thought

of consulting Shih. Shih replied according to a sentiment of Mencius (V. Pt. L. v. 3) that 'Heaven does not speak,' and asked how then there could be any Book of Heaven. Was this Book of Heaven, thus rejected on Shih's counsel, a copy of our Sacred Scriptures, which some Nestorian Christian was endeavouring in the manner indicated to bring before the court of

China? *漢趙氏註,宋孫奭疏.‘阮云孟子註疏校勘 記序.‘孟子指要.‘論孟集義; 論孟集註

ཐཱ་

subject, and has been the test of orthodoxy and scholarship in the literary examinations since A. D. 1315.

3. Under the present dynasty two important contributions have been made to the study of Mencius. They are both published in the Explanations of the Classics under the Imperial Dynasty of Ch'ing'.' The former, bearing the title of 'An Examination of the Text in the Commentary and Annotations of Mencius,' forms the sections from 1039 to 1054. It is by Yuan Yüan, the Governor-General under whose auspices that compilation was published. Its simple aim is to establish the true reading by a collation of the oldest and best manuscripts and editions, and of the remains of a series of stone tablets containing the text of Mencius, which were prepared in the reign of Kao-tsung (A.D. 1128-1162), and are now existing in the Examination Hall of Hăng-châu. The second Work, which is still more important, is embraced in the sections 1117-1146. Its title is--'The Correct Meaning of Mencius, by Chiâo Hsün, a Chü-zăn of Chiang-ta".' It is intended to be such a Work as Sun Shih would have produced, had he really made what has been so long current in the world under his name. I must regret that I was not earlier acquainted with it.

SECTION IV.

INTEGRITY; AUTHORSHIP; AND RECEPTION AMONG THE CLASSICAL BOOKS.

1. We have seen how the Works of Mencius were catalogued by Liû Hsin as being in 'eleven Books,' while a century earlier Sze-mâ Ch'ien referred to them as consisting only of seven.' The question has very much vexed Chinese scholars whether there ever really were four additional Books of Mencius which have been lost.

2. Châo Ch'i says in his preface :-'There likewise are four additional Books, entitled "A Discussion of the Goodness of Man's Nature," "An Explanation of Terms," "The Classic of Filial Piety," and "The Practice of Government." But neither breadth nor depth marks their composition. It is not like that of the seven acknowledged Books. It may be judged they are not really the production of Mencius, but have been palmed upon the world by some subsequent imitator of him.' As the four Books in question are lost, and only

1 See vol. i. proleg. p. 133. '孟子正義 江都焦孝廉循著 ``又有外書四篇,性善辯,文說,孝經,為政,其文不能

a very few quotations from Mencius, that are not found in his Works which we have, can be fished up from ancient authors, our best plan is to acquiesce in the conclusion of Châo Ch'i. The specification of 'Seven Books' by Sze-mâ Ch'ien is an important corroboration of it. In the two centuries preceding our era, we may conceive that the four Books whose titles are given by him were made and published under the name of Mencius, and Hsin would only do his duty in including them in his catalogue, unless their falsehood was generally acknowledged. Ch'i devoting himself to the study of our author, and satisfied from internal evidence that they were not his, only did his duty in rejecting them. There is no evidence that his decision was called in question by any scholar of the Han or the dynasties immediately following, when we may suppose that the Books were still in existence.

The author of 'Supplemental Observations on the Four Books',' says upon this subject:-"It would be better to be without books than to give entire credit to them ";"-this is the rule for reading ancient books laid down by Mencius himself, and the rule for us after-men in reading about what purport to be lost books of his The seven Books which we have "comprehend the doctrine of heaven and earth, examine and set forth ten thousand topics, discuss the subjects of benevolence and righteousness, reason and virtue, the nature of man and the decrees of Heaven, misery and happiness"." Brilliantly are these things treated of, in a way far beyond what any disciple of Kung-sun Ch'âu or Wan Chang could have attained to. What is the use of disputing about other matters? Ho Sheh has his "Expurgated Mencius," but Mencius cannot be expurgated. Lin Chin-sze has his "Continuation of Mencius," but Mencius needs no continuation. I venture to say-" Besides the Seven Books there were no other Works of Mencius."

3. I have said, in the note at the end of this volume, that Chao Ch't gives the total of the characters in Mencius as 34,685, while they are now found actually to amount to 35,226. This difference has been ingeniously accounted for by supposing that the continually recurring

This is the language

宏深,不與內篇相似,似非孟子本眞,後世依放而託 t. 1 See vol. i. proleg. p. 131. 'Mencius, VIL. Pt. II. iii. of Châo Ch'î. *MA Twan-lin mentions two authors who had taken in hand to expurgate Mencius, but neither of them is called. He mentions Lin Chin-sze, calling him

Lin Shăn-sze (B), and his Work.

Mencius' and 'Mencius said' were not in his copies. There would be no use for them on his view that the whole was composed by Mencius himself. If they were added subsequently, they would about make up the actual excess of the number of characters above his computation. The point is not one of importance, and I have touched on it simply because it leads us to the question of the authorship of the Works.

say

4. On this point Sze-mâ Ch'ien and Chao Ch'î are agreed. They that Mencius composed the seven Books himself, and yet that he did so along with certain of his disciples. The words of the latter are:-'He withdrew from public life, collected and digested the conversations which he had had with his distinguished disciples, Kung-sun Châu, Wan Chang, and others, on the difficulties and doubts which they had expressed, and also compiled himself his deliverances as ex cathedra;-and so published the seven Books of his writings.'

This view of the authorship seems to have been first called in question by Han Yü1, commonly referred to as 'Han, the duke of Literature,' a famous scholar in the eighth and ninth centuries, under the Tang dynasty, who expressed himself in the following terms:'The Books of Mencius were not published by himself. After his death, his disciples, Wan Chang and Kung-sun Châu, in communication with each other, recorded the words of Mencius3.'

5. If we wish to adjudicate in the matter, we find that we have a difficult task in hand. One thing is plain-the book is not the work of many hands like the Confucian Analects. 'If we look at the style of the composition,' says Chû Hsi, 'it is as if the whole were melted together, and not composed by joining piece to piece.' This language is too strong, but there is a degree of truth and force in it. No principle of chronology guided the arrangement of the different parts, and a foreigner may be pardoned if now and then the ' pearls' seem to him 'at random strung;' yet the collection is characterised by a uniformity of style, and an endeavour in the separate Books to preserve a unity of matter. This consideration, however, is not

·韓愈,字退之‘韓文公.‘孟軻之書,非軻自著, 軻既沒其徒萬章公孫丑,相與記軻所言焉耳; se note by Chú Hsi in his prefatory notice to Mencius. ·觀其筆勢,如鎔鑄而成, 非綴緝所就者; quoted in 四書拓餘說,孟子, art. I

enough to decide the question. Such as the work is, we can conceive it proceeding either from Mencius himself, or from the labours of a few of his disciples engaged on it in concert.

The author of the Topography of the Four Books" has this argument to show that the Works of Mencius are by Mencius himself: 'The Confucian Analects,' he says, were made by the disciples, and therefore they record minutely the appearance and manners of the sage. But the seven Books were made by Mencius himself, and therefore we have nothing in them excepting the words and public movements of the philosopher'. This peculiarity is certainly consonant with the hypothesis of Mencius's own authorship, and so far may dispose us to adopt it.

On the other hand, as the princes of Mencius's time to whom any reference is made are always mentioned by the honorary epithets conferred on them after their death, it is argued that those at least must have been introduced by his disciples. There are many passages, again, which savour more of a disciple or other narrator than of the philosopher himself. There is, for instance, the commencing sentences of Book III. Pt. I:-'When the duke Wăn of T'ǎng was crown-prince, having to go to Ch'û, he went by way of Sung, and visited Mencius (lit. the philosopher Măng). Mencius discoursed to him how the nature of man is good, and when speaking, always made laudatory reference to Yao and Shun. When the crownprince was returning from Ch', he again visited Mencius. Mencius said to him "Prince, do you doubt my words? The path is one, and only one."

6. Perhaps the truth after all is as the thing is stated by Sze-mâ Ch'ien,-that Mencius, along with some of his disciples, compiled and composed the Work. It would be in their hands and under their guardianship after his death, and they may have made some slight alterations, to prepare it, as we should say, for the press. Yet allowing this, there is nothing to prevent us from accepting the sayings and doings as those of Mencius, guaranteed by himself.

7. It now only remains here that I refer to the reception of Mencius's Works among the Classics. We have seen how they were not admitted by Liû Hsin into his catalogue of classical works. Mencius 1 See vol. i. proleg. p. 131. *論語成于門人之手,故聖人 容貌甚悉,七篇成于已手,故但記言語或出處; 皇

, Sect. xxiv, at the end.