 | This article mayrequirecleanup to meet Wikipedia'squality standards. The specific problem is:use of chinese-language text needs to be pared down or edited to conform withMOS:ZH. Please helpimprove this article if you can.(November 2023) (Learn how and when to remove this message) |
 A page of an annotatedBook of Documents manuscript from the 7th century, held by theTokyo National Museum | |
| Author | Various;trad. compiled byConfucius |
|---|---|
| Original title | 書 |
| Language | Old Chinese |
| Subject | Compilation of rhetorical prose |
| Publication place | China |
TheBook of Documents (Chinese:書經;pinyin:Shūjīng;Wade–Giles:Shu King) or theClassic of History,[a] is one of theFive Classics of ancientChinese literature. It is a collection of rhetorical prose attributed to figures ofancient China, and served as the foundation of Chinesepolitical philosophy for over two millennia.
TheBook of Documents was the subject of one of China's oldest literary controversies, between proponents of different versions of the text. A version was preserved fromQin Shi Huang'sburning of books and burying of scholars by scholarFu Sheng, in 29 chapters (piān篇). This group of texts were referred to as "Modern Script" (or "Current Script";jīnwén今文), because they were written with the script in use at the beginning of the Western Han dynasty.
A longer version of theDocuments was said to be discovered in the wall ofConfucius's family estate inQufu by his descendantKong Anguo in the late 2nd century BC. This new material was referred to as "Old Script" (gǔwén古文), because they were written in the script that predated the standardization of Chinese script during the Qin. Compared to the Modern Script texts, the "Old Script" material had 16 more chapters. However, this seems to have been lost at the end of the EasternHan dynasty, while the Modern Script text enjoyed circulation, in particular inOuyang Gao's [zh] study, called theOuyang Shangshu (歐陽尚書). This was the basis of studies byMa Rong andZheng Xuan during the Eastern Han.[2][3]
In 317 AD,Mei Ze presented to theEastern Jin court a 58-chapter (59 if the preface is counted)Book of Documents as Kong Anguo's version of the text. This version was accepted, despite the doubts of a few scholars, and later was canonized as part ofKong Yingda's project. It was only in the 17th century thatQing dynasty scholarYan Ruoqu demonstrated that the "old script" were actually fabrications "reconstructed" in the 3rd or 4th centuries AD.
In the transmitted edition, texts are grouped into four sections representing different eras: the legendary reign ofYu the Great, and theXia,Shang andZhou dynasties. The Zhou section accounts for over half the text. Some of its modern-script chapters are among the earliest examples of Chinese prose, recording speeches from the early years of the Zhou dynasty in the late 11th century BC. Although the other three sections purport to record earlier material, most scholars believe that even the New Script chapters in these sections were composed later than those in the Zhou section, with chapters relating to the earliest periods being as recent as the 4th or 3rd centuries BC.[4][5]
The history of the various versions of theDocuments is particularly complex, and has been the subject of a long-running literary and philosophical controversy.
According to a later tradition, theBook of Documents was compiled byConfucius (551–479 BC) as a selection from a much larger group of documents, with some of the remainder being included in theYi Zhou Shu.[6] However, the early history of both texts is obscure.[7] Beginning with Confucius, writers increasingly drew on theDocuments to illustrate general principles, though it seems that several different versions were in use.[8]
Six citations to unnamed chapters of theDocuments appear in theAnalects. While Confucius invoked the pre-dynastic emperorsYao andShun, as well as figures from theXia andShang dynasties, he complained of the lack of documentation prior to the Zhou. TheDocuments were cited increasingly frequently in works through the 4th century BC, including in theMencius,Mozi andZuo Zhuan. These authors favoured documents relating to Yao, Shun and the Xia dynasty, chapters now believed to have been written in theWarring States period. The chapters currently believed to be the oldest—mostly relating to the early Zhou—were little used by Warring States authors, perhaps due to the difficulty of the archaic language or a less familiar worldview.[9] Fewer than half the passages quoted by these authors are present in the received text.[10] Authors such asMencius andXunzi, while quoting theDocuments, refused to accept it as genuine in its entirety. Their attitude contrasts with the reverence later shown to the text during the Han dynasty, when its compilation was attributed to Confucius.[11]
Many copies of the work were destroyed in theBurning of Books during theQin dynasty.Fu Sheng reconstructed part of the work from hidden copies in the late 3rd to early 2nd century BC, at the start of the succeedingHan dynasty. The texts that he transmitted were known as the "Modern Script" (今文jīn wén) because it was written in theclerical script.[12][13]It originally consisted of 29 chapters, but the "Great Speech" 太誓 chapter was lost shortly afterwards and replaced by a new version.[14] The remaining 28 chapters were later expanded into 30 when Ouyang Gao divided the "Pangeng" chapter into three sections.[15]
During the reign ofEmperor Wu, renovations of the home of Confucius are said to have uncovered several manuscripts hidden within a wall, including a longer version of theDocuments.These texts were referred to as "Old Script" because they were written in the pre-Qinseal script.[13]They were transcribed into clerical script and interpreted by Confucius' descendantKong Anguo.[13]Han dynasty sources give contradictory accounts of the nature of this find.[16] According to the commonly repeated account of theBook of Han, the "Old Script" texts included the chapters preserved by Fu Sheng, another version of the "Great Speech" chapter and some 16 additional ones.[13]It is unclear what happened to these manuscripts. According to theBook of Han,Liu Xiang collated the Old Script version against the three main "Modern Script" traditions, creating a version of theDocuments that included both groups. This was championed by his sonLiu Xin,[17]who requested in a letter to Emperor Ai the establishment of aboshi position for its study.[18] But this did not happen. Most likely, this edition put together by the imperial librarians was lost in the chaos that ended the Western Han dynasty, and the later movement of the capital and imperial library.
A list of 100 chapter titles was also in circulation; many are mentioned in theRecords of the Grand Historian, but without quoting the text of the other chapters.[19]
Theshu were designated one of theFive Classics when Confucian works made official byEmperor Wu of Han, andjīng ('classic') was added to its name.The termShàngshū 'venerated documents' was also used in the Eastern Han.[20]TheXiping Stone Classics, set up outside the imperial academy in 175–183 but since destroyed, included a Modern Script version of theDocuments.[21]Most Han dynasty scholars ignored the Old Script version, and it disappeared by the end of the dynasty.[19]
A version of theDocuments that included the "Old Script" texts was allegedly rediscovered by the scholarMei Ze during the 4th century, and presented to the imperial court of theEastern Jin.[21]His version consisted of the 31 modern script texts in 33 chapters, and 18 additional old script texts in 25 chapters, with a preface and commentary purportedly written by Kong Anguo.[22] This was presented asGuwen Shangshu 古文尚書, and was widely accepted. It was the basis of theShàngshū zhèngyì (尚書正義 'Correct interpretation of theDocuments') published in 653 and made the official interpretation of theDocuments by imperial decree. The oldest extant copy of the text, included in theKaicheng Stone Classics (833–837), contains all of these chapters.[21]
Since theSong dynasty, starting from Wu Yu (吳棫), many doubts had been expressed concerning the provenance of the allegedly rediscovered "Old Script" texts in Mei Ze's edition. In the 16th century, Mei Zhuo (梅鷟) published a detailed argument that these chapters, as well as the preface and commentary, were forged in the 3rd century AD using material from other historical sources such as theZuo Commentary and theRecords of the Grand Historian. Mei identified the sources from which the forger had cut and pasted text, and even suggestedHuangfu Mi as a probable culprit. In the 17th century,Yan Ruoqu's unpublished but widely distributed manuscript entitledEvidential analysis of the Old Script Documents (尚書古文疏證;Shàngshū gǔwén shūzhèng) convinced most scholars that the rediscovered Old Script texts were fabricated in the 3rd or 4th centuries.[23]
New light has been shed on theBook of Documents by the recovery between 1993 and 2008 of caches oftexts written on bamboo slips from tombs of thestate of Chu inJingmen, Hubei.[24] These texts are believed to date from the late Warring States period, around 300 BC, and thus predate the burning of the books during the Qin dynasty.[24] TheGuodian Chu Slips and the Shanghai Museum corpus include quotations of previously unknown passages of the work.[24][25] TheTsinghua Bamboo Slips includes a version of the transmitted text "Golden Coffer", with minor textual differences, as well as several documents in the same style that are not included in the received text. The collection also includes two documents that the editors considered to be versions of the Old Script texts "Common Possession of Pure Virtue" and "Command toFu Yue".[26] Other authors have challenged these straightforward identifications.[27][28]
In the orthodox arrangement, the work consists of 58 chapters, each with a brief preface traditionally attributed to Confucius, and also includes a preface and commentary, both purportedly by Kong Anguo.An alternative organization, first used byWu Cheng, includes only the Modern Script chapters, with the chapter prefaces collected together, but omitting the Kong preface and commentary.In addition, several chapters are divided into two or three parts in the orthodox form.[22]
With the exception of a few chapters of late date, the chapters are represented as records of formal speeches by kings or other important figures.[29][30]Most of these speeches are of one of five types, indicated by their titles:[31]
Classical Chinese tradition lists six types ofShu, beginning withdian典, Canons (2 chapters in the Modern corpus).
According toSu Shi (1037–1101), it is possible to single out Eight Announcements of the early Zhou, directed to the Shang people. Their titles only partially correspond to the modern chapters marked asgao (apart from the nos. 13, 14, 15, 17, 18 that mention the genre, Su Shi names nos. 16 "Zi cai", 19 "Duo shi" and 22 "Duo fang").
As pointed out byChen Mengjia (1911–1966), announcements and commands are similar, but differ in that commands usually include granting of valuable objects, land or servants to their recipients.
Guo Changbao过常宝 claims that the graph for announcement (誥), known since theOracle bone script, also appears on two bronze vessels (He zun andShi Zhi gui史[臣+舌]簋), as well as in the "six genres"六辞 of theZhou li[32][clarification needed]
In many cases a speech is introduced with the phraseWáng ruò yuē (王若曰 'The king seemingly said'), which also appears on commemorativebronze inscriptions from the Western Zhou period, but not in other received texts.Scholars interpret this as meaning that the original documents were prepared scripts of speeches, to be read out by an official on behalf of the king.[33][34]
The chapters are grouped into four sections representing different eras: the semi-mythical reign ofYu the Great, and the three ancient dynasties of theXia,Shang andZhou.The first two sections – on Yu the Great and the Xia dynasty – contain two chapters each in the Modern Script version, and though they purport to record the earliest material in theDocuments, from the 2nd millennium BC, most scholars believe they were written during theWarring States period.The Shang dynasty section contains five chapters, of which the first two – the "Speech ofKing Tang" and "Pan Geng" – recount the conquest of the Xia by the Shang and their leadership's migration to a new capital (now identified asAnyang).The bulk of the Zhou dynasty section concerns the reign ofKing Cheng of Zhou (r.c. 1040–1006 BC) and the king's uncles, theDuke of Zhou andDuke of Shao.The last four Modern Script chapters relate to the later Western Zhou and early Spring and Autumn periods.[35]
| Part | New Text | Orthodox chapter | Title | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 虞書 Yu [Shun] | 1 | 1 | 堯典 | Yáo diǎn | Canon ofYao |
| 2 | 舜典 | Shùn diǎn | Canon ofShun | ||
| 3 | 大禹謨 | Dà Yǔ mó | Counsels ofGreat Yu | ||
| 2 | 4 | 皋陶謨 | Gāo Yáo mó | Counsels ofGao Yao | |
| 5 | 益稷 | Yì jì | Yi and Ji | ||
| 夏書 Xia | 3 | 6 | 禹貢 | Yǔ gòng | Tribute of [Great] Yu |
| 4 | 7 | 甘誓 | Gān shì | Speech at [the Battle of] Gan | |
| 8 | 五子之歌 | Wǔ zǐ zhī gē | Songs of the Five Sons | ||
| 9 | 胤征 | Yìn zhēng | Punitive Expedition on [King Zhongkang of] Yin | ||
| 商書 Shang | 5 | 10 | 湯誓 | Tāng shì | Speech ofTang |
| 11 | 仲虺之誥 | Zhònghuī zhī gào | Announcement of Zhonghui | ||
| 12 | 湯誥 | Tāng gào | Announcement of Tang | ||
| 13 | 伊訓 | Yī xùn | Instructions ofYi [Yin] | ||
| 14–16 | 太甲 | Tài jiǎ | Great Oath parts 1, 2 & 3 | ||
| 17 | 咸有一德 | Xián yǒu yī dé | Common Possession of Pure Virtue | ||
| 6 | 18–20 | 盤庚 | Pán Gēng | Pan Geng parts 1, 2 & 3 | |
| 21–23 | 說命 | Yuè mìng | Charge toYue parts 1, 2 & 3 | ||
| 7 | 24 | 高宗肜日 | Gāozōng róng rì | Day of the Supplementary Sacrifice ofKing Gaozong | |
| 8 | 25 | 西伯戡黎 | Xībó kān lí | Chief of the West [King Wen]'s Conquest of [the State of] Li | |
| 9 | 26 | 微子 | Wēizǐ | [Prince] Weizi | |
| 周書 Zhou | 27–29 | 泰誓 | Tài shì | Great Speech parts 1, 2 & 3 | |
| 10 | 30 | 牧誓 | Mù shì | Speech atMuye | |
| 31 | 武成 | Wǔ chéng | Successful Completion of the War [on Shang] | ||
| 11 | 32 | 洪範 | Hóng fàn | Great Plan [of Jizi] | |
| 33 | 旅獒 | Lǚ áo | Hounds of [the Western Tribesmen] Lü | ||
| 12 | 34 | 金滕 | Jīn téng | Golden Coffer [of Zhou Gong] | |
| 13 | 35 | 大誥 | Dà gào | Great Announcement | |
| 36 | 微子之命 | Wēizǐ zhī mìng | Charge to Prince Weizi | ||
| 14 | 37 | 康誥 | Kāng gào | Announcement toKang | |
| 15 | 38 | 酒誥 | Jiǔ gào | Announcement about Drunkenness | |
| 16 | 39 | 梓材 | Zǐ cái | Timber of Rottlera | |
| 17 | 40 | 召誥 | Shào gào | Announcement of Duke Shao | |
| 18 | 41 | 洛誥 | Luò gào | Announcement concerningLuoyang | |
| 19 | 42 | 多士 | Duō shì | Numerous Officers | |
| 20 | 43 | 無逸 | Wú yì | Against Luxurious Ease | |
| 21 | 44 | 君奭 | Jūn shì | Lord Shi [Duke Shao] | |
| 45 | 蔡仲之命 | Cài Zhòng zhī mìng | Charge to Cai Zhong | ||
| 22 | 46 | 多方 | Duō fāng | Numerous Regions | |
| 23 | 47 | 立政 | Lì zhèng | Establishment of Government | |
| 48 | 周官 | Zhōu guān | Officers of Zhou | ||
| 49 | 君陳 | Jūn chén | Lord Chen | ||
| 24 | 50 | 顧命 | Gù mìng | Testamentary Charge | |
| 51 | 康王之誥 | Kāng wáng zhī gào | Proclamation of King Kang | ||
| 52 | 畢命 | Bì mìng | Charge to the [Duke of] Bi | ||
| 53 | 君牙 | Jūn Yá | Lord Ya | ||
| 54 | 冏命 | Jiǒng mìng | Charge to Jiong | ||
| 25 | 55 | 呂刑 | Lǚ xíng | [Marquis] Lü on Punishments | |
| 26 | 56 | 文侯之命 | Wén hóu zhī mìng | Charge toDuke Wen of Jin | |
| 27 | 57 | 費誓 | Fèi shì | Speech at [the Battle of] Fei | |
| 28 | 58 | 秦誓 | Qín shì | Speech ofDuke Mu of Qin | |
Not all of the Modern Script chapters are believed to be contemporaneous with the events they describe, which range from the legendary emperorsYao andShun to early in theSpring and Autumn period.[36]Six of these chapters concern figures prior to the first evidence of writing, theoracle bones dating from the reign of theLate Shang kingWu Ding.Moreover, the chapters dealing with the earliest periods are the closest in language and focus to classical works of theWarring States period.[37]
The five announcements in the Documents of Zhou feature the most archaic language, closely resembling inscriptions found on Western Zhou bronzes in both grammar and vocabulary.They are considered by most scholars to record speeches ofKing Cheng of Zhou, as well as theDuke of Zhou andDuke of Shao, uncles of King Cheng who were key figures during his reign (late 11th century BC).[38][39] They provide insight into the politics and ideology of the period, including the doctrine of theMandate of Heaven, explaining how the once-virtuous Xia had become corrupt and were replaced by the virtuous Shang, who went through a similar cycle ending in their replacement by the Zhou.[40]The "Timber of Rottlera", "Numerous Officers", "Against Luxurious Ease" and "Numerous Regions" chapters are believed to have been written somewhat later, in the late Western Zhou period.[39]A minority of scholars, pointing to differences in language between the announcements and Zhou bronzes, argue that all of these chapters are products of a commemorative tradition in the late Western Zhou or early Spring and Autumn periods.[41][42]
Chapters dealing with the late Shang and the transition to Zhou use less archaic language.They are believed to have been modelled on the earlier speeches by writers in the Spring and Autumn period, a time of renewed interest in politics and dynastic decline.[39][4]The later chapters of the Zhou section are also believed to have been written around this time.[43]The "Gaozong Rongri" chapter comprises only 82 characters, and its interpretation was already disputed in Western Han commentaries.Pointing to the similarity of its title to formulas found in the Anyangoracle bone inscriptions,David Nivison proposed that the chapter was written or recorded by a collateral descendant ofWu Ding in the late Shang period some time after 1140 BC.[44]
The "Pan Geng" chapter (later divided into three parts) seems to be intermediate in style between this group and the next.[45] It is the longest speech in theDocuments, and is unusual in its extensive use of analogy.[46] Scholars since the Tang dynasty have noted the difficult language of the "Pan Geng" and the Zhou Announcement chapters.[b] Citing the archaic language and worldview, Chinese scholars have argued for a Shang dynasty provenance for the "Pan Geng" chapters, with considerable editing and replacement of the vocabulary by Zhou dynasty authors accounting for the difference in language from Shang inscriptions.[47]
The chapters dealing with the legendary emperors, the Xia dynasty and the transition to Shang are very similar in language to such classics as theMencius (late 4th century BC).They present idealized rulers, with the earlier political concerns subordinate to moral and cosmological theory, and are believed to be the products of philosophical schools of the late Warring States period.[4][45]Some chapters, particularly the "Tribute of Yu", may be as late as theQin dynasty.[5][48]
When Jesuit scholars prepared the first translations of Chinese Classics into Latin, they called theDocuments the "Book of Kings", making a parallel with theBooks of Kings in theOld Testament. They sawShang Di as the equivalent of the Christian God, and used passages from theDocuments in their commentaries on other works.[49]
.svg)