This report by the Jesuit Niccolò Longobardo, who succeeded Matteo Ricci as Superior of the Jesuit China mission, was one of the most controversial texts in the history of Sino-Western exchange. Ricci had attempted to use indigenous Chinese vocabulary to represent the Christian God, the soul and the angels. This approach was challenged by Jesuits arriving in Macau from Japan who feared that such accommodations could lead to heterodoxy among Chinese Christian converts. Influenced by these missionaries, Longobardo started compiling this report in the early 1620s using a combination of Chinese and Western sources, as well as interviews with Christian and pagan literati. The report was leaked in the early 1660s to the Franciscan missionary Antonio de Santa Maria Caballero, who forwarded it to Rome. The printing of this text in Europe had a decisive impact on the Chinese Rites Controversy and Enlightenment understanding of Confucianism.

1. 1.

   In this translation, Santa Maria’s additions to Longobardo’s text are indicated with curly brackets {}. Square brackets [] indicate our editorial glosses. Some of these glosses include significant words in the Portuguese text that were excluded from Santa Maria’s translation.

2. 2.

   The Father Visitor is Jerónimo Rodrigues, Visitor in 1619–1621 and 1622–1626. This treatise of Longobardo was written in reply to the Macao conference of 1621, which decided in favour of Ricci’s position in the terms controversy. See Antonio Sisto Rosso,Apostolic Legations to China of the Eighteenth Century (South Pasadena: P.D. and Ione Perkins, 1948), 96.

3. 3.

   1661 indicates the year of the translation of Longobardo’s report by Santa Maria from Portuguese into Latin. Longobardo first drafted the report in Portuguese around 1623, but continued to revise the text until at least 1630. The text was discussed in 1627 at Jiading, in Zhejiang province. See the introduction by Claudia von Collani for the composition of the text and Song Liming’s chapter for the late dating of the extant autograph manuscript.

4. 4.

   Longobardo’s text was originally intended for internal use among Jesuits in China and thus Longobardo presumes that his readers understand the meaning of terms such as Shangdi. In contrast, Santa Maria opted to gloss Chinese terms to make the text more accessible for his intended audience—the cardinals of Propaganda Fidei—who were most likely ignorant of the Chinese language.

5. 5.

   Longobardo refers here to Ricci and other Jesuits who claimed that the ancient Chinese knew God as Shangdi, but later the Chinese went astray from the original meaning of the canonical texts.

6. 6.

   Longobardo was based in Shaozhou, in Guangdong province starting from 1597. After Ricci’s passing in May 1610, he was named superior of the Jesuit mission in China; he arrived Beijing in May 1611.

7. 7.

   In fact, the first missionary was Michele Ruggieri (1543–1607), but Ricci was generally regarded as the founder of the China mission, especially after his death in 1610.

8. 8.

   Francesco Pasio (1554–1612) was the Visitor to the Jesuit Mission of Japan and China from 1611 to 1612. He was Michele Ruggieri’s first companion in Zhaoqing. See Sangkeun Kim,Strange Names of God: The Missionary Translation of the Divine Name and the Chinese Responses in Late Ming China, 1583–1644 (New York: Peter Lang, 2004), 167. The date of the letter is not mentioned in Longobardo’s treatise, but a letter of Pasio from Nagasaki to Longobardo dated 24 September 1611 is mentioned in the list (elenchus) of documents on Rites Controversy compiled in 1680 by the then Vice-Provincial of China, Giandomenico Gabiani (1623–1694) as part of theDissertatio apologetica. Theelenchus is not included in the version printed in 1700, but included in full in appendix to Henri Bernard-Maître, “Un dossier bibliographique de la fin du XVIIe siècle sur la question des termes Chinois,”Recherches de science religieuse 36 (1949): 26–79.

9. 9.

   Those books includeThe True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven (Tianzhu shiyi 天主實義) by Ricci, first published in Beijing in 1603, and reprinted in Guangdong province in 1605 by order of Alessandro Valignano for use in the Japan mission.

10. 10.

    Francesco Pasio was probably influenced by João Rodrigues who was at that time considered within the Japanese province as an expert on Chinese books. See the note below on Rodrigues.

11. 11.

    Sabatino de Ursis (1575–1620) was an Italian Jesuit from Lecce who arrived in Beijing in 1607 to assist Ricci with astronomical research. He contributed to the translation of Euclid and also wrote a book in Chinese on hydraulics, theTaixi shuifa 泰西水法.

12. 12.

    Paul was the baptismal name of Xu Guangqi (1562–1633), who also collaborated with Ricci on the translation of Euclid. This suggests that Longobardo had a first round of discussions in the years 1610–1615, with Xu Guangqi in Beijing, and with Li Zhizao and Yang Tingyun in Hangzhou through letters, but those Chinese Christians expressed their support to Ricci’s policy.

13. 13.

    Michael was the baptismal name of Yang Tingyun (1557–1627), who collaborated with Giulio Aleni on a global atlas, theZhifang waiji 職方外紀. Leo was the baptismal name of Li Zhizao (1565–1630). They were both from Hangzhou. Together with Xu Guangqi, they are known as the “Three Pillars of Chinese Catholicism.”

14. 14.

    The Portuguese Jesuit João Rodrigues (1561/1562–1633/1634), known as Tçuzu or “the Interpreter” arrived in Japan as a teenager in 1577. Known for his fluency in Japanese, he served as an interpreter for Alessandro Valignano and Gaspar Coelho and had a close relationship with Toyotomi Hideyoshi and Tokugawa Ieyasu. In 1610, he was exiled from Japan and came to Macao.

15. 15.

    Rodrigues spent two years in China, from June 1613 to June 1615. He arrived Beijing in early 1615; see Cooper,Rodrigues the Interpreter (New York: Weatherhill, 1974), 280.

16. 16.

    Ru 儒 refers to Confucianism;Shi 釋 refers to Buddhism;Dao 道 refers to Daoism.

17. 17.

    Valentim Carvalho (1559–1630), provincial of Japan from 1611 to 1617. Rodrigues returned Macao on July 1615; see Cooper,Rodrigues the Interpreter, 289. Rodrigues expressed in a letter dated 22 January 1616 his disagreement with Ricci’s policy; see Cooper,Rodrigues the Interpreter, 261.

18. 18.

    Longobardo refers to a period where the Chinese mission was still under the provincial of Japan. In 1615, Superior General Acquaviva erected the China mission as a vice-province independent from Japan, but this was applied only in 1623.

19. 19.

    Francisco Vieira (1555–1619) was Visitor of Japan and China in 1616–1619.

20. 20.

    The term “prefect” used in the Latin text corresponds to “mandarin” used in the Portuguese text. For clarity, “mandarin” is used throughout this translation.

21. 21.

    Due to the Nanjing persecution, Ursis and Pantoja were forced to leave Beijing on 18 March 1617 for Macao; see Dehergne,Répertoire, 75.

22. 22.

    Diego de Pantoja (1571–1618) accompanied Ricci to Beijing from Nanjing in 1600. Alfonso Vagnone (1566–1640) was first based in Nanjing, but after the first nationwide persecution of Christianity, was exiled in Macao, returning later to Shanxi where he had a very fruitful apostolate. For an English presentation of his works, see Sher-shiueh Li and Thierry Meynard,Jesuit Chreia in Late Ming China: Two Studies with an Annotated Translation of Alfonso Vagnone’s Illustrations of the Grand Dao (Bern: Peter Lang: 2014).

23. 23.

    Vagnone and Pantoja arrived Macao at the end of 1617 and wrote their treatise in 1618–1619. Concerning Alfonso Vagnone, we have only found a very brief report of three pages, with seven points, on the question of the name of God:Breve informaçao sobre o nome Xam’ti, e Tien En lugar de Deus por os Senhor, ARSI Jap. Sin. 161, II, 225–226.

24. 24.

    Sabatino de Ursis arrived Macao in 1603 and Ricci requested him to come to Beijing in 1607 because of his knowledge in astronomy and hydraulics. Together with Diego de Pantoja, he was expelled from Beijing and exiled to Macao. We have lost the report that he wrote there in 1617, as instructed by Vieira and Longobardo, and we have only the name of it: “Adnotationes quaedam Patris Sabbatini de Ursis super rebus memorabilibus a P. Nicolao Longobardo pro dirigenda re christiana ad P. Visitatorem Franciscum Vieiram anno 1617 post commotam Nankinensem persecutionem conscriptis.” Henri Bernard-Maitre, “Un dossier bibliographique de la fin du XVIIe siècle sur la question des termes Chinois,”Recherches de science religieuse 36 (1949): 67.

25. 25.

    We have not found the treatise by Rodrigues, but his ideas can be clearly seen from his letter to the Superior General, dated 22 January 1616; for the English translation of this letter, see Michael Cooper, “Rodrigues in China. The Letters of João Rodrigues, 1611–1633,” inKokugoshi e no michi: Doi sensei shōjukinen ronbunshū 国語史への道: 土井先生頌寿記念論文集, ed. Doi Tadao (Tokyo: Sanseidō, 1981), 2:352–224.

26. 26.

    This refers to the Jesuit College of Saint Paul in Macao.

27. 27.

    The Portuguese manuscript is more precise: “huma carta que me / escreveu de tres folhas.”

28. 28.

    We have not been able to determine the meaning of “post nostram publicationem,” which corresponds to the Portuguese “depois na nossa publicação.” Longobardo is probably referring to the years 1622–1623 when he was still in Hangzhou, and the years 1623–1624 when he was back to Beijing.

29. 29.

    This suggests that Longobardo addressed his report to Jerónimo Rodrigues (1567–1628), the Jesuit Visitor at that time (1619–1626), but he seems to have in view the Jesuits in Rome (fathers outside of China).

30. 30.

    The Portuguese and Latin texts use the words “preludio” and “praeludium” respectively to indicate the chapters of Longobardo’s treatise. This term emphasizes the fact that these chapters are intended as an introduction to the second and third parts of Longobardo’s treatise, which have been lost.

31. 31.

    Santa Maria’s annotations often concern ritual questions such as rites in honour of Confucius and ancestors that were being debated during the 1660s when Santa Maria made his translation. Longobardo’s treatise, however, focuses exclusively on terminological questions.

32. 32.

    In the Portuguese text, Longobardo includes reference to thetianshen (angels) and soul (linghun); however, Santa Maria only more vaguely refers to “spirits.”

33. 33.

    The Portuguese manuscript of APF (but not BnF) adds the title of Prelude 18, but the text of this prelude is missing in all our manuscripts: “Preludio. Do proprio estado destas Controversias, que he ver se se pode seguir a doutrina apparente d’algums Textos antigos, contra a comum exposoção dos Interpretes Classicos, e contra a corrente dos Letrados Modernos.”

34. 34.

    Longobardo overlooks here the distinction between theFive Classics and theFour Books, but he makes the distinction below. In the list of the Five Classics, APF Latin manuscript omits theLiji, but the other manuscripts make mention of it.

35. 35.

    This refers to theSection and Sentence Annotations and CollectedCommentaries on the Four Books, orSishu zhangju jizhu 四書章句集注 by Zhu Xi 朱熹. Also, Zhu Xi wrote commentaries for theYijing and theShijing.

36. 36.

    The Yongle Emperor (1360–1424), the third emperor of the Ming dynasty, reigned from 1402 till his death.

37. 37.

    The Spanish version by Navarrete (1676) and the French version by Champion de Cicé indicate wrongly 2500 years instead of 200 years. This error of date influenced Leibniz who gathered that theWujing daquan and theXingli daquan are ancient texts with the greatest authority; see Thierry Meynard, “Leibniz as proponent of Neo-Confucianism in Europe,” inLeibniz and the European Encounter with China: 300 Years of Discours sur la théologie naturelle des Chinois, ed. Li Wenchao 李文潮 (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner, 2017), 187.

38. 38.

    This refers to theSishu wujing daquan 四書五經大全, published in 1413 under the supervision of Hu Guang 胡廣 (1369–1418).

39. 39.

    The listing for theSishu daquan 四書大全 indeed has 107 names and that for theYizhuan daquan 易傳大全 136. However, in relation to theShujing, theShuzhuan daquan 書傳大全 lists only 133 instead of Longobardo’s 166. Moreover, 70 interpreters are listed forShijing daquan 詩經大全, and 92 for theChunqiu daquan 春秋大全.

40. 40.

    This refers to theXingli daquan 性理大全, published in 1413, again under the supervision of Hu Guang.

41. 41.

    See Preface, N.^o 7. In his letter dated 22 January 1616 to the Superior General, Rodrigues finds in China “many other symbols in the fashion of the Chaldeans and the Persian magicians, whose founder was Zoroaster, Magician King of Bactria, which is now Samarcan”; Cooper, “Rodrigues in China,” 312. Following Rodrigues, Longobardo assigns to Confucianism a genealogy which traces back to Zoroaster, considered as the source of all heresies and superstitions. To theprisca theologia of Ricci, Rodrigues and Longobardo oppose what we may call aprisca theologia diabolica.

42. 42.

    The Portuguese text is slightly different here: “Mas os Interpretes atribuem todo isto ao mesmo Ceo, ou a Substantia e Natureça universal que chamamLy, como depois se dira em seu lugar.”

43. 43.

    The term “operative virtues” was used by Aquinas to explain the references to the “arm” of God in Sacred Scripture. As God has no members, the “arm of God” (Dei bachium) must be understood figuratively as God’s “operative power.”Summa theologiae I, q. 1, a. 10, ad 3: “Nec est litteralis sensus ipsa figura, sed id quod est figuratum. Non enim cum Scriptura nominat Dei brachium, est litteralis sensus quod in Deo sit membrum huiusmodi corporale: sed id quod per hoc membrum significatur, scilicet virtus operativa.” Thus Longobardo is applying scholastic biblical exegesis to the interpretation of neo-Confucianism.

44. 44.

    Chapter “Wen Wang” (文王) in theShijing 詩經: “文王陟降, 在帝左右.” James Legge,Chinese Classics, vol. 4.2 (London: Frowde, 1893), 428.

45. 45.

    Santa Maria renders Longobardo’s “substantia” (substance) as “corpore” (body). We have opted to translate Longobardo’s original wording because it has a technical scholastic meaning.

46. 46.

    In fact, Chinese philosophy does not discuss the concept oflinghun, a neologism invented by Ricci. Longobardo seems to refer here to the concept ofhun 魂.

47. 47.

    The sect of the idols (Secta idolorum in Latin,Seita dos Pagodes in Portuguese) refers to Buddhism.

48. 48.

    Acts 17:28. Paul cites from the hexameter poemPhenomena by the Greek poet Aratus (315/310 BC–240 BC).

49. 49.

    In 1615, the Buddhist abbot Zhu Hong 祩宏 (1535–1615) publishedTianshuo 天説 (On heaven) to refute Ricci’sThe True Meaning of the Lordof Heaven. Longobardo is probably referring to the beginning of theTianshuo: “The foreigner [Ricci] worships and serves Tianzhu, but he does not understand very well the discourse on heaven” (彼虽崇事天主, 而天之说实所未谙). See Zhu Hong 祩宏, Tianshuo 天說, and Xu Changzhi 徐昌治, ed., Shengchao poxieji 聖朝破邪集, Dazangjing bubian 大藏經補編 (Taipei: Huayu chubanshe 華宇出版社, 1986), 28:322.

50. 50.

    Qu Rukui 瞿汝夔 or Qu Taisu 瞿太素 (1549–1611) studied mathematics with Ricci and assisted him with the translation of the first book of Euclid into Chinese. Qu Taisu suggested to Ricci to don the clothes of Chinese literati. He was finally baptised in 1605. The book of Qu Taisu referred to by Longobardo is not extant.

51. 51.

    The Portuguese text here is slightly different: “sabendo pella doutrina doJukiao que oXámtý he o mesmo Ceo, ou a sua virtude e dominio.”

52. 52.

    This refers to Aquinas’ second way for proving the existence of God (efficient cause). See Thomas Aquinas,Summa theologica, Ia, q.2.a.3.

53. 53.

    This refers to the fathers of the China mission (Vagnone, De Ursis, Pantoja), in contrast to the “Japanese fathers” like Rodrigues.

54. 54.

    In the Latin manuscript, but not in the Portuguese manuscripts, there is a marginal note added by Santa Maria connected to the Rites Controversy, which started more than ten years after Longobardo’s report: “[Nor] can it be omitted here to say that it is noteworthy to see how much they otherwise are devoted to the worship of Confucius, parents and of dead ancestors, including pagan, as if it was a divine law or revealed doctrine, since it is full of superstitious sacrifices, as will be seen below in Prelude 12, N.^o 8 and 11, and in Prelude 17, Part 2, N.^o 11.”

55. 55.

    The year 65 AD for the entrance of Buddhism into China had already been given by Ricci inDella entrata della Compagnia di Giesù e christianità nella Cina (Book 1, Chapter 10). See Pasquale M. D’Elia,Fonti Ricciane: documenti originali concernenti Matteo Ricci e la storia delle prime relazioni tra l’Europa e la Cina (1579–1615) (Rome: Libreria dello Stato, 1942), 1:121.

56. 56.

    This dates corresponds roughly to the beginning of the Han dynasty (206 BC), and Longobardo believes that the commentaries of the Confucian texts started from that date. Indeed, theWujing daquan lists the commentators according to the dynasties, starting from the Han. For example, theShuquan daquan has the four names of Kong Anguo 孔安國 (156 BC–4 BC), Kong Guang 孔光 (65 BC–5 AD), Yang Xiong 楊雄 (53 BC–18 AD) and Zheng Xuan 鄭玄 (127 AD–200 AD) for the Han dynasty. Instead of “many of them lived two hundred years before Christ,” Navarrete wrongly translates: “many of them lived two thousand years before Christ”; Navarrete,Tratados, 253.

57. 57.

    To prove that the commentarial tradition is very orthodox and free from the supposed corruption of Buddhism, Longobardo suggests that some commentaries of the Confucian classics were written as early as 200 BC.

58. 58.

    Longobardo seems to contradict himself since he had refered below to the commentaries as being theWujing daquan and theSishu daquan, written during the Ming dynasty.

59. 59.

    Here is another marginal note by Santa Maria concerning the Rites Controversy: “= a It seems it is better to say that if permitted by the ministers they can persist with their rites of worship of Confucius and their deceased parents under a political pretext. Since the cult is religious, it is considered as one of the sacrifices of the other false spirits, as seen below in Prelude 11, N.^o 6, Prelude 12, N.^o 8 and 11, Prelude 17, Part 2, N.^o 11. We ministers ought to guide them, not be misguided by them.”

60. 60.

    Longobardo perhaps has in mind the commentary on theShijing written by Xu Guangqi,Maoshi liutie 毛詩六帖 (1617).

61. 61.

    In general, the citation corresponds toCommentarii Conimbricenses in octo libros physicorum Aristotelis (Lyon, 1592), 145. However, “Poëtæ enim fabulis; Pythagorei Philosophi symbolis; Platonici Mathematicis; Aristoteles orationis brevitatem arcana Philosophiæ obrexuit et obscuravit” is taken from page 60 of the same work. In 1619, Nicolas Trigault brought to China the full series of Coimbra commentaries, which were then translated into Chinese by the Jesuits and their Chinese collaborators.

62. 62.

    Longobardo possibly borrowed his views on theYijing from Rodrigues who had written in 1616: “Here are to be found in all their vigour the Pythagorean symbols of odd and even numbers and how things are composed of numbers and why.” Cooper, “Rodrigues in China,” 312.

63. 63.

    Juan 11 and 12 of theXingli daquan include the “Guanwu waipian 觀物外篇” (Outer chapters on observing things) from theHuangji jingshi shu 皇極經世書 (Book of the supreme ultimate ordering the world) by the Song philosopher Shao Yong 邵雍 (1011–1077) and his disciples, which combine cosmology and numerology. Interestingly, Longobardo suggests that the Chinese numerology of Shao Yong could help in retrieving the teaching of Pythagoras.

64. 64.

    The term gymnosophist refers in general to an Indian sage, but for the Jesuits, this refers more specifically to Buddha and his disciples in India. The idea that Buddhism had borrowed from the cosmology and numerology of theYijing is far-fetched. However, the connection with Daoism is obvious since Shao Yong himself was inspired by Daoism.

65. 65.

    The theory of the double teaching, one esoteric and one exoteric, was devised by Jesuits in Japan, like Baltasar Gago (1520–1583) and Alessandro Valignano (1539–1606), to explain the Buddhist sects in Japan. Rodrigues was the first to extend the theory to Chinese sects, including Confucianism and Daoism. For a short presentation of the theory by Rodrigues, see his letter of 1616; Cooper, 311–312.

66. 66.

    Actually, Pseudo-Plutarch. Greek title isΠερὶ τῶν ἀρεσκόντων φιλοσόφοις φυσικῶν δογμάτων. In Latin,De placitis philosophorum.

67. 67.

    Pierio Valeriano Bolzani (1477–1560) wrote a study of Egyptian hieroglyphics calledHieroglyphica seu de sacris aegyptiorum aliarumque gentium literis commentarii (1556), which he dedicated to Cosimo de’ Medici (1519–1574), the Duke of Florence. It was very popular in Europe at the time.

68. 68.

    The citation corresponds to Plutarch,De placitis philosophorum, 1.3 in Plutarch,Scripta moralia, ed. Johann Friedrich Dübner (Paris: Firmin-Didot et Socii, 1890), 2:1069.

69. 69.

    The Coimbra commentary on the soul discusses the belief in transmigration and mentions Pythagoras, Plato and other philosophers, but there is no mention of the gymnosophists; seeDe anima II, c.1.q.7.a.1.

70. 70.

    Ricci says that Pythagoras created the theory of transmigration to restrain evil-doing among the people; Matteo Ricci,The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven, ed. Thierry Meynard (Boston: Jesuit Sources, 2016), 197.

71. 71.

    SeeDe placitis philosophorum, 1.7. See Plutarch,Scripta moralia, 2:1072. This is the first passage where Longobardo uses the term religion, with twelve occurrences in the whole treatise, including five mentions in direct quotes. In 1701, the French translation by Louis Champion de Cicé appeared under the titleTraité sur quelques points de la religion des Chinois, thus making religion the focal point of the treatise.

72. 72.

    Marcus Terentius Varro (116 BC –27 BC), prolific Roman author and Stoic philosopher. This reference is made in Rodrigues’ letter of 22 January 1616. See Cooper, “Rodrigues in China,” 312.

73. 73.

    Augustine,City of God, 6.5.

74. 74.

    This reference is also made in Rodrigues’ letter of 22 January 1616. See Cooper, “Rodrigues in China,” 312.

75. 75.

    Augustine,City of God, 6.10.

76. 76.

    Quintus Mucius Scaevola Pontifex (died 82 BC) was a jurist of the late Roman Republic and pontifex maximus (high priest) from 89. He is not be confused with Quintus Mucius Scaevola “Augur” (159 BC–88 BC), who appeared in Cicero’s dialogues.

77. 77.

    Augustine,City of God, 4.27.

78. 78.

    Pan Feng-chuan 潘鳳娟 believes that this and the other quotes from theFour Books come from theXingli daquan; Pan Feng-chuan 潘鳳娟, “Long Huamin Lun Zhongguo zongjiao de jidian wenti fanyi chutan 龍華民 《論中國宗教的幾點問題》 翻譯初探” [A Preliminary Investigation to Niccolò Longobardo’s Account on China],Zhexue yu wenhua 哲學與文化 [Monthly Review of Philosophy and Culture] 522 (November 2017): 29–43. However, the page number here, as well as for the other quotes, indicates that Longobardo was using the standard Nanjing edition of Zhu Xi’sSishu zhangjujizhu. What Longobardo calls “book” here refers tojuan in the Zhu Xi’s edition.

79. 79.

    The Chinese text of this passage fromLunyu (5.13) is inserted in a marginal annotation: “夫子之言性與天道, 不可得而聞也.” Longobardo follows the interpretation of Zhu Xi according to whom Confucius “rarely spoke” (han yan 罕言) about human nature, but Longobardo makes it more radical by suggesting that Confucius never talked about it in his whole life except that at the end of his life. Similarly, we have some hints that Rodrigues believed that Buddha had addressed to a few disciples an esoteric teaching just before his death. See Urs App,The Cult of Emptiness (Tokyo: UniversityMedia, 2012), 141. Longobardo probably reads this interpretation in the now lost treatise of Rodrigues and then applied it to Confucius. However, nothing in this passage of theLunyu indicates that Confucius decided to reveal something only at the end of his life, as suggested by Longobardo.

80. 80.

    The Chinese text of this passage fromLunyu (6.20) is provided in a marginal annotation: “子曰:務民之義, 敬鬼神而遠之, 可謂知矣.” This means that wisdom consists in two things: devoting oneself to secure justice, and to pay respect to theguishen while keeping them at distance. However, Longobardo’s translation collapses the two things into one: to govern others, this is to make them practice a religion, but without them understanding it.

81. 81.

    This is in accordance with the exoteric meaning of the teaching, which turns religion into a mere political tool.

82. 82.

    The Chinese text of this passage fromLunyu (11.11) is provided in a marginal annotation: “問死。曰: 未知生, 焉知死.”

83. 83.

    The Chinese text of this passage fromLunyu (7.20) is provided in a marginal annotation: “子不語怪、力、亂、神.”

84. 84.

    Longobardo follows Zhu Xi’s interpretation: “有未易明者, 故亦不輕以語人也.”

85. 85.

    The corresponding Chinese sentence is provided in a marginal annotation: “家語孔子曰六合之內論而不議六合之外存而不論.” The reference toThe Sayings ofConfucius (Jiayu 家語) is incorrect. The quote comes from the chapter Qiwulun 齊物論 in theZhuangzi: “莊子: 六合之外, 聖人存而不論; 六合之內, 聖人論而不議.” Longobardo probably did not read the text directly, and his use is even more problematic since Zhuangzi was criticizing Confucian discourse.

86. 86.

    Those four conclusions are strongly inspired by Rodrigues, and Longobardo’s analysis of the Song dynasty philosophy in the following preludes serves as a confirmation.

87. 87.

    The numerology of Shao Yong indeed bears some similarities with that of Pythagoras, who is mentioned twice in Prelude 3.

88. 88.

    The Portuguese text is slightly different here: “E ate que ponto chegue o tal predomínio, pera as cousas se gerarem: ou se torna a recolher, e as cousas se corrompam.”

89. 89.

    Longobardo explains the distinction betweenxiantianxue andhoutianxue according to Shao Yong’s “Guanwu waipian” which he read in thejuan 11 and 12 of theXingli daquan, as he mentioned above in the Prelude 3. Accordingly, the eight trigrams of Fuxi constitute thexiantianxue, which display the essence of the universe, and the eight trigrams of Wen Wang constitutehoutianxue, which display the functioning of the universe.

90. 90.

    According to theChunqiu fanlu 春秋繁露 by Dong Zhongshu 董仲舒 (179 BC–104 BC), punishments were given during autumn, and capital punishments during winter.

91. 91.

    Master Yang or Yangshi 揚氏 refers to the Han-dynasty philosopher Yang Xiong 揚雄 who composed a book in imitation of theYijing. Zhu Xi wrote theOriginal Meaning ofthe Yijing (Zhouyi benyi 周易本義).

92. 92.

    This refers toli 理. See the Portuguese manuscript of BnF: “a qual elles chamamly.” Navarrete in his Spanish version translates this clarification which is present in the Portuguese but not in the Latin manuscript: “la qual ellos llamas Li”; Navarrete,Tratados históricos, políticos, éticos y religiosos de la monarchia de China (Madrid Imprenta Real, 1676), 260. This is an indication that Navarrete translated the Spanish from the Portuguese original.

93. 93.

    According to Shao Yong in the “Guanwu waipian,” this amounts to a cycle of 129,600 years (十二萬九千六百). However, Shao Yong calls this cycleyuan 元. The term of great year (taisui 太歲) originates from ancient Chinese astronomy, corresponding to a cycle of twelve years, but it was later used in Taoism and popular religions.

94. 94.

    This short paragraph is key to understanding the premises of Longobardo’s interpretation ofli. From the standpoint of Thomistic philosophy, many features ofli suggest that it is spiritual since it “can only be perceived with the intellect,” but in the next sentence, Longobardo reveals the premise which grounds and predetermines his interpretation ofli: “it is not spiritual.”

95. 95.

    Chaos is another name forli 理; BnF: “chamadoly.” In the philosophy of Shao Yong,li 理 is the highest reality, placed abovetaiji 太極. However, Longobardo is not consistent, as he sometimes follows Zhu Xi’s identification ofli withtaiji, such as in Prelude 14.

96. 96.

    Text in the Latin ms. (with our punctuation): “儒者計有五運: 其一曰太易, 即氣相未分; 其二曰太初, 即元氣始萌; 其三曰太始, 即氣形之端; 其四曰太素, 即形變有質; 其五曰太極, 即形質已具是也.” This text seems connected to a Han dynasty cosmology with the five initial stages in the constitution of the universe, such as that listed in the chapterTianrui 天瑞 of theLiezi 列子: “太易者, 未見氣也。太初者, 氣之始也。太始者, 形之始也。太素者, 質之始也。氣形質具而未相離, 故曰渾淪, 渾淪者, 言萬物相渾淪而未相離也.” Those five stages are calledwuyun 五運 in a divination book of the Han dynasty, theXiaojing goumingjue 孝經鉤命決 (Tally of the key to the mandate in theClassic of Filial Piety): “天地未分之前有太易, 有太初, 有太始, 有太素, 有太極; 謂之五運。釋云: 氣象未分謂之太易, 元氣始萌謂之太初, 氣形之端謂之太始, 形變有質謂之太素, 質形已具謂之太極; 五氣漸變謂之五運.” In the citation “氣相未分” of the APF Latin and Portuguese manuscripts, the character 相 seems a mistake. The BnF manuscript has the character 象.

    Seehttps://zh.wikisource.org/zh-hant/%E7%94%84%E6%AD%A3%E8%AB%96.

97. 97.

    Those expressions ofhundun orhunlun are not Confucian, but Daoist.

98. 98.

    All the explanations we have inserted in brackets were added by Santa Maria. They are not present in the Portuguese manuscript. The addition here translates “渾淪一氣圖”

99. 99.

    This means: “Before there was heaven and earth, all was undifferentiated without any object or form, and yet there was oneqi which could not be extinguished and was the root of heaven and earth.” Strikingly, Longobardo has replaced Shao Yong’sli 理 with the Buddhist notion ofkong or emptiness as the matrix oftaiji, as we can see with the four characters ofkong 空 outside of the external circle. Even more surpringly, Longobardo calls this diagram “Sphere - firstqi” (渾淪一氣). This already suggests strongly that Longobardo is superposing his materialist interpretation upon the philosophical system of Shao Yong, for whomli, and notqi, is the matrix oftaiji.

100. 100.

     We have not yet found the source of this Taoist passage, but in his translation, Longobardo seems influenced by Aristotelian cosmology, makingli as an equivalent of the ether or prime matter, andtaiji as the equivalent of proximate matter or sublunar matter. We can also notice his use of the Neoplatonic concept of emanation, stressing the continuity in terms of substance between the first ultimate origin and its different emanations. This model is in complete opposition to Christian creationism.

101. 101.

     Longobardo understands heat and cold as cause of natural changes in an Aristotelian way. For Aristotle, natural changes are explained by the four qualities of heat and cold, dryness and wetness.

102. 102.

     This section comments on a passage of theTaijitu shuo 太極圖說 by Zhou Dunyi 周敦頤: “太極動而生陽, 動極而靜, 靜而生陰, 靜極復動。一動一靜, 互為其根; 分陰分陽, 兩儀立焉.” Longobardo suggests that the process of alteration or change described here is not complete from an Aristotelian perspective because there is no substantial transformation. For Aristotle, the four qualities of heat, cold, dryness and humidity provoke substantial changes so that the four natural elements change into each other.

103. 103.

     Santa Maria’s addition translatesliangyi 兩儀.

104. 104.

     The diagram above and this passage describe the prior heaven (xiantian) with its polarities according to Shao Yong: heaven–earth, man–woman,yin–yang and motion–rest. From an Aristotelian point of view, it is impossible to have heat and cold joined together.

105. 105.

     This passage describes the posterior heaven (houtian) with its five phases (wuxing): fire, water, metal, water and earth.

106. 106.

     Santa Maria’s addition translateswuxing zhi tu五行之圖.

107. 107.

     Addition of Santa Maria.

108. 108.

     All these explanations in brackets are not present in the Portuguese manuscripts but were added by Santa Maria. The Chinese text on the left within the diagram reads: “Outside of the six directions, there is stillqiwhich is not exhausted” (六合之外, 猶有未盡之氣); the Chinese text on the right: “The twelve hours have fixed positions, and the place reached by the sun immediately marks the hour, like the sun reaching noon marking noontime, and so on” (十二時固有定方, 惟日所到處即為時, 如日行到午則為午時, 餘皆然).

109. 109.

     Longobardo describes here the triad heaven-earth-man, ortian-di-ren 天地人.

110. 110.

     There is a marginal note added by Santa Maria, which translates as: “Thegua are the eight points of the horizon, namely those points which face east, west, north and the other four intermediary points placed evenly between them.”

111. 111.

     Longobardo intends here to underline the difference between the naturalist cosmology of the Chinese and Christian creationism.

112. 112.

     For Aquinas’s concept of prime matter (materia prima), in turn derived from Augustine’s concept of informed matter (materia informa), see Aquinas,Summa theologiae, Ia.q.44.a.2.

113. 113.

     Santa Maria’s Latin translation suggests thatLuoshu is the title of a book (“in figura libriLŏxū”), whereas Longobardo’s Portuguese text more accurately describes it as the name of the figure itself (“na figura doLŏ Xu”). We have followed the Portuguese text here.

114. 114.

     This translates the quote from the “Guanwu neipian 觀物內篇” (Inner chapters on observing things) by Shao Yong, drawn fromjuan 9 of theXingli daquan: “觀物内篇之一第七頁: 太極生兩儀, 兩儀生四象, 四象生八卦.” The original expression in the Appendix (Xici 系辭) of theYiijng is slightly different: “易有太極, 是生兩儀, 兩儀生四象, 四象生八卦.”

115. 115.

     The Portugese text here is slightly different: “E assi estas oito ou estas tres produziram todas as cousas.”

116. 116.

     The Portuguese text reads differently: “De modo que tudo he pera armar esteSançâi que dizem são causa das cousas que se geram e corrompem no Universo.”

117. 117.

     Xingli daquan,juan 1,Taijitu 太極圖, 1b.

118. 118.

     This passage translates the beginning of chapter 42 of theDaodejing 道德經: “道生一, 一生二, 二生三, 三生萬物”. The gloss of thebagua as the “eight qualitities of the air of the horizon” is not present in the Portuguese text. The gloss is also missing from Navarrete, indicating that he was translating from the Portuguese original and not the Latin.

119. 119.

     Santa Maria has slightly abbreviated Longobardo’s Portuguese text here: “os quaes como vissem [por] experientia que com o calor se geravam as cousas, e se sostentava a vida dos animaes, plantas, hervas, e com o mesmo exercitavam suas op[er]ações pera conseguirem seus fins; e pello contrario que com o frio, faltando o calor, se corrumpiam / e em hum certo modo morriam.”

120. 120.

     Longobardo’s Portuguese text is quite different here: “a efficientia das causas agentes geraes, ou o predominio e actividade.”

121. 121.

     The manuscript has in Chinese a quote from the Song philosopher Cheng Yi 程頤 (1032–1085), drawn from the chapter “Ximing 西銘” (Western inscriptions), which is included inZhengmeng 正蒙 (Correcting youthful ignorance) by Zhang Zai 張載 (1020–1077). This passage can be found in theXingli daquan (juan 4,Ximing, 6): “所以謂萬物一體者皆有此理.”

122. 122.

     SeeDe physica;commentarii Collegii Conimbricensis Societatis Iesu in octo libros physicorum (Coimbra, 1592), 146 (liber I, c. 7, q. 1, a. 1).

123. 123.

     Longobardo’s original analogy refers to bread (pao), not wood.

124. 124.

     SeeDe physica;commentarii Collegii Conimbricensis Societatis Iesu in octo libros physicorum (Coimbra, 1592), 100–103 (liber I, c. 2, q. 2). Already in a letter of 1598, Longobardo pointed out that the natural philosophy of the Chinese was similar to the one of Melissus, which was rejected by Aristotle: “Exemplum epistolae a P. Nicolao Longobardo, anno 1598 ex China conscriptae, ad Reverendum P. Claudium Aquavivam Societatis Iesu Generalem,” inRecentissima de amplissimo regno Chinae (Mainz: Ioannes Albinus, 1601), 7: “si aliquid è Philosophia naturali delibandum sit, verè de iis dici potest, quod Aristoteles dixit de Melisso:Peccant in materia & forma.” The quote “Peccant in materia & forma” was expressed by Walter Burley (c.1275–1344) on Melissus and Parmenides in hisCommentaria super libros de physico auscultatione Aristotelis.

125. 125.

     As noticed by Mário Carvalho, this gloss on Physics does not belong to the corresponding Coimbra commentary, but to a manuscript course given by Fonseca while he was lecturing in Coimbra. We know only of it through this excerpt by Longobardo. See Mário Santiago de Carvalho, “Fonseca, Pedro da,” inConimbricenses.org Encyclopedia, ed. Mário Santiago de Carvalho and Simone Guidi.https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2563270,https://www.conimbricenses.org/encyclopedia/fonseca-pedro-da, latest revision: January 29, 2020. Longobardo or another Jesuit missionary obtained a manuscript copy while in Portugal and brought it along to China. Aristotle’s position on the Presocratics is quite nuanced, and their full rejection was done by Scholasticism on the ground they knew only a material principle; see Aquinas,Summa theologiae, Ia.q.4.a.1. As expressed in the next paragraph, Longobardo opposed the attempt of some of his contemporaries to re-evaluate the Presocratics in more positive light.

126. 126.

     The source of this citation has not been identified. The Portuguese text mentions Fonseca: “como diz o Fonseca na sua grosa tirada do texto.”

127. 127.

     Cicero,De oratore, 3.20.

128. 128.

     Santa Maria simply writes “ab illis” and is not clear to what the “illis” refers. The Portuguese text specifies more clearly that the Chinese Bonzes derived their doctrines from the gymnosophists in India: “[Quart]o finalmente, provase não ser isto cousa nova, que outros Autores mais antigos que os sobre nomeados não tivessam, pois a Seita dos Gymnosophistas Indianos o tem abertamente, e o professam os Bonzos da China que delles emanaram.”

129. 129.

     InThe True Meaning of the Lordof Heaven, Ricci refuted the pantheist doctrine that all things form one entity (wanwu yiti 萬物一體), but the doctrine was attributed to the more recent Confucians, not to the ancient Confucians. Longobardo considers that both ancient and modern Confucians hold this doctrine.

130. 130.

     Longobardo explains here the Anterior Heaven, orxiantian, by Shao Yong; see Prelude 5 above.

131. 131.

     This explains the Posterior Heaven, orhoutian, by Shao Yong; see Prelude 6 above.

132. 132.

     This corresponds to Zhu Xi’s classification of people according to their natural endowment; seeXingli daquan,juan 1.

133. 133.

     Aristotle,Metaphysics I.3, 984a5: “Anaximenes and Diogenes make air prior to water, and the most primary of the simple bodies […] Of those who said the universe was one, then no one succeeded in discovering a cause of this sort, except perhaps Parmenides, and he only inasmuch as he supposes that there is not only one but also in some sense two causes. But for those who make more elements it is more possible to state the second cause, e.g. for those make hot and cold, or fire and earth, the elements; for they treat fire as having a nature which fits it to move things, and water and earth and such things they treat in the contrary way.” Aristotle,The Basic Works of Aristotle, ed. Richard McKeon (New York: Modern Library, 2001), 694–695.

134. 134.

     The Portuguese text is more precise, adding “vestindoseper motum et quietem.”

135. 135.

     In scholastic philosophy, “proximate” or “immediate matter” (materia immediata) refers to what a thing is directly made of (i.e. bricks in the case of a house), as opposed to “prime matter,” which is undifferentiated.

136. 136.

     The gloss “quae praefata significant” is not in the Portuguese text and redundant.

137. 137.

     Zhongyong 16: “The Master said: In their being virtuous, how great are ghosts and spirits!…” (子曰: 鬼神之為德).

138. 138.

     Xingli daquan,juan 28.

139. 139.

     According to the marginal note added by Santa Maria, the five universal moral virtues orwuchang 五常 are clemency (ren 仁), justice (yi 義), cultivation (li 禮), wisdom (zhi 智) and faith on a human level (xin 信).

140. 140.

     The corresponding Portuguese text adds “cinco” here.

141. 141.

     The corresponding Poruguese text adds the concept of substance here: “rezão e Substantia universalíssima.”

142. 142.

     Quote from the chapterLiren 里仁 of theLunyu (4.15): “子曰: 參乎!吾道一以貫之.”

143. 143.

     The relationship betweenli andqi is quite complex and varies among different Neo-Confucian philosophers. Longobardo expresses here the priority assigned by Zhu Xi toli overqi, and he explains this priority in terms of Aristotelian causes.

144. 144.

     This is not the common teaching of Neo-Confucianism, but the view of Shao Yong. Also, Stoicism held the view of an endless cycle of birth and death of the universe.

145. 145.

     As mentioned above,Zhongyong 16 deals specifically withguishen.

146. 146.

     Longobardo probably used the commentary by Chen Hao 陳澔 (Yuan dynasty) which was inserted in theWujing daquan.

147. 147.

     Canon of Shun (Shundian 舜典) in theBook of Documents, orShujing.

148. 148.

     Longobardo inserted the Chinese text by Chengzi 程子, drawn fromXingli daquan,juan 26, 11a: “或問天帝之異。曰: 以形體謂之天, 以主宰謂之帝, 以至妙謂之神, 以功用謂之鬼神, 以性情謂之乾, 其實一而已。所自而名之者, 異也。夫天專言之, 則道也.” The original quote is found in chapterTiandi (天地篇) of the bookEr Cheng cuiyan 二程粹言.

149. 149.

     Longobardo inserted the words ofZhongyong 16: “體物而不可遺.” The idea of an immediate destruction in case of separation is not in the Chinese text or in the commentaries, but is Longobardo’s own interpolation.

150. 150.

     The Portuguese text adds the Greek wordentelekia (entelechy) to further define the spirits, but this is not translated in the Latin text.

151. 151.

     The Portuguese text here is clearer and includes the concept of substance, which contrasts with the concept of quality or property: “e assi mais veriam a ser a qualidade ou propriedade, que a Substantia das cousas.”

152. 152.

     The Portuguese text adds the concept of quality and accident here: “Respondo [secund]o que tomandose os Spiritos pella pura virtude ou actividade das cousas, fica o conceito delles cada vez mais abatido, com de qualidade e accidente quenon potestper se exsistere.”

153. 153.

     The Portuguese text uses the word “Substantia” here.

154. 154.

     Missionaries use the termTutao, derived from the Chinesedutang 都堂, to indicate a Governor,xunfu 巡撫 orzongdu 總督. Wu Yongxian 吳用先 (1558–1626), literary name Wu Benru 吳本如, was from Anhui province. He became advanced scholar (jinshi) in 1592. He was the governor (zongdu) of Jiliao 蓟遼 for less than a year, from August 1624 to March 1625. He is also mentioned in Prelude 13, N.^o 8, and Prelude 17, N.^o 1.

155. 155.

     Also mentioned in Prelude 17, N.^o 5. For more information on Wu Benru, see the chapter by Song Liming above.

156. 156.

     The Portuguese text uses the word “Substantia” here.

157. 157.

     Santa Maria forgets to include “Ki,” which can be found in the Portuguese text. This is obviously an oversight because he provides a gloss for this word in the same sentence.

158. 158.

     Santa Maria’s Latin text has: “the second greatest cause of the universe” (quod cælum maior prorsus causa 2.^a totius universi) but this does not correspond to the Portuguese (que he a maior cousa que ha no Universo). Morales’ Latin text is more accurate (quod prorsus est maior causa totius universi).

159. 159.

     The text of theShujing is: “天聰明, 自我民聰明。天明畏, 自我民明威” (虞書·皋陶謨). However, Longobardo inserted a Chinese quote from a commentator: “天之聦明, 非有視聽也, 因民之視聽以為聦明; 天之明畏, 非有好惡, 因民之好惡以為明畏.” See Wu Cheng 吳澄,Shu zuan yan 書纂言,juan 1, 54.

160. 160.

     Longobardo inserts a quote of Cheng Yi 程颐, drawn from the section “Tiandi 天地” (Heaven and earth), injuan 26 of theXingli daquan, 16b: “天地無心而成化, 聖人有心而無為.”

161. 161.

     The Portuguese text here is slightly more precise here: “vontade rational.”

162. 162.

     As the BnF ms. attests, Longobardo inserts here the same quote which was already given in Prelude 3, and wrongly attributed to Confucius: “六合之內論而不議, 六合之外存而不論.”

163. 163.

     Chinese words ofZhongyong 16 on the BnF manuscript: “體物而不可遺.” See N.^o 7 above.

164. 164.

     Longobardo translates here the words ofZhongyong 16 that he inserted in the text (Latin ms. APF): “使天下之人齊明盛服以承祭祀.” In the BnF manuscript, there is a further addition “明盛服以承祭祀, 如在其上, 如在其左右.”

165. 165.

     The terms “philosophical spirits” and “civil spirits” seem to be adaptations of Varro’s tripartite theology (civil theology, natural theology and mythical theology). Whereas civil theology is practised by the people for the purpose of social cohesion, natural theology is theorised by philosophers using reason. Trigault had adopted the terms “political” and “civil” to describe the rituals surrounding Ricci’s burial. See Nicolas Standaert, “Early Sino-European Contacts and the Birth of the Modern Concept of ‘Religion’,” inRooted in Hope: China—Religion—Christianity: Festschrift in Honor of Roman Malek S.V.D. on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, ed. Barbara Hoster and Dirk Kuhlmann (Oxford: Routledge, 2017, 3–27.

166. 166.

     Santa Maria has slightly abbreviated Longobardo’s Portuguese text here: “Por onde não ha [que] acribar nos textos das suas doutrinas, nas quaes de industria falam de maneira que o povo possa imaginar haver Spiritos ou Deoses viventes, e assi os reverencie e tenha medo delles mas ha mister estar fixos nos principios da sua Ph[ilosophi]a, entendendo tudo como o entendem os mestres das Seitas, conforme a luz e guia [que] dão os Interpretes classicos.”

167. 167.

     Longobardo here applies Rodrigues’s theory of the double teaching, with an esoteric teaching for the elite, and an exoteric teaching for the people.

168. 168.

     Longobardo cites in Chinese fromZhongyong 16: “鬼神, 天地之作用而造化之迹也.” However, he has “作用” instead of“功用” as found in Zhu Xi’sSishu zhangju jizhu,juan 1, 11a. The mistake is found in all four manuscripts consulted: the APF Latin and Portuguese manuscripts, the BnF Portuguese manuscript, and the Casanatenese Latin manuscript.

169. 169.

     Longobardo cites in Chinese fromXingli daquan,juan 28, 37b: “《易》說: 鬼神便是造化也.”

170. 170.

     This translates the Chinese text, not present in our manuscripts: “又問如名山大川能興雲致, 何也?曰: 氣之蒸成耳”. The Portuguese text reads slightly differently: “E risponde dizendo que são effeitos dos fumos ou / vapores dos Ar.” The word “effeitos” (effects) is not translated in Santa Maria’s Latin text.

171. 171.

     Longobardo translates this passage fromXingli daquan,juan 28, 37b, and provides the Chinese text in the margin: “又問: 既有祭, 則莫須有神否?曰: 只氣便是神也。今人不知此理, 纔有水旱便去廟中祈禱。不知雨露是甚物, 從何處出, 復於廟中求邪?名山大川能與雲致雨却都不説著, 却只於山川外木土人身上討雨露, 木土人身上有雨露邪?” The Portuguese translatesbuzhi 不知 as “ignorantia” (ignorance), but Santa Maria’s Latin translation opts for a stronger “stultitia” (stupidity).

172. 172.

     The Portuguese translateszhuzai 主宰 as “governo” (government), but the Latin translation opts for a more theological expression: “regens providentia.”

173. 173.

     Longobardo had already alluded to this quote of Chengzi in Prelude 11, N.^o 7, drawing fromXingli daquan,juan 26, 11a, and here he gives a more literal translation. He writes again the same Chinese words in the margin: “或問天帝之異。曰: 以形體謂之天, 以主宰謂之帝, 以至妙謂之神, 以功用謂之鬼神, 以性情謂之乾, 其實一而已。所自而名之者, 異也.” However, the last sentence is omitted: “夫天專言之, 則道也.”

174. 174.

     The Portuguese only has “elle,” but the Latin specifies this as “aeternum corpus caeleste.”

175. 175.

     Longobardo translates this quote from Zhang Zai 張載 and provides the Chinese text in the margin, drawing fromXingli daquan,juan 28, 38a: “鬼神[事]無他却只是箇誠.”

176. 176.

     This is taken also from theXingli daquan, in reference toZhongyong 16, but Longobardo did not provide the Chinese characters, which are as follows: “吕堅中曰: 如在其上如在其左右, 曰然.” Lü Jianzhong is a Song dynasty commentator who is mentioned inZhuzi yulei,juan 119.

177. 177.

     Longobardo translates the words of Zhang Zai which he writes in Chinese: “鬼神者, 二氣之良能也.” According to Pan Feng-chuan, this comes from theXingli daquan, but in fact, it comes from Zhu Xi’sSishu zhangju jizhu, Nanjing edition, 11a.

178. 178.

     Longobardo provides the Chinese, drawing fromXingli daquan,juan 28, 2b: “問: 鬼神便只是此氣否?曰: 又是這氣裏面神靈相似.” Longobardo uses the Aristotelian concept ofentelecheia to define theguishen.

179. 179.

     Longobardo provides in the margin the Chinese text of Zhu Xi, drawn fromXingli daquan,juan 28, 3a: “雨風露雷、日月晝夜, 此鬼神之迹也, 此是白日公平正直之鬼神。若所謂有嘯于梁、觸于胷, 此[則]所謂不正邪暗、或有或無、或去或來、或聚或者, 又有所謂禱之而應、祈之而獲, 此亦所謂鬼神, 同一理也。世間萬事皆此理, 但精粗大小之不同爾.”

180. 180.

     “The five sacrifices [wusi] are archaic sacrifices to spirits that were eventually linked to the five phases: door/wood, stove/fire, middle pillar/earth, gate/metal, and well/water.” See “Sacrifice and the Imperial Cult of Confucius,”History of Religions 41, no. 3 (2002): 256, n.16.

181. 181.

     Longobardo provides the Chinese characters, drawing fromXingli daquan,juan 28, 38b: “鬼神若是無時, 古人不如是求, 七日戒、三日齋, 或求諸陽, 或求諸陰, 須是見得有如天子祭天地, 定是有個天, 有個地。諸侯祭境內名山大川, 定是有個名山大川; 大夫祭五祀, 定是有個門行戶中霤。今廟宇有靈底亦是山川之氣聚會處, 久之被人掘損壞, 於是不復有靈, 亦是這些氣過了.”

182. 182.

     Longobardo provides the Chinese characters, drawing fromXingli daquan,juan 28, 38b–39a: “問: 祭天地山川而用牲帛酒禮者, 只是表吾心之誠耶?抑真有氣來格也?曰: 若道無物來享時, 自家祭甚底?肅然在上, 令人奉承敬畏是甚物?若道真有雲車擁從而來, 又妄誕.”

183. 183.

     Longobardo provides Zhu Xi’s words in Chinese, drawing fromXingli daquan,juan 28, 39a: “天氣常伸, 謂之神.”

184. 184.

     The Portuguese text correctly translatesji 稷 as “Deoses dos cinco mantimientos” (gods of the five provisions), but Santa Maria erroneously translates it as “Dei quinque elementorum” (gods of the five elements).

185. 185.

     In fact, the question has two parts. For the first question, this corresponds to the words of theXingli daquan,juan 28, 39a–b, provided by Longobardo: “問子之祭先祖, 固是以氣而求, 若祭其他鬼神, 則如之何?有來享之意否?曰: 子之於祖先, 固有顯然不易之理。若祭其他, 亦祭其所當祭。祭如在, 祭神如神在。如天子, 則祭天, 是其當祭, 亦有氣類, 烏得而不來歆乎?諸侯祭社稷, 故今祭社亦是從氣類而祭, 鳥得而不來歆乎?今祭孔子, 必於學, 其氣類亦可想.” The quote of Confucius comes fromLunyu 3.12. Santa Maria added a note in the Latin manuscript, not present in the Portuguese manuscripts, concerning the rites to Confucius.

186. 186.

     The words for the second part of the question are also written in the margin, drawn fromXingli daquan,juan 28, 39b: “問天地山川是有個物事, 則祭之, 其神可致。人死, 氣己散, 如何致之?曰: 只是一氣。如子孫有個氣在此, 畢竟是因何有此, 其所自來, 葢自厥初生民氣化之祖, 相傳到此, 只是此氣.”

187. 187.

     Chen Chun 陳淳, or Chen Beixi 陳北溪 (1159–1223), was a disciple of Zhu Xi. Longobardo provides the Chinese text, drawn fromXingli daquan,juan 28, 40a–b: “古人祭天地山川皆立尸, 誠以天地山川只是陰陽二氣, 用尸要得二氣來聚這尸上, 不是徒然歆享, 所以用灌、用燎、用牲、用幣, 大要盡吾心之誠敬。誠敬既盡, 則天地山川之氣便自聚.”

188. 188.

     Zhu Gongqian 朱公遷 (Yuan dynasty) wrote a commentary on theFour Books, called theSishutongzhi 四書通旨. Longobardo provides the Chinese the text, probably drawing from theWujing daquan:“鬼神自造化而言, 是專言之也; 主乎祭祀而言, 是偏言之也.”

189. 189.

     Augustine quotes Virgil,Georgics, 4.221f.

190. 190.

     Augustine,City of God, 4.12.

191. 191.

     Juan Luis Vives (Latin: Ioannes Ludovicus Vives), 1493–1540, Spanish humanist. Longobardo might have used Vives’ edition of Augustine’sDe civitate Dei (1522) because the following two citations from theAeneid andGeorgics are taken from this work. See Augustine,De civitate Dei libri xxii, ed. Juan Luis Vives (Basil, 1555), 245.

192. 192.

     i.e. the Sun, called Titan in Virgil,Aeneid, 4.119.

193. 193.

     Virgil,Aeneid, 6.724–732.

194. 194.

     Virgil,Georgics 4.219–227.

195. 195.

     The identity betweenli andtaiji was affirmed by Zhu Xi, and Longobardo mentions Zhu Xi’s words in Chinese, drawn from theXingli daquan,juan 26, 5a: “太極只是一箇理字.”

196. 196.

     Longobardo provides the quote in Chinese, drawn from theXingli daquan,juan 26, 7b: “太極只是以理言也, 理緣何又謂之極?極, 至也。以其在中有樞, 極之義如皇極、北極等, 皆有在中之義, 不可便訓極為中.”

197. 197.

     Santa Maria’s Latin translation has “res agunt suas operationes semper incessanter.” However, in the original Portuguese Longobardo writes, “as cousas sempre fazem suas gerações sem cessar.” Morales’ Latin translation is a more accurate translation of Longobardo’s text: “homines et res semper agunt suas generationes incessanter.” We have followed Longobardo’s text in rendering this passage.

198. 198.

     Longobardo gives a passage of Chen Chun (Chen Beixi) in Chinese, drawn from theXingli daquan,juan 26, 8a–b: “若太極云者, 乃是就理論天之所以萬古常運, 地之所以萬古長存, 人物之所以萬古生生不息, 不是各各自恁地都是理。在其中為之主宰便自然如此, 就其為天地萬物主宰處論, 恁地渾淪極至, 故以太極名之, 葢總天地萬物之理, 到此凑合, 更無去處。及散而為天地、為人、為物, 又皆一一停勻, 無少虧欠, 所以謂之太極.” Despite Longobardo’s claim, Shangdi is not mentioned in this passage, onlyzhuzai 主宰.

199. 199.

     “In primo vere” is literally “early spring” and “in medio veris” is literally “mid spring” in Latin, but in Portuguese “primavera” simply means “spring” and “verão” means “summer.” Hence what is meant here is “spring” and “summer,” respectively.

200. 200.

     Another quote from Chen Chun (Chen Beixi) given by Longobardo in Chinese, drawn from theXingli daquan,juan 1, 27a: “天道流行, 自古及今, 無一毫之妄。暑往則寒來, 日往則月來。春生了便夏長, 秋殺了便冬蔵。元亨利貞, 終始循環, 萬古常如此, 皆是真實道理為之主宰.” The indication of page 31 in all our manuscripts is a mistake.

201. 201.

     This quote of Zhou Dunyi’sTaiji tu shuo 太極圖說 is given in Chinese by Longobardo, drawn from theXingli daquan,juan 26, 9a–b: “開物之前, 渾沌未[太]始。混元之如此者, 太極為之也。開物之後, 有天地、有人物, 如此者, 太極為之也。閉物之後, 人銷物盡, 天地又合為渾沌者, 亦太極為之也。太極常常如此, 始終一般, 無增無減, 無分無合, 故以未判已判言太極者, 不知道之言也.” In the Portuguese manuscript of APF, parts of the Chinese quote cannot be read, but the other three manuscripts consulted have the character ofwei未 instead oftai太. Santa Maria omits in his translation “não ha acrecentarlhe nem ha tirarlhe etc” (there is no need to add to it or remove anything from it).

202. 202.

     Ricci had already remarked that Chinese do not pay respect totaiji. See Ricci,The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven (Boston: Institute of Jesuit Sources, 2016), 81.

203. 203.

     For Wu Benru, see above Prelude 11, N.^o 8, and below Prelude 17, N.^o 1.

204. 204.

     Santa Maria’s Latin text adds the notion of “actualization” at this point (iuxta diversitatem qualitatum quibus actuatur et induitur) but this is absent in Longobardo’s Portuguese text (conforme a diversidade das qualidades de que se vai vestindo).

205. 205.

     Longobardo gives in Chinese: “萬物一太極.” This is drawn fromXingli daquan,juan 1, 2b. The indication of page 6 is probably a mistake.

206. 206.

     Longobardo originally stated in Portuguese that this comment is more universal (clausula mais universal), but Santa Maria instead says that it is more specific (individuanter).

207. 207.

     Longobardo gives in Chinese: “是萬物各一太極.” This is drawn fromXingli daquan,juan 1, 21b: “物物各一太極.”

208. 208.

     Words of Cheng Yi are given in Chinese: “理一分殊合, 天地萬物而言, 只是一箇理, 及在人物又各自有一箇理.” This is drawn fromXingli daquan,juan 26, 1b–2a.

209. 209.

     Li Tiangang proposed Zhou Jiamo 周嘉謨, but he is from Hubei, and not a member of the Libu. Song Liming identifies him as Zhou Muqian 周慕乾. See also Prelude 17, N.^o 2. For more information on Huang Yuntai and Zhou Muqian, see the chapter by Song Liming above.

210. 210.

     Quintus Valerius Soranus (ca. 135 BC–82 BC). Latin poet and tribune of the people. This is the only extant text attributed to him. It was handed down to posterity by Augustine inCity of God, 7.9.

211. 211.

     Santa Maria’s wording diverges slightly from Longobardo’s Portuguese text: “E aquelle outro,Kĕ uaĕ Kiŭm Ly: chegar ao intimo das cousas, e esgotar a sua essentia e natureça.” It is possible that Santa Maria misread “intimo” as “ultimo”, thus translating “chegar ao intimo” as “usque ad ultimum quod sic.”

212. 212.

     In theTaiji tu shuo, Zhou Dunyi considerswuji as prior totaiji.

213. 213.

     In fact, for Zhu Xi,li,taiji andwuji are identical, but Longobardo suggests in fact the unfolding of a cosmogenesis in different temporal stages, something similar to the Bible.

214. 214.

     The concept oftaixu is mentioned in theZhuangzi, but it refers here to the concept developed by Zhang Zai in the first chapter “Taihe 太和” (Great harmony) of hisZhengmeng 正蒙 (Correcting youthful ignorance).

215. 215.

     Taiyi may refer to a Taoist divinity residing in the pole star, or to a principle of number divination (shushu 數術) based on theYijing.

216. 216.

     Hundun refers to the Daoist notion of chaos and was used by Shao Yong to express the idea of an ordered chaos. See the chapter by Meynard above.

217. 217.

     Hunlun is also a Daoist concept for chaos.

218. 218.

     In the myth of the creation of the world by Pangu 盤古,hongmeng refers to the original chaos.

219. 219.

     “Actiones sunt suppositorum” refers to the fact that the subject of an action is not the part, as the hand, or an organ, as the eye, or even the form, as the soul, but the individual substance. Cf. Thomas Aquinas,Summa theologiae, 2a2ae, q. 58.2. Longobardo’s wording here is slightly different: “De modo que o Ar primigenio per huma parte denota a primeira qualidade que emanou da Substantia daLy, e lhe serve como de instrumento conionto: e per outra significa a mesma Substantia daLy disposta ja pera operar.” (Thus primordial Air signifies the first quality which germinated from that first substanceli, and serves as a conjoined instrument, and also the same substanceli disposed to act.)

220. 220.

     A more appropriate translation oftianming would be “heavenly mandate.”

221. 221.

     Longobardo’s Portuguese text has here “Substantia” (substance).

222. 222.

     Chinese text given by Longobardo, drawn from theXingli daquan,juan 34, 19b: “天下只是一箇理.”

223. 223.

     Chinese text given by Longobardo: “天下之理, 即萬物之理.” TheXingli daquan,juan 34, 19b, has something sligthly different: “隨時觀理, 而天下之理矣.”

224. 224.

     Chinese text given by Longobardo, drawn from theXingli daquan,juan 34, 20a: “所以謂萬物一者皆有此理.”

225. 225.

     Longobardo gives the words of Zhen Dexiu 真德秀 (1178–1235) in Chinese, drawn from theXingli daquan,juan 26, 7a: “萬物各具一理, 萬理同出一原, 所謂萬物一原者, 太極也。太極者, 乃萬理統會之名.”

226. 226.

     Longobardo gives in Chinese the quote ofZhongyong 20, drawn from the “ordinary commentary,” i.e. Zhu Xi’sSishu zhangju jizhu,juan 1, 19a–b: “誠者, 真實無妄之謂, 天理之本然也.”

227. 227.

     Longobardo provides the following Chinese text: “太極固純之善.” This seems to continue the passage of theXingli daquan,juan 1, 19a: “所謂 ‘繼之者善’、 ‘誠之複’是萬物已得此理,而皆有所歸藏之時所謂 ‘成之者性’.”

228. 228.

     Santa Maria adds “from every impurity” (ab omni impuritate), but the Portuguese text does not mention the concept of purity, which does not seem to have any relation withxu.

229. 229.

     Santa Maria adds “which is most pure and empty” (purissimum et inane), but again the Portuguese text does not mention purity.

230. 230.

     The Chinese text given by Longobardo is drawn from theXingli daquan,juan 26, 11a: “至善者, 虛也。虛者, 天地之祖, 天地從虛中來.”

231. 231.

     These are the words of Chen Chun (Chen Beixi), which are given by Longobardo in Chinese, drawn from theXingli daquan,juan 26, 7b: “太極之所以為極至者, 言此理至中、至正、至精、至粹, 至神、至妙, 至矣、盡矣, 不可以復加矣.”

232. 232.

     TheLunyu does not discussli 理, but in reference to the reverence towardstian 天 (heaven) inLunyu 3.13, Zhu Xi identified heaven withli: “天, 即理也.” Longobardo gives those words in reference toli 理, drawn from Zhu Xi’sSishu zhangju jizhu,juan 2, 5b: “其尊無對.”

233. 233.

     Longobardo makes the point that Shangdi, identified by Ricci as the equivalent of God, is not in Chinese philosophy the ultimate reality.

234. 234.

     Virgil,Eclogue 3.93.

235. 235.

     This is mentioned in the Portuguese text, but is absent in Santa Maria’s translation.

236. 236.

     This refers to two sections ofjuan 26:liqiyi 理氣一 andtaiji 太極. In the Portuguese text, Longobardo translatesXingli asPhilosophia sinica, but Santa Maria has a more restrictive translation ofSinensis Physica, or Chinese natural philosophy. The confusion between thephilosophia andphysica can be attributed to Longobardo’s use of an abbreviation (Phiá), which can in fact be read in both ways. However, in certain parts Longobardo clearly spellsphysica with a “y”, suggesting thatPhiá must be an abbreviation ofphilosophia.

237. 237.

     This refers to chapter 24 of theLiji (祭義第二十四) onjuan 8 of theLiji jishuo in theWujing daquan.

238. 238.

     “Shundian 舜典” (Canon of Shun) of theShujing: “After twenty-eight years the emperor demised” (二十有八載, 帝乃殂落); James Legge,Chinese Classics, vol. 3.1 (London: Trübner, 1865), 40.

239. 239.

     Comment of Wu Cheng 吳澄 (1249–1333) on the “Shundian” drawn probably from theWujing daquan: “殂落, 死也。死者魂氣升于天, 故曰殂; 體魄降于地, 故曰落.”

240. 240.

     Ricci had argued that thepo elements are material and thehun elements are spiritual. See Ricci,The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven, 145. However, Longobardo considers that evenhun, being air, is material.

241. 241.

     Indeed, Longobardo’s understanding of thehun po elements was more correct than Ricci, since those elements after some time ultimately disperse into heaven and earth.

242. 242.

     Quote from Chengzi given by Longobardo in Chinese, drawn from theXingli daquan,juan 28, 41a: “合而生, 非來也; 盡而死, 非往也。然而精氣歸於天, 形魄歸於地, 謂之往亦可矣.”

243. 243.

     Longobardo cites theShijing and writes the Chinese characters in the margin: “文王陟降, 在帝左右.” There is already an allusion to this passage in Prelude 2, N.^o 1.

244. 244.

     Ricci had used similar quotes of theFive Classics to show that the ancient Chinese believed that the soul of Wen Wang was still alive and protecting the country; see Ricci,The True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven, 145. Through this secular explanation, Longobardo destroys Ricci’s argumentation.

245. 245.

     This refers to the second part of the previous quote of theShijing: “On the right and left of God” (在帝左右). James Legge,Chinese Classics, vol. 4.2 (London: Frowde, 1893), 428.

246. 246.

     In scholastic philosophy, separated soul (anima separata) refers to the soul as separated from the body after death, and waiting for the resurrection of the body. While the separated soul retains its individuality, theyouhun in Chinese thought disappears into heaven and loses all individuality.

247. 247.

     Portuguese text is clearer here: “E então não havera mais que huma Natureça universal despida de todas as figuras e qualidades, como hera antes que começasse a vestirse dellas.”

248. 248.

     In fact, Confucianism rejects the Buddhist category ofkong, or emptiness. In the fourth figure of Prelude 5 on Anterior Heaven, Longobardo had already inserted this category ofkong, and mentioned it also in Prelude 10.

249. 249.

     Nicolas Trigault,De christiana expeditione apud Sinas suscepta ab Societate Iesu (Augsburg: Apud Christophorum Mangium, 1615), 105. The citation has been slightly modified. In the original text it should read “ab inanium Deorum cultu” (from the cult of empty gods).

250. 250.

     The clause “cum nullam syncerè persequantur” (since they do not sincerely follow any) is omitted here.

251. 251.

     Trigault,De christiana expeditione apud Sinas, 116.

252. 252.

     Longobardo discusses here ancient Chinese philosophy but through some Neo-Confucian ideas like the unity of all into one entity (wanwu yiti 萬物一體).

253. 253.

     This conception of a cycle of birth and destruction of the universe is not Confucian, but comes from Daoism.

254. 254.

     See Prelude 3, N.^o 6.

255. 255.

     Ricci made the mistake of assuming a complete break between ancient and modern Confucianism; Longobardo goes in another extreme, assuming a complete uniformity of the teaching, and thus denying any difference between the two.

256. 256.

     Vieira had already passed away in 1619 when Longobardo writes. Concerning Vieira, see Preface, N.^o 5, as well as the chapter by Collani above.

257. 257.

     Wu Benru, alias Wu Yongxian, is already mentioned in Prelude 11, N.^o 8. The description of him as a Buddhist monk seems incorrect, but in any case, he was known for his Buddhist sympathies. At one point of his career, he is said to have resigned from his position and stayed at home for eight years because of his health. Longobardo inserted in his Portuguese text important information that was omitted by Santa Maria: Wu Benru held the rank oftutao (dutang). Thanks to this information, we can determine his identity.

258. 258.

     The Portuguese text makes the Latin clearer here: “vendo que diziamos que o nossoTienchu tinha criado o ceo e a terra com todas as mais cousas, e ainda oTáikiĕ, que elles poem [por] primeiro principio do Universo.”

259. 259.

     On the manuscript Longobardo Wu Benru’s words in Chinese, comprising two sentences. The first comes from the Buddhist monk Fu Dashi 傅大士 (497–569): “有物先天地, 無形本寂寥, 能為萬象主, 不逐四時凋.” Fu Dashi 傅大士,Guzunsu yulu 古尊宿語錄 (Recorded sayings of the ancient worthies, Song dynasty) CBETA 68, no. 1315.

260. 260.

     The second sentence noted down on the manuscript by Longobardo is a famous verse of theJingang jing 金剛經 (Diamond Sutra): “若以色見我, 以音聲求我, 是人行邪道, 不能見如來.” See Thich Nhat Hanh,The Diamond That Cuts Through Illusion (Berkeley: Parallax Press, 1992), 22.Rulai is one of the titles of Buddha. Being in contact with the syncretism of the three teachings, Longobardo inadvertently received some Buddhist and Daoist influences which made him misunderstand Confucianism.

261. 261.

     Vergil,Aeneid, VI, 730–732.

262. 262.

     The Portuguese (APF) more precisely identifies him as an assistant of the “chù kĕ sīi”, which corresponds to “Bureau of Receptions” (主客司). Song Liming identifies him as Zhou Muqian 周慕乾.

263. 263.

     Manual Dias (1574–1659) was the first vice-provincial, holding office from 23 March 1623 to 1635.

264. 264.

     Standaert identified Çiên lîn vû as Qian Xiangkun 錢象坤, literary name Linwu 隣武; see Nicolas Standaert,Yang Tingyun, Confucian and Christian in Late Ming China (Leiden: Brill, 1988), 199. Li Tiangang said the same, but without mentioning Standaert. See Li Tiangang 李天綱, “Long Huamin dui Zhongguo zongjiao benzhi de lunshu ji qi yingxiang 龍華民對中國宗教本質的論述及其影響,”Xueshu yuekan 學術月刊 49, no. 5 (2017): 177. Qian Xiangkun (1569–1640) was from Shaoxing 紹興 in Zhejiang province. He became advanced scholar in 1601. He held the position of junior vice-president,youshilang 右侍郎, in the Ministry of Rites (Libu 禮部).

265. 265.

     Santa Maria’s Latin text merely states that he was “præfectus” (mandarin), while the Portuguese text provides extra information about a recent promotion toshangshu 尚書 of the Ministry of Rites (Libu 禮部).

266. 266.

     Santa Maria adds the marginal note “= a Ecce conceptus tam sublimis quem Sinæ habent de suo Confucio. Quid ergo erit si ministri Christi Domini Christianis sub prætextu politico permittamus cultum eius supra relatum Præludio 12, N.^o 11?”

267. 267.

     This meeting probably happened in Hangzhou in 1622–1623, and Song Liming suggests that it may have taken place in the famous Academy of Wansong (Wansong shuyuan 萬松書院).

268. 268.

     Song Liming suggests Xu Ruke 徐如珂 or Xu Shaoji 徐紹吉 as possibilities.

269. 269.

     Perhaps a reference to Nicholas of Cusa whose works could be found in the Jesuit library in Beijing.

270. 270.

     Lunyu 4.15: “吾道一以貫之.” This passage was already quoted in Prelude 11, N.^o 2.

271. 271.

     Song Liming identifies him as Zhou Hongmo 周洪謨 (1565–1630) with the literary name as Qingyu 慶虞. He is already mentioned in Prelude 11, N.^o 9.

272. 272.

     If Shangdi is understood as the spirit of an ancestor, it may make sense to say that after sometime, it will also disappear, but it cannot be said in Confucianism that heaven or its spirit will vanish. Either this literatus was influenced by Daoist ideas, or Longobardo did not get it right.

273. 273.

     Li Tiangang suggests the name of Li Daiwen 李待問 (Kuiru 葵如). In fact, this refers to Li Zongyan 李宗延 (1563–1627), literary name Songyu 崧毓, from Henan province. He became advanced scholar in 1586. He was promoted in 1621 to the censorate 都察院 in Beijing, and not long after became its president. In 1623–1624, he held the office of President of the Ministry of Revenue (Hubu shangshu 戶部尚書). Li Zongyan wrote a preface and a postface to Longobardo’sDizhenjie 地震解 (Treatise on earthquakes, 1626).

274. 274.

     Perhaps Li Songyu was influenced by Buddhism, but at any rate the Buddhist concept ofkong was strongly rejected by Confucian orthodoxy.

275. 275.

     Song Liming suggests Chen Qiyu 陳奇瑜 as a possibility.

276. 276.

     Song Liming suggests Zhu Yicheng 祝以成 as a possibility. BnF has “Cheu” instead of “Çeū”.

277. 277.

     This passage of theShujing and its commentary by Wu Cheng was already mentioned Prelude 11, N.^o 11.

278. 278.

     Yuhuang Shangdi 玉皇上帝 is the holy name given to the Jade emperor Yuhuang dadi 玉皇大帝 by the Song dynasty emperor Huizong 徽宗 (r. 1100–1126).

279. 279.

     Chinese words on the BnF manuscript: “周公、召公, 何人乎?其謂成湯、文王既崩之後, 猶在天陟降而能保佑國家.” Ricci quoted this passage inThe True Meaning of the Lord of Heaven, 145.

280. 280.

     The question is drawn fromLunyu 7.34. Commenting this passage, Zhu Xi expressed the idea that Confucius conformed his actions to the spirits (孔子素行合於神明), but neither Zhu Xi nor the other Chinese commentators ever said that Confucius claimed to be identical with heaven.

281. 281.

     This literatus candidly expresses what Rodrigues referred to as a reprehensible double teaching. Longobardo mentions only “the pretext of religion” but Santa Maria qualifies religion with three adjectives: false, fake and fabricated. Longobardo states that the control over the people through religion is enduring (que se não desanda), but Santa Maria omits this.

282. 282.

     Song Liming identifies him as Wu Shiqi 吳士奇 (1566–?), literary name Hengchu 恒初.

283. 283.

     Song Liming identifies him as Huang Yuntai 黃運泰, literary name Jiyun 際雲.

284. 284.

     Song Liming identifies him as Mao Yilu 毛一鹭, literary name Ruchu 孺初.

285. 285.

     Song Liming identifies him as Chen Yi 陳儀, literary name Shaofeng 紹鳳.

286. 286.

     Song Liming identifies him as He Qiaoyuan 何喬遠 (1558–1631), literary name Feiwo 匪莪. In the Portuguese text, Longobardo states that he presently (agora) occupies the position.

287. 287.

     Song Liming suggests Liu Dingguo 刘定國.

288. 288.

     Song Liming identifies him as Cao Yubian 曹于汴 (1558–1634), literary name Zhenyu 貞予.

289. 289.

     Song Liming suggests Feng Shixing 馮时行.

290. 290.

     Jesuit mission started in South Vietnam in 1615.

291. 291.

     In the Portuguese text, Longobardo describes his methods of drawing Yang Tingyun into the debate as a “strategem” (stratagemma). While Longobardo stresses that the Jesuits in Vietnam truly made this request (como foina verdade), Longobardo’s true purpose in asking these questions was in fact to resolve questions debated within the Jesuit China mission. Perhaps embarrassed by this duplicity, Santa Maria adds that a degree of “caution” (cautela) was used.

292. 292.

     Zizhi tongjian gangmu 資治通鑒 (The original mirror for aid of government) by Sima Guang.

293. 293.

     On the BnF manuscript: “五倫之道, 君臣父子夫婦兄弟朋友.”

294. 294.

     Marginal note added by Santa Maria in relation to the Rites Controversy: “Since Confucius teaches that the dead ought to be reverenced as if they were still living, they ought to be honoured with the cult of sacrifices after the funeral rights (ji zhi yi li 祭之以禮), which means to sacrifice with those signs. Why are we ministers of the gospel bound to these opinions?”

295. 295.

     This last sentence is not from Yang Tingyun, but from Longobardo: the acknowledgement by Yang Tingyun that Chinese literati do not understand the notions of God, angels and soul, answers the questions that were asked by Carvalho and Vieira. In doing his interviews, Longobardo may have been interested only in listening to the literati to confirm his own standpoint, overlooking nuances.

296. 296.

     Yang Tingyun was himself a Buddhist, and then converted to Christianity, rejecting completely his former Buddhist faith. He believed that Buddhism and Christianity shared a common concern for the afterlife, but adopted the missionaries’ view that the notions of paradise and hell were first invented by Christians, and then copied by the Buddhists; see Standaert,Yang Tingyun, 193.

297. 297.

     See mentions in Prelude 2, N.^o 1 and Prelude 15, N.^o 6.

298. 298.

     Longobardo raises here a suspicion of syncretism in Yang Tingyun’s thought and belief.

299. 299.

     TheXixue shijie chujie 西學十誡初解 (The introduction to the Ten Commandments of Western learning) was written by Yang Tingyun in 1624, but the text is not extant. Only the preface mentioned below has been preserved. The mention of this book here shows that Longobardo had met Yang Tingyun in 1624 in Beijing.

300. 300.

     In the Portuguese text, Longobardo mentions that this maxim has led Europeans in recent years to atheism. As Standaert says, Yang Tinyun may have made such a statement (the work itself is lost), but “this does not mean that Yang Tingyun did not make any distinction between the nature of the Master of Heaven, man and animals, and it certainly did not lead Yang Tingyun to atheism”; Standaert,Yang Tingyun, 198.

301. 301.

     As Standaert shows, Yang Tingyun rejected in fact the idea that Heaven is onlyli; Standaert,Yang Tingyun, 198.

302. 302.

     Santa Maria adds the following marginal note: “Yao and Shun are two of the most ancient Chinese Kings and are considered by the Chinese most holy and excellent. Confucius, however, is called the foremost teacher of the Chinese, and is considered great by everybody, such that he is often said to be the epitome ofzhisheng 至聖, or perfect holiness or excellence. The charactersheng 聖 has a broad meaning.”

303. 303.

     Ye Xianggao’s preface, entitledXixue shijie chujie xu 西學十誡初解序, is dated automn 1624, and it is preserved in his collectionCangxia yucao 蒼霞餘草: “惟謂天主降生其國,近于語怪。然聖賢之生, 皆有所自, 其小而有功德于人者, 猶必以山嶽以列星, 則其大而主宰造化, 開萬世之太平如堯舜孔子, 非上帝所降生, 安得有許大力量, 夫既生于東, 又安知其不生于西乎.” Standaert compared Longobardo’s translation and the original preface by Ye Xianggao, and he concluded that “the statements quoted by Longobardo are authentic; but one still has to be very cautious about the contents.” See Nicolas Standaert,Yang Tingyun, 187–188.

304. 304.

     Longobardo detects in Yang Tingyun a syncretist belief by which Jesus Christ was for him on the same level as Confucius, but Longobardo’s exclusivism does not pay justice to the Christian faith of Yang Tingyun.

305. 305.

     Yang Tingyun expressed his conviction about the compatibility between Christianity and the ancient teaching of the sages in China, transmitted along the ages. Following the idea of Lu Jiuyuan 陆九渊 (1139–1193), Yang Tingyun also wrote: “Within the four seas, this mind and thisli are the same” (四海之内此心此理同也). See Standaert,Yang Tingyun, 200–201.

306. 306.

     Yang Tingyun holds in fact that reverence is given to the Lord of Heaven, and this includes reverence towards heaven and earth. See Standaert,Yang Tingyun, 202.

307. 307.

     Santa Maria adds the following marginal note: “The [Roman] Curia was already given clear and true information about these sacrifices which are made in China to ancestors, teachers and the dead.”

308. 308.

     Here Yang Tingyun expresses quite clearly the idea that there is a strong distinction between ancient and modern Chinese thought, and this goes against Longobardo’s main line of argumentation which assumes a strong uniformity in the Confucian teaching. However, the idea that sects with the plural, that is, including Buddhism and Daoism, would have been free from errors in their beginning cannot truly represent Yang Tingyun’s thought because he harshly criticized Buddhism and Daoism.

309. 309.

     Standaert noted that Longobardo had approved Yang Tingyun’s opinion about the lack of knowledge about invisible matters in China (the end of N.^o 3), but Longobardo makes here an ironical comment on Yang Tingyun; see Standaert, 188. Longobardo seems to read into Yang Tingyun’s mind the theory of the double teaching of Rodrigues.

310. 310.

     Not yet identified. Longobardo describes him as being a scholar from Jiangxi who had not yet passed civil exams. He taught Chinese to the missionaries and wrote a work on Shangdi.

311. 311.

     According to the words written in Chinese, those are the “common theses of Confucianism” (rujia tonglun 儒家通論). However, those theses are quite schematic and lack nuances.

312. 312.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “論人, 不論天.”

313. 313.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “論生, 不論死.”

314. 314.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “論今世, 不論後世.”

315. 315.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “論有形, 不論無形.”

316. 316.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “論一本, 不論萬殊.”

317. 317.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “論無所為而為, 不論報應.”

318. 318.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “論天人一理, 盡人即所以事天.”

319. 319.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “論至善者為性之極, 性上無以復加.”

320. 320.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “論天道只是一至善之理, 無聲無臭.”

321. 321.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “論至善之性無始無終, 只在人身心之內.”

322. 322.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “論人道盡則生順死安.”

323. 323.

     Longobardo provides the corresponding Chinese text in the margin: “以上諸論儒者十分中有九分是這等所以天學未易得明.”

324. 324.

     The BnF Portuguese manuscript states that Athanasius “seems to refer to God” (The BnF Portuguese manuscript states that Athanasius “seems to refer to God” (aqui parese falar a palavra: Deus). Anathasius was still following Ricci’s position and not Rodrigues and Longobardo’s since he accepted the notion of Shangdi as an equivalent of God.

325. 325.

     Brother Pascal Mendez (邱永良厚, 1584–1640) was born in Macao of Chinese Christian parents. He was a close companion of Longobardo. See Louis Pfister,Notices biographiques et bibliographiques sur les Jésuites de l’ancienne mission de Chine, 1552–1773 (Chang-hai: Imprimerie de la mission catholique Orphelinat de T’ou-Se-We, 1932), 1:120–121.

326. 326.

     Xu Guangqi uses the term Shangdi in his own writings. For example, in hisBianxue shugao 辨學疏稿 (Memorial in defense of [Western] teaching, 1616), he defines the Western teaching as “to serve Shangdi” (zhaoshi Shangdi 昭事上帝) and “to worship Him” (chongfeng Shangdi 崇奉上帝); Li Tiangang 李天綱, ed.,Mingmo Tianzhujiao sanzhushi wenjianzhu 明末天主教三柱石文箋注 [Catholic Documents of Xu Guangqi, Li Zhizao and Yang Tingyun] (Hong Kong: Logos and Pneuma Press, 2007), 62–69. From Longobardo’s record of the interview, we can see that Xu Guangqi was well aware that there was a discrepancy between what the ancient texts say about Shangdi and the Catholic teaching on God, but yet the word Shangdi could be used as a full equivalent for the Christian God. This is what Longobardo would not allow.

327. 327.

     Xu Guangqi collaborated with Francesco Sambiasi in writing theLingyan lishao (1623). Sambiasi himself was opposed to the idea that the Chinese had some knowledge on the soul, and therefore he did not use the neologism oflinghun 靈魂, invented by Ruggieri and Ricci to connect with the Chinese tradition, but instead he merely translatedanima asya-ni-ma. However, in hisOutline of the Correct Way, orZhengdao tigang 正道題綱 (1603–1630), he uses the wordlinghun. Li Tiangang, ed.,Mingmo Tianzhujiao sanzhushi wenjianzhu, 107–108. Xu Guangqi accepted the teaching of the soul taught by the missionaries, and he expresses here the idea that the Chinese had some unclear knowledge about it.

328. 328.

     Li Zhizao is already mentioned once; see Preface, N.^o 2. Four mentions of Shangdi can be found in his writtings; Zheng Cheng 鄭誠, ed.,Li Zhizao ji 李之藻集 [Collected writings of Li Zhizao] (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2018).

329. 329.

     Sun Yuanhua 孫元化 (1582–1631) was from Jiading, obtained the degree of licentiate (juren 舉人) in 1612, was baptized as Ignatius in 1621. That year, he invited the Jesuits to set up a residence in Jiading, where he attended the conference held by the Jesuits between December 1627 and January 1628. He published a work on the Western technique of canons (Xifa shenqi 西法神機, 1622–1623). He also collaborated with Francesco Sambiasi and Alfonso Vagnone, revising their books or writing prefaces. We do not know from his writings his position on the Terms Controversy, but from Longobardo’s record, we can see that he was dismissive of the interpretations of Song philosophy, and this was not acceptable to Longobardo.

330. 330.

     This prelude is missing in all extant manuscripts.

331. 331.

     This cover page is not present in the Portuguese manuscript of APF, nor in the Portuguese manuscript of BnF. It was added by Santa Maria before the document was brought to Rome by Ibañez. Santa Maria underlines here the importance of Longobardo’s preface and of the first two preludes which expose his hermeneutical principles, mostly drawn from Rodrigues.

332. 332.

     Preface present in the Latin manuscript of APF and the Portuguese manuscript of BnF, but not present in the Portuguese manuscript of APF.

333. 333.

     This meaning in the Latin manuscript is also present in the BnF manuscript, but the latter stops here.

334. 334.

     Santa Maria’s description matches the APF Portuguese manuscript. Hence, we can presume that this is the manuscript referred to by Santa Maria. This suggests that the APF Portuguese manuscript is the original text of Longobardo and that the BnF is a copy.

Authors and Affiliations

1. Xue-Heng Institute for Advanced Studies, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China

   Daniel Canaris

2. Sun Yat-Sen University, Guangzhou, China

   Thierry Meynard

Corresponding author

Correspondence toDaniel Canaris.

Editors and Affiliations

1. Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China

   Thierry Meynard

2. Xue-Heng Institute for Advanced Studies, Nanjing University, Nanjing, China

   Daniel Canaris

Reprints and permissions

© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

Policies and ethics