Summary
The Chinese classics were read as explorations of the true way of good governance left behind by Sages of Chinese antiquity. The complexity of their subject forced these Sages to use a coding of such complexity that the later born had to bridge the gap between what for them seemed like empty signifiers and the assumed definite meaning of the Sages’ bequests. The Imperial Chinese state, its educational system, and the class of scholar-officials it produced were all tied to this body of classics. The state institutions and the commentary to the classics are both advertized as translations of the classics into specific forms. A competitive challenge to the state always came with or in the form of a challenge to the reading of the classics it patronized. The perceived superiority of Western state institutions transformed the Chinese state and the reading of the classics in the educational systems and commentaries into not just deficient modes, but formidable obstacles to a modern reform. Rereading the classical Chinese heritage in the light of the Western state institutions against the inherited “translations” helped reformers to produce an alternative for both the state and the understanding of the classics that had the cultural advantage of representing modernization along Western lines as a return to the true and forgotten dispensations of the Sages of Chinese antiquity. This argumentation eased anxieties about asymmetries in cultural exchanges, while keeping the way open for an emulation of foreign features that were considered beneficial.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
During the eighteenth century, the European perception of prosperity, order, and rational governance in the Qing state had offered a challenge in the inverse direction, although without Chinese agency in this projection.
- 2.
The work has only been translated into French: Biot 1851.
- 3.
Cf. the story of the ‘miraculous’ production of the Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Bible: de Lange, this volume.
- 4.
“Commentary” is here used as a generic term. It includes both formal commentaries attached to specific classic texts, and interpretations of the classics in other formats and genres.
- 5.
The original term is Ernesto Laclau’s. It is, however, too good and suggestive a coinage to leave to his narrow definition and polemics with structuralism. The term is used here for a pointer to some truth that is beyond language’s narrow powers of definition and therefore is intrinsically empty beyond this function. The truth it is pointing to can only be linguistically approached by reducing it to specific aspects that might seem valid at a given time. This reduction, its replacement by another reduction, and the rediscovery of the original emptiness is the purpose of the commentaries. The classics thus get their specific ‘meaning’ through the eternal efforts of the commentators to overcome their linguistically unavoidable ‘emptiness’.
- 6.
This is not imitation, but a deep-seated pattern of reaction. Though it is not part of the theme of our volume, comparison of premodern strategies for rereading indigenous classic texts in response to internal or external challenges would be worthwhile. Some work has been done on the more philological techniques (textual emendation, accusations of intrusive editing or forgery, etc.), but this is not the whole story. Josephus’ retelling of the Jewish ‘history’ of the Bible (Antiquities) is a clear example.
- 7.
Often quoted with another, more accurate title, Zhou guan 周官, the Officials of the Zhou. The earliest known text, in “old [i.e. pre-Qin] script” was found among other manuscripts in the second century B.C.E. (modern scholars accept that it contains material of this date), and transcribed into “new” clerical script at the end of the first century. Ascription to the Duke of Zhou (the last Sage before Confucius) had become established by c. 200 C.E., and this gave it classic (jing) status; it became part of the official canon from the Tang period on. However, it only became prominent in periods of agitation and contestation; this made its status rather questionable.
- 8.
The Book of Songs, the Book of Documents, the Ritual Records and texts later elevated to the rank of classics such as the Analects and the Mengzi are all collections of stand-alone units. The core of the Book of Changes has an overall cohesiveness, although the sequence of the hexagrams varies in different manuscripts and editions. The Spring and Autumn Annals is an annalistic record of events with no visible structure other than time sequence.
- 9.
Missionaries used a well-known Neoplatonist schema (which can be traced back through the Renaissance to Late Antiquity: Walker 1972) in which an original revelation given to all mankind at the Creation had been, except in Christianity, perverted in the course of time by priests who wrapped it in myth to convey it to simpler folk and/or for their own profit.
- 10.
This topic was much discussed in the West; Lewis Henry Morgan (1877) held up the Iroquois to Americans as a model of municipal self-government; Marxian socialism, anarchism, guild socialism are also relevant. The Manchu Tsai-Tse, travelling in 1906 on a “Mission to Investigate the Practice of Constitutional Government in Foreign Countries,” singled out municipal government as the real strength of the British system. Tsai-Tse 1908, entry March 30, 1906, quoted in Min Tu-ki 1989: 145. The Meiji reorganization of municipal units in 1889 may also have stimulated discussions in China.
- 11.
The Taipings also wanted to redistribute land, which other reformers considered impracticable.
- 12.
E.g. Feng Guifen’s ‘Counterproposals’, kangyi, written in the 1860s.
- 13.
Wang Gengsheng 1972, vol. 1: 22.
- 14.
Sun Xidan (1736–1784) 孫希旦 from his clan in Ruian between Shanghai and Hangzhou had written a standard commentary to the Liji, Liji jijie 禮記集解, which was edited by Sun Yirang and his father Sun Yiyan 孫衣言 in the late 1860s in a collection printed by the Sun family (Sun Xidan 1868). His father was a jinshi of 1850, a class to which also Yu Yue (1821–1906) 俞越 belonged, an important scholarly contact in later years.
- 15.
Sun Yirang (1905) 2000, vol. 1: 4.
- 16.
- 17.
See Wagner 2002.
- 18.
The parallel between Sun’s work on the Zhouli and the Mozi is nicely put in Zhang Jian’s epitaph, Zhang Jian 1920.
- 19.
The extensive biography by Wang Gengsheng previously quoted in note 13 offers much information. It has been the main source for Rankin 1985.
- 20.
Sun actually wrote a polemic against Kang Youwei’s Xinxue weishu kao, the Xinxue weishu kao boyi 新學偽書考駁誼, which has not been published but seems to be extant. It is quoted in Hong Cheng 1963.
- 21.
Sun Yirang (1905) 2000, Preface: 5.
- 22.
Sun was not shy about his opinions concerning the intellectual quality of the Christian faith. In an 1896 letter to a friend, he went on lustily: “What gives me sorrow for my remaining years is… the current political situation. I say the spread of Nestorianism [=Christianity] went on like a wildfire without stop. Beginning with the trumped-up birth of Jesus Christ [from a virgin] the vulgar stuff from the Old and New Testaments was shallow enough, but the villagers believe it all in a great rage! There is no honesty in gladly accepting [Christian teaching], the [Westerners] in fact rely on the help of their wealth and power, sacrifice some money and silk and lubricate that with riches, gather military forces together to extend their protection [of Christians], and with a strategy of tethering the oxen and horses [honest people] they fulfil their plan to provide ample fodder for the snakes and pigs [greedy evil people]. And in all this the Chinese literati wear their official sash and hold forth about the Book of Poetry and the Book of Documents and in grand style talk about politely giving precedence. Already thinking about it can make one’s heart hurt. That is why with my ignorance and inability I always hold forth in great detail so as broadly to locate the best talents in the entire country, and muster the collective strength of the people… so as to excite their aspirations, spread this distant model, clarify the teachings of the Six Arts in the Zhouli to spread this far and wide among the barbarians, and store up the plans of the nine arts of Zhong and Li so as greatly to wash away the shame [inflicted] by the enemy.”
- 23.
Sun Yirang 1902.
- 24.
Shen Jingru 1963: 76.
- 25.
- 26.
Sun Yirang 1902, Preface: 2a.
- 27.
Sun Yirang 1903: 52–53.
- 28.
Legge 1865: 41. This reference had already become topical for newspaper discourses. It had already been used in a Shenbao editorial.
- 29.
Sun Yirang (1905) 2000: 3008.
- 30.
This phrase also occurs in Laozi 47. It has already become a standard quotation in newspaper editorials. With newspapers, one can be informed about the entire world without even looking out of the window.
- 31.
The name is given in phonetic transcription, magena zhada 馬格那吒達.
- 32.
In the Magna Charta I see no such rule, but a rule that frank words in parliament should not be punishable was made in 1523, and famously used by Thomas More in his defence.
- 33.
Another trope of newspaper self-depiction. Liang Qichao already used it in a programmatic article on the benefits of newspapers in the first issue of the Shiwubao in 1896; see Vittinghoff 2002: 29.
- 34.
Cf. Egyptian embarrassment and annoyance that new classical texts found in Egypt are studied in Europe but unknown locally: Pormann, this volume.
- 35.
This translation was serialized in late 1900 and early 1901, and printed as a book by the Shanghai wenming shuju in 1902 under the title Lusuo minyue lun 盧梭民約論. See Li Fan 2003:69.
- 36.
- 37.
An entire literature sprang up to record these insights. See, for example, Fei Xiaotong 1950.
- 38.
Xiong Shili 熊十力 1945: 1108–1109.
- 39.
Quan Hansheng 1935.
- 40.
See Wagner 1984.
- 41.
This doctrine is mostly associated with Zhang Zhidong (1837–1909), who proposed it in his 1898 work Quanxue pian 勸學篇 (Exhortation to Study), Zhang 1898.
- 42.
Kang Youwei 1897.
- 43.
Richard had made his own reform proposal with his Xin zheng ce 新政策, Richard 1897.
- 44.
For an overview, see Heasman 1962.
- 45.
Goldfuss 2001.
- 46.
This work circulated in manuscript and was printed in its entirety as the Datong shu only in 1935. Bellamy’s novel had a huge impact in the US and abroad. A summary was published in Chinese in 1892 in a journal subscribed to by Kang Youwei.
- 47.
For the discussions about this text earlier in the nineteenth century, see Wagner 2010. The volume with this study is dedicated in its entirety to the history of the Zhouli.
- 48.
Tang Jinggao 1923.
Bibliography
Bellamy, Edward. 1888. Looking Backward from 2000 to 1887. Boston: Ticknor & Company.
Biot, Édouard. 1851. Le Tcheou-li, ou, les Rites des Tcheou, 3 vols. Paris: Imprimerie Nationale.
Elman, Benjamin A., and Martin Kern, eds. 2010. Statecraft and Classical Learning: The Rituals of Zhou in East Asian History. Leiden: Brill.
Fei Xiaotong 費孝通, et al., eds. 1950. Jiu renwu de gaizao 舊人物的改造. Guangzhou: Chunqiu shudian.
Feng Guifen 馮桂芬. 1998. Jiaobinlu kangyi 校邠盧抗議, ed. Dai Yangben. Chengzhou: Zhongzhou guji.
Goldfuss, Gabriele. 2001. Vers un Bouddhisme du XXe siècle: Yang Wenhui (1837–1911), réformateur laïc et imprimeur. Paris: de Boccard.
Heasman, Kathleen. 1962. Evangelicals in Action. An Appraisal of their Social Work in the Victorian Era. London: Geoffrey Bles.
Hong Cheng. 1963. “Du Zhouli zhengyi.” In Sun Yirang yanjiu, 21–37.
Kang Youwei 康有爲. 1897. Kongzi gaizhi kao 孔子改制攷. Shanghai: Datong yishu ju.
Legge, James. 1865. “The Shoo King.” In Legge, The Chinese Classics. Vol. III.1. London: Trübner.
Li Fan 李帆. 2003. Liu Shipei yu Zhongxi xueshu, yiqi zhongxi jiaorong zhe xue he xueshu shi yanjiu wei zhongxin 劉師培與中西學術, 以其中西交融之學和學術史研究為中新. Beijing: Beijing shifan daxue press.
Li Miaogen 李妙根, ed. 1996. Guocui yu xihua, Liu Shipei wenxuan 國粹與西化, 劉師培文選. Shanghai: Yuandong.
Liu Shipei 劉師培. 1904. Zhongguo minyue jingyi 中國民約精義, Shanghai: Jingjin shuju 境今書局. Cited from Liu Shipei quanji 劉師培全集. 1990. Beijing: Zhonggong zhongyang dangxiao.
Mackenzie, Robert. 1880. The Nineteenth Century, a History. London: Nelson and Sons.
Min, Tu-ki. 1989. National Polity and Local Power. The Transformation of Late Imperial China. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Council on East Asian Studies.
Morgan, Lewis Henry. 1877. Ancient Society: Or, Researches in the Line of Human Progress from Savagery Through Barbarism to Civilization. Chicago: C.H. Kerr.
Quan Hansheng 全漢昇. 1935. “Qing mo de xixue yuanchu Zhongguo shuo 清末的西學源出中國說.” Lingnan xuebao 嶺南學報 4(1935) 2: 57–102.
Rankin, Mary. 1985. Elite Activism and Political Transformation in China: Zhejiang Province, 1865–1911. Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Richard, Timothy. 1897. Xin zheng ce 新政策. In Zhixue congshu chubian質學叢書初集, vol. 28. Wuchang: Zhixue hui.
–––. 1898. Taixi xinshi lanyao 泰西新史攬要. Shanghai: Guangxue hui.
Shen Jingru 沈鏡如. 1963. “Sun Yirang de zhengzhi sixiang 孫詒讓的政治思想述評.” In Sun Yirang yanjiu 1963, 72–88.
Sun Xidan 孫希旦. 1868. Liji jijie 禮記集解. In Sun Yiyan 1860–1879, vols. 47–70.
Sun Yirang 孫詒讓. 1902. Zhouli zhengyao 周禮政要, 2 vols. Ruian: Putong xuetang.
–––. 1903. Pingdian Zhouli zhengyao 評點周禮政要. Shanghai: Rixin tushu ju.
–––. 1905. Zhouli zhengyi 周禮正義. Reprint 2000. Beijing: Zhonghua.
Sun Yirang yanjiu 孫詒讓研究. 1963. Edited by Hangzhou daxue yuyan wenxue yanjiushi 杭州大學語言文學研究室. Hangzhou: Hangzhou daxue yuyan wenxue yanjiushi.
Sun Yiyan 孫衣言 and Sun Yirang 孫詒讓, eds. 1860–1879. Yongjia congshu 永嘉叢書, 80 vols. Ruian: Sun shi.
Tang Jinggao 唐敬臯, et al., eds. 1923. Xin wenhua cishu 新文化辭書. Shanghai: Commercial Press.
Vittinghoff, Natascha. 2002. Die Anfänge des Journalismus in China (1860–1911). Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz.
Wagner, Rudolf. 1984. “God’s Country in the Family of Nations: The Logic of Modernism in the Taiping Doctrine of International Relations.” In Religion and Rural Revolt, edited by Janos Bak and Gerhard Benecke, 354–372. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
–––. 1999. “Exploring the Common Ground: Buddhist Commentaries on the Taoist Classic Laozi.” In Commentaries - Kommentare, edited by Glenn W. Most, 95–120. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
–––. 2001. “The Early Chinese Newspapers and the Chinese Public Sphere.” European Journal of East Asian Studies 1: 1–34.
–––. 2002. “The Philologist as Messiah: Kang Youwei’s 1902 Commentary on the Confucian Analects.” In Disciplining Classics - Altertumswissenschaft als Beruf, edited by Glenn W. Most, 143–168. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht.
–––. 2005. “Shinmatsu Shanhai ni okeru Chugoku shinbun sokan to kodai Chugoku no seiken tachi.” Intelligence (Tokyo) 5 (Jan. 2005): 14–24.
–––. 2010. “The ‘Zhouli’ as the Late Qing Path to the Future.” In Elman and Kern 2010, 359–387.
Walker, Daniel Pickering. 1972. The Ancient Theology: Studies in Christian Platonism from the Fifteenth to the Eighteenth Century. London: Duckworth.
Wang Gengsheng 王更生. 1972. “Zhouqing xueji – Sun Yirang xiansheng zhi shengping jiqi xueshu” 籀廎學記 – 孫詒讓先生之生平及其學術, 2 vols. Ph.D. Dissertation, Taibei daxue.
Xiong Shili 熊十力. 1945. Du jing shi yao 讀經示要. In Xiong Shili 2001, vol. 3.
–––. 2001. Xiong Shili quanji 熊十力全集. Wuhan: Hubei jiaoyu chubanshe.
Zaize 載澤. 1908. Kaocha zhengzhi riji 考察政治日記. China (no publisher, no place).
Zhang Jian 張謇. 1920. “Sun Zhengjun mubiao 孫徵君墓表.” In Zhang Jizi jiu lu, wen lu 張季子九錄 文錄 15, in Minguo congshu 3 vol. 97, p. 3a. 1991. Shanghai: Shanghai Shudian.
Zhang Zhidong 張之洞. 1898. Quanxue pian 勸學篇. Reprint 2002. Shanghai: Shanghai shudian.
Zürcher, Eric. 1959. The Buddhist Conquest of China. Leiden: Brill.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2013 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Wagner, R.G. (2013). A Classic Paving the Way to Modernity: The Ritual of Zhou in the Chinese Reform Debate Since the Taiping Civil War. In: Humphreys, S., Wagner, R. (eds) Modernity's Classics. Transcultural Research – Heidelberg Studies on Asia and Europe in a Global Context. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33071-1_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-33071-1_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-642-33070-4
Online ISBN: 978-3-642-33071-1
eBook Packages: Humanities, Social Sciences and LawSocial Sciences (R0)