Book of Documents
View on Wikipedia
This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: use of chinese-language text needs to be pared down or edited to conform with MOS:ZH. (November 2023) |
Key Information
| Part of a series on |
| Confucianism |
|---|

The Book of Documents (Chinese: 書經; pinyin: Shūjīng; Wade–Giles: Shu King) or the Classic of History,[a] is one of the Five Classics of ancient Chinese literature. It is a collection of rhetorical prose attributed to figures of ancient China, and served as the foundation of Chinese political philosophy for over two millennia.
The Book of Documents was the subject of one of China's oldest literary controversies, between proponents of different versions of the text. A version was preserved from Qin Shi Huang's burning of books and burying of scholars by scholar Fu Sheng, in 29 chapters (piān 篇). This group of texts were referred to as "Modern Texts" (or "Current Script"; jīnwén 今文), because they were written with the script in use at the beginning of the Western Han dynasty.
A longer version of the Documents was said to be discovered in the wall of Confucius's family estate in Qufu by his descendant Kong Anguo in the late 2nd century BC. The texts were referred to as "Old Texts" (gǔwén 古文), because they were written in the script that predated the standardization of Chinese script during the Qin. Compared to the Modern Texts, the "Old Texts" material had 16 more chapters. The Old Texts had been lost at the end of the Eastern Han dynasty, while the Modern Texts text enjoyed circulation, in particular in Ouyang Gao's study, called the Ouyang Shangshu (歐陽尚書). This was the basis of studies by Ma Rong and Zheng Xuan during the Eastern Han.[2][3]
In 317 AD, Mei Ze presented to the Eastern Jin court a 58-chapter (59 if the preface is counted) Book of Documents as Kong Anguo's version of the text. This version was accepted, despite the doubts of a few scholars, and later was canonized as part of Kong Yingda's project. It was only in the 17th century that Qing dynasty scholar Yan Ruoqu proposed that the "Old Texts" were fabrications "reconstructed" in the 3rd or 4th centuries AD.
In the transmitted edition, texts are grouped into four sections representing different eras: the legendary reign of Yu the Great, and the Xia, Shang and Zhou dynasties. The Zhou section accounts for over half the text. Some of its modern-script chapters are among the earliest examples of Chinese prose, recording speeches from the early years of the Zhou dynasty in the late 11th century BC. Although the other three sections purport to record earlier material, most scholars believe that even the New Script chapters in these sections were composed later than those in the Zhou section, with chapters relating to the earliest periods being as recent as the 4th or 3rd centuries BC.[4][5]
Textual history
[edit]The history of the various versions of the Documents is particularly complex, and has been the subject of a long-running literary and philosophical controversy.
Early references
[edit]According to a later tradition, the Book of Documents was compiled by Confucius (551–479 BC) as a selection from a much larger group of documents, with some of the remainder being included in the Yi Zhou Shu.[6] However, the early history of both texts is obscure.[7] Beginning with Confucius, writers increasingly drew on the Documents to illustrate general principles, though it seems that several different versions were in use.[8]
Six citations to unnamed chapters of the Documents appear in the Analects. While Confucius invoked the pre-dynastic emperors Yao and Shun, as well as figures from the Xia and Shang dynasties, he complained of the lack of documentation prior to the Zhou. The Documents were cited increasingly frequently in works through the 4th century BC, including in the Mencius, Mozi and Zuo Zhuan. These authors favoured documents relating to Yao, Shun and the Xia dynasty, chapters now believed to have been written in the Warring States period. The chapters currently believed to be the oldest—mostly relating to the early Zhou—were little used by Warring States authors, perhaps due to the difficulty of the archaic language or a less familiar worldview.[9] Fewer than half the passages quoted by these authors are present in the received text.[10] Authors such as Mencius and Xunzi, while quoting the Documents, refused to accept it as genuine in its entirety. Their attitude contrasts with the reverence later shown to the text during the Han dynasty, when its compilation was attributed to Confucius.[11]
Han dynasty: Modern and Old Scripts
[edit]
Many copies of the work were destroyed in the Burning of Books during the Qin dynasty. Fu Sheng reconstructed part of the work from hidden copies in the late 3rd to early 2nd century BC, at the start of the succeeding Han dynasty. The texts that he transmitted were known as the "Modern Script" (今文 jīn wén) because it was written in the clerical script.[12][13] It originally consisted of 29 chapters, but the "Great Speech" 太誓 chapter was lost shortly afterwards and replaced by a new version.[14] The remaining 28 chapters were later expanded into 30 when Ouyang Gao divided the "Pangeng" chapter into three sections.[15]
During the reign of Emperor Wu, renovations of the home of Confucius are said to have uncovered several manuscripts hidden within a wall, including a longer version of the Documents. These texts were referred to as "Old Script" because they were written in the pre-Qin seal script.[13] They were transcribed into clerical script and interpreted by Confucius' descendant Kong Anguo.[13] Han dynasty sources give contradictory accounts of the nature of this find.[16] According to the commonly repeated account of the Book of Han, the "Old Script" texts included the chapters preserved by Fu Sheng, another version of the "Great Speech" chapter and some 16 additional ones.[13] It is unclear what happened to these manuscripts. According to the Book of Han, Liu Xiang collated the Old Script version against the three main "Modern Script" traditions, creating a version of the Documents that included both groups. This was championed by his son Liu Xin,[17] who requested in a letter to Emperor Ai the establishment of a boshi position for its study.[18] But this did not happen. Most likely, this edition put together by the imperial librarians was lost in the chaos that ended the Western Han dynasty, and the later movement of the capital and imperial library.
A list of 100 chapter titles was also in circulation; many are mentioned in the Records of the Grand Historian, but without quoting the text of the other chapters.[19]
The shu were designated one of the Five Classics when Confucian works made official by Emperor Wu of Han, and jīng ('classic') was added to its name. The term Shàngshū 'venerated documents' was also used in the Eastern Han.[20] The Xiping Stone Classics, set up outside the imperial academy in 175–183 but since destroyed, included a Modern Script version of the Documents.[21] Most Han dynasty scholars ignored the Old Script version, and it disappeared by the end of the dynasty.[19]
Claimed recovery of Old Script texts
[edit]A version of the Documents that included the "Old Script" texts was allegedly rediscovered by the scholar Mei Ze during the 4th century, and presented to the imperial court of the Eastern Jin.[21] His version consisted of the 31 modern script texts in 33 chapters, and 18 additional old script texts in 25 chapters, with a preface and commentary purportedly written by Kong Anguo.[22] This was presented as Guwen Shangshu 古文尚書, and was widely accepted. It was the basis of the Shàngshū zhèngyì (尚書正義 'Correct interpretation of the Documents') published in 653 and made the official interpretation of the Documents by imperial decree. The oldest extant copy of the text, included in the Kaicheng Stone Classics (833–837), contains all of these chapters.[21]
Since the Song dynasty, starting from Wu Yu (吳棫), many doubts had been expressed concerning the provenance of the allegedly rediscovered "Old Script" texts in Mei Ze's edition. In the 16th century, Mei Zhuo (梅鷟) published a detailed argument that these chapters, as well as the preface and commentary, were forged in the 3rd century AD using material from other historical sources such as the Zuo Commentary and the Records of the Grand Historian. Mei identified the sources from which the forger had cut and pasted text, and even suggested Huangfu Mi as a probable culprit. In the 17th century, Yan Ruoqu's unpublished but widely distributed manuscript entitled Evidential analysis of the Old Script Documents (尚書古文疏證; Shàngshū gǔwén shūzhèng) convinced most scholars that the rediscovered Old Script texts were fabricated in the 3rd or 4th centuries.[23]
Modern discoveries
[edit]New light has been shed on the Book of Documents by the recovery between 1993 and 2008 of caches of texts written on bamboo slips from tombs of the state of Chu in Jingmen, Hubei.[24] These texts are believed to date from the late Warring States period, around 300 BC, and thus predate the burning of the books during the Qin dynasty.[24] The Guodian Chu Slips and the Shanghai Museum corpus include quotations of previously unknown passages of the work.[24][25] The Tsinghua Bamboo Slips includes a version of the transmitted text "Golden Coffer", with minor textual differences, as well as several documents in the same style that are not included in the received text. The collection also includes two documents that the editors considered to be versions of the Old Script texts "Common Possession of Pure Virtue" and "Command to Fu Yue".[26] Other authors have challenged these straightforward identifications.[27][28]
Contents
[edit]In the orthodox arrangement, the work consists of 58 chapters, each with a brief preface traditionally attributed to Confucius, and also includes a preface and commentary, both purportedly by Kong Anguo. An alternative organization, first used by Wu Cheng, includes only the Modern Script chapters, with the chapter prefaces collected together, but omitting the Kong preface and commentary. In addition, several chapters are divided into two or three parts in the orthodox form.[22]
Nature of the chapters
[edit]With the exception of a few chapters of late date, the chapters are represented as records of formal speeches by kings or other important figures.[29][30] Most of these speeches are of one of five types, indicated by their titles:[31]
- Consultations (謨 mó) between the king and his ministers (2 chapters),
- Instructions (訓 xùn) to the king from his ministers (1 chapter),
- Announcements (誥 gào) by the king to his people (8 chapters),
- Declarations (誓 shì) by a ruler on the occasion of a battle (6 chapters), and
- Commands (命 mìng) by the king to a specific vassal (7 chapters).
Classical Chinese tradition lists six types of Shu, beginning with dian 典, Canons (2 chapters in the Modern corpus).
According to Su Shi (1037–1101), it is possible to single out Eight Announcements of the early Zhou, directed to the Shang people. Their titles only partially correspond to the modern chapters marked as gao (apart from the nos. 13, 14, 15, 17, 18 that mention the genre, Su Shi names nos. 16 "Zi cai", 19 "Duo shi" and 22 "Duo fang").
As pointed out by Chen Mengjia (1911–1966), announcements and commands are similar, but differ in that commands usually include granting of valuable objects, land or servants to their recipients.
Guo Changbao 过常宝 claims that the graph for announcement (誥), known since the Oracle bone script, also appears on two bronze vessels (He zun and Shi Zhi gui 史[臣+舌]簋), as well as in the "six genres" 六辞 of the Zhou li[32][clarification needed]
In many cases a speech is introduced with the phrase Wáng ruò yuē (王若曰 'The king seemingly said'), which also appears on commemorative bronze inscriptions from the Western Zhou period, but not in other received texts. Scholars interpret this as meaning that the original documents were prepared scripts of speeches, to be read out by an official on behalf of the king.[33][34]
Traditional organization
[edit]The chapters are grouped into four sections representing different eras: the semi-mythical reign of Yu the Great, and the three ancient dynasties of the Xia, Shang and Zhou. The first two sections – on Yu the Great and the Xia dynasty – contain two chapters each in the Modern Script version, and though they purport to record the earliest material in the Documents, from the 2nd millennium BC, most scholars believe they were written during the Warring States period. The Shang dynasty section contains five chapters, of which the first two – the "Speech of King Tang" and "Pan Geng" – recount the conquest of the Xia by the Shang and their leadership's migration to a new capital (now identified as Anyang). The bulk of the Zhou dynasty section concerns the reign of King Cheng of Zhou (r. c. 1040–1006 BC) and the king's uncles, the Duke of Zhou and Duke of Shao. The last four Modern Script chapters relate to the later Western Zhou and early Spring and Autumn periods.[35]
| Part | New Text |
Orthodox chapter |
Title | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 虞書 Yu [Shun] |
1 | 1 | 堯典 | Yáo diǎn | Canon of Yao |
| 2 | 舜典 | Shùn diǎn | Canon of Shun | ||
| 3 | 大禹謨 | Dà Yǔ mó | Counsels of Great Yu | ||
| 2 | 4 | 皋陶謨 | Gāo Yáo mó | Counsels of Gao Yao | |
| 5 | 益稷 | Yì jì | Yi and Ji | ||
| 夏書 Xia |
3 | 6 | 禹貢 | Yǔ gòng | Tribute of [Great] Yu |
| 4 | 7 | 甘誓 | Gān shì | Speech at [the Battle of] Gan | |
| 8 | 五子之歌 | Wǔ zǐ zhī gē | Songs of the Five Sons | ||
| 9 | 胤征 | Yìn zhēng | Punitive Expedition on [King Zhongkang of] Yin | ||
| 商書 Shang |
5 | 10 | 湯誓 | Tāng shì | Speech of Tang |
| 11 | 仲虺之誥 | Zhònghuī zhī gào | Announcement of Zhonghui | ||
| 12 | 湯誥 | Tāng gào | Announcement of Tang | ||
| 13 | 伊訓 | Yī xùn | Instructions of Yi [Yin] | ||
| 14–16 | 太甲 | Tài jiǎ | Great Oath parts 1, 2 & 3 | ||
| 17 | 咸有一德 | Xián yǒu yī dé | Common Possession of Pure Virtue | ||
| 6 | 18–20 | 盤庚 | Pán Gēng | Pan Geng parts 1, 2 & 3 | |
| 21–23 | 說命 | Yuè mìng | Charge to Yue parts 1, 2 & 3 | ||
| 7 | 24 | 高宗肜日 | Gāozōng róng rì | Day of the Supplementary Sacrifice of King Gaozong | |
| 8 | 25 | 西伯戡黎 | Xībó kān lí | Chief of the West [King Wen]'s Conquest of [the State of] Li | |
| 9 | 26 | 微子 | Wēizǐ | [Prince] Weizi | |
| 周書 Zhou |
27–29 | 泰誓 | Tài shì | Great Speech parts 1, 2 & 3 | |
| 10 | 30 | 牧誓 | Mù shì | Speech at Muye | |
| 31 | 武成 | Wǔ chéng | Successful Completion of the War [on Shang] | ||
| 11 | 32 | 洪範 | Hóng fàn | Great Plan [of Jizi] | |
| 33 | 旅獒 | Lǚ áo | Hounds of [the Western Tribesmen] Lü | ||
| 12 | 34 | 金滕 | Jīn téng | Golden Coffer [of Zhou Gong] | |
| 13 | 35 | 大誥 | Dà gào | Great Announcement | |
| 36 | 微子之命 | Wēizǐ zhī mìng | Charge to Prince Weizi | ||
| 14 | 37 | 康誥 | Kāng gào | Announcement to Kang | |
| 15 | 38 | 酒誥 | Jiǔ gào | Announcement about Drunkenness | |
| 16 | 39 | 梓材 | Zǐ cái | Timber of Rottlera | |
| 17 | 40 | 召誥 | Shào gào | Announcement of Duke Shao | |
| 18 | 41 | 洛誥 | Luò gào | Announcement concerning Luoyang | |
| 19 | 42 | 多士 | Duō shì | Numerous Officers | |
| 20 | 43 | 無逸 | Wú yì | Against Luxurious Ease | |
| 21 | 44 | 君奭 | Jūn shì | Lord Shi [Duke Shao] | |
| 45 | 蔡仲之命 | Cài Zhòng zhī mìng | Charge to Cai Zhong | ||
| 22 | 46 | 多方 | Duō fāng | Numerous Regions | |
| 23 | 47 | 立政 | Lì zhèng | Establishment of Government | |
| 48 | 周官 | Zhōu guān | Officers of Zhou | ||
| 49 | 君陳 | Jūn chén | Lord Chen | ||
| 24 | 50 | 顧命 | Gù mìng | Testamentary Charge | |
| 51 | 康王之誥 | Kāng wáng zhī gào | Proclamation of King Kang | ||
| 52 | 畢命 | Bì mìng | Charge to the [Duke of] Bi | ||
| 53 | 君牙 | Jūn Yá | Lord Ya | ||
| 54 | 冏命 | Jiǒng mìng | Charge to Jiong | ||
| 25 | 55 | 呂刑 | Lǚ xíng | [Marquis] Lü on Punishments | |
| 26 | 56 | 文侯之命 | Wén hóu zhī mìng | Charge to Duke Wen of Jin | |
| 27 | 57 | 費誓 | Fèi shì | Speech at [the Battle of] Fei | |
| 28 | 58 | 秦誓 | Qín shì | Speech of Duke Mu of Qin | |
Dating of the Modern Script chapters
[edit]Not all of the Modern Script chapters are believed to be contemporaneous with the events they describe, which range from the legendary emperors Yao and Shun to early in the Spring and Autumn period.[36] Six of these chapters concern figures prior to the first evidence of writing, the oracle bones dating from the reign of the Late Shang king Wu Ding. Moreover, the chapters dealing with the earliest periods are the closest in language and focus to classical works of the Warring States period.[37]
The five announcements in the Documents of Zhou feature the most archaic language, closely resembling inscriptions found on Western Zhou bronzes in both grammar and vocabulary. They are considered by most scholars to record speeches of King Cheng of Zhou, as well as the Duke of Zhou and Duke of Shao, uncles of King Cheng who were key figures during his reign (late 11th century BC).[38][39] They provide insight into the politics and ideology of the period, including the doctrine of the Mandate of Heaven, explaining how the once-virtuous Xia had become corrupt and were replaced by the virtuous Shang, who went through a similar cycle ending in their replacement by the Zhou.[40] The "Timber of Rottlera", "Numerous Officers", "Against Luxurious Ease" and "Numerous Regions" chapters are believed to have been written somewhat later, in the late Western Zhou period.[39] A minority of scholars, pointing to differences in language between the announcements and Zhou bronzes, argue that all of these chapters are products of a commemorative tradition in the late Western Zhou or early Spring and Autumn periods.[41][42]
Chapters dealing with the late Shang and the transition to Zhou use less archaic language. They are believed to have been modelled on the earlier speeches by writers in the Spring and Autumn period, a time of renewed interest in politics and dynastic decline.[39][4] The later chapters of the Zhou section are also believed to have been written around this time.[43] The "Gaozong Rongri" chapter comprises only 82 characters, and its interpretation was already disputed in Western Han commentaries. Pointing to the similarity of its title to formulas found in the Anyang oracle bone inscriptions, David Nivison proposed that the chapter was written or recorded by a collateral descendant of Wu Ding in the late Shang period some time after 1140 BC.[44]
The "Pan Geng" chapter (later divided into three parts) seems to be intermediate in style between this group and the next.[45] It is the longest speech in the Documents, and is unusual in its extensive use of analogy.[46] Scholars since the Tang dynasty have noted the difficult language of the "Pan Geng" and the Zhou Announcement chapters.[b] Citing the archaic language and worldview, Chinese scholars have argued for a Shang dynasty provenance for the "Pan Geng" chapters, with considerable editing and replacement of the vocabulary by Zhou dynasty authors accounting for the difference in language from Shang inscriptions.[47]
The chapters dealing with the legendary emperors, the Xia dynasty and the transition to Shang are very similar in language to such classics as the Mencius (late 4th century BC). They present idealized rulers, with the earlier political concerns subordinate to moral and cosmological theory, and are believed to be the products of philosophical schools of the late Warring States period.[4][45] Some chapters, particularly the "Tribute of Yu", may be as late as the Qin dynasty.[5][48]
Influence in the West
[edit]When Jesuit scholars prepared the first translations of Chinese Classics into Latin, they called the Documents the "Book of Kings", making a parallel with the Books of Kings in the Old Testament. They saw Shang Di as the equivalent of the Christian God, and used passages from the Documents in their commentaries on other works.[49]
Notable translations
[edit]- Gaubil, Antoine (1770). Le Chou-king, un des livres sacrés des Chinois, qui renferme les fondements de leur ancienne histoire, les principes de leur gouvernement & de leur morale; ouvrage recueilli par Confucius [The Shūjīng, one of the Sacred Books of the Chinese, which contains the Foundations of their Ancient History, the Principles of their Government and their Morality; Material collected by Confucius] (in French). Paris: N. M. Tillard.
- Medhurst, W. H. (1846). Ancient China. The Shoo King or the Historical Classic. Shanghai: The Mission Press.
- Legge, James (1865). The Chinese Classics, volume III: the Shoo King or the Book of Historical Documents. London: Trubner.; rpt. Hong Kong: Hong Kong University Press, 1960. (Full Chinese text with English translation using Legge's own romanization system, with extensive background and annotations.)
- Legge, James (1879). The Shû king; The religious portions of the Shih king; The Hsiâo king. Sacred Books of the East. Vol. 3. Oxford: Clarendon Press. Includes a minor revision of Legge's translation.
- Couvreur, Séraphin (1897). Chou King, Les Annales de la Chine [Shujing, the Annals of China] (in French). Hokkien: Mission Catholique. Reprinted (1999), Paris: You Feng.
- Karlgren, Bernhard (1950). "The Book of Documents". Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities. 22: 1–81. (Modern Script chapters only) Reprinted as a separate volume by Elanders in 1950.
- Katō, Jōken 加藤常賢 (1964). Shin kobun Shōsho shūshaku 真古文尚書集釈 [Authentic 'Old Text' Shàngshū, with Collected Commentary] (in Japanese). Tokyo: Meiji shoin.
- (in Mandarin Chinese) Qu, Wanli 屈萬里 (1969). Shàngshū jīnzhù jīnyì 尚書今注今譯 [The Book of Documents, with Modern Annotations and Translation]. Taipei: Taiwan shangwu yinshuguan.
- Waltham, Clae (1971). Shu ching: Book of History. A Modernized Edition of the Translation of James Legge. Chicago: Henry Regnery.
- Ikeda, Suitoshi 池田末利 (1976). Shōsho 尚書 [Shàngshū] (in Japanese). Tokyo: Shūeisha.
- Palmer, Martin; Ramsay, Jay; Finlay, Victoria (2014). The Most Venerable Book (Shang Shu) also known as the Shu Jing (The Classic of Chronicles). London: Penguin Books.
Notes
[edit]See also
[edit]References
[edit]Citations
[edit]- ^ Baxter & Sagart (2014), pp. 327–378.
- ^ 後漢書 [Book of Later Han] (in Chinese). Taipei: Dingwen shuju. 1981. p. 79.2556.
- ^ Liu Qiyu (劉起釪) (2018). 尚書學史 (in Chinese) (2nd ed.). Zhonghua shuju. p. 7.
- ^ a b c Lewis (1999), p. 105.
- ^ a b Nylan (2001), pp. 134, 158.
- ^ Allan (2012), pp. 548–549, 551.
- ^ Allan (2012), p. 550.
- ^ Nylan (2001), p. 127.
- ^ Lewis (1999), pp. 105–108.
- ^ Schaberg (2001), p. 78.
- ^ Nylan (2001), pp. 127–128.
- ^ Nylan (2001), p. 130.
- ^ a b c d Shaughnessy (1993), p. 381.
- ^ Nylan (1995), p. 26.
- ^ Liu Qiyü 劉起釘. (1996). Shangshu xue shi 尚書學史. Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju 中華書局. p. 153.
{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: publisher location (link) - ^ Nylan (1995), pp. 28–36.
- ^ Nylan (1995), p. 48.
- ^ Hanshu 漢書. pp. 36.1967–1970.
- ^ a b Brooks (2011), p. 87.
- ^ Wilkinson (2000), pp. 475–477.
- ^ a b c Shaughnessy (1993), p. 383.
- ^ a b Shaughnessy (1993), pp. 376–377.
- ^ Elman (1983), pp. 206–213.
- ^ a b c Liao (2001).
- ^ Shaughnessy (2006), pp. 56–58.
- ^ "First Research Results on Warring States Bamboo Strips Collected by Tsinghua University Released". Tsinghua University News. Tsinghua University. May 26, 2011. Archived from the original on 2011-07-25.
- ^ Li Rui 李銳 (2013). "清华简《傅说之命》研究". Shenzhen Daxue Xuebao. Shehui Kexueban. 深圳大学学报(人文社会科学版) Journal of Shenzhen University (Humanities & Social Sciences). 30 (6): 68–72.
- ^ Edward L. Shaughnessy (2020). "A Possible Lost Classic: The *She Ming, or *Command to She". T'oung Pao. 106.3–4: 266–308.
- ^ Allan (2011), p. 3.
- ^ Allan (2012), p. 552.
- ^ Shaughnessy (1993), p. 377.
- ^ 论5尚书6诰体的文化背景
- ^ Allan (2011), pp. 3–5.
- ^ Allan (2012), pp. 552–556.
- ^ Shaughnessy (1993), pp. 378–380.
- ^ Shaughnessy (1993), pp. 377–380.
- ^ Nylan (2001), pp. 133–135.
- ^ Shaughnessy (1999), p. 294.
- ^ a b c Nylan (2001), p. 133.
- ^ Shaughnessy (1999), pp. 294–295.
- ^ Kern (2009), pp. 146, 182–188.
- ^ Vogelsang (2002), pp. 196–197.
- ^ Shaughnessy (1993), p. 380.
- ^ Nivison (2018), pp. 22–23, 27–28.
- ^ a b Nylan (2001), p. 134.
- ^ Shih (2013), pp. 818–819.
- ^ 範文瀾:"《盤庚》三篇是無可懷疑的商朝遺文(篇中可能有訓詁改字)"
- ^ Shaughnessy (1993), p. 378.
- ^ Meynard, Thierry (2015). The Jesuit Reading of Confucius : The First Complete Translation of the Lunyu (1687) Published in the West. Leiden, Boston: Brill. p. 47. ISBN 978-90-04-28977-2.
Works cited
[edit]- Allan, Sarah (2011), "What is a shu 書?" (PDF), EASCM Newsletter (4): 1–5.
- ——— (2012), "On Shu 書 (Documents) and the origin of the Shang shu 尚書 (Ancient Documents) in light of recently discovered bamboo slip manuscripts", Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, 75 (3): 547–557, doi:10.1017/S0041977X12000547.
- Baxter, William H.; Sagart, Laurent (2014). Old Chinese: A New Reconstruction. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-994537-5.
- Brooks, E. Bruce (2011), "The Shu" (PDF), Warring States Papers, 2: 87–90.[dead link]
- Elman, Benjamin A. (1983), "Philosophy (i-li) versus philology (k'ao-cheng)—the jen-hsin Tao-hsin debate" (PDF), T'oung Pao, 69 (4): 175–222, doi:10.1163/156853283x00081, JSTOR 4528296.
- Kern, Martin (2009), "Bronze inscriptions, the Shijing and the Shangshu: the evolution of the ancestral sacrifice during the Western Zhou" (PDF), in Lagerwey, John; Kalinowski, Marc (eds.), Early Chinese Religion, Part One: Shang Through Han (1250 BC to 220 AD), Leiden: Brill, pp. 143–200, ISBN 978-90-04-16835-0.
- Lewis, Mark Edward (1999), Writing and authority in early China, SUNY Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-4114-5.
- Liao, Mingchun (2001), A Preliminary Study on the Newly-unearthed Bamboo Inscriptions of the Chu Kingdom: An Investigation of the Materials from and about the Shangshu in the Guodian Chu Slips (in Chinese), Taipei: Taiwan Guji Publishing Co., ISBN 957-0414-59-6.
- Nivison, David S. (2018) [1984], "The King and the Bird: a Possible Genuine Shang Literary Text and Its Echoes in Later Philosophy and Religion", in Schwartz, Adam C. (ed.), The Nivison Annals : Selected Works of David S. Nivison on Early Chinese Chronology, Astronomy, and Historiography, Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton, pp. 22–28, doi:10.1515/9781501505393-003, ISBN 978-1-5015-0539-3.
- Nylan, Michael (1995), "The Ku Wen Documents in Han Times", T'oung Pao, 81 (1/3): 25–50, doi:10.1163/156853295x00024, JSTOR 4528653.
- ——— (2001), The Five "Confucian" Classics, Yale University Press, ISBN 978-0-300-08185-5.
- Schaberg, David (2001), A patterned past: form and thought in early Chinese historiography, Harvard Univ Asia Center, ISBN 978-0-674-00861-8.
- Shaughnessy, Edward L. (1993). "Shang shu 尚書". In Loewe, Michael (ed.). Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide. Berkeley: Society for the Study of Early China; Institute for East Asian Studies, University of California Berkeley. pp. 376–389. ISBN 978-1-55729-043-4.
- ——— (1999), "Western Zhou history", in Loewe, Michael; Shaughnessy, Edward L. (eds.), The Cambridge History of Ancient China, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 292–351, ISBN 978-0-521-47030-8.
- ——— (2006), Rewriting early Chinese texts, SUNY Press, ISBN 978-0-7914-6643-8.
- Shih, Hsiang-lin (2013), "Shang shu 尚書 (Hallowed writings of antiquity)", in Knechtges, David R.; Chang, Taiping (eds.), Ancient and Early Medieval Chinese Literature (vol. 2): A Reference Guide, Part Two Handbook of Oriental Studies. Section 4 China, BRILL, pp. 814–830, ISBN 978-90-04-20164-4.
- Vogelsang, Kai (2002), "Inscriptions and proclamations: on the authenticity of the 'gao' chapters in the Book of Documents", Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, 74: 138–209.
- Wilkinson, Endymion (2000), Chinese history: a manual (2nd ed.), Harvard Univ Asia Center, ISBN 978-0-674-00249-4.
External links
[edit]- 《尚書》 – Shang Shu at the Chinese Text Project, including both the Chinese text and Legge's English translation (emended to employ pinyin)
- Shangshu at the Database of Religious History.
- Selections from Legge's Shu Jing (also emended)
- Annotated Edition of The Book of Documents (13th century)
- Book of Documents 《尚書》 Chinese text with matching English vocabulary at chinesenotes.com
Book of Documents
View on GrokipediaOverview and Historical Context
Definition and Core Composition
The Shangshu (尚書), translated as the Book of Documents or Venerated Documents, is an anthology of ancient Chinese prose texts comprising speeches, proclamations, edicts, and oaths attributed to rulers and officials from the semi-legendary Xia dynasty through the early Zhou dynasty, spanning roughly 2070 BCE to 256 BCE.[1] These documents emphasize themes of moral governance, dynastic legitimacy, and the Mandate of Heaven, forming a core repository of early Chinese political philosophy.[9] The text's composition reflects a compilation process likely initiated during the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), though traditional attribution credits Confucius with its editing from older materials.[5] The core structure divides the 58 chapters into four chronological sections: the Yushu (虞書, Documents of Yu) with 4 chapters on mythical sage-kings like Yao and Shun; the Xiashu (夏書, Documents of Xia) with 4 chapters covering the Xia dynasty; the Shangshu (商書, Documents of Shang) with 17 chapters on Shang dynasty events; and the Zhoushu (周書, Documents of Zhou) with 33 chapters detailing Zhou conquests, rituals, and admonitions.[1] [10] This organization underscores a narrative of virtuous rule and dynastic cycles, with chapters varying in length from brief oaths to extended discourses.[11] Internally, chapters are grouped by rhetorical genre, including dian (典, canons or models of governance), xun (訓, instructions), meng (盟, covenants), guming (顧命, last commands), and zhi (志, announcements), reflecting diverse literary forms used for historical and didactic purposes.[1] While the jinwen (modern-script) portions—33 chapters preserved through oral transmission and Han-era recensions—are generally dated to the Western Zhou (1046–771 BCE) or earlier, the guwen (ancient-script) sections' authenticity remains contested, with scholarly consensus viewing many as Eastern Han (25–220 CE) compositions imitating archaic styles.[7][12] This dual textual tradition shapes the Shangshu's composition, blending purported archaic records with later interpretive layers.Canonical Status in Confucianism
The Book of Documents (Shangshu) occupies a foundational position among the Five Classics (Wujing) of Confucianism, comprising ancient speeches, edicts, and proclamations attributed to rulers from the Xia, Shang, and early Zhou dynasties. This canonization positioned it alongside the Book of Odes, Book of Rites, Book of Changes, and Spring and Autumn Annals, forming the core curriculum for Confucian education and state ideology during the Han dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE). Its inclusion stemmed from its portrayal of sage-kings like Yao, Shun, and Yu as exemplars of virtuous governance, aligning with Confucian emphasis on moral precedent over legalistic codes.[1] The text's authority derived from traditional attribution to Confucius, who purportedly selected and arranged 100 chapters from a larger corpus of historical records to illustrate principles such as the Mandate of Heaven (tianming), filial piety in rulership, and the consequences of tyrannical rule. Mencius (ca. 372–289 BCE) frequently cited its passages to argue for righteous rebellion against unfit sovereigns, reinforcing its role in justifying dynastic change based on ethical performance rather than mere heredity. By the Western Han period, under Emperor Wu (r. 141–87 BCE), official chairs for teaching the Shangshu were established in 136 BCE, integrating it into the imperial academy and civil service examinations, which perpetuated its doctrinal weight for over two millennia.[1][11] Despite textual variants—such as the New Text (jinwen) transmission via oral memory and the later Old Text (guwen) discoveries in 280 CE—the Shangshu endured as canonical, influencing Neo-Confucian syntheses. Zhu Xi (1130–1200 CE) provided commentaries integrating it with metaphysical interpretations, prioritizing its ethical lessons amid authenticity debates. Qing dynasty (1644–1912 CE) scholars identified forgeries in approximately half of the Old Text chapters through philological analysis, yet this did not erode its scriptural status in Confucian orthodoxy, as its utility in modeling hierarchical order and remedial admonition outweighed evidentiary discrepancies.[1][13][14]Textual Transmission and Evolution
Ancient Compilation and Early References
The Shangshu, also known as the Shujing or Book of Documents, traditionally comprises a compilation of rhetorical speeches, edicts, and proclamations attributed to rulers from the semilegendary Xia dynasty through the early Zhou period (c. 2070–1046 BCE). Chinese historiographical tradition, first recorded in Han dynasty catalogs, ascribes the initial editing to Confucius (551–479 BCE), who purportedly culled 100 chapters from an original corpus of over 3,000 documents to exemplify moral governance and dynastic legitimacy. This narrative, however, originates from retrospective accounts in texts like the Hanshu bibliographic treatise (completed c. 92 CE) and lacks corroboration from pre-Qin sources, reflecting a later Confucian effort to canonize the work rather than empirical compilation evidence.[2] Archaeological and textual evidence indicates that the Shangshu as a recognizable anthology emerged during the Warring States period (475–221 BCE), when scholars assembled pseudo-archaic prose to construct historical precedents for political philosophy. Bamboo-slip manuscripts from this era, such as those acquired by Tsinghua University in 2008, include compositions like the "Yin zhi" (Announcement of Yin), which parallel Shangshu chapters in style and content, suggesting active textual production and circulation rather than mere preservation of older records. These slips, dated paleographically to the mid-Warring States (c. 4th–3rd centuries BCE), demonstrate that documents were inscribed in a deliberate archaic script to evoke antiquity, with no full Shangshu precursor attested in earlier Zhou bronze inscriptions or oracle bones.[5][9] Earliest explicit references to the Shangshu appear in Warring States philosophical works, predating Qin unification (221 BCE). The Mozi (c. 4th century BCE) employs the title Shangshu to denote venerated historical writings, marking its initial conceptualization as a discrete corpus of authoritative documents. Quotations resembling Shangshu passages occur in the Zuo zhuan (compiled c. 4th century BCE from earlier annals) and Xunzi (c. 3rd century BCE), where they serve as precedents for ritual and statecraft, indicating dissemination among ru (Confucian) scholars by the late 4th century BCE. Such allusions, totaling over 20 discrete excerpts across these texts, confirm the collection's role in contemporaneous debates but reveal variations from transmitted versions, underscoring fluid transmission prior to Han standardization.[15][9]Han Dynasty Schisms: New Text and Old Text Traditions
The Han Dynasty (202 BCE–220 CE) witnessed a significant schism in the transmission of the Shangshu (Book of Documents), dividing scholarly traditions into New Text (jinwen) and Old Text (guwen) schools based on script, provenance, and interpretive approaches. The New Text tradition, rooted in the Western Han, derived from the recitations of Fu Sheng (ca. 260–190 BCE), a Qin-era scholar who reportedly concealed the text during the 213 BCE book burnings and later transmitted 28 chapters orally to Han officials, which were transcribed in contemporary clerical script (lishu).[1] This version, comprising speeches from Yao to the early Zhou, became the core of the imperial curriculum established in 136 BCE under Emperor Wu, with professorial chairs (boshi) for its study in the Imperial Academy (taixue), emphasizing moral governance and cosmological allegories aligned with New Text exegeses of other classics like the Gongyang zhuan.[13] In contrast, the Old Text tradition emerged from purported discoveries of manuscripts in ancient seal script (zhuan shu), predating Qin's standardization. Around 154 BCE, during the destruction of Confucius's former residence in Lu by Prince Gong of Lu, 16 additional chapters surfaced, presented by Kong Anguo (fl. late 2nd century BCE), a descendant of Confucius, who claimed fidelity to an original 100-chapter edition edited by the Master himself.[1] These texts, including expansions like the Zhou shu and Lu shu sections, totaled up to 46 chapters in some reckonings, with variations in divisions (e.g., splitting Pan Geng into three parts). Initially marginalized in the Western Han due to script unfamiliarity and lack of oral lineages, Old Text gained prominence in the Eastern Han, particularly after Wang Mang's interregnum (9–23 CE), which favored archaic scholarship.[13] The schism fueled intellectual rivalries, with New Text adherents, such as those in the Ouyang and Xiahou lineages, accusing Old Text versions of incompleteness or interpolation, while Old Text proponents, including Ma Rong (79–166 CE) and Zheng Xuan (127–200 CE), argued for greater historical authenticity and philological precision.[1] New Text interpretations often incorporated apocryphal (weishu) prognostication and esoteric symbolism to legitimize Han rule, whereas Old Text focused on literal rhetoric and institutional history, influencing bureaucratic ideals. Zheng Xuan's commentaries synthesized both traditions, reconciling 34 chapters by integrating Old Text materials into New Text frameworks, though debates persisted, as evidenced by the Xiping shijing stone engravings (175–184 CE) prioritizing New Text.[16] This divide not only shaped classical philology but also reflected broader tensions between court-sanctioned orthodoxy and emergent antiquarianism.[13]Post-Han Developments and Imperial Endorsements
Following the collapse of the Eastern Han dynasty in 220 CE, transmission of the Shangshu persisted amid political fragmentation, with the Old Text (guwen) tradition, emphasizing archaic script chapters, gradually supplanting the New Text (jinwen) version in scholarly circles during the Wei (220–266 CE) and Jin (266–420 CE) dynasties. In the early 4th century CE, Jin scholar Mei Ze (d. ca. 300 CE) compiled an edition integrating 16 additional Old Text chapters, drawing from purported ancient manuscripts, which circulated widely and influenced subsequent redactions despite lacking direct archaeological corroboration at the time.[1] The Sui dynasty (581–618 CE) initiated efforts toward textual unification by compiling a combined Shangshu in its official canon, bridging Han-era divisions, though full standardization occurred under the Tang (618–907 CE). Tang Emperor Taizong (r. 626–649 CE) sponsored scholarly projects to resolve classical ambiguities, culminating in the state-commissioned Wujing zhengyi ("Correct Meaning of the Five Classics"), with the Shangshu zhengyi segment led by Kong Yingda (574–648 CE) and completed ca. 653 CE under Emperor Gaozong (r. 649–683 CE); this 36-fascicle commentary reconciled pre-Tang exegeses, prioritizing the Mei Ze-derived Old Text corpus for its perceived antiquity. The Tang court further endorsed the text by incising it on stone steles in the mid-8th century CE as part of the Kaicheng shijing ("Stone Classics of the Kaicheng Era") project, using regular script (kaishu) to facilitate study and imperial propagation.[1][17] In the Song dynasty (960–1279 CE), imperial printing technology enabled widespread dissemination, including official editions from the Imperial Academy (Taixue), where the Shangshu—now standardized as 58 chapters in the Shangshu zhengyi framework—became a core curriculum text for civil service examinations introduced in 1065 CE under Emperor Yingzong (r. 1063–1067 CE). Neo-Confucian scholars, such as Cai Shen (1167–1230 CE), produced interpretive works like Shujing zhuan (ca. 1213 CE), which reframed the text through rationalist lenses while affirming its role in moral governance, receiving tacit endorsement via inclusion in state-approved compendia. Subsequent dynasties, including Yuan (1271–1368 CE), Ming (1368–1644 CE), and Qing (1644–1912 CE), perpetuated this through mandatory examination study and integration into imperial anthologies like the Ming Wujing daquan (1414–1415 CE), underscoring the Shangshu's utility in legitimizing dynastic authority via precedents of virtuous rule.[1] Scholarly developments post-Han included growing authenticity debates, with Song critics like Wu Yu (1100–1154 CE) and Zhu Xi (1130–1200 CE) alleging Western Jin-era forgeries in the 16 Old Text chapters due to linguistic anachronisms and stylistic inconsistencies absent in Han New Text portions, though imperial orthodoxy retained the full corpus until Qing evidential scholarship, such as Yan Ruoqu's (1636–1704 CE) Shangshu guwen shuzheng (1709 CE), empirically validated these suspicions via paleographic analysis.[1]Archaeological Finds and Recent Scholarship
Excavations at the Guodian Chu tomb in Hubei province yielded bamboo slips dated to approximately 300 BCE, containing excerpts and citations from chapters of the Shangshu, such as references to speeches attributed to ancient rulers, which align closely with the New Text tradition's content but exhibit variant phrasing and orthography typical of Warring States-era scribal practices.[4] These manuscripts, written in Chu-state script, demonstrate that core Shangshu materials circulated in localized forms among southern elite by the late Warring States period, predating Han compilations and supporting claims of pre-imperial origins for select documents.[5] In 2008, Tsinghua University acquired a cache of over 2,000 Warring States bamboo strips, including nine chapters that parallel Shangshu sections like "Jin Teng" and "Zhou Guan," with textual variants revealing editorial layers absent in transmitted editions.[18] Paleographic analysis of these slips, radiocarbon dated to the mid-Warring States (ca. 300 BCE), confirms their antiquity through ink composition and slip preparation techniques matching contemporaneous sites, providing empirical anchors for reconstructing the corpus's evolution and refuting later fabrications for those segments.[19] Bronze inscriptions from Western Zhou sites, such as the Da Yu ding (ca. 11th century BCE), echo thematic elements in Shangshu chapters like "Yu Gong" through shared administrative terminology and flood-control motifs, though direct verbatim matches are absent, indicating the text's reliance on oral or archival traditions rather than verbatim epigraphy.[1] Oracle bone inscriptions from late Shang (ca. 1200 BCE) at Anyang yield no direct correspondences to Shangshu's rhetorical prose, limited instead to divinatory queries and ritual records, which underscores the Documents' composite nature as later compilations drawing selectively from historical lore rather than unmediated transcripts.[20] Recent scholarship, leveraging these artifacts, has intensified scrutiny of the Old Text (Guwen) chapters, with linguistic studies identifying post-Han syntactic patterns and vocabulary anachronisms—such as Eastern Han-era idioms in purportedly archaic sections—suggesting fabrication around the 4th century CE amid Jin dynasty antiquarian revivals.[7] Peer-reviewed paleographic comparisons, including script evolution metrics from Guodian and Tsinghua slips, affirm the New Text's Warring States provenance while deeming Old Text claims of Western Han recovery from Qin burnings implausible, as the archaic script professed lacks precedents in verified pre-Qin epigraphy.[5][21] This consensus, drawn from empirical dating via stratigraphy and carbon-14 assays, prioritizes inscriptional realism over traditional attributions, revealing the Shangshu as a layered anthology shaped by successive redactions rather than a pristine Confucian canon.[22]Internal Structure and Literary Features
Traditional Categorization of Chapters
The chapters of the Book of Documents (Shangshu) are traditionally categorized into six genres reflecting their rhetorical forms and intended functions, a system derived from early classifications in commentaries such as those associated with Kong Anguo (ca. 2nd century BCE).[1] These categories—dian (典, canons), mo (謨, counsels), gao (誥, announcements), shi (誓, speeches or oaths), xun (訓, instructions), and ming (命, charges)—organize the 58 chapters of the received text, though not all documents align perfectly with a single type, as some function as historical records or are titled by persons or events rather than genre.[1] This schema underscores the text's emphasis on exemplary governance, moral exhortation, and ritual communication among ancient rulers.| Category | Chinese Term | Description | Examples |
|---|---|---|---|
| Canons | 典 (dian) | Foundational texts establishing models of rule, cosmology, or administrative norms, often presenting archetypal precedents for legitimacy. | Yao dian (Canon of Yao), outlining early sage-kings' virtues and flood control.[1] |
| Counsels | 謨 (mo) | Advisory discourses offering strategic or moral recommendations to rulers, typically from ministers to sovereigns. | Gao Yao mo (Counsels of Gao Yao), advising on personnel selection and governance.[1] |
| Announcements | 誥 (gao) | Formal proclamations or edicts issued by rulers to subjects, announcing policies, victories, or moral imperatives to reinforce authority. | Tang gao (Announcement of Tang), justifying the overthrow of the Xia dynasty; Kang gao (Announcement to Kang), exhorting virtue post-conquest.[1] |
| Speeches/Oaths | 誓 (shi) | Exhortatory addresses, often military oaths rallying troops or declaring war, invoking divine sanction and loyalty. | Mu shi (Speech at Mu), King Wu's pre-battle harangue against the Shang.[1] |
| Instructions | 訓 (xun) | Didactic teachings or guidelines transmitted between rulers and officials, focusing on ethical conduct and administrative duties. | Yi xun (Instructions of Yi), on agricultural and ritual responsibilities.[1] |
| Charges | 命 (ming) | Mandates appointing officials or enfeoffing nobles, specifying duties and expectations to ensure dynastic continuity. | Wei zi zhi ming (Charge to the Prince of Wei), delegating oversight of former Shang territories.[1] |