________________
INTRODUCTION.
461
lected works of Mão Khi-ling (1623-1713) is one called
Questions about the Hsiao King,' in which, with his usual ability, and, it must be added, his usual acrimony, he defends the received text. He asserts--and in this he is correct that there is no difference of any importance between the ancient and modern texts; when he asserts further that there never was any such difference, what he affirms is incapable of proof. He pours scorn on Ka Hsi and Wa Khăng; but he is not so successful in defending the integrity of the Hsião as I have allowed him to be in vindicating the portions of the Shù that we owe to Khung An-kwo.
The Hsiao King has always been a favourite with the emperors of China. Before Hsuan Zung took it in hand, the first and eighth emperors of the eastern Kin dynasty (317-419), the first and third of the Liang (502-556), and the ninth of the northern Wei (386-534) had published their labours upon it. The Manchâu rulers of the present dynasty have signalised themselves in this department. In 1656 the first emperor produced in one chapter his . Imperial Commentary on the Hsiao King,' and in 1728 the third published a 'Collection of Comments' on it. Between them was the long reign known to us as the Khang-hsî period (1662– 1722), during which there appeared under the direction of the second emperor, the most distinguished of his line, his 'Extensive Explanation of the Hsiao King,' in 100 chapters. The only portion of the text which it gives in full is Ku Hsi's chapter of Confucian text; but most of the topics touched on in Ka's supplementary chapters, added, as he supposed, by some later hand, are dealt with in the course of the work, the whole of which will amply repay a careful study.
4. It will have been seen that the two great scholars, Ka Conclusion Hsi and Wů Khăng, who have taken the regarding the greatest liberties with the text of our classic, genuineness and integrity allow that there is a Confucian element in it,
of the Hsião. and that more than a fifth part of the whole, containing, even as expurgated by Ků, about 400 characters, may be correctly ascribed to the sage. I agree with them
Digitized by Google