An Outline Of The Research History Of MaoZhuan And ZhengJian

Mao Shi Gu Xun Zhuan, written by Mao Heng in Western Han Dynasty and MaoShiJian,written by Zheng Xuan in Eastern Han Dynasty, are the earliest and the most complete and systematic works survive today as annotation on the Book of Songs, the two works were later called MaoZhuan and ZhengJian.MaoZhuan is one of the representatives of classical learning based on earlier texts. During Western Han Dynasty and Eastern Han Dynasty, there were four schools studying the Book of Songs. In struggling against the other three schools based on new texts, Maoshi was supported step by step by dominance hierarchy and was being perfected day by day. Maoshi was transiently made official doctrine in the period of Emperor Ping. In the middle of Eastern Han Dynasty, Maoshi was supported step by step by dominance hierarchy. It was admitted by the official and it’s scholars held office at court, though it was not made official doctrine. Many scholars studied the Book of Songs on both earlier and new texts, they also accepted fortune and alchemy and divination by augury and mystical intepretation of Confucianist texts. In the end of Eastern Han Dynasty, Zheng Xuan noted all the classics to make different notes to consensus of opinion. He noted the Book of Songs mainly according to Maoshi, with the other three schools as supplementary.Zheng Xuan mixed together the four schools, unified earlier and new texts, set up Zhengxue of the Book of Songs. From then on, the other three schools perished, only Maoshi survived.During the Wei Jin and Southern and Northern Dynasties Period, though there were debates between ZhengXue and WangXue, there were different study traditions between the North and the South, almost all scholars follow Maoshi. Wang Su was criticized by Zheng Xuan’s students for his supporting Maoshi and denying Zheng Xuan, debates between ZhengXue and WangXue, made the study on the Book of Songs more deep-going. That led to the decline of new texts. The struggle reached down until Sui Dynasty. In the Southern and Northern Dynasties, scholars began to explain classics with the form of YiShu. In the beginning of Tang Dynasty, Emperor Taizong ordered Yan Shigu to correct the Five Classics, ordered Kong Yingda to explain them with the form of YiShu. With the help of other scholars, which named Wujingzhengyi. Among them, Maoshizhengyi patched debates between the South and the North by mixing Maozhuan and Zhengjian. During the whole Tang Dynasty, there were no debates between scholars.In Song Dynasty, since Qingli of Emperor Song Renzong, scholars examine most of the classics, and began to doubt them. For the Book of Songs, there were debates on obeying to the preface or abandoning it. Zhu Xi denied the preface but he didn’t abandon Maozhuan and Zhengjian.His Shijizhuan accepted opinions of Maoheng, Zheng Xuan, Lu Ji and Kong Yingda. Though he didn’t mention these names. Thus the opinions of Mao and Zheng spread in a different way.In Yanyou of Yuan Dynasty, the Book of Songs was officially supported with the explanation of Zhu Xi’s Shijizhuan, which continued to Ming Dynasty and Qing Dynasty. In Yuan Dynasty and Ming Dynasty, study on classics had no innovation, scholars usually explained classics according to Zhu Xi. In the middle and late of Ming Dynasty, with the development of economic and active thoughts, scholars began to reject Zhu Xi and accept Mao Heng, Zheng Xuan and Kong Yingda.In Qing Dynasty, most of scholars followed the interpretation of Zhu Xi, facilitated Zheng and Mao, as scholars in late Ming Dynasty. Chen Qiyuan promoted ancient interpretations. During the period of Emperor Qian Long, textual authentication was developed with the example of Imperial Collection of Four. There were many famous scholars, such as Hu Chenggong, Ma Ruichen, Chen Huan, Chen Shouqi and Chen Qiaocong and so on. Wei Yuan and Wang Xianqian promoted new texts, which became the fashion of that time.In the Republic of China, ancient history conforming school thought Mao Heng and Zheng Xuan as injudicious Confucian scholars. They looked on the Book of Songs as history, which was the theory of Zhang Xuecheng. With lots of cultural relics unearthed, scholars such as Wang Guowei, Lin Yiguang, Wen Yiduo found new way to study the Book of Songs.There are three parts of the paper, introduction, the text and conclusion. Introduction discusses the time,nature and imparting history of Maoshi,looks back on study of the Book of Songs in the latest30years.The text of the paper is divided into five chapters. The first chapter discusses the difference of four schools, the academic status of four schools in Han Dynasty and the development of Maoshi in Eastern Han Dynasty, points out that the change of the academic status of four schools have connection with both the support of dominance hierarchy and it’s own academic level. The first chapter also points out that Zheng Xuan had the aim of blending the earlier texts and the new texts, affirms the academic status of Zheng Xuan by comparing Zhengjian to Maozhuan.The second chapter discusses research of the Book of Songs from the Three Kingdoms to Sui,Tang and the Five Dynasties, discusses the difference between Zheng Xuan and Wang Su, set a high value on Kong Yingda’s contribution to research of the Book of Songs.Chapter three observes the academic transformation in Song Dynasty and it’s relationship with the interpretation of the Book of Songs, discusses Ouyang Xiu’s way and attitude of seeking the basic meaning of the Book of Songs. We also learn from this chapter that Lv Zuqian’s notes on the Book of Songs at home carried forward Maoshi. We learn from this chapter that to some extent Shijizhuan is an abridgement of Maoshizhengyi.Chapter four discusses the relationship between textology and the study of the Book of Songs in Qing Dynasty, points out that Hu Chenggong, Ma Ruichen, Wang Huan and Wang Xianqian were all good at phonology, exegetics and emendation studyChapter five discusses the way of research in the Republic of China, describes the academic characteristic of ancient history conforming school and new evidence school,lays special stress on analysing the particularity of Huang Zhuo’s supporting Mao Heng.The conclusion points out that notes of Maoshi changed from simple to complex, then to simple, then complex to simple. Scholars’attitude to the Preface of Maoshi changed from supporting to abandoning, then supporting to abandoning, then supporting. We can hardly do without Mao Heng and Zheng Xuan’s interpretation like it or not. As to the future research, we should collate ancient books completely, tell the difference of Mao and Zheng to eliminate disputes. It has been more than100years since the establishment of the Republic of China, it is necessary to draw a conclusion on the research of the Book of Songs.