Page:Ch'un Ts'ew Pt I.pdf/164

Rh  41.  ﬁﬂﬁ, ‘An Examination into the Names of places in the Ch‘un Ts‘éw.’ In 14 Books; by Kaou Sze-ke (E 3]; ﬁ; styled E A), a great scholar of the K‘ang-he period. The writer sometimes defeats his end by the minuteness of his researches. The Work is valuable, but not so convenient for the student as that on the same subject. by K'éang Yang, which I have already noticed.

42. i, ‘The principal things in the Ch‘un Ts‘éw exhibited in atabular form.’ In 50 Books, with one Book of Plates, and an Appendix. By Koo Tung-kaou (a styled E £0, a scholar and ofﬁcer of the K‘ang-he and K‘éen-lung periods. I have met with no Work on the Ch‘un Ts‘éw more exhaustive, and cer- tainly with none from which I have myself derived more assistance. The author’s tables and disquisitions supply the most abundant matter for study and research. '

43. f K [79 1% ’5 if iﬁ 1?, ‘The old Comments on the Ch‘un Ts‘éw and Tso Chuen Collected and Preserved.’ In 3 Books (E M); by Yen Wei (ﬂ? styled  A); published in 1,788. The Work is an attempt to gather and preserve the Comments of Fuh K‘éen and other Commentators of the Han dynasty, to which the writer thinks Too Yu was often under obligation without acknowledging it.

44. 2f; a, ‘ Collected Discourses on the Ch‘un Ts‘éw of Tso-she.’ In 10 Books; with two Books of Introduction and Appendix, chiefly on the Laws of the Ch‘un T s‘éw. By Choo Gob.- ling (ﬁeﬂﬁ; styled E %, and also called E), a graduate of the Ming dynasty who lived on into the present. The Work is useful, principally because the author is constantly quoting from Tan Tsoo and Chaou K‘wang of the T‘ang dynasty, though he does not himself agree with them.

45.  E} M %, ‘ On the Articles on Divination in the Ch‘un Ts‘éw.’ ln 3 Books. This is another Work bearing on the inter; pretation of the Tso Chuen by Maou K‘e—ling, which has not been reprinted in the The title is incorrect, because the references to divination in the text of the Ch‘un Ts‘éw are the briefest possible, and the Work deals with articles in the Tso Chuen. It is said correctly in Maou’s introductory notice that no satisfactory attempt to explain those articles had been made by Too Yu, K‘ung Ying—tah, or any other of the critics. It was bold in Maou to try. to do so; but I do not think he has succeeded. So far as I have attained hitherto in the study of the Yih King and the ancient divina- tion of the Chinese, I have failed to understand their principles;— if there be any principles in them.



143]