have gone in search of them, for he is as much at home in the events of Chow, Tsin, Ts‘e, Sung, Ch‘ing, Ts‘oo, and other States, as he is in those of Loo. And not only does he draw from the records about the ruling Houses of the States, but also from the histories of the principal families or clans and the chief men in them.[1] From whatever quarter, in whatever way, he got his information, he has transmitted it to us. The events and the characters of the time pass as in reality and life before us. In no ancient history of any country have we such a vivid picture of any lengthened period of its annals as we have from Tso of the 270 years which he has embraced in his Work. Without his Chuen the text of the sage would be of little value. Let the former be preserved, and we should have no occasion to regret the loss of the latter.
To myself it appears plain that Tso's Work was compiled on a twofold plan. First, he had reference to the text of the Ch‘un Ts‘ëw, and wished to give the details of the events wluch were indicated in it. Tso's Work compiled on a two-fold plan. He wished first to explain the text.Occasionally also he sets himself to explain the words of that text, being sometimes successful and sometimes not. He lays down canons to regulate the meaning and application of certain characters, but it can hardly be said that we find him under the influence of the ‘praise-and-censure’ theory. In this respect he differs remarkably from Kung-yang and Kuh-lëang; and I have sometimes fancied that the characteristic is an evidence that he lived before Mencius, and had never read the accounts of the Classic which we find in him. His object evidently was to convey to his readers a knowledge of the facts given in the master’s paragraphs as if independent and isolated in their connexion with one another. Hence he often mentions new facts which are necessary for that
- ↑ The following passage from Tan Tsoo (啖助) of the T‘ang dynasty sets forth correctly this characteristic of Tso’s work, and I adduce it without reference to Tsoo‘s peculiar opinions about our author:— 左氏傳自周,晉,齊,宋,楚,鄭等國之事最詳,晉,則每出一師,具列將佐,宋,則每因興廢,備舉六卿,故知史策之文,每國各異,左氏得此數國之史以授門人,義則口傳,未形竹帛,後代學者乃演而通之,總而合之,編次年月,以爲傳記,又廣採當時文籍,故兼與子産,晏子,及諸國卿佐家傳,井卜書及雜占書,縱橫家小說諷諫等,雜在其中,故敘事雖多,釋意甚少,是非交錯,混然雜證,其大略皆是左氏舊意,故此餘傳,其功最高,博採諸家,敘事尤備,能今百代之下頗見本末.
28]
