| |
SINCE the seventeenth century the Chinese classics have been making their way to the West, making them not only the classics of China, but gradually causing them to become classics worldwide. Here we will try to understand the beginnings of the travel of Chinese classics to the West, how Western people first read, understood, translated and disseminated the Analects, causing this book to become, in the eyes of Western people, the text best able to represent Chinese culture. The first edition of the Analects in the West is part of a book that can be seen as an encyclopaedia of Chinese thought, titled Confucius Sinarum Philosophus (“Confucius the Chinese Philosopher”) (Paris, 1687, hereafter simplified as ‘the Confucius’). This book systematically introduced the pre-Qin hundred schools, the pre-Qin Confucian school, Neo-Confucianism of the Song and Ming dynasties [Song Ming Rujia], Taoism and Chinese Buddhism. In addition to the translation of the Analects, it also includes translations of the Great Learning [Daxue], and the Doctrine of the Mean [Zhongyong].
I. Historical Background to the Translation of the Analects
The translation published in 1687 brought together the fruits of one hundred years of the combined efforts of the Jesuit missionaries. From 1583, missionaries to China primarily used the Four Books to study the Chinese language. In the course of the study, they used the Four Books to prepare some language teaching materials. Italian Michele Ruggieri [Luo Mingjian] (1543-1607), was the first Jesuit missionary to write these teaching materials, translating the first half of the Great Learning into Latin. In 1594, Matteo Ricci [Li Madou] translated important parts of the Four Books, and tested the effectiveness of this teaching material on his own students. Later, Nicolas Trigault [Jin Nige] (1577-1628) also said that all the missionaries coming to China were using Ricci’s translation to study Chinese. Very regrettably, Ricci’s translation has been lost.
In 1624, the Vice-Provincial of the Jesuits’ China province, Manual Dias [Li Manuo] (1559-1639), approved a four year “curriculum plan” (ratio studiorum) for the missionaries to China. Within this plan, missionaries were required to study the Four Books and the Book of History. Later, Inàcio da Costa (1603-1666) attempted to improve Ricci’s translation and together with his student Prospero Intorcetta (1626-1696) published Sapientia Sinica (“The Wisdom of China”, 1662). The translation included two pages on the life of Kong Fuzi, or Confucius, and a fourteen-page section of the Great Learning. Later Intorcetta translated The Doctrine of the Mean into Latin, with the title Sinarum Scientia Politico-Moralis (“The Ethico-political Knowledge of the Chinese”, 1668-1669). This translation features several special traits together: 1) Chinese and Latin texts side-by-side, 2) literal translations, 3) each Chinese character bears a number, corresponding to the Latin word, and 4) the Chinese characters are also marked with the phonetic system invented by the Jesuits. This kind of editing makes it much easier for Westerners to understand, read aloud and memorize the text.
Later on, in addition to their uses in studying the language and understanding the culture, the Four Books took on a new role, that is that of proving that China’s ancient tradition of offering sacrifices to ancestors was completely in accord with reason and did not carry with it any tinge of idolatry. That would lead Chinese Catholics to be allowed to participate in these rites. In fact, the primary reason for some controversy was that Chinese people themselves held differing understandings of the ancestral sacrifices: not only did each region’s social customs, habits and conceptions vary, but great differences in the understanding of the ancestral sacrifices also existed between the rural peasantry and the literati. Because of this, the so-called Chinese Rites Controversy began among the missionaries. To solve this predicament, some of the Jesuit missionaries attempted to arrive at a comprehensive plan to solve the crisis through the study of the Chinese classics. Here, we can see the important role played by the classics: in order to establish “orthopraxis” it was first necessary to establish “orthodoxy” and this “orthodoxy” had to be based upon a correct understanding of the classics.
Because of this, in Guangzhou, from 1666 to 1671, a group of missionaries devoted themselves to the work of translating the Four Books: besides the afore-mentioned Intorcetta, the group included the Austrian Jesuit Christian Herdtrich [En Lige] and two Flemish Jesuits, François de Rougemont [Lu Riman] (1624-1676) and Philippe Couplet [Bo Yingli] (1622-1693). In 1668, Intorcetta returned to Europe, entrusting the work of translating the Four Books to Herdtrich, de Rougemont and Couplet. They continued to translate for three years and added the translated annotations of the Chinese commentators. This is why the translation holds value not only as a language teaching tool, but for scholarship. However, because the workload was too great, during the course of translating they decided to leave out the Mencius, and only completed the translations of the Great Learning, the Doctrine of the Mean and the Analects. In 1671, the manuscript was sent to Europe.
The official publication of the translation still had to wait for more than ten years. It can be said that there were two key factors that led to the final publication: first was Couplet’s own determination. In Guangzhou, he expended a great amount of energy in translating and in 1683, when he returned to Europe, he went through much trouble to find a way to publish the work. The second major factor was that the French king at the time wanted to develop diplomatic relations with the Far East. Thus, on September 25 1684, Couplet met with Louis XIV to discuss sending a group of French missionaries to China. In 1687, with strong backing by the head of the royal library, Melchisédec Thévenot (1620-1692), the book was finally published, bearing the latin title: Confucius Sinarum Philosophus sive Scientia Sinensis Latine Exposita..., that is: “Confucius the Chinese Philosopher, or Chinese Knowledge—formulated in Latin, through the diligent efforts of Prospero Intorcetta, Christian Herdtrich, François de Rougemont and Philippe Couplet”.
It is quite clear that Louis XIV’s support for the Confucius came forth from political considerations. From his point of view, it was not the Confucian classics that made his reign more glorious, on the contrary, through the acceptance of the classics of the Far East, he primarily wanted to demonstrate his own wisdom. In order to express his gratitude to the French monarch, at the beginning of the work Couplet added the “Letter to the King of France” and readers of today may well feel that Couplet’s flattery is somewhat excessive:
“O Great King, this Confucius now places himself here before you, as if transported to France through your care and Royal generosity. Prostrated, he approaches your Majesty’s feet. He wonders openly at your wisdom and recognizes that his own, though enjoying such an incredible reputation and esteem among his people, yet yields to yours, like Stars to the Sun.”
As also happens in Chinese history, it was difficult for the Four Books in Europe to avoid being used for political purposes. The Chinese classics provided legitimacy to the regime of the Chinese emperor, they gave legitimacy to the missionary endeavours of the Jesuits and brought glory to the king of France.
II. The Typesetting of the Latin Edition of the Analects
Before discussing the Latin title of the Analects, we must first explain the title of the entire work. The missionaries gradually realized that the Chinese thought that they confronted constituted a kind of system, namely, Sinensis Scientia, the Chinese Knowledge. Because of this, when Intorcetta translated the Four Books, he used “Chinese Knowledge” as the title. He hinted that the Chinese ideological system was able to respond to the “European Knowledge” (Europea Scientia), thus establishing a bridge between the two systems. Moreover, the Jesuits believed that “Chinese Knowledge” had its own classical system, which was the Four Books. Among them, the Analects became the third book of “Chinese Knowledge”.
When publishing, Couplet still retained the words “Chinese Knowledge” on the front cover of the book; not as the book’s title, but merely...
[ End of sample | Please purchase the magazine for full articles ]
|
| |
Thierry Meynard, S.J., is Professor at Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, where he teaches Western Classics. In 2003, he has obtained his PhD in Philosophy from Peking University, presenting a thesis on Liang Shuming. From 2003 to 2006, he has taught philosophy at Fordham University, New York. Since 2006, he is a member of the Macau Ricci Institute. He has authored twenty academic articles and a dozen of essays. He has recently edited Teilhard and the Future of Humanity, New York, Fordham University Press, 2006. Also, he has authored Following the Footsteps of the Jesuits in Beijing, St Louis, Jesuit Sources, 2006. |
|
back to top ▲
|
|
| Issue 7.2 |
|
Priceless Friendship
—Matteo Ricci’s Legacy
|
|
|
