Paul van Els

This article examines the complex relationship between the Laozi 老子 and the Wenzi 文子, arguing that the two text traditions of the Wenzi engage with the Laozi in distinct yet complementary ways. The first, the Ancient Wenzi 古本《文子》 (mainly represented by an unearthed bamboo manuscript) reveals unmarked but unmistakable textual and philosophical affinities with the Laozi. Drawing on several Laozi passages, it echoes themes such as non-interference, humility, and sagacity, while developing a milder and more pragmatic orientation, especially in its nuanced discussions of leadership and warfare. The second, the Transmitted Wenzi 傳世本《文子》, transforms this relationship by explicitly centering Laozi himself: nearly all of its sections begin with "Laozi said," turning the text into both a vehicle for Laozi's voice and an extended commentary on the Laozi through direct quotation and elaboration. By massively incorporating material from the Huainanzi and expanding Laozi's teachings into a comprehensive politico-philosophical treatise, the Transmitted Wenzi seeks to elevate Laozi's authority and systematize his thought. Together, the two Wenzi versions chart the evolving reception of the Laozi from early Han manuscript culture to the later Daoist canon, revealing shifts from subtle intertextual dialogue to overt exegetical reverence.

The Mozi presents at least three distinct arguments against offensive warfare. The "moral argument" holds that offensive warfare is morally wrong. The "economic argument" maintains that the foreseeable costs of a military campaign inevitably outweigh its potential benefits. The "religious argument" warns that military aggression runs counter to the interests of Heaven. Drawing extensively on translated passages from the original text, this paper examines these three lines of argumentation. It considers what each argument entails, the audiences to which it may have been addressed, and its persuasiveness from a modern academic perspective. The paper shows not only how Mozi and his followers theorized about offensive warfare, but also how, at least according to anecdotes preserved in the latter part of the received Mozi, they put these arguments into practice. Ultimately, it argues that the Mohists actively adapted their argumentative strategies in their search for the most effective words with which to bring wars to an end.

The Wenzi in its transmitted form is closely related to the Huainanzi. Text passages shared between the two works amount to tens of thousands of characters. In the ancient Chinese philosophical tradition, where intertextual connections are common, this is highly unusual. The sheer volume of textual parallels suggests massive borrowing of content from one work in the process of creating the other. The present chapter shows how scholars throughout history assessed this intriguing intertextual relation; it analyzes which work likely served as the source, and it reflects on the philosophical relevance of the derivative text.

This chapter focuses on Former Han Dynasty philosophers who recognized the Dao as the primordial source of existence—something to be emulated and harnessed for personal cultivation. They viewed the Dao as an "obscure," "empty," "formless," or even "nonexistent" origin of life and its natural cycles. At the same time, the Dao and its oneness served as a model for rulers, who were expected to govern through nonaction (wuwei), humility, and magnanimity. As both a subject of philosophical inquiry and a guide for self-cultivation, the Dao entered the world of Han elites and assumed a central role in meditative, self-cultivational, and medical practices considered beneficial to both body and mind.

This chapter studies classifications of warfare in Master Wu, The Four Canons, and Master Wen. In sections one through three, I analyze the classifications in their original contexts. How do they relate to the texts in which they appear? In what way does each classification feed into the overall philosophy of the text? In section four, I compare the three classifications. What are their similarities and differences? In section five, I discuss the possibility of a relationship between the three classifications. Are any perhaps directly and demonstrably influenced by another? I hypothesize that the classification of warfare in Master Wu may have served as a source for those in The Four Canons and Master Wen. In section six, I explore the development of classifications of warfare in writings from the Warring States period to the early Han dynasty. How did the classifications evolve from military–strategic writings to texts of politico–philosophical nature? Finally, in section seven, I survey the impact of classifications on the wider political debate on warfare in those days. Did classifications influence the debate? If so, to what effect?

Early Chinese thought enjoys a wide appeal, in the scholarly world as much as elsewhere, as people are keen on learning about the ideas of Confucius, Mencius, and other thinkers whose views have shaped traditional Chinese culture. In the study of early Chinese thought, emphasis has long been on what thinkers said, not on how they proffered their views. Even studies that do consider the how, tend to focus on logic and argumentation, rather than rhetoric. Fortunately, in the past few decades growing attention has been paid to Chinese rhetoric which has led to an impressive number of publications. This work briefly outlines rhetoric in the West and in China.

This chapter analyzes the anecdotes tradition of early China. It contains three parts. Part 1 is a case study of a single anecdote, which serves as a typical example of the thriving anecdotal tradition of early China, from the earliest Chinese narrative histories to the end of the Western Han Dynasty. Part 2 continues the case study by analyzing what happened to that single anecdote in texts from the Eastern Han Dynasty onwards, thereby illustrating the rapid decline of the anecdotes tradition of early China. Part 3 offers tentative explanations for the decline.

This paper is intended as a gateway to two 2000-year-old manuscripts of the Analects. The first two sections discuss the archaeological context of the discoveries and analyse the manuscripts themselves, including characteristic features of the bamboo strips and the texts inked thereon and notable differences between these and other Analects versions. In these sections, I also critically evaluate present-day Analects studies and offer alternative hypotheses where there is room for debate. The third and final section of the paper discusses what I consider the most fascinating (and most complex) issue regarding the manuscripts: their provenance. In that section, I examine when, where, and why the Analects was copied onto the bamboo strips. The ultimate goal of this paper is to present a nuanced understanding of the two bamboo manuscripts that conveys the fascinating insights they offer while also exploring the limitations of what these manuscripts can actually tell us.

Huang-Lao is now generally regarded as a set of ideas that gained currency from the final stages of the Warring States period to well into the Han dynasty. "Huang" stands for Huangdi, the Yellow Emperor; "Lao" refers to Laozi, the "Old Master," who is traditionally regarded as the founder of Daoism. Huang-Lao is thus a combination of ideas attributed to the mythical figures of the Yellow Emperor and Laozi. What those ideas are and how they have manifested themselves in Chinese history remains the subject of heated debate.