Editing Chinese classics (section)

==Qin dynasty==
===Loss of texts===
According to [[Sima Qian]]'s ''[[Records of the Grand Historian]]'', after [[Qin Shi Huang]], the first [[emperor of China]], unified China in 221&nbsp;BC, his chancellor [[Li Si]] suggested suppressing intellectual discourse to unify thought and political opinion. This was alleged to have destroyed philosophical treatises of the [[Hundred Schools of Thought]], with the goal of strengthening the official Qin governing philosophy of [[Legalism (Chinese philosophy)|Legalism]]. According to the ''Shiji'', three categories of books were viewed by Li Si to be most dangerous politically. These were poetry, history (especially historical records of other states than Qin), and philosophy. The ancient collection of poetry and historical records contained many stories concerning the ancient virtuous rulers. Li Si believed that if the people were to read these works they were likely to invoke the past and become dissatisfied with the present. The reason for opposing various schools of philosophy was that they advocated political ideas often incompatible with the totalitarian regime.{{sfnp|Chan|1972|pp=105–107}}

Modern historians doubt the details of the story, which first appeared more than a century later. Regarding the alleged Qin objective of strengthening Legalism, the traditional account is anachronistic in that Legalism was not yet a defined category of thought during the Qin period,<ref name="Smith 2003" /> and the "schools of thought" model is no longer considered to be an accurate portrayal of the intellectual history of pre-imperial China.{{sfnp|Csikszentmihalyi|Nylan|2003|pp=59–99}}{{sfnp|Meyer|2012|pp=247–249}}{{sfnp|Grebnev|2022|pp=2–3, 254–255}} [[Michael Nylan]] observes that despite its mythic significance, the "[[burning of books and burying of scholars]]" legend does not bear close scrutiny. Nylan suggests that the reason Han dynasty scholars charged the Qin with destroying the Confucian [[Five Classics]] was partly to "slander" the state they defeated and partly because Han scholars misunderstood the nature of the texts, for it was only after the founding of the Han that Sima Qian labeled the Five Classics as Confucian. Nylan also points out that the Qin court appointed classical scholars who were specialists on the ''[[Classic of Poetry]]'' and the ''[[Book of Documents]]'', which meant that these texts would have been exempted, and that the ''[[Book of Rites]]'' and the ''[[Zuo Zhuan]]'' did not contain the glorification of defeated feudal states which the First Emperor gave as his reason for destroying them. Nylan further suggests that the story might be based on the fact that the Qin palace was razed in 207&nbsp;BC and many books were undoubtedly lost at that time.{{sfnp|Nylan|2001|pp=29–30}} Martin Kern adds that Qin and early Han writings frequently cite the Classics, especially the ''Documents'' and the ''Classic of Poetry'', which would not have been possible if they had been burned, as reported.{{sfnp|Kern|2010|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=qY32-zfTU9AC&q=%22status+of+the+Classics%22 111–112]}}