During the subsequent flourishing of classical studies, Confucians sought to refashion their obscure past, a project that culminated with Ban Gu in the first century of the Common Era and which continues to shape perceptions of Han Confucianism to the present.
The scholarly lineages of the Five Classics that Sima Qian outlined have been modified by subsequent scholars, a project that started with Ban Gu and continued for centuries.
Also, Ban Gu knew Fu Zhan's father, Fu Li [TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], who was an expert on the Songs, but Ban never traced Fu Li's origins back to the founding teacher of the Documents.
But 150 years later, Ban Gu recorded a debate that took place in front of Emperor Wu between Scholar Han and Dong Zhongshu, noting that Scholar Han was capable and vigorous, having a clear judgment when handling state affairs, and Dong Zhongshu could not rebut him.
, a historian during China's Han Dynasty in the first century CE, was influential on later Chinese historians, Clark (Chinese history, U.
The term liumin appeared in Hanshu, one of the twenty-four Chinese histories that was compiled by the Han historian, Ban Gu
As the "other" Han historian, Ban Gu has received less attention than his more famous Western Han counterpart, Sima Qian.
Instead, he gives us a dynamic reading of the Hanshu, which he treats not as a conveyor of raw data but as an object to be analyzed in terms of what it did--what it did for Ban Gu and his clan, as well as for Han rulers and the imperial state.
Through an analysis of Ban's treatment of his own ancestors, Clark shows that the history of the Western Han figured in the efforts by Ban Gu to bolster the standing of his own clan at court--and more pointedly, to conceal the true sources of the clan's power and standing.
Thus, between the time of Ban Gu
and that of Xu Shen, we notice the emergence of the notion that Confucius knew of the game weiqi.
It is true that both Ban Gu
and Sima Biao based their interpretations on the moralistic tradition shaped by the commentaries on the Spring and Autumn Annals, but can we say absolutely that pre-Han portents and their five-phases theory included in Ban Gu
's treatise - instead of the portents of the Hah - are the center of his treatise?
As both Keimatsu and Dai point out, if Dong wrote on the Forces, why didn't Ban Gu
quote any of his opinions in the Hanshu "Wuxing zhi" [UNKNOWN TEXT OMITTED] ("Treatises on the Five Forces")?