Abstract
Following advances in our knowledge of Warring States scripts, interest has been steadily growing in studies of traditionally received versions of ancient texts. Some scholars have used traditionally received versions of ancient texts to explicate ancient scripts, while others have used recently excavated manuscripts to examine traditionally received versions. Both methods have proven successful. In this paper we compare the traditionally received version of Laozi with the version excavated at Guodian, on bamboo strips in Chu script, and other data concerning ancient scripts. The comparison proves that the received version of Laozi is not only close to the original source but is also a very reliable witness.
Keywords
Laozi, traditionally transmitted ancient texts, collation and verification
Cite
Citations are generated automatically from bibliographic data as a convenience, and may not be complete or accurate.
