The identification bet365 bonus code indiana is the study of the authenticity bet365 bonus code indiana and the age when they were written，Is an important part of philology。In fact，Philology has paid special attention to the identification bet365 bonus code indiana from the beginning。Liu Xiang of the Western Han Dynasty, who is regarded as the originator of philology、Liu Xin and his son were already concerned about the authenticity bet365 bonus code indiana。Liu Xiang's Narrative of "Yan Zi Chun Qiu" says: "There are also some unconventional techniques，Not like Yan Ziyan，Those who doubt what later generations did。"Ban Gu's "Hanshu·Yiwenzhi" and his own annotations are all compiled based on Liu Xin's "Qilue"，Reflects the research results of Liu and his sons。"Hanshu·Yiwenzhi" "Zhuzilue" records 9 articles of "Wenzi"，Self-note: "It seems to be someone who relies on"。"Also recorded 22 chapters of "Li Mu"，Self-note: "Made during the Six Kingdoms period，Tuozhilimu。" also recorded "大》37 articles，Self-note: "It is rumored that Yu made it，The writing is like the language of later generations。"All of this points out that the authors and the dates of writing of these bet365 bonus code indiana are unreliable，It is actually a book written by a later pseudo-ancient person。

　Dialectical look at previous methods of identifying bet365 bonus code indiana

Documentary scholars of all dynasties after Liu Xiang and his son，They also attach great importance to identifying the forgeries bet365 bonus code indiana，Formed a long tradition of identifying forgeries。The flourishing of textual criticism in the Qing Dynasty，Pushing the authenticity bet365 bonus code indiana to a new level。Research on counterfeiting represented by Yan Ruochu's "Shangshu Ancient Texts"，Has an important position in the academic history of the Qing Dynasty。Early years of the Republic of China，The "ancient history theory" school represented by Gu Jiegang，On the one hand, we inherit the ancient Chinese tradition of identifying forgeries，On the other hand, absorb Western academic concepts and methods，From "Book of Falsification" to "History of Falsification"，Proposed the concept of "ancient history created layer by layer"，The influence is extremely far-reaching。

Under the leadership of the "Ancient History" school，The identification of forgeries in bet365 bonus code indiana once became a prominent science，Many scholars participate in research and discussions on forgery identification，Achieved impressive results。But it goes without saying，Under the influence of doubtful thoughts，Some scholars’ research on forgery identification is too hasty and radical，There is a shortcoming in the identification of some bet365 bonus code indiana due to lack of evidence and lax judgment。In recent decades，With the advancement of research on unearthed documents，Scholars have a deeper understanding of the complexity of the formation and spread of ancient bet365 bonus code indiana in the Pre-Qin Dynasty，Thus, we question the tendency of "doubting the past and being brave" in the previous research on forgery identification。In this context，The academic trend of “getting out of doubt about the past” is gradually emerging in the academic world。

The trend of “getting out of doubt about the past” has its own positive academic value and significance，But some scholars place too much emphasis on “getting out of doubt about the past”，There are also some bad tendencies of overcorrecting。Some fake books that have long been concluded，For example, the fake "Guwen Shangshu" etc.，There are also scholars who forcefully write articles to overturn the verdict，But failed to respond reasonably to the falsification evidence of previous generations。Some scholars even have some prejudice against the research on forgery identification itself，Intentionally or unintentionally belittle or even deny the research on authenticating bet365 bonus code indiana。

For example，About methods of identifying forgeries bet365 bonus code indiana，Hu Yinglin in the Ming Dynasty proposed the "Eight Methods for Distinguishing Falsehoods"，Liang Qichao's "Chinese History Research Method" is further summarized as "Twelve Public Examples of Discriminating Falsehoods"，It is also summarized in "The Authenticity and Age bet365 bonus code indiana" as the eight methods of "distinguishing from the teachings"，And the five methods of "distinguishing from the meaning of the text"。Some scholars have refuted this point by point，I think neither of them can be established。The method of identifying forgeries summarized by Liang Qichao，Almost all the main methods used by scholars in the past to identify forgeries are included。If none of these methods of identifying forgeries are valid，It is tantamount to completely denying the legitimacy of research on authenticating ancient books。But actually，These methods of identifying forgeries are not impossible，It just cannot be used in isolation。

Take the first method mentioned by Liang Qichao as an example: "No records from old records，Depending on its authenticity，or suspicious。”This is evidence of the circulation bet365 bonus code indiana from a bibliographic perspective，If an ancient book claims to be from a very early era，But there is no description in early bibliographies，Of course it’s suspicious，This is the most basic method for identifying forgeries bet365 bonus code indiana。Rebutters deny this method of identifying forgeries based on Yu Jiaxi's "General Rules bet365 bonus code indiana" that "all historical classics and records have unrecorded books"。This method of criticism is to isolate the method of identifying forgery first、Absolute，Then let’s talk about how this method is not enough to identify forgeries。This ignores that the forgery identification methods themselves need to be combined with each other and used comprehensively。“Isolated evidence cannot stand” is the tenet of textual criticism，You cannot use one method in isolation to identify the authenticity bet365 bonus code indiana。The reason why Liang Qichao added the words "may be suspicious"，Indicates that we have realized that we cannot absolutely identify falsification based on this isolated evidence。Yu Jiaxi pointed out that "all historical classics and records have unrecorded books" and then made a special statement: "This is not to defend all false books... except those transmitted from sea ships，Excavation of stone chamber，There is no reason to hide it for thousands of years。If "Ancient Three Tombs" and "Zihuazi" were outstanding in the Song Dynasty，Zigong's "Poetry"、Shen Pei's "Poetry", "Yu Lingzi" and "Tianlu Pavilion Foreign History" are outstanding in the Ming Dynasty，Obviously hypocritical，Do not support this example。”Yu Jiaxi also recognized the rationality of this forgery identification method summarized by Liang Qichao。Reflect on previous methods of identifying forgeries，Indicate possible exceptions to these methods，Definitely beneficial，But if we simply and crudely deny the method of identifying forgeries，I’m afraid it’s not appropriate。

　　Correct understanding of "General Rules in bet365 bonus code indiana"

Some scholars like to use the "general rules bet365 bonus code indiana" summarized by Yu Jiaxi and others to refute the research on forgery identification。Admittedly，The "General Rules bet365 bonus code indiana" certainly has the aspect of identifying and correcting errors in ancient books，But few scholars have noticed，Some "General Rules bet365 bonus code indiana" themselves are just a summary of the achievements of predecessors in identifying forgeries bet365 bonus code indiana，This cannot be used to blindly deny the conclusions of the research on forgery identification。

For example，The general rule of "not all bet365 bonus code indiana are in hand"，The first people to discuss this issue were Sun Xingyan and Yan Kejun from the Qing Dynasty。Sun Xingyan's "Preface to "Yan Zi Chun Qiu"" states: "(Yan) Infant died，His guests mourned，Pure his actions from the history of the country and write it down...Yan Zi wrote it during the Warring States Period，Fan Zhishu，It’s not self-made，The one with no legs。"Yan Kejun's "Book "After the Book of Guanzi"" says: "Modern bibliographers say that this book talks too much about Guanzi's funeral，The future generations will benefit from it。I am not sure，Pre-Qin scholars，Written by all disciples, guests or descendants，No need to do it。”Sun Xingyan、Yan Kejun’s discussion，Probably all were published due to the "General Catalog of Sikuquanshu"。Before Tang Dynasty，Most scholars believe that "Guanzi" and "Yanzi" are Guanzi、Written by Yan Zi。After the Song Dynasty, scholars began to have doubts，The "Sikuquanshu General Catalog" believes that "Yanzi" was not written by Yanzi on this basis，It is a biography of Yan Zi’s deeds compiled by later generations，It is also believed that "Guanzi" "probably later generations have attached more references to (Guan) Zhong's book"。Sun Xingyan、Yan Kejun intends to defend "Yanzi" and "Guanzi"，Think that although the contents of the two books are not Yanzi、Written by Guanzi，But it can still be regarded as Yanzi、Book of Guanzi，It should not be regarded as a bogus favor or a biography compiled by future generations，Because bet365 bonus code indiana are not always held in hand。

Sun Xingyan、Yan Kejun’s suggestion that “not all ancient books are written by hand” is indeed consistent with the writing method of some pre-Qin ancient books，Has academic value。But as far as specific ancient books are concerned，But not everyone can apply this "general rule"。Even Sun Xingyan、Yan Kejun believes that "Yanzi" and "Guanzi" are guests、Written by disciples or descendants，Actually, it’s just a guess for reference，No solid evidence。Yan Kejun even applied this general rule to defend "Wanzi"。Proposed by "General Catalog of Sikuquanshu"，Wanzi is known as the one who met King Wen of Zhou at the age of ninety，But in the book, King Zhou Cheng asked about Kang Shufeng’s military affairs，Appears to be a false entrustment to future generations。Yan Kejun's "Synopsis of "Vouzi"" says: "It is not the words of Xiong Xiong who wrote "Vouzi"... You don't have to hold the ancient book in hand，《黻子》King Gai Kang、Recorded by Zhou Shichen, Queen Zhao，Or the descendants of the descendants record the good words of the ancestors，For the Order of Chu。"Yan Kejun believes that "Wanzi" was written in the Western Zhou Dynasty，"The scholars regard "Wanzi" as the earliest"。This statement is obviously untenable。Sun Xingyan's "Preface to "Yan Danzi"" also applies this general rule to defend "Yan Danzi"，Thought to be an ancient book from Pre-Qin Dynasty，I’m afraid it’s also difficult to establish。It can be seen from this，"Not all ancient books are written by hand" although it is consistent with the writing method of some ancient pre-Qin books，But it cannot be generalized and understood。If "not all ancient books are in hand" is regarded as a denial of the authenticity bet365 bonus code indiana，Any forgery research points out that the content in the book is inconsistent with the era the book is advertised as，Use this general rule to defend，It will happen again to Yan Kejun、Sun Xingyan’s mistakes。

　Reasonable use of bet365 bonus code indiana

Some scholars place too much emphasis on unearthed documents，Any unearthed documents related to the authenticity bet365 bonus code indiana，It is often believed that unearthed documents can correct the "mistakes" made by predecessors in identifying forgeries bet365 bonus code indiana。But actually，Sometimes it’s not so。For example，Ye Shi of the Southern Song Dynasty suspected that Sun Wu was not the one，"Sun Tzu's Art of War" is a pseudo-commissioned work by a scholar during the Warring States Period。Japanese scholar Saito Zhuotang's "Sun Wu Ben" further believes that: "Today's "Sun Tzu" is a book，Written by Sun Bin。”“Sun Wu and Sun Bin，After all, we are the same person，Wu Qiming，And Bin is his nickname。”Sun Tzu’s Art of War and Sun Bin’s Art of War were both unearthed from Yinqueshan Han Tomb，Many scholars believe that this can put an end to previous doubts about "The Art of War"。But from a philological perspective，Proved by unearthed documents，First, the current version of "The Art of War" is an ancient book written before the Western Han Dynasty，The second is that there are two different books in the Western Han Dynasty, "Sun Tzu's Art of War" and "Sun Bin's Art of War"。But scholars doubt "The Art of War"，Most people just suspect that it was written during the Warring States Period rather than the Spring and Autumn Period，It is generally not believed that it was written after the Western Han Dynasty。As for the existence of two books in the Western Han Dynasty, "Sun Tzu's Art of War" and "Sun Bin's Art of War"，This has been clearly recorded in "Hanshu·Yiwenzhi"，Scholars have never doubted or denied it。"Sun Tzu's Art of War·Yongjian" says: "The prosperity of the Yin Dynasty in the past，Yi Zhi Zai Xia；Zhou Zhixingye，Lv Ya is in Yin。"The Yinqueshan Han bamboo slips say: "...in summer；Zhou Zhixingye，Lu Ya is here...Shibi in Xing；The prosperity of Yan，Su Qin is in Qi。”If the Yinqueshan Han bamboo slips are closer to the original appearance of “The Art of War”，bet365 bonus code indiana mentions Su Qin at the end of the Warring States Period，Obviously not compatible with Sun Wu in the Spring and Autumn Period。Although this can also be understood as the addition of the Han bamboo slips in the process of circulation rather than the original appearance of the book，But there is no solid evidence after all，Overall, this is still slightly favorable evidence for the “false subterfuge theory”。The authenticity of "The Art of War" and the date of its publication are quite complicated，Of course we cannot draw conclusions based on just a few words，bet365 bonus code indiana remains to be further discussed by scholars。But claiming that the Yinqueshan Han bamboo slips can end the controversy over the authenticity of "The Art of War"，Obviously not true either。

The author gives this example，This is not to deny the value of unearthed documents in correcting misjudgments bet365 bonus code indiana，But it reminds scholars that they should view the relationship between unearthed documents and the authenticity bet365 bonus code indiana more objectively and fairly。The unearthed documents are important，But it may not always solve the problem of authenticity bet365 bonus code indiana。Should admit，Some unearthed documents can indeed correct previous misjudgments on the authenticity bet365 bonus code indiana，For example, the "Chongwen General Catalog" of the Song Dynasty suspects that the handed down "Yanzi Chunqiu" is not the source of the "Hanshu Yiwenzhi"，It is a false trust book after the ancient book was lost，Guan Tong of the Qing Dynasty further believed that it was a fake trust from the Six Dynasties。After the "Yanzi Spring and Autumn Annals" was unearthed from the Yinqueshan Han Tomb，Of course, these doubts have been completely overturned。But there are also some unearthed documents that confirm the forgery of previous generations，For example, 3 pieces of Tsinghua bamboo slips "Fu Shuo's Ming"，Almost completely different from "Shuo Ming" in the ancient Chinese text "Shang Shu"，This is a strong confirmation of Yan Ruochu and others' identification of the ancient text "Shang Shu"。Of course，In more cases, the unearthed documents cannot confirm it，It is impossible to deny the forgery of previous generations。

Perhaps some scholars think，The authenticity bet365 bonus code indiana is not certain、Destructive Research，There is even a certain aversion to authenticating ancient books because of this。In fact, this attitude is not advisable，The essence of authenticating ancient books is the philological study of the author and the age of the book，That is, to examine whether the real author of the ancient book is consistent with the advertised author，Is the real year of publication the same as the advertised year of publication。The purpose of authenticating ancient books is not to destroy them、Negative ancient books，Place the ancient books in appropriate historical coordinates。For example，Research on the Forgery of Liezi，Examination that "Liezi" is not an ancient pre-Qin book，It is a forgery from the Wei and Jin Dynasties。This is for pre-Qin ancient books，Seems negative、Destructive，Resulting in the loss of one ancient book in Pre-Qin Dynasty。But look at it from another angle，Since "Lieh Zi" is a forgery from the Wei and Jin Dynasties，Of course it can be regarded as a work of the Wei and Jin Dynasties，Can be used to study the thought and culture of the Wei and Jin Dynasties，This is constructive for the ancient books of the Wei and Jin Dynasties。Therefore，Only when a genuine book is misjudged as a forgery，It is destructive；Examine the fake books clearly，Remove the false and retain the true，Definitely constructive。Discrimination and verification bet365 bonus code indiana，This is two sides of the same thing。Any rigorous identification bet365 bonus code indiana，In the research process, both possibilities of truth and falsehood need to be considered at the same time，Make a final judgment after weighing the true and false evidence。Therefore，Discrimination and verification are both components of philological research，Should not force the distinction，Differential treatment。

Zhang Zhidong's "Jingxuan Yu" states: "One point is true or false，Remove half of the ancient book。”Although the language is exaggerated，But it is also true that there are a large number of forgeries in ancient books in the past。Some of these fake books have been discovered，Some are yet to be discovered；Some have been decided，Some are still controversial。Therefore，In philological research，Research on authenticating forgeries bet365 bonus code indiana still has a long way to go，It requires long-term joint efforts by literature scholars。

(Author’s unit: bet365 bonus code indiana Renmin University of China)