the disciples of the sage, making free use of the written
memorials concerning him which they had received, and the oral
statements which they had heard, from their several masters.
And we shall not be far wrong, if we determine its date as about
the end of the fourth, or the beginning of the fifth century before
Christ.
3. In the critical work on the Four Books, called 'Record of
Remarks in the village of Yung [1],' it is observed, 'The Analects,
in my opinion, were made by the disciples, just like a record of
remarks. There they were recorded, and afterwards came a first-
rate hand, who gave them the beautiful literary finish which we
now witness, so that there is not a character which does not have
its own indispensable place [2].' We have seen that the first of
these statements contains only a small amount of truth with
regard to the materials of the Analects, nor can we receive the
second. If one hand or one mind had digested the materials
provided by many, the arrangement and the style of the work
would have been different. We should not have had the same
remark appearing in several Books, with little variation, and
sometimes with none at all. Nor can we account on this
supposition for such fragments as the last chapters of the ninth,
tenth, and sixteenth Books, and many others. No definite plan has
been kept in view throughout. A degree of unity appears to belong
to some books more than others, and in general to the first ten
more than to those which follow, but there is no progress of
thought or illustration of subject from Book to Book. And even in
those where the chapters have

1 º_§ø»y¿ý,-- º_§ø, 'the village of Yung,' is, I conceive, the writer's
nom de plume.