{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030103995621237, 'fraction_numerical': 0.013136288998357963, 'mean_word_length': 5.647272727272727, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The trend for “preserving classical learning” in Anhui in the late Qing dynasty: Centered on Shen Zengzhi and the Tongcheng School

Abstract In the waning years of the Qing dynasty, traditional Chinese academia generally presented an aspect of decay and disintegration. However, in Anhui Province, the study of the classics was still commonly practiced: the gentry and officials were profoundly in accord with respect to the intrinsic principles of regional cultural and academic development, and worked in concert in the cause of cultural education, thus forming an intertwined structure in which the literati way of thinking, relations between bureaucrats and elites, academic customs, and the cause of cultural education mutually complemented one another. Shen Zengzhi (沈曾植, 1850–1922), Yao Yonggai (姚永概, 1866–1923), Ma Qichang (马其昶, 1855–1930), and other elites from the Tongcheng School held liberal yet well-rooted ideas on education and cultural views, and embodied distinctive considerations and choices with respect to the continuation and perpetuation of Chinese learning. Anhui learning of the late Qing dynasty, chiefly represented by the Tongcheng School, emphasized the “lineage method” of passing down learning from master to disciple, and minimized “sectarianism”; it took a forward-thinking and liberal approach to Western learning, actively adjusting to the changing times. The observations in this article may aid us in casting aside a potential tendency toward “demonization” prior to this point, adhering to the traditional respect for elites in Chinese culture, and taking a “localized” perspective to further understand the contemporary characteristics of Chinese society in the late Qing and early Republican eras, as well as those aspects that were “unchanged” or experienced “change within tradition.”