They believed history was caused by human actions and viewed the Son of Heaven (the emperor of China) as the axis mundi whose will was absolute. Officials may advise but not disobey as it is the emperor who is ultimately responsible for keeping or losing the Mandate of Heaven. The “old texts” had a peculiarly archaist bent. They emphasized the sage-like as opposed to the prophet-like characteristics of Confucius, thereby making him look more like the earlier sages who founded and ruled Zhou Dynasty or even the still more archaic states which preceded it. And yet, these archaic sage-kings are shown ruling China with a bureaucratic apparatus peculiarly like that available to Han Dynasty rulers, and hence by methods which strikingly echoed those of putative enemies of Wang Mang, the modernists. The Former Han (206 BC-AD 8), prior to Wang Mang, had favored New Text. When Wang seized power, he declared the Old Texts to be the state orthodoxy. After the Han restoration, the New Texts became orthodox again. Later Han (AD 25–220) scholars began favoring the Old Text versions. Old Texter Zheng Xuan synthesized the teachings of both schools. While he was very influential, he was unable to unseat the New Text orthodoxy though the issue became moot when both schools disappeared after the collapse of the Han. Zheng became the mainstream source of interpretation until the appearance of Neo-Confucianism in the Tang and Song dynasties. The controversy was forgotten until it was rediscovered during the Qing dynasty by Han Learning scholars. Modern interpretations Significance of the old/new text controversy is a debate topic in the modern sinology. Michael Nylan has proved that the issue itself was an artificial projection of the mid-Han problematic onto the early Han realities. See also Chinese classic texts guwen (disambiguation) New Text Confucianism References Sources The History of Classical Scholarship. Stuart V. Aque (a chapter from his doctoral dissertation at the University of Washington). (PDF) Nylan, Michael, "The Chin wen/Ku wen Controversy in Han Times," in: T'oung Pao, 80 (1994), pp. 83–145. A thorough and detailed study of the jinwen/guwen designation, distinction, and related topics. Ess, Hans Van, 'The Old Text/New Text Controversy. Has the 20th Century Got It Wrong?' in: T'oung Pao, 80 (1994), pp. 146–170. A study that addresses the views of modern scholars. Chinese classic texts Confucian texts Four Books and Five Classics