Robert Henricks was a specialist translator of excavated Chinese manuscripts, and this is his scholarly translation of the Guodian bamboo slip Laozi, the version of the text recovered from a tomb sealed around 300 BCE and excavated in 1993, the earliest physical witness to the Tao Te Ching known to survive. Its real evidentiary basis is direct: Henricks works chapter by chapter from the excavated bamboo strips themselves, and the book explicitly compares the Guodian readings against both the earlier-recovered Mawangdui silk manuscripts and the later received Wang Bi edition, noting where the three diverge rather than presenting one as simply superior. Use it for the content of the Guodian Laozi and for its documented differences from the Mawangdui and Wang Bi versions; a claim resting on the Mawangdui manuscripts alone in their own right should also be checked against Henricks's earlier dedicated Mawangdui translation.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier1
Published by Columbia University Press as Robert G. Henricks's scholarly translation of the Guodian bamboo-slip Tao Te Ching, peer reviewed university press scholarship. NotesTranslation and study of the Guodian bamboo slip Laozi manuscripts excavated in 1993, the earliest witnesses to the text.
Citation
AuthorRobert G. Henricks
PublisherColumbia University Press
Publication Year2000
Source Typebook
Connections
Associated With
Laozi, Figures This source names Laozi directly: "translation of the Guodian bamboo slip Laozi, the version of the text recovered from a tomb sealed around 300 BCE and excavated in 1993, the earliest physical witness to the Tao Te Ching known to..."
Source Lao Tzu's Tao Te Ching: A Translation of the Startling New Documents Found at GuodianRobert G. Henricks
Claims Backed By This Source (33 claims)
This source backs 33 claims across the atlas. As facts: 22 well-attested, 3 scholarly debate. As cited relationships: 3 holds. Plus 5 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Scripture Portions, 10 claims: 4 well-attested, 3 scholarly debate, 3 general references.
- Sacred Sites, 9 claims: 6 well-attested, 2 holds, 1 general references.
- Sources, 8 claims: 7 well-attested, 1 holds.
- Articles, 6 claims: 5 well-attested, 1 general references.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.