From December 5 to 7, 2025, the academic symposium titled “Classical Studies Oriented Toward the Future: Annual Forum on Classical Studies & the Third Anniversary of Research in Classics” was successfully held at the Miyun Research Base of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS). The conference was organized by the Center for Classical Civilization Studies of CASS and brought together over 40 scholars and experts from more than 30 universities, research institutes, and publishing organizations both in China and abroad.

Opening Ceremony

▲ Opening Ceremony in Progress

On the morning of December 6, the opening ceremony was presided over by Yue Shenghao of the Institute of Foreign Literature, CASS. He emphasized that classical studies must not retreat into an ivory tower of ancient texts. In an era of profound global transformation, he argued, the enduring appeal of classical thought has grown ever more salient, offering a vital lens for reflecting on the present and analyzing contemporary dilemmas.

He Fangying, Director of the Center for Classical Civilization Studies at the same institute, delivered the welcome address. She noted that this annual forum not only carries forward the spirit of the inaugural World Conference of Classics but also constitutes a forward-looking contemplation of classical research grounded in our own civilization. She highlighted that the forum was entirely conceived and organized by young scholars, expressing her hope that their intellectual energy would generate new perspectives for shaping the future direction and research paradigms of classical studies in China.

Keynote Speech

Professor Liu Xiaofeng from the School of Liberal Arts, Renmin University of China delivered the forum’s keynote speech titled “The Classical Scholar and the Future”. Reflecting on his personal academic journey, he highlighted the profound connection between scholars and the destiny of their nation. He further analyzed the unpublished sixth chapter, “We Philologists”, from the early text On The Future of Our Educational Institutions by the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche.

Professor Liu pointed out that the young Nietzsche lamented the erosion of classical education by utilitarian values, which reduced education to a mere instrument for practical gains, thereby betraying its fundamental purpose. He emphasized that upholding noble ideals and the pursuit of noble learning constitute the historical mission of Chinese classical scholars. Finally, he expressed ardent expectations for the Division of Classics at the Institute of Foreign Literature of CASS and its journal, Research in Classics.

Parallel Sessions

Parallel Session I

Parallel Session I was chaired by Li Hui from the School of European Languages and Cultures at Beijing Foreign Studies University, with Zhu Chengming from the Liberal Arts (Boya) College of Chongqing University and Xie Qinglu from the Institute of Foreign Literature, CASS, serving as commentators.

The presentation titled “Speaking of What Is Yet to Come: The Semantic Evolution of μέλλω and the Emergence of the Concept of ‘Future’” was delivered by Xue Jingming from the Boya (Liberal Arts) College of Sun Yat-sen University. Through a diachronic analysis of classical texts, he traced the semantic evolution of μέλλω, pointing out that the term gradually shifted from describing present mental states to conveying perspectives and judgments about future events, increasingly carrying meanings of speculation, expectation, and cognition regarding the future. Consequently, the future is not confined merely to a temporal dimension based on empirical judgment but also becomes an object that can be contemplated and articulated through reason. The evolution of μέλλω both marks a change in linguistic expression and reveals the gradual formation of the concept of the future within classical thought.

Yue Shenghao from the Institute of Foreign Literature, CASS, presented a report titled “The Discovery of ‘Stillness’: Plato and the Ontological Turn in Classical Greece”. He pointed out that Plato maintained that all sensible things are in a constant state of flux and motion, a view that is commonly believed to have been influenced by Heraclitus’s doctrine of universal flux. However, this assertion fails to recognize the metaphysical foundation of Plato’s related doctrine — the generativity of motion — which in fact traces its origin elsewhere: namely, to the principle of the absolute self-identity of being advocated by Parmenides and the Eleatic school. This principle forces sensible things into a state of eternal, generative motion and change, thereby negating any possibility of their being at stillness. From his middle to late dialogues, Plato dedicated himself to reopening the possibility of rest, ultimately accomplishing the task of overcoming and transcending the doctrines of the Pre-Socratic philosophers.

In her presentation, “Philostratus on the Distinction Between the Philosopher and the Sophist”, Cheng Xiwen from the School of Humanities at Shanghai Normal University focused on the classic opposition between the philosopher and the sophist. Based on Lives of the Sophists by Philostratus, a writer of the Roman Empire period, she argued that while Philostratus ostensibly uses Plato’s distinction between the philosopher and the sophist as his benchmark, his real intention is to legitimize the “Second Sophistic” movement. By attempting to rehabilitate the sophists and clear their name, his work ultimately serves to elevate the contemporary orators. This shift reveals how the age-old power dynamic between philosophy and rhetoric was quietly transformed during the Roman Empire period. At its core, this represented a defense mounted by Greek cultural intellectuals in their bid to seize cultural leadership within the Roman Empire.

Xiong Chen from the School of History at Capital Normal University delivered a presentation titled “Between Kingship and Republic: The Concept of Imperium and Its Evolution in Ancient Rome”. She pointed out that imperium is the core concept for understanding the nature of state power in Rome. While traditional scholarship emphasizes the Republic’s constraints on royal power, Professor Xiong argued that imperium essentially perpetuated the sacred military authority of the regal period. During the Republic, far from being dissolved, imperium became the foundation of the hierarchical order and a transcendent power invoked during crises, allowing the essence of kingship to resurface under specific conditions. A deeper understanding of imperium, she concluded, helps to reveal the mixed nature and internal tensions of the Roman republican constitution, thereby illuminating the underlying logic of power that drove both Roman expansion and its subsequent crises.

In her presentation, “A Misread Conflict: Reconsidering Machiavelli in the Context of Modern Pluralist Democracy”, Liu Siyu from the School of Marxism at the University of Science and Technology Beijing argued that Machiavelli’s analysis of internal conflict is dualistic: he acknowledges its role in sustaining the political order, while also emphasizes that conflict can transform from benign to destructive. Machiavelli reflects on the mechanisms of conflict deterioration from two dimensions: human nature and political economy. The unbridled desires of the populace can easily turn into a lust for domination, thereby undermining order; meanwhile, economic inequality and distribution dilemmas make conflicts difficult to regulate. Professor Liu concludes that Machiavelli’s attitude toward internal conflict is both nuanced and cautious.

In her presentation, “The ‘Ancient-Modern dispute’ in the Hamburg Dramaturgy: Lessing’s Reconstruction of the Hierarchy between Aristotelian ‘Plot’ and ‘Character’”, Lu Baiyu from the School of Foreign Languages at Peking University examined how Gotthold Ephraim Lessing, in his Hamburg Dramaturgy, negotiated the tension between the modern trend of dramatic “psychologization” and the authority of Aristotle’s Poetics. Lu Baiyu pointed out that Lessing, by introducing the concept of “προαίρεσις (prohairesis)” (choice or deliberate preference) from Aristotle’s The Nicomachean Ethics, reinterpreted the Aristotelian notion of “character” (ēthos). He argued that “character” serves as the causal foundation of action, thereby establishing a theoretical basis for the modern focus on psychological portraiture in drama, all without deviating from the Aristotle’s “plot-centric” principle.

Liu Zhen from the Department of Philosophy at Yangzhou University delivered a presentation titled “Lampert on Nietzsche and Platonic Political Philosophy”, which examines Laurence Lampert’s interpretation of Nietzsche. Liu pointed out that, inspired by Leo Strauss, Lampert interprets Nietzsche as a Platonic political philosopher. Lampert posits that the core driving force of Nietzsche’s thought is theoretical cognition. To safeguard philosophy in the modern age, Nietzsche proposed a “politics for the sake of philosophy” — namely, the doctrine of eternal recurrence as a philosophical poetry, which constitutes Nietzsche’s own Platonic political philosophy. In Lampert’s view, Nietzsche’s thought is not only coherent but also a courageous act to rescue philosophy. Liu Zhen concludes that while Lampert’s interpretation of Nietzsche is brilliant and meticulous, its fundamental thesis remains open to critical scrutiny.

Zhu Chengming and Xie Qinglu offered their comments on the presentations, respectively, and engaged in a lively discussion with the audience.

Parallel Session II

Parallel session II was chaired by Gu Jiming from the Department of Philosophy at Tongji University, with Wang Er from the School of History at Renmin University of China and Feng Xi from the Liberal Arts (Boya) College at Chongqing University serving as commentators.

Liu Yutong from the Institute of Ancient History of CASS delivered a presentation titled “On the Formation of the ‘Confucians in appearance but Legalists in substance’ (Yang Ru Yin Fa) Concept in the Han System”. She argued that “Yang Ru Yin Fa,” as a common lens for understanding traditional politics since the late Qing dynasty, has given rise to multiple interpretive models. Proponents explain it through terms like “the confluence of Confucianism and Legalism” to elucidate its role as a mechanism for political stability in the traditional structure. Critics, however, use the phrase “Confucians in appearance but Legalists in substance” to expose its aspect as a form of hypocritical statecraft. This concept has long been employed to analyze The Confucian-Legalist State pioneered by Dong Zhongshu and Emperor Wu of Han. Professor Liu concludes that while the explanatory power of “Yang Ru Yin Fa” appears to span the politics of all dynasties after the Han, its academic connotations still require further critical examination.

Gao Juan from the School of Philosophy and Religious Studies at Minzu University of China delivered a presentation titled “A New Inquiry into the ‘Four Beginnings and Five Occasions’ (Si Shi—Wu Ji) Theory in the Wefts of the Odes”.

The “Four Beginnings and Five Occasions” doctrine is a core theory of the Yi-shi School of the Qi Poetry tradition in the Han dynasty. Similar in purpose to the “Bright Hall Monthly Ordinances,” it aimed to guide governance and education according to seasonal changes. Through textual research based on sources such as the lost fragments of the Yuzhu Baodian (Treasure Canon of Jade Candles) and the Laozi Heshanggong Zhangju (Heshanggong’s Commentary on the Daodejing) , it is argued that the “Five Occasions” should include the “Zi” occasion. Furthermore, the occasion referred to as “the deity at the Gate of Heaven” between the Xu and Hai positions actually signifies the Grand One (Taiyi).

Therefore, the “Four Beginnings” and “Five Occasions” are constituted by the Grand One and eight earthly branches (Hai, Zi, Yin, Mao, Si, Wu, Shen, and You), corresponding to the eight seasonal markers. The theoretical structure of this doctrine is akin to the “Grand One in the Nine Palaces” and “Eight Trigrams correlated with seasonal qi” theories in studies on the Book of Changes (Yijing). Its allocation of poems also follows the principles of seasonal nodes, demonstrating a close relationship with the “Bright Hall Yin-Yang” theoretical framework.

In his presentation titled “The Fu Hexagram of the Book of Changes and the Re-systematization of Heavenly Deity Worship in Neo-Confucianism: Focusing on the Cheng-Zhu Construction of the ‘Winter Solstice Sacrifice to the Supreme Heaven’”, Huang Yongqi from the Department of Philosophy at Capital Normal University argued that Neo-Confucian scholars such as the Cheng brothers and Zhu Xi took the concept of “the initial Yang starts to be born” from the Fu (Return) Hexagram of the Book of Changes as their pivotal axis to integrate and reconstruct the fragmented system of heavenly deity worship inherited from the Han and Tang dynasties.

They merged the “the southern suburban sacrifice to Ganshengdi in the first month of the Xia calendar” and “The Winter Solstice Sacrifice to the Supreme Deity at the Circular Mound” into a single, exclusive “Winter Solstice Sacrifice to the Supreme Heaven”. Concurrently, by introducing the notions of “Mind of Heaven and Earth” and the meaning of “flow and transformation,” the Neo-Confucians constructed a system wherein the human mind is isomorphic with the cosmos. This allowed them to unify the “Heavenly Emperor” and the “Five Emperors” while making a distinction between their substance and function.

The change of four seasons was seen as the alternation between the movement and stillness, the expressed and unexpressed states of the Yi substance. The winter solstice thus became the crucial nodal point where all things are “about to be generated but not yet generated”, and the Mind of Heaven and Earth directly manifests the noumenon. Therefore, the “Winter Solstice Sacrifice to the Supreme Heaven” is essentially a ritual in which the officiant, with a reverential mind, confronts the ontological reality of Heaven and Earth, thereby achieving interactions between Heaven and mankind.

Li Changchun from the Department of Philosophy at Sun Yat-sen University delivered a presentation titled “Form and Substance: Antiquity and Modernity”. He emphasized that the pair concepts wen (form) and zhi (substance) are often used to express the two opposing yet complementary aspects of things.

Zhang Xuecheng applied this conceptual pair to the discussion of historical writing. He argued that the excessive development of wen (i.e., form and technique) led to the gradual thinning of zhi (content and thought). Before the Three Dynasties (Xia, Shang, Zhou), form and substance were unified; writing was integral to political life, thus characterized by a public nature. After the Three Dynasties, form and substance became separated; writing diverged from political life, thereby acquiring a private character.

Thus, in Zhang Xuecheng’s philosophy of history, the distinction between wen and zhi evolves into a differentiation between the public and the private and a debate between antiquity and modernity. Through this framework, Zhang Xuecheng developed a strongly critical perspective on cultural history.

In his report titled “In Search of Nature: On the Meaning and Dilemma of Zhang Xuecheng’s ‘The Six Classics Are All History’ — An Interpretation Based on ‘Yuan Dao’ (Tracing the Way)”, Lei Tianlai from the School of Philosophy and Social Development at South China Normal University pointed out that Zhang Xuecheng proposed the thesis “the Six Classics are all history” to challenge the traditional dogma that regarded the Classics as “books that convey the Way”. Instead, he argued that “the Way” is embedded within historical evolution and concrete institutions, opposing any discourse that “speaks of principle in isolation from affairs.”

However, Zhang’s theory of the Way faces a dilemma: while emphasizing the absolute distance between the Way and human existence, he also acknowledges that all things and their order are “natural” (ziran). This creates a tension that undermines the logical self-consistency of his critique against “discussing the Way apart from its vessels.”

By drawing on Liu Xianxin’s interpretation, it is possible to reconcile the dual connotations of “naturalness” (ziran) as both passive negation and active affirmation. The “Way” (Dao) both transcends concrete things and embraces all existence, thereby refining Zhang Xuecheng’s conception of “naturalness”. As seen in “Yuan Dao”, Zhang Xuecheng reinstated “naturalness” as the highest principle of civilization, reflecting a return to traditional core themes in his thought.

Guo Xiao from Center for Classical Civilization Studies of CASS delivered a presentation titled “The Specter of Spinoza in Modern Confucianism: The Late Xiong Shili’s Doctrine of the Non-Duality of Reality and Function and Its Limitations”. He argued that there are significant Spinozist elements in the development of modern Confucianism, most typically exemplified in Xiong Shili’s doctrine of “the non-duality of reality (ti) and function (yong).” By drawing on perspectives from recent Spinoza studies, the internal difficulties of this system can be further revealed: how to maintain the independence of substance while insisting on their non-duality, thereby establishing a thoroughgoing substance monism. Xiong Shili’s critiques of teleology and of Neo-Confucianis are both intrinsic to this monistic construction. Professor Guo suggested that by utilizing the Cheng-Zhu Neo-Confucian analysis of the ti-yong relationship, one can better clarify the limitations and significance of Xiong’s thought, potentially providing directions for overcoming the aforementioned difficulties. 

Finally, commentators Wang Er and Feng Xi offered their respective critiques of the presentations, sparking a lively discussion with the audience.

Parallel Session III

Parallel Session III was presided over by Guo Xiao from the Center for Classical Civilization Studies of CASS. The commentators are Li Changchun from the Department of Philosophy at Sun Yat-sen University and Lei Tianlai from the School of Philosophy and Social Development at South China Normal University.

Professor Gu Jiming from the Department of Philosophy at Tongji University delivered a presentation titled “Temporality and Position: Classical Chinese Conceptions of Space”. He noted that although ancient Chinese texts had terms like “cosmos” to express spatial concepts, the notion of “position” was more commonly used to denote the human realm within the cosmos. Position is intrinsically linked to order and, crucially, must be understood within the context of “time” or “temporality”. He proposed that by examining the rich corpus of materials on “position” from both transmitted and excavated texts, we can elucidate its defining characteristics and how it coheres with “time”. This inquiry, he argued, aids in our understanding of classical Chinese theories of “cosmo-politics” and “cosmo-technics.”

The presentation by Wang Er from the School of History at Renmin University was titled “Creating a ‘Community of Strangers’: A New Perspective on the Similarities and Differences Between Xunzi and Mozi”. He pointed out that previous emphasis on the opposition between Xunzi and Mozi has overshadowed the similarities in their views on social construction. Both shared a core concern: “How can people live together as a community?” Their vision centered on the emergence of a “community of strangers” in the late Spring and Autumn period, which transcended blood ties. This idea arose during a transitional phase marked by the dissolution of patriarchal small communities and the not-yet-established system of registered households with equal status within a larger community. Faced with similar social predicaments, Xunzi and Mozi exhibited commonalities in their proposed solutions. Their differences essentially represent divergent approaches based on a shared consensus regarding the “community of strangers”.

In her presentation titled “Classics and Ethical Life in Ancient China: A Case Study of Mourning Rituals for Biological Parents by Designated Heirs in the Song Dynasty”, Feng Xi from the Liberal Arts (Boya) College at Chongqing University argued that classical texts stipulated that designated heirs should observe a reduced mourning period of Qi-cui for their biological parents. However, from the Sui and Tang dynasties onward, an additional three-year period of “heart mourning” was introduced. This practice influenced the “Pu Controversy” and discussions on mourning rituals in the Southern Song Dynasty. Song Dynasty scholars extended heart mourning to include biological stepmothers, thereby strengthening the status of biological parents and disrupting the classical balance between hierarchical respect (zunzun) and familial affection (qinqin). While abandoned children often emphasized gratitude for their biological parents’ nurturing in their mourning practices, such actions frequently conflicted with ritual texts. In folk adoption customs, discrepancies between titles and mourning rituals coexisted. Moreover, debates on mourning rituals revealed that the ethical structure balancing familial affection and hierarchical respect was largely a construct of classical texts, which also formed the deeper cultural logic behind the compilation of Southern Song ritual texts.

In her presentation titled “The Later Development and Influence of the ‘All-under-Heaven Perspective on History’: The Case of Wang Anshi”, Tong Xinyan from the Institute for Advanced Studies on Asia at the University of Tokyo proposed that the “Tianxia” chapter of the Zhuangzi narrates the transmission of Daoist teachings through a structure of “holistic unity” and “fragmentation”, thereby forming a “All-under-Heaven Perspective on History” distinct from the orthodox Confucian narrative. This historical perspective profoundly influenced Wang Anshi and his school during the Song dynasty. Wang Anshi believed that later scholarship consisted only of fragments of the great Dao, and that to restore the “comprehensive substance of the ancients”, it was necessary to both draw upon and transcend all inherited teachings. This drove him to question classical texts and innovate their interpretations. Moreover, the “holistic Dao” he pursued integrated “inner sageliness and outer kingliness”, as well as substance and function, which determined that his scholarly construction consistently revolved around this comprehensive framework.

The presentation by He Qinghan from the Literature and History Teaching Department of the Party School of the CPC Central Committee was titled “The Emergence of the Neo-Confucian Monarch: A Study on the Concept of ‘regal virtues’ in Zhen Dexiu’s Abundant Meanings of the Great Learning (Daxue Yanyi)”. He pointed out that Zhen Dexiu, as an important successor of Zhu Xi’s Neo-Confucianism, advanced the politicization of Neo-Confucianism and the construction of a political order grounded in heavenly principles. Focusing on “regal virtue”, Zhen redefined the ethical foundation of “maintaining rule through virtue” and the intrinsic connection between “regal virtues” and “popular virtues”, thereby reshaping the legitimate source of monarchical authority. In Abundant Meanings of the Great Learning, Zhen Dexiu employed Neo-Confucian standards to critique “virtuous rulers” of the Han and Tang dynasties, revealing that their “incomplete virtue” stemmed from a failure to recognize the “Great Learning” as the foundation of learning. This approach not only continued Zhu Xi’s historical critique centered on the “Three Dynasties” and “Confucius and Mencius” as exemplars but also reflected the intent to uphold the monarchy and its power structure.

At the conclusion of the session, Li Changchun and Lei Tianlai provided their respective comments, to which each speaker responded in turn.

Parallel Session IV

On the morning of December 7, the conference proceeded to the Parallel Session IV, presided over by Huang Weiwei from the Center for Greek Studies of Beijing International Studies University. The commentators were Cao Cong from the Department of Philosophy at Xi’an Jiaotong University and Lu Baiyu from the Department of German Language and Literature at the School of Foreign Languages, Peking University.

The presentation by Zhu Chengming from the Liberal Arts (Boya) College of Chongqing University was titled “Classics and Poetic Knowledge”. He argued that the tradition of classical studies established since the Renaissance has exhibited a human-centered orientation and, under the influence of Enlightenment philosophy, gradually evolved into modern humanities disciplines that idealize objectivity and neutrality. However, this scientific research tendency often diminishes or oversimplifies the poetic knowledge within classical experiences, reducing it merely to rhetoric or literary techniques. He pointed out that classical scholars should restore their appreciation of poetic knowledge, treating it as wisdom with practical significance rather than as mere antiquities. Finally, through teaching cases, he emphasized the importance of immersive experiences in classical language learning, advocating for engaging with the poetic wisdom of the ancients through contemplative immersion and memorization of classical texts.

In her presentation “The Conceptual History of the ‘Macedonian Renaissance’ and the Compilation of Classical Texts at the Byzantine Court (9th–10th Centuries)”, Chu Minqi of the Department of History at Peking University examined, from a historiographical perspective, the evolution of the concept of the “Macedonian Renaissance” in classical and Byzantine historical and literary studies since the 19th century. Building on this, she took the compilation of ancient historical collections by the Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII as a case study to analyze how the Byzantine imperial court during the “Macedonian Renaissance” selectively appropriated and systematically reorganized classical texts, highlighting the pivotal role of this cultural practice in the political praxis of the Macedonian dynasty.

Xing Beichen from the College of Literature at Guizhou Normal University delivered a presentation titled “Taming the Classics: Voltaire’s Rewriting of Sophocles’ Electra”. He pointed out that changes in the taste of the times reflect a persistent tension between two demands in adapting classical drama: insight into the classical spirit and adaptation to contemporary thought and stage sensibilities. In the 18th century, French audiences generally recoiled from the cruelty of classical tragedy. Against this backdrop, Voltaire attempted to tame the brutality of the matricide plot in Sophocles’ Electra, making it align with “human nature”. At the same time, this approach and its underlying philosophy obscured the vision of classical tragedy.

In his report titled “Wolf’s ‘Point of No Return’ Moment”, Professor He Xiangdi from the Department of Philosophy at Chongqing University revisited the “Homeric Questions” from the early days of modern classical studies. Wolf reshaped the “Homeric Questions” through a historicist perspective and comparative linguistic methods, denying Homer’s authorship of the Homeric epics. He applied this stance and methodology to ancient texts, devised a comprehensive plan for studying ancient culture, and defined the methods and tasks of philology. This effort established classical philology as an independent discipline and integrated it into the educational system. He argued that reflecting on the significance and influence of Wolf’s work still offers valuable insights for the development of classical studies in China.

The report by Gu Zhiying from the Institute of Foreign Literature of CASS was titled “The Compilation of Vocabulary Handbooks and the Learning of Latin and Ancient Greek”. Through an analysis of vocabulary handbooks by Crowell and Hundhausen, he pointed out that while the organizational approaches in these scholars’ works can stimulate interest, they may also mislead learners due to their diagrams or classifications — for instance, overlooking the specific meaning of οἰωνός [omen-bird]. Finally, he emphasized that a genuine understanding of Ancient Greek and Latin requires returning to classical texts and comprehending the depth of word meanings within specific contexts, rather than merely memorizing surface-level vocabulary, thereby approaching the classical spirit.

The report by Li Hui from the School of European Languages and Cultures at Beijing Foreign Studies University was titled “Tradition and Innovation in Teaching Latin Phrases: A Case Study of Latin Instruction at Beijing Foreign Studies University”. She pointed out that, according to the textbook tradition since the Renaissance, phrases and fixed expressions have always served as an essential foundation for learning Latin. However, the teaching of Latin phrases (iuncturae / locutiones) is often overlooked in current pedagogical practices both domestically and internationally. Li Hui argued that the “Natural Method” (Methodo Natura), which emphasizes language acquisition through context, assigns a crucial role to phrase-based instruction.

The report by You Yuze from the Department of European Languages and Literature, School of Foreign Languages at Peking University was titled “Tradition and Training in Italian Classical Studies: The Case of the Department of Classics at Sapienza University of Rome”. Taking the Department of Classics at Sapienza University of Rome (Sapienza Università di Roma) — which has consistently ranked first globally in the QS World University Rankings by Subject for several consecutive years — as an example, the presentation introduced the current development and educational system of classical studies in Italy, exploring the discipline’s status and significance in contemporary Italian academia and society.

At the conclusion of the session, Cao Cong and Lu Baiyu provided comments on the insightful presentations delivered by each speaker, generating a lively discussion with the audience.

Roundtable Discussion

▲ Roundtable Discussion in Progress

The theme of the roundtable discussion was “Opportunities and Challenges in Classical Studies”, moderated by Yue Shenghao from the Institute of Foreign Literature of CASS.

Starting from the close relationship between Confucian classical learning and classical studies, Gao Juan argued that the opportunity for the revival of Confucian Classical Learning likewise lies in the revival of civilization. As people re-evaluate the value of their own civilization, they rediscover the classical texts of ancient China. Similar to comprehensive disciplines such as classical studies, the challenge for Confucian Classical Learning also lies in defining its concepts and content. There is a need today for a forward-looking approach to Confucian Classical Learning — one that connects the past and present through renewed awareness of issues spanning antiquity and modernity, East and West. This involves understanding Confucian Classical Learning through enduring principles and norms while also endowing it with the vitality to address contemporary challenges.

Tong Xinyan started from her personal reflection on the waning of globalization and the revival of cultural conservatisms, observing that the appetite for genuine cross-civilizational dialogue is fading, along with the enthusiasm to challenge entrenched views and undertake intellectual adventures. What she finds particularly remarkable, however, is the ability of classical studies in China to carve out a trans‑civilizational academic space engaging scholars from both Chinese and Western traditions. This, she contends, holds the promise of reanimating the reading and dialogue between the canonical texts of both classical worlds.

He Qinghan addressed the question of intellectual anchoring for scholars amid the transition from antiquity to modernity. He contends that researchers cannot evade the profound societal and epochal shifts that may arise. In this context, classical studies, he suggests, can furnish the foundational ground — an inner ethos — for scholarly life. It ceases to be merely a specific field of inquiry and becomes a constitutive element of the scholar’s own intellectual formation. This stance is neither condescending nor self-indulgent; rather, it enables dialogue with the public and the concrete predicaments of life. It empowers one to confront particular problems, informed by a classical sensibility and fortified by its enduring strength.

Chu Minqi explored the opportunities and challenges of classical studies through the example of AI applications in teaching practice. On one hand, she noted that AI has created confusion among novice learners of classical languages; on the other hand, it has greatly facilitated research in areas such as classical text recognition, philology, and paleography. She suggested that both learners and researchers of classical languages should strive to strike a balance between their studies or research and the use of AI tools.

Gu Zhiying focused on the relationship between classical studies and personal cultivation. He argued that engaging in the study of classical studies and participating in the development of the discipline can lead to a path toward understanding higher ideals of cultivation. Using Cicero’s description of Plato as a “god-like man” as an example, he illustrated the existence of such higher spiritual archetypes. Particularly in the face of civilizational decline or corruption, Gu emphasized that the higher spiritual archetypes within the perspective of classical studies can still offer valuable reference points for individuals.

From the perspective of the philosophy of history, Li Xue contends that classical studies is far from a static or antiquated discipline. It is, instead, characterized by a transcendent and transhistorical quality, remaining deeply relevant to contemporary life and even capable of addressing, in significant ways, the pressing concerns of our own time. By drawing on cases from both scholarship and everyday experience, she illustrated how classical studies can provide a crucial vantage point for mutual understanding between Chinese and Western civilizations.

Luo Geng traced the conceptual formation of classical studies, highlighting the intrinsic political and ethical values of the classical tradition itself. He proposed that the future of classical studies in China may depend on reviving a shared recognition of, and aspiration for, the higher spiritual qualities exemplified by the ancients. Furthermore, in constructing this field, he stressed the necessity of achieving a synthesis of Chinese and Western learning while maintaining discernment between superior and inferior moral qualities.

Liu Yutong began by reflecting on the frequent disjunction between intellectual thought and its historical era, arguing that as humanities scholars, one should resonate with one’s own time while also avoiding complete synchronization with it. The future of classical studies, she emphasized, depends on every scholar who believes in the classics and continually breathes new life into them.

You Yuze drew on the English-taught undergraduate program in the Department of Classics at Sapienza University of Rome as a reference for advancing classical studies in China. The program represents an experiment in grounding classical education in tradition while orienting it toward the future. Against the backdrop of a wider decline in the field, the department proactively recruits international students committed to the classics, providing an accessible pathway through a coherent curriculum and a condensed duration of study.

Zhang Peijun argued that, overall, the opportunities for classical studies in China outweigh the challenges, with the challenges primarily arising from within the discipline itself. As spiritually and intellectually engaged classical researchers, scholars should strive to deeply comprehend classical texts and maintain a sound balance between humanistic inquiry and technological tools. He emphasized that the opportunities and challenges faced by contemporary scholars are not fundamentally different from those encountered by the ancients. The greatest opportunity, he noted, remains the potential intellectual and spiritual nourishment gained from studying classical works, while the greatest challenge lies in whether we can truly attain such nourishment.

▲ Roundtable Discussion in Progress

Closing Ceremony

▲ Closing Ceremony in Progress

The closing ceremony was presided over by Guo Xiao from the Center for Classical Civilization Studies of CASS. In his address, Li Changchun from the Department of Philosophy at Sun Yat-sen University remarked that the rise of classical studies in China is closely linked to the global crisis facing the humanities. Within the journey of the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, classical studies can offer a valuable perspective for Chinese civilization to re-examine itself. He emphasized that research in classical studies should not merely be a simplistic combination of methodologies from literature, history, and philosophy but should explore its own distinctive approaches and establish new research paradigms. It should not simply transplant existing Western classical studies or rely solely on a specific branch of traditional Chinese scholarship. He expressed hope that through the collaborative efforts of like-minded scholars committed to the spirit of the classics, more exemplary works can be produced for the future of classical studies in China.

He Fangying, Director of the Center for Classical Civilization Studies of CASS, remarked that the day-and-a-half forum had featured exceptionally vibrant discussions and was a complete success. She expressed hope that the academic exchange platform jointly established by the Center and the Division of Classics (Institute of Foreign Literature, CASS) would continue to bring together young scholars from diverse disciplines and with varied intellectual concerns for substantive dialogue, thereby generating profound momentum for the development of classical studies in China. She encouraged young scholars in the field to shed disciplinary arrogance, break down academic barriers, and overcome sectarian biases, approaching their research with an open and inclusive scholarly mindset. In particular, she noted that the journal Research in Classics has, since its launch three years ago, received widespread attention and support, and she hoped young researchers would continue to contribute to its growth. Finally, she extended sincere gratitude to the publishing representatives and the organizing committee for their full engagement in the forum. The conference concluded successfully amid warm applause.

▲Group Photo