The scientific spirit of 19th century Europe challenged the dominant position of theology and promoted the transformation of Sinology. The Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals of Various Dynasties has aroused the interest of Westerners in China and become a focus of methodological debate in Sinology. In the second half of the 19th century, Westerners who came to China had polarized evaluations of the "Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals of All Dynasties", which was closely related to two European methods of Sinology research: the Oriental method of the Bible and the scientific method. There is a lot of discussion in academia about the methods of Eastern studies in the Bible, but insufficient attention is paid to scientific methods. This article takes the debate over the "Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals in Various Dynasties" as the starting point to supplement the research methods of scientific Sinology.

1、 The polarized evaluation of the "Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals of Various Dynasties" by Westerners who came to China in the second half of the 19th century

This article introduces the different evaluations and debates among Westerners who came to China in the second half of the 19th century regarding the "Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals of All Dynasties". American missionary Melvin published an article in the Journal of Academic Affairs, citing research from ethnology and linguists, attempting to connect Pangu in the "Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals of All Dynasties" with the ancient reality in the Bible, believing that Pangu is a descendant of ancient reality. This viewpoint has sparked heated debate. Dennis, the editor of China Review, criticized Melvin's analysis for being illogical, while British missionary McGee refuted Dennis and believed that the content of "A Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals in All Dynasties" was true. Subsequently, Ou De, the editor in chief of China Review, wrote an article criticizing the "Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals of All Dynasties" by citing the "General Catalogue of the Complete Library of Four Branches", stating that the book is a mixture of nonsense and has no real historical value. This debate reflects the different understandings and evaluations of the same Taoist scripture by Westerners in China, which may be related to the development of European Sinology in the 19th century.

2、 Maggi's Interpretation of the Book of Changes and the Sinological Research Methods of Oriental Studies in the Bible

This article explores Maggi's interpretation of the Book of Changes and points out that his interpretation is similar to that of Malvern's interpretation of the Comprehensive Mirror to the Gods throughout the ages, both based on the Bible and attempting to incorporate Eastern races, languages, and religions into the genealogy of the Bible. McGee believes that the content of the Book of Changes is related to the dispersal of the three descendants of Noah, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, in the Bible, reflecting the Orientalist color of the Bible. This sinological research method believes that there is an inevitable connection between the East and the West in terms of race, writing, language, and religion, and that the lives, behaviors, customs, and thoughts of the East contain the revelation of God. The study of Sinology by McGee and Melvin is known as the biblical Orientalist style of Sinology, and the research methods they rely on are regarded as the Sinological research methods of biblical Orientalism. The description of amateur sinologists by German sinologist Euderie in the 19th century helps to understand this method of Sinology research. American sinologist Xue Aihua criticized the view that Chinese characters originated from Egyptian hieroglyphs, pointing out that this view pollutes academia. McGee and Melvin are the inheritors of this' flowing wind and lingering emotions'. The chapter analyzes the underlying reasons why Maggi supports Melvin, namely their surprisingly consistent interpretation of the Book of Changes and the Comprehensive Mirror to the Gods throughout the ages, both reflecting a clear Oriental flavor of the Bible.

3、 Oudeli's Criticism of Maggi and Scientific Sinology Research Methods

In his article "Amateur Sinology", Oudeli criticized Maggi's interpretation of the Book of Changes, stating that his approach to interpretation and the Sinological research methods of Eastern studies in the Bible are epidemics of "amateur Sinology", manifested as hasty induction based on limited facts, a mixture of hypothetical facts and circular reasoning, and rough analysis of original information sources. He advocates for a scientific approach to Sinology research, emphasizing the importance of systematic data collection, in-depth critical research, and careful and impartial evaluation. He advocates using raw materials as the basis, strictly verifying the authenticity of the materials, and making independent judgments without being influenced by others. Oudeli believed that only by relying on authoritative evidence can sinologists make accurate judgments. Although he did not fully implement his research methods in the debate over the "Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals of All Dynasties", the scientific Sinology research methods he advocated had important inspirations for later generations.

4、 The cognition and inspiration brought by the debate over the "Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals of All Dynasties"

In depth exploration of the debate among Western scholars during the late Qing Dynasty on the "Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals of All Dynasties" and the underlying methodology of Sinology research. Analyzed the overlooked aspect of the development of Sinology in Europe in the second half of the 19th century, namely the importance of scientific methods in Sinology research. By comparing the research methods of Oriental studies in the Bible and scientific Sinology, the profound influence of scientific methods on Sinology research is revealed. The chapter cites the views of Xue Aihua, Zhan Johann, and Sangyuan Fuzang, emphasizing the core position of scientific methods in Sinology research. John Zhan's proposal for the scientific study of Sinology echoes Thomas Kuhn's concept of "paradigm", demonstrating the driving role of scientific methods in the development of Sinology. At the same time, it points out the limitations of the biblical Orientalism method and the enduring influence of scientific Sinology methods. Finally, it emphasizes the consistency between the Sinology research methods advocated by Oudeli and the principles of Chinese language studies, as well as the sustained impact of this research method on modern Sinology research.

5、 Conclusion

In the second half of the 19th century, the "Comprehensive Mirror to Immortals of All Dynasties" sparked controversy among Westerners in China. Melvin and McGee believed that its records of ancient Chinese history were credible, while Oudeli and Dennis believed that its records were absurd. The debate stems from two different methods of Sinology research: Malvern and McGee's biblical Orientalism approach, and Euclid's scientific approach. The Eastern methods of the Bible were popular at the time but had serious problems, while the scientific methods were more reasonable but did not become mainstream. The interpretation of Melvin and McGee reflects the influence of Christian apologetic traditions on Sinology, indicating that Sinology is influenced by Christian preconceptions. Audrey's criticism reveals the resistance and reflection of some missionaries towards the negative impact of Christian ideas, reflecting the tension between the missionary mission and Sinology research faced by Sinologists in the second half of the 19th century.