There are hundreds of matters brought up within A Draft Essay on Ancient Chinese History which could have been discussed in another depth. For example, it states that: 1) "Han Chinese did not know the story of the Fan-hsiang ou-mu ghost." 2) The state of Chin's original enfeoffment was located at Chin-yang (north of present-day Tai-yuan county, Shanghsi).－ But in actual fact, it was located at yi (present-day Yi-ch'eng county, Shanhsi). 3) All political power originated from primordial forms of spiritual power, so that the matters recorded by the shi (史 scribes ) were all in principle related to religion, -Yet by the Ch'un-ch'iu era the level of rationality had already attained to a rather high and profound state, we must not continue to limit it within the bounds of such primordial religious concepts, but should rather view it in a separate light. 4) To be sure, the earliest occupation of the shi was closely related to those of the chu (祝), tsung (宗) ( sacrificial experts), and bu (卜) (prognosticator) officials, however, the amalgamation of these offices took place only after the move of the capital eastward (770 B.C.). The explanation of Wang Rongfu is not in error after all. 5) "Chung-sun Chiu of the said State of Lu still upholds the ritual of Chou, moreover, the methods employed by the various states of the Chi surname were generally alike.…mutually similar. This is a convincing piece of evidence." But in fact, as far as the Ch'un-ch'iu period is concerned, such similitude probably extended to all of the states rather than being limited to those of the Chi surname. 6) Was the Earldom of T'ung after all of the Ssu surname, later to be enfeoffed upon its extermination at the hands of Chou to someone of the same surname as the latter? At present there is no way to prove any of these, and we should be allowed to maintain the possibility of each of the three. 7) Fathers and sons were enfeoffed to separate places, and thus their appellations were different as well. 8) "The resources of Ch'u find their application in Chin" (Tso chuan, Hsiang 26)-even the commander of Ch'u himself thought this to be case. 9) Service to a lord was not restricted to a single master-this had always been true. 10) Lordships enfeoffed in the Warring States period could not be extended tohte third generation if one's sons or brothers had earned no merit, but could be extended to the third generation if they had. 11)Ever prior to the time of Confucius, the "petty man" had the opportunity to receive education. 12) The ancient shi official presided over ritual matters. Confucius was correct in his explanation. 13) When a state was lost, or there was a change in dynasties, the former nobility would generally all be lowered to the status of commoners. A similar outcome was in state for those ch'ing (卿) or ta-fu (大夫) ministers who brought ruin to their estates or clans because of the exposition of some crime they committed. 14) The Chou's "Announcement of the Lunar Beginning" (Ku-shuo) is one thing, but whether or not each of the various states made use of it is another. 15) According to the saying of Confucius, the distinction between the nobleman and the petty man was based upon virtue, speech, and conduct, rather than upon knowledge. 16) The appellation of chun-tzu (nobleman) in ancient times was not limited to the Great Lork (Son of Heaven) and the lords of states. 17) Although the Chou Li ( Ritual of Chou) was a product of the Warring States period, it is not altogether lacking in words and meanings carried over from both the Western and Eastern Chou periods.