Although Song classical studies were rigorously challenged by the revival of Han Learning during the Qing, the ultimate collapse of scriptural Confucianism came in the early twentieth century from Zhang Taiyan's attacks and the end of China's dynastic system. Introduction of new bibliographic schemes under the influence of Western learning spelled the demise of the four traditional bibliographic divisions (classics, history, masters, and collected writings). One defensive response is to systematize and historicize the exegetical traditions of the Classics, and another is to reset the academic framework altogether. Many contemporary protagonists would like to see classical studies revived under the broad disciplinary umbrella of National Studies. They complain that over the course of the past century classical studies has been reduced to philosophy, philology, history or anthropology – a reductionism which results in methodological confusion and impedes understanding. They despair that the traditional categories of learning associated with the four traditional bibliographic divisions have not only each been subjected to dislocation but that the knowledge contained in each has become mere “material” for research by disciplines introduced from the West. These views often go hand in hand with such claims as the difference between Western schemes of knowledge classification and Chinese approaches to learning is analogous to the differences between the holistic approach of practitioners of traditional Chinese medicine and the analytic approach of practitioners of Western medicine.