自明孫彀《古微書》專輯緯書佚文以來，開啟了識緯佚文的蒐輯大門，清初康熙年間，朱葬尊《經義考．毖緯》、殷元正《集緯》，迄至乾隆時《四庫全書．易緯八種》，都做了更深入的整理，而識緯在經學上的地位也逐漸被看重，孫星衍推崇緯書，於解經之際輒依識緯為準，以論定經義。 蒐檢孫氏四種著作：《尚書今古文注疏》、《孔子集語》、《問字堂集》、《岱南閣集》等，前兩書共引書十種、50篇、19條，後兩書則計具引用識緯的內容，略可類分為四類：一、關述天文星象暦法；二、解說經義；三、論述祭祀；四、論述帝王。由所引用的識緯佚文種類涵蓋十種，可知知孫氏在解說經義上，並未區分《河圖》、《洛書》等「識」與七緯，由此亦可反證孫氏並無《四庫》館臣所認為的「緯醇、識駁」之觀念。 孫星衍常自識緯字句中尋繹出一己之灼見，並參酌相關文獻記載，為經義的解說增添新證，例如六朝以後學者多將「璇璣玉衡」 視作「渾天儀」，認為堯、瞬時已有此類測量天象的儀器。孫氏則引據漢、魏文獻，輔以識緯佚文，證明視「璇璣玉衡」為測天儀器是緯書纔開始的說辭，漢、魏學者其實多半解之作北斗七星等天象的運行此一澄清，足以破除宋、明《尚書》學者在此議題上的迂說。 不過，孫星衍認為「緯書出周末」、「有三代古說」，所以頗引緯說以證先秦制度，卻是不可從信的誤解。因為明、清的緯書輯本，是以恢復光武帝所宣布的「圖讖八十一卷」為目的，而光武圖讖本來就是雜纂各種經解通義與方士讖語而成。尊崇此類雜纂，並以之為論定和代經學正統的準繩，是難還原學術真象的。因此，孫氏引述《萬形經》論西海郡「但有瀚海」；引《詩舍神霧》言「伏羲生於雷澤」；引《尚書緯》論「嵎夷」字之異體：皆不免於推論主觀的缺憾。

Sun Xing-Yan, the scholar of the Chin dynasty, emphasized the chen-wei(讖緯). He usually explained the jing-shu according to the chen-wei. Sun Xing-Yan had four kinds of works: Shang Shu Jin Gu Wen Zhu Gj Shu(《尚書今古文注疏》), Confucius Ji Yu(《孔子集語》),Wen Zi Tang Ji(《問字堂集》) and Dai Nan Ge Ji(《岱南閣集》). The first two works cited number 197 item of the chen-wei. Another two cited number 55 item. The content of the chen-wei could be divided into four kinds: first, constellation or almanac; second, the explanation of jing-yi; third, the ceremony of sacrifice; fourth, the achievement of the emperors. From the chen-wei cited by Sun, there didn't exist the idea the "wei is more suitable to the orthodoxy, and the chen is more confused," which was considered by the scholars of the Chin dynasty, on his explanation of jing-yi. Sun Xing-Nan often found some special explanation from chen-wei and added some new evidences to the conventional jing-shu by the reference of ancient books. However, it is a misunderstanding that Sun Xing-Yan thought the wei-shu(緯書) had existed since the late Chou dynasty and wei-shu included the ancient doctrine of the Xia, Shang and Chou dynasty. So when Sun cited the wei shu, it still had the flaw of subjective inference.

孫星衍、讖緯、緯書、緯書輯本、經義

Sun Xing-Yan, Chen Wei（讖緯）, Wei Shu（緯書）, Wei Shu Ji Pen（緯書輯本）, Jing Yi（精義）