Liu Xuan’s(刘炫)Chunqiu Guiguo(Rectifying Erors in the Spring and Auumn Annals)contains more than 170 entries.Those related to the Book of Songs can be broadly classified into threecategories.First,there are cases where DuYu's(杜预)annotations are erroneous and Liu Xuan's correctionsare valid,such as those conceming Duke Xi's recital of“Liu Yue”(六月)in the 23rd year of Duke Xi,therecital of“Chun zhi Benben”(鹑之贲贲)by Bo You(伯有)in the 27th year of Duke Xiang,as well as thecitations in the 2nd yea of Duke Huan and the 28th year of Duke Zhao,and the commentay on theperformance of the “Zhou Nan”(周南),“Shao Nan”(召南)and“Xiao Ya”(小雅)in the 29th year ofDuke Xiang.In these instances,Liu's interpretations are more consistent with the textual meaning than Du's.Second,there are cases where both Du Yu's and Liu Xuan’s interpretations are plausible,as seen inreferences to the musical peformance“Si Xia”(肆夏)in the 4th year of Duke Xiang,the phrase “Shang DiLin Ru”(上帝临汝)in the 24th year of Duke Xiang,the principle of“matching rectations wih context”inthe 16th year of Duke Xiang,and the recital of “Lu Xiao”(蓼萧)by Guo Jingzi(国景子)on behalf ofthe Marqus of Qi in the 26th year of Duke Xiang.In such examples,it is dificult to detemine whichinterpretation is definitively corect,or Du's commentary is concise while Liu's provides furthr elaboration.Thind,there are cases where Du Yu's annotations are accurate and Liu Xuan's are mistaken,such as thediscussion of the“Da Wu”(大武)music by the King of Chu in the 12th year of Duke Xuan,the commentaryon the“Odes”(颂)in the 29th year of Duke Xiang,and the recital of“Che Xia”(车辖)in the 25th year ofDuke Zhao.Overall,while inaccuracies in Du Yu's annotations do exist,Liu Xuan's citiques often presentalternatve viewpoints rather than wholly negating Du's work.Nevertheless,Chunqu Guiguo offers valuableperspectives and analytical insights beyond Du's annotations,making it a significant contribution to the studyof both the Spring and Autumn Annals and the Book of Songs.