摘要
明代张治道、王九思在为康海撰写碑状时,提出“往时京官值亲殁,持厚币求内阁志铭以为荣显”以及“诸翰林之葬其亲者,铭表碑传无弗谒诸馆阁诸公者”两说。上述说法被李开先、何良俊及当代学者视为明代传记写作的一种惯例。事实上明代京官包括翰林官员,在丧葬父母时,并非一定要请诸内阁,这一所谓的“惯例”并不成立。康海被罢黜的主要原因并不在于他违背了当时传记请托的惯例,进而加剧了与李东阳的矛盾,康海疏狂的性格以及他不注意行迹的处事方式才是导致其被罢黜的主要原因。康海作为明代第一次复古运动的领导者,他的经历与结局具有丰富的象征意味。
In the Ming Dynasty,Zhang Zhidao and Wang Jiusi proposed that“when the parents of officials in Beijing died,these officials would give gifts to cabinet officials to ask for an epitaph”and“when an imperial academician buried his relatives,he invariably sought an inscription by cabinet offcials”.Li Kaixian,He Liangjun and other contemporary scholars regarded this as a“convention”in the writing of biographies.In fact,in the Ming Dynasty,the imperial offcials,including the imperial academician officials,were not required to invite the cabinet when their parents were buried,so the so-called“practice”did not exist.Furthermore,the main reason for Kang Hai's dismissal was not his violation of the“convention”of the biographical request at that time,thus aggravating the conflict with Li Dongyang.Instead,Kang Hai's careless character and manners mainly accounted for his dismissal.As the leader of the first movement of restoring ancient literary in the Ming Dynasty,Kang Hai's tragic experience has rich symbolic meaning.
作者
夏朋飞
Xia Pengfei(Department of History at Sun Yat-Sen University)
出处
《现代传记研究》
2022年第2期195-207,共13页
Journal of Modern Life Writing Studies
基金
国家社科基金一般项目《古代传记文体的发展与文史观念之演变》(20BZW078)阶段性成果
关键词
康海
传记
文体惯例
Kang Hai
biography
stylistic conventions
