摘要
赵师渊入朱门不早于淳熙八年,并未参与《资治通鉴纲目》初稿的编修,而是在朱熹晚年时,帮助其师"整顿"《纲目》,并至少承担了汉、唐部分的修订。"赵师渊作目"最初因王柏对史料的误读而起。元、明时期《纲目》成为史学义理取向的典范后,"赵师渊作目"作为一种可资利用的叙述策略,在阐释《纲目》书法的论说中得到凸显。明中期以后,信奉治史实证路径的文人群体宣扬《纲目》出自赵师渊之手,以此消解《纲目》在史学义理维度的典范意义。而无论是"赵师渊作目"或"赵师渊撰《纲目》",其载体是关涉《纲目》阅读、阐发、评价、接受等性质的文本。在此类文本中,虽然"赵师渊作目"说的表象是一致的,但其背后蕴含的史学观念在明中期发生了翻转,从阐释经典转为解构典范,由宋学取向转为汉学立场。
Zhao Shiyuan taking Zhu Xi as his teacher was not earlier than 1181, so he didn＇t participate in compiling draft of ZIZHITONGJIAN GANGMU, but he assisted Zhu Xi in revising GANGMU in Zhu Xi＇s old age and revised the part related to history from the Han Dynasty to the Tang Dynasty. The conclusion that Zhao Shiyuan had written specific item of GANGMU was frist put forward by Wang Bai for his misunderstanding the historical evidence. In the Yuan Dynasty and the Ming Dynasty, GANGMU was constructed as paradigm of writing history with Confucianism, and as a strategy, the story that Zhao had written specific item of GANGMU was becoming popular in the comments on approaches of compiling GANGMU. After the Mid-Ming Dynasty, intellectuals who advocated textual criticism widely announced that Zhao created GANGMU in order to deconstruct the meaning of GANGMU being written with Confucianism. Both the story that Zhao had written specific item of GANGMU and story that Zhao completed GANGMU were recorded in the texts which referred to the reading, explanation, evaluation and acceptation of GANGMU. As a story of Zhao compiling GANGMU, its literal meaning was unchanged, but the ideas of historiography in it changed after the Mid-Ming Dynasty, and it changed from interpretation of Classics to deconstruction of it and from admiring the Song School of classical philology to the Han School of classical philology.
出处
《史学史研究》
CSSCI
北大核心
2017年第1期33-42,共10页
Journal of Historiography
