摘要
班固《汉书·艺文志》将《世本》至《汉大年纪》诸书附于“春秋”,后世称之为“‘春秋’二十三家”。阮孝绪、郑樵分别判定“史书甚寡”、“分职校书”是“附”之原因。后世多袭用阮氏之论,视“‘春秋’二十三家”即是史书附于春秋的体例。若考虑到班固和阮孝绪各自时代的学术认知,则后世对“史书甚寡”的理解未必合于阮氏,遑论契合班固确立“春秋”二十三家的标准,因此后世多从篇(卷)数而论,认为“春秋”所附诸书实难言“甚寡”。实际上,汉代知识体系中,“史书”内涵与后世不同,后世一般的史书分类尚未建立。而班固“春秋”二十三家的标准恰恰反映了当时的“史书”认知和史学意识。在整合司马迁、班彪等人构建的“春秋”谱系基础上,班固以强调史官重要性与创造性引入“事”这一话语,释证了“右史记事,事为《春秋》”的标准,以“释经”与“续传”来定位撰史行为,构建了中国早期史学话语体系,并对中国古代史学发展产生了潜在而深远的影响,直至近代西方新史学引入前,这始终是传统史学中史学起源书写的主流叙事。
HanShu Yiwenzhi by Ban Gu attached “Shiben” to “Handanianji” and the “The Spring and Autumn Annals”, which was called twenty-three types of “The Spring and Autumn Annals”. Ruan Xiaoxu and Zheng Qiao judged that “history books are very few” and “the books were proofread by different positions”. Later generations followed Ruan s theory. If we take into account the academic cognition of Ban Gu and Ruan Xiaoxu in their respective times, the understanding of later generations of “very few historical books” may not agree with Ruan s, let alone with Ban Gu s standard of establishing twenty-three “Spring and Autumn Annals”, so later generations think that the books attached to “Spring and Autumn Annals” can hardly be said to be “very few” from the number of chapters(volumes). In fact, in the knowledge system of Han Dynasty, the connotation of “historical books” is different from that of later generations, and the general classification of historical books in later generations has not been established. On the basis of integrating the genealogy of “Spring and Autumn Annals” constructed by Sima Qian and Ban Biao, Ban Gu stressed the importance of historians and creatively introduced the discourse of “events”, explained the standard of “right historian records events and events are the Spring and Autumn Annals”, and positioned the behavior of history writing with “interpretation” and “continuation”, thus constructing the discourse system of early Chinese historiography. It had a potential and far-reaching influence on the development of ancient Chinese historiography. Until the introduction of modern Western new historiography, it has always been the mainstream narrative of the origin of historiography in traditional historiography.
作者
雷平
秦宁东
LEI Ping;QIN Ning-dong
出处
《湖北大学学报（哲学社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2024年第2期48-56,177,共10页
Journal of Hubei University(Philosophy and Social Science)
基金
国家民委民族研究项目“近代‘中华民族史’撰述资料整理与中华民族共同体思想研究(1900—1949年)”(2023-GMI-161)。
