论宋代的《史记》人物评论
发布时间：2018-08-26 14:33
【摘要】： 《史记》作为一部体大思精的长篇宏著,亦史亦文,从重视它的史学意义到发掘它的文学价值,从对它的简短评价到长篇评论,经历了相当长的一段历史时期。唐人尊《史记》为正史之首,使它成了史家修史的楷模,文人学习的榜样,翻开了《史记》研究史上的新一页,也为宋代盛行的评史之风奠定了基础。对《史记》的评论,在宋代以前已经开始,但人数不多,并没有形成风气。到了宋代,《史记》被大量刊刻印行,极大地促进了《史记》的流传,扩大了《史记》在社会上的影响,评论《史记》蔚然成风,这标志着《史记》研究步入了一个新的历史阶段。宋代文人嗜好史书,又长于议论,具备评论史事和批评史书的能力,对《史记》作出了许多新颖的、影响深远的分析评论。宋人或评人物,或论史事,或说体例,或谈语言,议论纷纷,各抒己见,有褒有贬,不宗一家,《史记》研究史上,第一次出现了既有一定的广度,又有一定的深度的《史记》评论的新局面。宋代文集中评《史记》之文多达四百篇,笔记中有近三十家大量内容涉及《史记》,诗歌中也不少。其中为数可观的人物评论,每每能突破陈见,对《史记》人物提出不同的看法。从纵的方面看,宋人对《史记》中人物的看法与司马迁的观点有同有异,更多是同中有异。从横的方面看,宋人各自立论,自成一说,但从深层次上考察又是异中有同。宋人对《史记》中帝王大臣的批评视角,实际上反映出他们在众多人物评论中的聚焦点和准则。 本文在借鉴前人研究方法和成果前提下,基于宋代对《史记》人物的评论材料,首先讨论了宋代所选取的评论对象和评论者自身情况,然后主要分析总结了宋人对《史记》中帝王大臣的评论特征,最后概括了宋代《史记》人物评论的方法和目的。
[Abstract]:As a long masterpiece, Shi Yiwen has experienced a long historical period from attaching importance to its historical significance to exploring its literary value, from its brief evaluation to its long commentary. The Tang Dynasty respected "Records of History" as the first of the official history, making it a model for historians to practice history. The literati's example opened a new page in the history of "Records of History", and also laid a foundation for the prevailing style of history evaluation in the Song Dynasty. The commentary on the Records of the historian had begun before the Song Dynasty, but the number of people was small, and it did not form a trend. By the Song Dynasty, the Records of the historian had been published in large numbers, which greatly promoted the spread of the Book of History, expanded the influence of the Book of History on society, and became popular in commenting on the Book of History. This marks a new historical stage in the study of Records of the historian. The scholars of the Song Dynasty were fond of historical books, were good at discussion, had the ability to comment on historical events and criticize historical books, and made a lot of novel and far-reaching analysis and comments on the Records of the History. The Song people or critics, or on historical matters, or on style, or on language, have commented on each other, expressed their own views, praised and disparaged, and did not live in a single family. For the first time in the history of the study of the Records of the historian, there has been a certain breadth for the first time. There is also a certain depth of "Records of the historian" commentary of the new situation. There are as many as 400 articles in the collection of the Song Dynasty, nearly 30 of which are related to the Records of the History, as well as a lot of poems. A sizable number of character reviews, often breaking through Chen, put forward a different view of the characters. From the vertical point of view, the Song people's views on the characters in the Records of the historian are different from those of Si Maqian. From a horizontal point of view, the Song people put forward their own theories, but from a deep level, there are differences and similarities. The Song Dynasty's critical perspective on the emperor and minister in the Records of the historian actually reflects their focus and norms in the comments on many characters. On the basis of the former research methods and achievements, based on the comments on the characters of the Book of History in Song Dynasty, this paper first discusses the selection of comment objects and the critics themselves in Song Dynasty. Then it analyzes and summarizes the characteristics of the comments made by the Song people on the emperor and ministers in the Book of History, and finally summarizes the methods and purposes of the comments on the characters in the Song Dynasty.
【学位授予单位】：西南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2009
【分类号】：K244
本文编号：2205167
[Abstract]:As a long masterpiece, Shi Yiwen has experienced a long historical period from attaching importance to its historical significance to exploring its literary value, from its brief evaluation to its long commentary. The Tang Dynasty respected "Records of History" as the first of the official history, making it a model for historians to practice history. The literati's example opened a new page in the history of "Records of History", and also laid a foundation for the prevailing style of history evaluation in the Song Dynasty. The commentary on the Records of the historian had begun before the Song Dynasty, but the number of people was small, and it did not form a trend. By the Song Dynasty, the Records of the historian had been published in large numbers, which greatly promoted the spread of the Book of History, expanded the influence of the Book of History on society, and became popular in commenting on the Book of History. This marks a new historical stage in the study of Records of the historian. The scholars of the Song Dynasty were fond of historical books, were good at discussion, had the ability to comment on historical events and criticize historical books, and made a lot of novel and far-reaching analysis and comments on the Records of the History. The Song people or critics, or on historical matters, or on style, or on language, have commented on each other, expressed their own views, praised and disparaged, and did not live in a single family. For the first time in the history of the study of the Records of the historian, there has been a certain breadth for the first time. There is also a certain depth of "Records of the historian" commentary of the new situation. There are as many as 400 articles in the collection of the Song Dynasty, nearly 30 of which are related to the Records of the History, as well as a lot of poems. A sizable number of character reviews, often breaking through Chen, put forward a different view of the characters. From the vertical point of view, the Song people's views on the characters in the Records of the historian are different from those of Si Maqian. From a horizontal point of view, the Song people put forward their own theories, but from a deep level, there are differences and similarities. The Song Dynasty's critical perspective on the emperor and minister in the Records of the historian actually reflects their focus and norms in the comments on many characters. On the basis of the former research methods and achievements, based on the comments on the characters of the Book of History in Song Dynasty, this paper first discusses the selection of comment objects and the critics themselves in Song Dynasty. Then it analyzes and summarizes the characteristics of the comments made by the Song people on the emperor and ministers in the Book of History, and finally summarizes the methods and purposes of the comments on the characters in the Song Dynasty.
【学位授予单位】：西南大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2009
【分类号】：K244
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 黄秀坤;宋代《史记》人物史评与诗评之比较举隅[J];北华大学学报(社会科学版);2000年03期
2 宋嗣廉;李白与《史记》人物情结之接受美学透视[J];北华大学学报(社会科学版);2002年03期
3 黄秀坤,杨桂平;唐末周昙、胡曾诗的《史记》渊源解析[J];北华大学学报(社会科学版);2002年03期
4 何明新;从《评史记》看钟惺的用人观点[J];重庆师院学报(哲学社会科学版);1986年01期
5 李彤;梁启超对《史记》的阐发[J];长沙电力学院学报(社会科学版);2003年03期
6 杨海峥,费振刚;《〈史记〉学史》(汉至唐)[J];中国典籍与文化;2003年02期
7 曾礼军;论唐代诗人对《史记·留侯世家》的接受[J];呼兰师专学报;2004年01期
8 俞樟华,赵霞;论唐代诗人对《史记·李将军列传》的接受[J];汉中师范学院学报(社会科学);2002年05期
9 张剑平;略论白寿彝先生对《史记》的研究[J];回族研究;2002年02期
10 俞樟华;唐宋八大家与《史记》[J];江苏社会科学;1996年04期
，本文编号：2205167
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/zggdslw/2205167.html
