《舊唐書》所涉“安史之亂”用語淺析——兼與《新唐書》比較

Comparative Analysis of the Wording Concerning the An-Shi Rebellion Used in the Two Tangshu

2018年,我寫了一篇《唐人是否視"安史之亂"爲"胡"亂?》的文章,提交當年7月由首都師範大學歷史學院、北京師範大學歷史學院、臺灣中正大學歷史學系主辦的"第六届漢化·胡化·洋化國際學術研討會",並承劉進寶先生好意,發表在《絲路文明》第三1[1]上。在這篇文章中,我從詔敕、墓誌、筆記等三種資料裏,選取與"安史之亂"有關詞語,將其分爲含"胡"詞語與"非胡"詞語.

This article divides the wording about the An-Shi Rebellion安史之亂into three types including the statements of facts,the quoted words from the Tang唐people and the comments from official historians of the Later Jin後晋Dynasty.The statistical result shows the proportion of words without and with hu胡among the three types is separately 158:8,47:20 and 17:4;totally 222:32.And the latter accounts for slightly over 12.5%of the total.Therefore in general,the words with hu were not often used in the wording about An-Shi Rebellion in the Jiu Tangshu舊唐書.In another word,the Jiu Tangshu rarely narrated the An-Shi Rebellion as a hu rebellion.Specially,as to the statements of facts,words without hu were not only accounted for a large proportion but also had a high degree of consistency,such as“An Lushan Rebellion(An Lusan fan安禄山反)”or"Lushan’s Upheaval(Lushan zhi luan禄山之亂)”.This implies that the court or historians had a unified narration when writing contemporary official history.Additionally,by comparing the Two Tangshu唐書,it was likely that official historians in the Song dynasty were more professional and objective when describing the An-Shi Rebellion in history books instead of being affected by the strong sense of"The Hua-Yi Distinctions and Segregation(hua yi zhi fang華夷之防)”at that time.