“书法不隐”无隐吗——董狐史案质疑

Did the Unveiled Historical Recording Conceal Nothing?—Question on the Truth of Dong Hu's Case

春秋时代晋国太史董狐"赵盾弑其君"之记,孔子赞为"书法不隐",采入《春秋》,百代以为实录典范。但据《左传》《国语》《史记》等,董狐恰恰歪曲和隐讳了事实真相。孔子之赞,非关实录,意在"正名"。从董狐到《春秋》以及后世的发扬,构成了以史"正名"、忠君尊王的正统史学传统,它为君主专制延续两千数百年,提供了话语暴力、"历史"依据和法统支撑。真不隐者,不是董狐、《春秋》也,而是以事实向董狐、《春秋》说"不"的史著和史家。

In the Spring and Autumn period, the record ＂Zhao Dun had murdered his sovereign＂ kept by Dong Hu, the country Jin＇s court historian, was praised by Confucius as ＂an unveiled principle and style in historiography＂ and a- dopted it into the Spring and Autumn Annals. Hundreds of later generations took it as a paragon of chronicles. Never- theless, in accordance with Zuo Commentary on Chunqiu , Discourses of the States, and Records of the Historian, Dong Hu had falsified and obscured the facts. The intention of Confucius＇ praise was on the rectification of names but not the factual record underneath. Dong Hu, Spring and Autumn Annals, as well as their developments carried on by descendants had constructed the history through nominal rectification and formed the orthodox tradition of history in royalty to the rulers. It had also provided discourse violence （the authority or power of words that could falsify facts）, historical bases and ritual roots for autocratic monarchy for over two thousand years. Actually, the real unveiled is not Dong Hu＇s record or the Spring and Autumn Annals, but the writers and their works which recorded the facts against the versions of Dong Hu and Spring and Autumn Annals.