二百年来《水经注》案的症结——谈谈胡适关于《御题诗》题写时间的发现

The Crux of the Case of Commentary on the Waterways Classic in the Past Two Centuries——Talk about Hu Shi's Views on the Writing Time of Emperor Qianlong's Poem

乾隆皇帝题诗《水经注》在前(乾隆三十九年二月),戴震完成《水经注》校订在后(乾隆三十九年十月)。但是,由于乾隆题诗没有注明题写的时间,又置于殿本《水经注》之卷首,后世便误认为《御题诗》是对戴震的"褒嘉"。《御题诗》之《序》,贬低"自明至今"的《水经注》版本,又竭力美化《大典》本。四库馆命戴震再校订那个据《大典》钞校的二手《水经注》时,处于极为棘手而尴尬的境地。因为遵照《御题诗》之《序》的旨意,要把一切胜处都归之于《大典》本,而把一切讹误都归之于"近刻"。从而也致使"《水经注》案"的争论,持续了两百多年。

The writing time of Qianlong’s poem on the Waterways Classic is February,while the proofreading completion time by Dai zhen is October of thirty -ninth year of Qianlong.Because the Qianlong’s poem had no writing time and was placed in the frontispiece of commentary on the Waterways Classic,we mistakenly believe that this poem was to praise Dai zhen.Qianlong’s poem tried to belittle the recent edition of commentary on the Waterways Classic,saying that the changes of characters made the loss of the original face,and tried to beautify the edition of Yongle Dadian.This evaluation made Dai zhen in an extremely awkward position when he revised commentary on the Waterways Classic.According to the meaning of Qian-long’s poem,Dai zhen needed to take all the advantages to the edition of Yongle Dadian,and put all the errors to the recent e-dition.This made the case of commentary on the Waterways Classic argued two hundred years.