摘要
按《史记·太史公自序》关于《龟策列传》的基本构想,今本《史记·龟策列传》"褚先生曰"之前的第一部分和最后的"卜辞"记录,应该就是司马迁的原作和该篇传记的全部内容。旧史家认为其"有录无书"或不当入于"列传"之体,是值得商榷的。而"褚先生曰"完全是作者不领会该篇传记的独特性所致,也招致了后世史论家的一致诟病;同时,也不可否认,所谓褚少孙补作,仍有一定文献性和史料性价值,是对《庄子》文本和有关历史传说的再创作。"褚先生曰"之所以杂凑《庄子》多篇,也说明先秦诸子之书,与"史"有同质的关系;史传文学是史官文化的产物,先秦诸子亦源于史官,二者的关系是同源而生。
according to the basic ideas about the Turtle Biographies, in Records of the Historian, Sima Qian＇ s Preface, Mr. Chu said about its modern version,＂The first and the last part of Oracle＇ s records should be the original of Sima Qian and it is also all contents of the biography. The ancient historians think it is no recorded book or improper to be sorted in biographies, which is worth discussing. Mr. Chu＇ s words are the complete misunderstanding of the uniqueness of the biography, which leads to the later historian＇ s criticism;at the same time, as to Chu Shaosun＇ s so-called complements it is undeniable about its certain literary and historical value, which is the re-creation of the text and historical biography of Chuang Tzu. Mr. Chu＇ s remarks crossed with several texts of Chuang Tzu shows that the doctrine of the pre-Qin presents the quality of history; history and biography literature is the product of the historiographer＇ s culture, and pre-Qin philosophers are also originated from the official and the relationship between those two.
出处
《渭南师范学院学报》
2016年第1期28-36,共9页
Journal of Weinan Normal University
