从敦煌写卷看李善注《文选》的文本变迁

To Confirm the Text Variation of Wenxuan Which Was Commented By Lishan From the Dunhuang Manuscripts

对《文选》李善注文本的变迁过程,最早有李邕"补益"说,以及晚唐李匡乂提出的"初注""覆注"说。从情理上看,显庆三年到麟德年间李善任崇贤馆直学士、秘书郎时期(六七年间),以及上元二年到李善去世的载初元年,即郑、汴讲学的十四五年间,李善都有充裕的时间可能再次修改、补苴旧注;从事实上看,如把幸存的敦煌P.2528号《西京赋》残卷及P.2527号残卷与宋代明州本、韩国奎章阁本等比勘,写卷均存在较为严重的注释缺陷,如其自定的"从省"的体例远没有贯彻到底,一些重要或关键的字词没能注释等,甚至还有注释的错误等。这都能在版本上证实李善注的早期风貌和"覆注",即文本变迁的客观存在。至于李善"白塔寺撰《文选注》"、李邕"补益"说不可能、没有他注的窜入等,均可在事实上佐证"覆注"说的真确。这些进一步的补充、修正以及补释,极大地提升了李善注的质量,也最终从根本上促使了其注的经典化。

For the process of the Wenxuan＇s annotation, there are two types of claims： Liyong has replenished at first and Many comments which Have been proposed by the LI Kangyi during the late Tang Dynasty. Looking from the sense, LiShan hold the post of secretary and scholar of ChongxianXueGuan, About 6 and 7 years from the second of XianQing to the LinDe ; Lishan discoursed on an academic subject in the place of Zhengzhou and Kaifeng about 14years, This situation continued to die. Lishan were likely to annotate the Wenxuan again. Seen from the fact, If the surviving dunhuang manuscripts of P. 2528 and P. 2527 compared with the other edition of Mingzhou and Kui zhangge in South Korea, the annotation existed serious defects, such as the style of its own development did not to carry out to the end, some important or key words failed to annotation, there were even wrong comments, etc. These can be confirmed comments on version＇s early style and the text variation of Wenxuan Which Was commented many times. As for LiShan commented on the Wenxuan at the temple of Baita, Liyong had replenished Wenxuan＇s annotation, there were no other comments mixed in ; all of these can prove the existence of the multiple comments. These additional notes greatly improved the quality of the annotation, also eventually fundamentally prompted the note of the classic.