历史记忆中的秦始皇——《史记》《资治通鉴》秦始皇书写比较研究

The First Emperor of Qin in Historical Memory——A Comparative Study on the Writing of Qin Shihuang in Records of the Grand Historian and the Comprehensive Reference of Capital Administration

《史记》和《资治通鉴》中关于秦始皇的书写是司马迁、司马光历史记忆文本化的表现。将二书秦始皇书写进行对读,通过司马光关于秦始皇记忆的有意重构,可以发现政治立场上司马迁“六家兼容”与司马光“儒家主导”的差别。进入二书文本内部,司马迁采撷不同主体、不同物质形态的历史记忆建构文本,形成“复调”,司马光删削修润,叙事走向“独白”,其背后是书写目的上司马迁“成一家之言”与司马光“鉴于往事,有资于治道”的差异。最终二书也呈现出“功过兼存”和“罪莫大焉”两种不同的秦始皇形象,这与睡虎地秦简、北大竹简等出土文献中的始皇形象又不相同。将文本作为一种书写下的记忆探讨,历史记忆在不同的书写立场中会被重新建构,在不同著述目的统摄下会被再次阐释,具有多元性、存在性、历史性的特点。此一视角的选择有助于打破文献作为“历史事实载体”的思维,对理解两司马的始皇书写差异、历史记忆与历史的关系大有裨益。

The writing of Qin Shihuang in Records of the Grand Historian(Shiji) and the Comprehensive Reference of Capital Administration(Zizhitongjian) is the expression of the textualization of Sima Qian and Sima Guang's historical memory.By reading two books of Qin Shi Huang's writing,we can find the difference between Sima Qian's "six compatible" and Sima Guang's "Confucian dominance" in political standpoint through Sima Guang's intentional reconstruction of Qin Shi Huang's memory.Entering into the text of the two books,Sima Qian gathered the historical memory of different subjects and different material forms to construct the text,forming a "polysyllabus".Sima Guang edited and condensed the narrative to a "monologue".Behind this is the difference between Sima Qian's writing purpose of "being a family's opinion" and Sima Guang's "having the ability to rule the way in view of the past".Finally,the two books also present two different images of the first Emperor of Qin,which are "both merits and faults" and "great SINS",which are also different from the images of the first emperor in the unearthed documents such as Qin Jian in the sleeping tiger land and bamboo Jian in Peking University.Taking text as a kind of memory discussion under writing,historical memory will be reconstructed in different writing positions,and will be explained again under the control of different writing purposes,which has the characteristics of pluralism,existence and historicity.The choice of this perspective helps to break the thinking of literature as the carrier of historical facts,and is of great benefit to our understanding of the differences in the writing of the first emperor of two Sima,and the relationship between historical memory and history.