摘要
《宋史》诸志的序言基本说清史料主要来源于宋国史诸志,清代学者也明确提出《宋史》"以宋人国史为稿本"。上个世纪40年代出现《宋史》的《职官志》、《刑法志》等抄袭《文献通考》说,至今许多学者沿用或夸大其说。本文主要就最早、最系统提出此说的《宋史·职官志》史料来源加以考辨。宋国史早已失传,通过查核《宋史》本书史料来源的说明及体裁、引文等,再搜集传世的宋元时期官私所修重要典籍引录的宋国史职官志片断史料,与相关的《宋史·职官志》相互比照,可以断定《宋史·职官志》抄袭《文献通考》说是缺乏依据的。
The prefaces to the records of SONGSHI have explained quite clearly the historical sources of the chronicles of the Kingdom of Song. Scholars in the Qing Dynasty also pointed out that SONGSHI is based on the original histories of the Kingdom of Song. There appeared in 1940s, however, an argument that ＇zhiguanzhi＇ , ＇ xingfazhi＇ and some other records of SONGSHI have plagiarized WENXIANTONGKAO. Even today, there are many scholars who are still clinging to or even exaggerating the plagiarism. This research presents a textual examination on the earliest and most systematic historical sources of the argument for the plagiarism in ＇ zhiguanzhi＇ of SONGSHI. The history of the Kingdom of Song was lost tong time ago, but we can still conclude that the argument of the plagiarism of ＇ zhiguanzhi＇ of SONGSHI on WENXIANTONGKAO is groundless if we examine the notes, style and quotations in the historical sources of SONGSHI, reinterpret the historical fragments about the officials＇ records of the Song Dynasty among the important quotations made from ancient books by official or private writers during the Song and Yuan dynasties, and make careful comparative studies with the materials concerning ＇ zhiguanzhi＇ of SONGSHI.
出处
《史学史研究》
CSSCI
北大核心
2014年第4期33-45,共13页
Journal of Historiography
