《群書治要》引《史記》研究

魏徵等所編《群書治要》五十卷，遍引經、史、子三部典籍，以治要為目的，用意乃在「昭德塞違，勸善懲惡」，希望君主可以史為鑒，從典籍所載治國之要道以見有國者之所為與不為。其中引用史書最夥，計及二十卷之多，蓋以古鑒今也。此等史書，包括《史記》、《漢書》、《後漢書》、《三國志》、《晉書》等，其中卷十一、十二所引者即為《史記》。司馬遷《史記》歷記三千年史事，上起軒轅黃帝，下訖漢武帝年間，全書共五十二萬六千五百字，究天人之際，通古今之變，成一家之言。《群書治要》所引包括以下《史記》篇章：〈五帝本紀〉、〈夏本紀〉、〈殷本紀〉、〈周本紀〉、〈秦本紀〉、〈秦始皇本紀〉；〈齊太公世家〉、〈魯周公世家〉、〈燕召公世家〉、〈宋微子世家〉、〈晉世家〉、〈趙世家〉、〈魏世家〉、〈田敬仲完世家〉；〈管晏列傳〉、〈老子韓非列傳〉、〈司馬穰苴列傳〉、〈孫子吳起列傳〉、〈樗里子甘茂列傳〉、〈白起王翦列傳〉、〈樂毅列傳〉、〈廉頗藺相如列傳〉、〈屈原賈生列傳〉、〈刺客列傳〉、〈李斯列傳〉、〈田叔列傳〉、〈循史列傳〉、〈酷吏列傳〉、〈滑稽列傳〉。準此而言，《群書治要》採錄《史記》「本紀」六篇，「世家」八篇，「列傳」十五篇，而不及「表」、「書」二體。王念孫《讀書雜志》利用《群書治要》校理古籍，多所創獲，其云：「凡《治要》所引之書，於原文皆無所增加，故知是今本遺脫也。」此可證《群書治要》之校勘作用也。《群書治要》有平安時代九条家本、鎌倉時代金澤文庫本、元和二年駿河版、尾張家天明本等四個主要版本流傳於世。其中九条家本時代最早，卻只屬殘本，今存十三卷。金澤文庫本之時代雖稍後，但存有四十七卷，最為完整。駿河版時代更後，天明本嘗經回改，皆不及前二者之善矣。本篇之撰，以《治要》所引《史記》及其注釋為本，探析當時所見《史記》之貌，並據以勘正今本《史記》。

關鍵字

群書治要；史記；互見文獻；校勘

並列摘要

Wei Zheng and other scholars compiled fifty volumes of the Qunshu Zhiyao, citing classics, history and hundred schools of thought for the purpose of governance. Its hoping that the monarch can learn from history. There are 65 kinds of classics quoted in Qunshu Zhiyao. Among them, volume 11 to volume 30 are the history records, including one and a half volumes of Shiji, half volumes Wu-Yue chunqiu, eight volumes of Hanshu, four volumes of Houhanshu, four volumes of Sanguozhi and two volumes of Jinshu. Sima Qian's Shiji records three thousand years of historical events, starting from the Yellow Emperor Xuanyuan and ending in the reign of Emperor Wu of the Han Dynasty, with a total of five hundred and twenty-six thousand five hundred words. In the Shiji, it studies the relationship between the unearthly and the mundane, looking through the changes taken place from before to now, and try to form a philosophy of one's own. In the Qunshu Zhiyao, six chapters of imperial annals-biographies, eight chapters of biographies of the houses of regional rulers of the Zhou period as well as of eminent persons and fifteen chapters of normal and collective biographies are cited, but tables and treatises are not quoted. There are four major versions of the Qunshu Zhiyao, Kujō clan version from the Heian period, Kanesawa-bunko version from the Kamakura period, Suruganokuni version in the second year of Genna era, and Tenmei version in the 7th year of Tenmei period (1787). Based on the Shiji and its annotations cited in Zhiyao, this paper analyzes the appearance of the Shiji at that time and corrects the present version of the Shiji.