透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.234.212.253
  • 學位論文

《羣書治要》史部研究——從貞觀史學的致用精神談起

The Pragmatism of Historiography in Zhen Guan Period: A Research on the Historiographical Part of Qunshu Zhiyao

指導教授 : 張蓓蓓
若您是本文的作者,可授權文章由華藝線上圖書館中協助推廣。

摘要


「政治」與「歷史」二者密切相關,是貞觀思潮的重要內涵。貞觀史學素有鑒戒史學之稱,好以史為鑒,而目的則指向現實政治之用。此種思維型態,是貞觀君臣論政論學的主軸。編成於貞觀五年的《羣書治要》,正是此思潮之典型呈現。   以往學界對《治要》的研究,偏重在輯佚、校勘等文獻學價值的闡發,《治要》流傳中、日之間所涉及的文化交流議題,與《治要》所反映的政治思想等等;本文則試圖從貞觀的重「史」意識切入,指出《治要》的編纂背景、全書宗旨、呈現形式與內在意向,都與此重「史」精神密切相關,為《治要》的解讀提供一種新途徑。   《治要》是魏徵等大臣為唐太宗所編纂的一部治道精選集,內容為經、史、子六十餘部典籍的節鈔。此書的編成,背後是貞觀重「史」用「史」的思想主流,其「致用」宗旨十分明確,與類書截然不同。就學術傾向來看,期於為治的終極指向,使此書無愧於帝王學的高標;而書中對經史子諸部典籍的節選,又在在顯露出與「史」相仿的特質,印證了貞觀重「史」的思想特色。   從《治要》史部的刪節去取,得以直接觀察《治要》展現的史學精神。比照典籍原本與《治要》的節鈔內容,編者的取捨過程於焉顯露;而取捨過程必然反映出某種價值觀,對此價值觀加以梳理,正能與貞觀史學的特質相互發明。約而言之,編者所重在於具體切近之人事,且力求有用,故多選錄具代表性的「言」與「事」,而不惜犧牲時間軸線的完整性,對史書體例、體裁等形式常規亦不甚措意;取捨之間所蘊藏的「致用」意向,則在教訓、修身勵德、現實施政、增篤情義等面向盡情彰顯。至於《治要》及貞觀「致用」史學的影響與侷限,本文於結論處亦有論及。

關鍵字

羣書治要 貞觀史學 致用 魏徵 唐太宗

並列摘要


This thesis attempts to offer an interpretation of Qunshu Zhiyao (羣書治要), especially focusing on the quotations from the historiographic part. The chief editor of Qunshu Zhiyao (hereafter Zhiyao) is Wei Zheng 魏徵, the well-known historian and politician highly trusted by Emperor Taizong 唐太宗in Tang Dynasty. As a collection of well-chosen matters about governance, Zhiyao reflects not only the political thinking of the governing class, but also their conception of history during the period of Zhen Guan. When Emperor Taizong and Wei Zheng discussed about politics, they emphasized on the cause of the rise and fall of each dynasty. By doing so, they obtained numerous lessons from history. That was the pragmatism of historiography, which formed the main ideology in Zhen Guan Period and was what Zhiyao depends on. My analysis in this thesis begins with the introduction of the whole Zhiyao and then focuses on the historiographic part of the work. This thesis consists of three parts. In the first part, I examine the political background which gave birth to the blossom of the study of historiography in Zhen Guan period. In the second part, I argue that the academic orientation of Zhiyao belongs to the Emperor Learning which was based on the study of history. In the last part, the historiographic part of Zhiyao will be the main focus. Only from the close reexamination of Zhiyao will we know that the editors transcribed the historical sources mainly from the pragmatic trajectory. That trajectory can be divided into these four aspects: (1) moral teachings, (2) positive models, (3) practical skills of governance, and (4) justice and mercy perceived in the study of monarch-subject relationship. It is from the study of Zhiyao that we know how those four aspects are especially extracted from the historical records and are deeply valued by the editors.

參考文獻


宋.范祖禹,《唐鑑》,臺北:臺灣商務印書館,1977。
雷家驥,《中古史學觀念史》,臺北:臺灣學生,1990。
清.嚴可均校輯,《全上古三代秦漢三國六朝文》,北京:中華書局,1958。
宋維哲,〈《群書治要》引經述略〉,《有鳳初鳴年刊》2期,2006,頁147-160。
牛致功,《唐代的史學與〈通鑑〉》,西安:陝西師範大學出版社,1989。

延伸閱讀