【摘要】：正編者按:在中國(guó)古代史學(xué)界,甲骨文、簡(jiǎn)牘、敦煌文書、明清檔案、徽州文書等出土或傳世文書的研究已相當(dāng)深入,形成了"甲骨學(xué)"、"簡(jiǎn)牘學(xué)"、"敦煌學(xué)"、"(明清)檔案學(xué)"、"徽學(xué)"等學(xué)科。然而,這些學(xué)科受限于研究對(duì)象的時(shí)代性及存在形態(tài)的差異性,形成不同的概念與分類標(biāo)準(zhǔn),始終缺乏一個(gè)能夠?qū)⒆鳛樵嘉墨I(xiàn)的古文書與一般編纂的典籍文獻(xiàn)區(qū)分開(kāi)來(lái),進(jìn)而從整體上概括中國(guó)古文書內(nèi)在特點(diǎn)的理論體系。因此,非常有必要在歷史學(xué)、文獻(xiàn)學(xué)、檔案學(xué)等既有學(xué)科的相關(guān)研究基礎(chǔ)之上,參考國(guó)外古文書學(xué)的理論與經(jīng)驗(yàn),建立起跨斷代的、涵蓋公私文書研究的"中
[Abstract]:Editor's note: in ancient Chinese historiography, the study of unearthed or handed down documents, such as oracle bone inscriptions, bamboo slips, Dunhuang documents, Ming and Qing archives, and Huizhou documents, has been thoroughly studied. Such subjects as oracle bone study, bamboo slips study, Dunhuang study, (Ming and Qing) archives, Huixue and so on were formed. However, these disciplines are limited by the differences of the times and the forms of existence of the objects of study, forming different concepts and classification standards, and lacking a way to distinguish the ancient literature as the original literature from the general compilation of the classical books. And then generalize the theoretical system of the inherent characteristics of ancient Chinese literature books as a whole. Therefore, it is very necessary to establish a cross-dynasty, covering the study of public and private documents, on the basis of the relevant studies of the existing disciplines such as history, philology and archives, and referring to the theories and experiences of ancient Chinese calligraphy abroad.
【分類號(hào)】：K877

【相似文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前1條

1 陳麗萍;;“中國(guó)古文書學(xué)”研討會(huì)綜述[J];中國(guó)史研究動(dòng)態(tài);2012年05期

相關(guān)重要報(bào)紙文章 前1條

1 ;“中國(guó)古文書學(xué)”的創(chuàng)立[N];文匯報(bào);2012年

，

本文編號(hào)：2272271