發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-04-27 20:37

  本文選題：蔡邕 + 《獨(dú)斷》　； 參考：《陜西師范大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：《獨(dú)斷》作為東漢末年經(jīng)學(xué)大家蔡邕在史學(xué)方面的代表作,歷經(jīng)千年流傳已變得殘缺不全、輾轉(zhuǎn)多偽,后經(jīng)清代學(xué)者盧文_(校正方可卒讀�！丢�(dú)斷》自問(wèn)世以來(lái)就受到學(xué)者的重視,其中關(guān)于禮制典章、名物考證等方面的內(nèi)容更是成為魏晉至隋唐時(shí)期學(xué)者考訂、注釋秦漢及前代禮儀制度的重要典籍,但多是對(duì)原文征引,而對(duì)于書(shū)籍的傳播所作甚少,以致后世難見(jiàn)全貌,顛倒錯(cuò)亂難以閱讀。兩宋及以后則少有學(xué)者對(duì)此書(shū)進(jìn)行整理和研究,待清代學(xué)者盧文_(整理后才廣為流傳,但仍作為考證秦漢及以前禮制典章的材料。近代以來(lái)史學(xué)界對(duì)于《獨(dú)斷》的研究只是將其作為考訂史料的參考材料,卻并未對(duì)其本身進(jìn)行深入的研究,尤其是在《獨(dú)斷》的成書(shū)時(shí)間、成書(shū)過(guò)程、材料來(lái)源、版本流傳、內(nèi)容特點(diǎn)以及對(duì)后世的影響等方面。鑒于此,本文依托秦漢傳世文獻(xiàn)典籍,結(jié)合相關(guān)考古材料,運(yùn)用兩重證據(jù)法對(duì)于《獨(dú)斷》自成書(shū)以來(lái)版本流傳、材料來(lái)源、內(nèi)容特點(diǎn)及其對(duì)后世的影響進(jìn)行了較為詳細(xì)的論述與考證。本文分為以下幾個(gè)部分： 緒論部分論述了本文選題的目的、意義及其研究的重點(diǎn),對(duì)本文涉及的研究對(duì)象作了簡(jiǎn)要的學(xué)術(shù)史回顧,重點(diǎn)指出了學(xué)術(shù)界長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)對(duì)于《獨(dú)斷》研究的薄弱之處,及本文的創(chuàng)新之處。 第一部分論述了作者蔡邕的生年問(wèn)題以及蔡邕撰寫(xiě)《獨(dú)斷》時(shí)所具備的條件,并據(jù)此認(rèn)為《獨(dú)斷》的成書(shū)時(shí)間大致是在蔡邕流亡的十年間,重點(diǎn)是對(duì)《獨(dú)斷》成書(shū)以來(lái)的版本流傳情況進(jìn)行了詳細(xì)的梳理歸納,并對(duì)唐宋以來(lái)《獨(dú)斷》在目錄學(xué)著作中的不同歸屬進(jìn)行了有益的探討。 第二部分主要探討了《獨(dú)斷》的取材。依據(jù)《獨(dú)斷》自身所引用的原始文獻(xiàn)和有可能參照文獻(xiàn)分類進(jìn)行論述,前者分條解析、查詢?cè)嘉墨I(xiàn)的出處；后者以《獨(dú)斷》的大致成書(shū)年代為時(shí)間軸,將成書(shū)之前的相關(guān)史籍與之對(duì)照梳理,逐條摘錄分析,最后歸納成表,總結(jié)《獨(dú)斷》的取材規(guī)律,并探尋其原因。 第三部分重點(diǎn)分析了蔡邕撰寫(xiě)《獨(dú)斷》時(shí)的內(nèi)容特點(diǎn)及其相關(guān)制度對(duì)后世的影響。通過(guò)對(duì)蔡邕撰寫(xiě)《獨(dú)斷》中內(nèi)容的特點(diǎn)進(jìn)行分析,我們可以清楚的看到蔡邕寫(xiě)作《獨(dú)斷》的根本目的就是為了通過(guò)整肅禮制典章,來(lái)突顯和加強(qiáng)皇權(quán),進(jìn)而實(shí)現(xiàn)吏治清廉,挽救國(guó)家十危難之際�！丢�(dú)斷》一書(shū)所記載的創(chuàng)新制度,如輿服、朝會(huì)等對(duì)后世正史志的撰寫(xiě)產(chǎn)生了重要的影響,此后成為史志不可或缺的重要內(nèi)容,并隨著時(shí)代的發(fā)展逐漸細(xì)化。 結(jié)語(yǔ)部分從整體上對(duì)于《獨(dú)斷》的版本流傳、取材特點(diǎn)、寫(xiě)作的內(nèi)容特點(diǎn)及其對(duì)后世史書(shū)的影響等方面進(jìn)行了概括性的敘述,并提出了自己的一些觀點(diǎn),指出《獨(dú)斷》在秦漢文化史研究中具有不可替代的重要地位,希冀有助于深化這一課題的研究。
[Abstract]:Arbitrariness, as the representative work of Cai Yong in historiography in the late Eastern Han Dynasty, has become incomplete after thousands of years of spread, and has become more and more false. Lu Wen, a scholar in the Qing Dynasty, has been paid attention to by scholars since it came into being. The contents of the rules and regulations of etiquette and the textual research of famous objects have become scholars' examination from Wei, Jin to Sui and Tang dynasties, especially in the period of Wei, Jin and Sui and Tang dynasties. Annotating the important books of the etiquette system of Qin and Han dynasties, but mostly referring to the original text, but doing little for the dissemination of the books, it is difficult to see the whole picture in later generations, and it is difficult to read the reverse disorder. Few scholars collate and study this book in the Song Dynasty and later, but it is still used as the material for the textual research of the Qin and Han dynasties and the previous rites and regulations of the Qin and Han dynasties, while Lu Wen, a scholar in the Qing Dynasty, has been widely circulated after finishing up the book. Since modern times, the study of "arbitrariness" in the field of history has only used it as a reference material for the examination of historical materials, but it has not deeply studied itself, especially in the time, process, source and edition of the book of "arbitrariness". The content characteristic and the influence to the later generation and so on. In view of this, this article relies on the ancient books of the Qin and Han dynasties, combines the relevant archaeological materials, and applies the double evidence method to circulate the version of "arbitrary" since the book, the source of the material, The content characteristics and its influence on later generations are discussed and studied in detail. This article is divided into the following parts: The introduction part discusses the purpose, significance and research focus of this paper, briefly reviews the academic history of the research object involved in this paper, and points out the weakness of the academic circles for the study of arbitrariness for a long time. And the innovation of this paper. The first part discusses the problem of the author Cai Yong's birth years and the conditions that Cai Yong possessed when he wrote "arbitrariness". Based on this, the author thinks that the writing time of "arbitrariness" was roughly in the ten years of Cai Yong's exile. The emphasis of this paper is to make a detailed analysis and induction of the spread of the edition since the completion of the book, and to probe into the different attribution of arbitrariness in the bibliographic works since the Tang and Song dynasties. The second part mainly discusses the material selection of arbitrariness. It is discussed according to the original documents cited by dogmatism itself and possibly by reference to the classification of the literature. The former is divided into sections to inquire into the origin of the original documents, while the latter takes the approximate age of the book as the time axis. The relative historical books before the completion of the book were combed and analyzed one by one. Finally, they were summarized into tables, and the rules of taking materials from arbitrariness were summarized, and the reasons were explored. The third part focuses on the content characteristics of Cai Yong's writing of arbitrariness and the influence of relevant systems on later generations. By analyzing the characteristics of Cai Yong's writing of arbitrariness, we can see clearly that the fundamental purpose of Cai Yong's writing of arbitrariness is to highlight and strengthen the imperial power by purging the rules of etiquette, and then to realize the clean and clean administration of officials. The innovation system recorded in the book "arbitrariness", such as Yu Fu and Chao Hui, had an important influence on the writing of the historical chronicles of later generations, and became an indispensable and important part of the historical chronicles since then. And with the development of the times gradually refined. In the conclusion part, the author makes a general description of the version of "arbitrariness", the characteristics of materials, the characteristics of the content of writing and its influence on the history books of later generations, and puts forward some points of view. It is pointed out that arbitrariness plays an irreplaceable important role in the study of the cultural history of Qin and Han dynasties, and it is hoped that it will help to deepen the research on this subject.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：陜西師范大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：K092

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前3條

1 劉后濱;從蔡邕《獨(dú)斷》看漢代公文形態(tài)與政治體制的變遷[J];廣東社會(huì)科學(xué);2002年04期

2 躍進(jìn);《獨(dú)斷》與秦漢文體研究[J];文學(xué)遺產(chǎn);2002年05期

3 馬萌;《琴操》撰者考辨[J];中國(guó)社會(huì)科學(xué)院研究生院學(xué)報(bào);2005年02期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前1條

1 呂升高;《獨(dú)斷》詞匯研究[D];四川大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號(hào)：1812243