论文部分内容阅读
司马迁是我国占代的史学巨匠,关于他的最后结局,两汉史文记载模糊。唯卫宏《汉书旧仪注》(以下简称《汉旧仪》)载录:“司马迁作景帝本纪,极言其短及武帝过,武帝怒而削去之。后坐举李陵,陵降匈奴,故下蚕室。有怨言,下狱死。”这条资料对于探讨司马迁一生的结局极为珍贵。1955年,郭沫若先生提出“司马迁之死可能是不自然的骤死”,1956年又以上举《汉旧仪》记载为主要沦据,明确指出司马迁“在既受宫刑之后”,又“再度下狱致死”。公平地说,这一结论是目前仅有的以汉代明文记述为据的研究所得。但多年来,相当一些同志却坚持旧说,认为《汉旧仪》之文不可信,进而否定郭沫若的论点,近年仍可见到这类文章。其根据主要是两个:第一,汉武帝没有见到景帝本纪的可能,因汉太史令不掌记
Sima Qian is a master of historiography that our country occupies. As to his final result, the records of the history of Han and Han dynasties are vague. Wei Weixong’s “Annotations of Old Books” (hereinafter referred to as “Old Instrument of Han Dynasty”) Records: “Sima Qian was King Jingdiji, extremely short and overdue to the emperor, , So the next Jamsil. Complaints, jail dead. ”This information is extremely valuable for the study of Sima Qian’s life’s ending. In 1955, Mr. Guo Moruo proposed that “the death of Si Maqian may be an unnatural death.” In 1956, again, the “old instrument of Han Dynasty” was recorded as the main source of reduction. It was clearly pointed out that Sima Qian “jailed again after being imprisoned” lethal“. To be fair, this conclusion is the only one that has come from the clear account of the Han Dynasty. However, over the years, quite a few comrades have insisted on using the old saying that such articles as the ”old Chinese instrument" are not credible and thus negate Guo’s argument. It is mainly based on two: First, the Emperor Wudi did not see the possibility of Jingdi Ji, because the Han Dynasty Shihlin not mind