论文部分内容阅读
一从马端临评论《通典》、《通鉴》说起史学批评是严肃的事情,没有严肃的态度,自亦难得有严肃的批评。中国古代史学遗产的精华之一,是许多史学家、史学批评家在撰写历史和评论史学中,都具有一种严肃的态度。《史记》、《汉书》孰高孰低的争论,编年、纪传孰优孰劣的辩难,以及关于其他一些问题的聚讼,其中凡见解精当者,大抵都离不开知人论世这个道理。上文说到马端临在评论杜佑《通典》和司马光《通鉴》时,提出了时有古今、述有体要的思想,可以看作是史学批评中之自觉的
A commentary from the horse end “Tongdian”, “Tongjian” Speaking of history criticism is a serious matter, there is no serious attitude, from rare to have serious criticism. One of the quintessential heritage of ancient Chinese historiography is that many historians and historians have a serious attitude in writing history and comment historiography. Debates on the highs and lows of the Records of the Historian and the Han Dynasty, the debate over the merits of the Chronicles and the Chronicles, and the court proceedings on other issues, This truth. As mentioned above, when Ma Duanlin commented on Du Tong’s “Tongdian” and Sima Guang’s “Tongjian”, he put forward the ideas that there are always ancient and modern times and described the important things, which can be regarded as the conscious of historical criticism