[1]贾鹏涛.论吕思勉、杨宽师生古史研究的异同[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2020,21(05):88-95.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2020.05.010]
　Jia Pengtao.On the Similarities and Differences between Lyu Simian and Yang Kuan in the Study of Ancient History[J].Journal of Changzhou University(Social Science Edition),2020,21(05):88-95.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2020.05.010]
点击复制

论吕思勉、杨宽师生古史研究的异同()
分享到：

常州大学学报(社会科学版)[ISSN:2095-042X/CN:32-1821/C]

卷:
第21卷
期数:
2020年05期
页码:
88-95
栏目:
文史哲研究
出版日期:
2020-10-15

文章信息/Info

Title:
On the Similarities and Differences between Lyu Simian and Yang Kuan in the Study of Ancient History
作者:
贾鹏涛
Author(s):
Jia Pengtao
关键词:
吕思勉;  杨宽;  古史辨;  二重证据法;  规律
Keywords:
Lyu Simian;  Yang Kuan;  ancient history discernment;  double evidence;  law
分类号:
K092
DOI:
10.3969/j.issn.2095-042X.2020.05.010
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
吕思勉、杨宽师生二人的古史研究有同有异。相同之处表现在:对古史辨派的古史造伪说持否定态度,肯定所谓伪书《山海经》《墨子》《尉缭子》《六韬》的史料价值。不同之处表现在:在研究方法上,吕思勉认为地下出土的实物未必有书籍可靠,不注重使用地下考古资料; 杨宽则认为应将纸上材料和考古材料结合起来。在古书的辨伪上,吕思勉认为《穆天子传》为伪书,杨宽则认为有史料价值; 吕思勉认为《逸周书》是价值很高的史料,杨宽则认为是假托的故事。在古史研究目的上,吕思勉侧重于微观方面的考证,所得结论稳重平实; 杨宽则侧重于宏观方面的贯通,在考证的基础上,尝试得出规律,所得结论较“粗”。而正是与吕思勉古史研究的不同,使得杨宽凭借一部《中国上古史导论》,在中国史学史上获得一席之地。
Abstract:
Lyu Simian and Yang Kuan, as teacher and student, have similarities and differences in the study of ancient history. The similarities are shown in the following aspects: they hold a negative attitude towards the theory of making false ancient history by the school of ancient history discernment, and affirm the historical values of the so-called fake books Shan Hai Jing, Mo Zi, Wei Liao Zi and Liu Tao. The differences are as follows: in terms of research methods, Lyu Simian thinks that the unearthed objects may not be as reliable as books, and he does not emphasize the use of underground archaeological materials, while Yang Kuan thinks that paper materials and archaeological materials should be combined. On the identification of ancient books, Lyu Simian thinks that The Biography of Mu Tianzi is a fake book, while Yang Kuan thinks it has historical value. Lyu Simian thinks that Yi Zhou Shu is a valuable historical material, while Yang Kuan thinks it is a fake story. On the purpose of studying ancient history, Lyu Simian focuses on the textual research in the micro aspect with steady and plain conclusions. Yang Kuan focuses on the macroscopic aspect and tries to acquire the law on the basis of textual research with “rough” conclusions. It is the difference between Yang Kuan and Lyu Simian in the study of ancient history that earns Yang Kuan a place in the history of Chinese historiography with An Introduction to Ancient Chinese History.

参考文献/References:

[1] 严耕望.治史三书[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2011:169.
[2]张耕华.人类的祥瑞:吕思勉传[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,1998: 186-192.
[3]李波.吕思勉与《古史辨》[J].史学史研究,2012(2): 65-73.
[4]何周.浅论吕思勉的史料观[J].古籍整理研究学刊,2011(3):103-106.
[5]王孝廉.中国的神话世界:下编 中原民族的神话与信仰[M].台北:洪叶文化事业有限公司,2006:433.
[6]李长银.杨宽“神话演变分化说”述论[J].齐鲁学刊,2016(6):54-58.
[7]吕思勉.吕思勉遗文集[M].上海:华东师范大学出版社,1997.
[8]吕思勉,童书业.古史辨:第7册:下[M].上海:开明书店,1941.
[9]杨宽.从康有为说到顾颉刚:史学方法的错误[N].大美晚报,1936-06-01(3).
[10]杨宽.历史激流:杨宽自传[M].台北:大块文化出版股份有限公司,2005.
[11]吕思勉.吕思勉读史札记[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2005.
[12]吕思勉.经子解题[M].北京:中国书籍出版社,2006:18.
[13]杨宽.战国史[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2016.
[14]吕思勉.先秦史[M].上海:上海古籍出版社,2005.
[15]杨宽.吕思勉先生的史学研究[J].中国史研究,1982(3):147-162.
[16]杨宽.怀念吕思勉先生[J].常州文史资料,1984(5):51-56.
[17]虞云国.用新方法整理旧国故[C]//华东师范大学思勉人文高等研究院吕思勉研究中心.观其会通:吕思勉先生逝世六十周年纪念文集.上海:上海古籍出版社,2017:36-37.
[18]杨宽.西周史[M].上海:上海人民出版社,2016:639-640.
[19]顾颉刚.当代中国史学[M].沈阳:辽宁教育出版社,1998:124.
[20]顾颉刚.顾颉刚日记:卷六[M].北京:中华书局,2011:282.
[21]顾颉刚.顾颉刚日记:卷八[M].北京:中华书局,2011:316.
[22]傅正.疑古派与唯物史观之间:杨宽与“井田制之争”[N].东方早报,2016-10-09(9).

相似文献/References:

[1]李 波.吕思勉对康有为今文经说的继承与扬弃[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2014,15(04):73.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095—042X.2014.04.016]
　LI Bo.LV Si-mian's Inheritance and Sublation of KANG You-wei's Contemporary School of Confucian Classics[J].Journal of Changzhou University(Social Science Edition),2014,15(05):73.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095—042X.2014.04.016]
[2]何　周.吕思勉的考据学宗旨及原因[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2011,12(03):81.
　HE Zhou.Aims and Reasons of Lv Si- mian's Textual Criticism[J].Journal of Changzhou University(Social Science Edition),2011,12(05):81.
[3]李　波.吕思勉与清代常州学术[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2011,12(04):92.
　LI Bo.LV Si- mian and Changzhou School in Qing Dynasty[J].Journal of Changzhou University(Social Science Edition),2011,12(05):92.
[4]李波.论吕思勉史学的学术风格 ———以吕氏通史著作为例[J].常州大学学报(社会科学版),2013,14(05):55.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095—042X.2013.05.013]
　LI Bo.On the Academic Style of LV Si － mian ———Taking his General History of China as an Example[J].Journal of Changzhou University(Social Science Edition),2013,14(05):55.[doi:10.3969/j.issn.2095—042X.2013.05.013]

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
作者简介:贾鹏涛,历史学博士,延安大学历史学院讲师。
基金项目:国家社会科学基金一般项目“杨宽与20世纪的中国史学研究”(20BZS006); 陕西省教育厅人文社会科学专项基金“杨宽的史学研究——以吕思勉、杨宽师生古史研究为中心”(19JK0943)。
更新日期/Last Update: 2020-10-15