民初清学史书写中的身份认同与叙述政治——以李慈铭传为中心
Identity Recognition and Narrative Politics of Qing Academic History in the Early Republican Era——Take the Biography of Li Ciming as Center
-
摘要: 后人在回顾、总结有清一代学术时，往往绕不开李慈铭（越缦）其人。20世纪30年代出自王式通之手的《清儒学案·越缦学案》小传，实际由平步青撰传、《清史稿·李慈铭传》以及王式通为王重民辑《越缦堂文集》所作跋文内容结合而成。因生前未有经史专著，对李慈铭应列入儒林还是文苑，归入正案还是诸儒一事，缪荃孙、吴士鉴、徐世昌、夏孙桐等人进行了深入讨论。最终，这些书写构成了后世认知李慈铭学术形象的基础性文本，而其背后的文本生成机制，不但折射出编纂者的身份认同情况，也显示了民初清学史书写中的叙述政治特质。Abstract: Li Ciming often played a central role in reviewing and summarizing the academic history of the Qing Dynasty.In the early 1930s,Wang Shitong wrote a short biography of Li Ciming in Qingru Xuean(《清儒学案·越缦学案》),synthesizing Ping Buqing’s biography of Li (Licimingzhuan in Qingshigao,《清史稿·李慈铭传》) and the postscript content from Wang Chongmin’s compilation of the Yuemantang Anthology(《越缦堂文集》).Without specialized writings,figures such as Miao Quansun,Wu Shijian,Xu Shichang,and Xia Suntong made different choices regarding whether Li Ciming should be included in the Rulinzhuan(《儒林传》) or Wenyuanzhuan(《文苑传》),and whether he should be categorized under the Zhengan（“正案”） or Zhuru（“诸儒”） after careful deliberation.Their writing modes shaped key texts of how Li Ciming was perceived by later generations。The underlying mechanisms of text production not only mirror the compilers’ identity orientations but also underscore the narrative-political characteristics inherent in early Republican Qing historiography.
-
点击查看大图
计量
- 文章访问数: 212
- HTML全文浏览量: 22
下载:
沪公网安备 31010102003103号