查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 論清高宗之重修遼、金、元三史
- 金世宗時期女真民族的危機--金世宗女真政策的背景
- 遼金元的契丹女真蒙古公主
- 檢討明代對蒙古、滿州 (女真) 民族的得失
- 元朝秘史所記「忽刺安.迭格列」人(紅襖軍)助金守潼關並抗禦蒙古入侵事跡考
- 評Pamela Kyle Crossley, A Translucent Mirror: History and Identity in Qing Imperial Ideology (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999,2002.)
- 乣軍考釋初稿
- 「春秋」「及宋人盟于宿」辨義
- 論蒙古史家的歷史意識:以「蒙古秘史」和「蒙古黃金史」為中心
- 從唐宋時期的「春秋」學著作論「文獻繫學」架構
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 論清高宗之重修遼、金、元三史 |
---|---|
作 者 | 何冠彪; | 書刊名 | 故宮學術季刊 |
卷 期 | 12:3 民84.春 |
頁 次 | 頁49-66 |
分類號 | 625.4 |
關鍵詞 | 一統同文; 大公至正; 女真; 元史; 四庫全書總目; 金史; 音譯; 契丹; 春秋; 重修; 索倫; 國語解; 勝國; 滿州; 傳信示公; 蒙古; 褒貶; 遼史; 歷史判官; 歷代通鑑輯覽; 邊疆民族; Yitong tongwen; Unified in territory and the use of language; Dagong zhizheng; Perfectly impartial and absolutely correct; Nuzhen; Jurchen; Yuanshi; Dynastic history of the Yuan; Siku quanshu zongmu; Summaries of the contents of the sikuquanshu; Jinshi; Dynastic history of the Jin; Yinyi; Transliteration; Xiedan; Khitan; Chunqiu; Spring and autumn annals; Chongxiu; Revise; Suolun; Solon; Guyou jie; Explanatory notes of the national language; Shengguo; The superseded dynasty; Manzhou; Manchu; Chuanxin shigong; Conveying truth and manifesting impartiality; Meggu; Mongol; Baobian; Praise and blame; Liaoshi; Dynastic history of the Liao; Lishi panguan; Judge of history; Lidai tongjian jilan; Comprehensive mirror of the successive reigns; Bianjiang minzu; Frontier peoples; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | [內容提要]:清高宗以歷史判官自居,除下令編纂大量史籍外,又重修不少前代著作。高大擠宗對遼、金、元三史無甚好評,尤其不滿書中人、地、官名的音譯,一方面因為漠人不懂三朝國語,另一方面因為他們暗寓褒貶。高宗提出「傳信示公」為口號,下令重修三史,實含政治目的。由於清朝本為邊疆民族而統治中外,因而借修訂三史音譯,指摘漢人狹隘的種族觀念,並為當時「一統同文」的局面,定下「大公至正」的法則。三史重修後,高宗又命以此作為根據,劃一從前史籍有關遼、金、元三朝的音譯,並且修改其他有關三朝的著述。 |
英文摘要 | Emperor Qianlong 乾隆 (r. 1735-1796) regarded himself as the sole worthwhile judge of history in his times. Prompted by this thinking, he ordered his officials to compile a greatnumber of histories and revise many historical writings. All these works had to be either finalised or, at least, endorsed by him before publication, of many such historical writings, he did not regard the Liaoshi 遼史 .Ct (Dynastic History of the Liao), Jinshi 金史 (Dynastic History of the Jin), and Yiianshi 元史 (Dynastic History of the Yuan) as faithful historical accounts. He was especially dissatisified with the transliterations of the names of persons, official titles, and places contained in these three histories. He observed that the three dynasties were founded by alien peoples, whereas the three histories were compiled by Hah-Chinese historians of the successive dynasties. Emperor Qianlong thus rejected the transliterations on the following grounds. Firstly, the Hah-Chinese compilers did not have ample knowledge of the "national" languages of the three dynasties. Secondly, the transliterations were formulated with hidden meanings, aiming at humiliating the alien dynasties and reflecting the Han-Chinese xenophobia of the compilers. The revision of the three histories were introduced under the imperial instruction of "conveying truth and manifesting impartiality" ( chuanxin shigong 傳信示公). The revision, moreover, took on an implicit political mission. As the Qing dynasty was a unitary multi-national state and the Manchus themselves were also aliens in the eyes of the Han-Chinese, Emperor Qianlong took this opportunity, by demonstrating the "perfectly impartial and absolutely correct" ( dagong zhizheng 大公至正) ways of writing history, to eliminate the influence of the narrow-mindedness of traditional sinocentrism which would split his unified do- main. Of the three histories, Emperor Qianlong paid most attention to the Jinshi since the Manchus were descendants of the Jurchen. Between the other two histories, he laid more stress on the Yuianshi as the Mongols formed an important part of the multi-national Qing dynasty, and were particularly well-treated by the Emperor himself. The revision was divided into three phases. The first phase took place in 1747 when Emperor Qianlong ordered his officials to revise the Chapter 〞Guoyu jie〞 (國語解 , Explanatory Notes of the National Language) of the Jinshi. However, only the official edition of this work required adaptation of the revision. Private editions could either adapt the new version or retain the original one. The second phase came in 1771 when Emperor Qianlong issued an edict to recompile the three 〞Guoyu jie〞 of the three histories. In early 1772, the one of the Jinshi was finished. Emperor Qianlong, who was too impatient to wait for the completion of those of the other two histories, ordered his officials to start the third phase of the revision, i.e., to revise the transliterations of all other chapters of the three histories on the basis of the new 〞Guoyu jie? In 1775, the revised Jinshi was issued. Although the dates of completion of the other two 〞Guoyu jie〞 were unknown, the revision of the Liaoshi and the Yiianshi were completed in 1781. The three new 〞Guoyu jie" were incorporated in early 1786 into a book entitled Liao-J in-Y iian sanshi guo yu fie ( 遼金元三史國語解, Explanatory Notes of the National Languages of the Three Dynastic Histories of the Liao, Jin, and Yiian). It was then used as the orthodox version of transliterations, unifying the transliterations of all other historical works concerning the three dynasties. However, unlike the three histories, the revision of these other works included their contents and styles, not just transliterations alone. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。