试论《明实录》对建文帝的态度及其变化  

The Variation of Description to Emperor Jianwen in Memoir of Ming Dynasty

作　　者：谢贵安[1] 

机构地区：[1]武汉大学中国传统文化研究中心暨历史学院,武汉430060

出　　处：《北京联合大学学报（人文社会科学版）》2010年第3期30-37,共8页Journal of Beijing Union University(Humanities and Social Sciences)

基　　金：教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地重大项目"实录修撰与中国传统史学流变"(06JJD770020)

摘　　要：作为明成祖嫡系君主所控制的《明实录》,在对待被成祖推翻的建文帝的年号及历史上,存在着明显的排斥态度和掩盖倾向,反映了明代官方史学在对待统治集团内部被打倒的重要人物上的处理倾向,以及专制政治下失势人物失载的命运。随着皇权的松弛和士风的变化,由史臣们具体纂修的晚明实录,开始改变以往掩盖建文历史的做法,频繁载录建文的历史以及为之平反的请求,表明代表帝国意识形态的儒臣与代表上层建筑的君主之间,在伦理价值与政治利益上也存在着一定的差异。The Memoir of Ming Dynasty, which was compiled under the control of the direct line of descent of Emperor Chengzu of the Ming Dynasty, had a clear trend of excludability and covering up the historical fact that the original Emperor of Jianwen was overthrown by Emperor Chengzu. This writing reveals such a trend that how the official historiography dealt with the important roles which were suppressed by the ruling group. It reflects the amnesic destiny of disgraced persons in historiography in the Caesarism. Also, it shows that with the relaxation of imperial power and the change of atmosphere of scholars, the memoir of the late Ming Dynasty which was compiled by historical officials, began to change the old way of covering up the history about Emperor Jianwen of the Ming Dynasty, and frequently to record the history about this emperor with the request of his rehabilitation. These changes indicate that there was a discrepancy between the ethic value and political interest, within the Confucian ministers which represented the empire＇ s ideology and the emperors who represented the superstructure of political society.

关 键 词：明实录 建文帝 记事态度 史书编纂 

分 类 号：K248.07[历史地理—历史学]