王鸿绪“敕修”《明史》辨伪  

The Scrutiny of Wang Hongxu’s Amendment Decreed of The History of the Ming Dynasty

作　　者：潘志和[1] 

机构地区：[1]广州城市职业学院学报编辑部,广东广州510405

出　　处：《广东第二师范学院学报》2013年第2期104-109,共6页Journal of Guangdong University of Education

摘　　要：结合康熙对《明史》编修前后的不同态度、王鸿绪整理《明史列传稿》与《敕修明史稿》的经过,对比分析王鸿绪两史稿呈表文本,可得出王鸿绪的所谓"敕修"不能成立的结论。王鸿绪的问题不在向来被指责的"窜改"或"攘窃"史稿,而在《敕修明史稿》之"敕修",在利用"416卷《明史稿》"曾被康熙批评的政治恐惧造成雍正朝以其《敕修明史稿》为底本续修而成现行《明史》。Kangxi＇ s attitudes before and after the amendment of The History of the Ming Dynasty, together with the process of amendment and the revised version of Biographies of The History of the Ming Dynasty and The Amendment of the History of the Ming Dynasty pointed to the fact that the ＇ amendment decreed＇ done by Wang Hongxu does not hold water. The issue lies in the ＇amendment decreed＇ rather than the frequently disputed ＇ falsification＇ or ＇ plagiary＇ of The Amendment of the History of the Ming Dynasty, and in Column 416 of The History of the Ming Dynasty which, once criticized by Kangxi, brought about the terror and the amendment of The History of the Ming Dynasty.

关 键 词：王鸿绪 “敕修” 《明史》 呈表 辨伪 “416卷《明史稿》” 

分 类 号：K248[历史地理—历史学]