加洛林时代历史文献的政治倾向性  

On political tendency of the Carolingian historical documents

作　　者：朱君杙[1] 王晋新[1] 

机构地区：[1]东北师范大学历史文化学院,吉林长春130024

出　　处：《中南大学学报（社会科学版）》2013年第5期217-222,共6页Journal of Central South University：Social Sciences

基　　金：中央高校基本科研业务费专项资金资助项目"加洛林时代史学成就探微"(11SSXT116);教育部人文社会科学重点研究基地2009年度重大项目"古典文明终结与地中海世界裂变:对西方文明形成的重新审视"(2009JJD770011)

摘　　要：国内学术界在评判中古西方史学运行机制,以及在对中西古代史学运行机制进行比较时,往往认为中世纪的西方史学与世俗统治权力之间并无密切的联系。实际上,这一观点并不符合加洛林史学的实际状况。在加洛林时代,由于加洛林王/皇室对于修史活动的支持和影响以及加洛林君主对于教会的牢牢控制,使得加洛林时代的许多历史作品都沾染了强烈的主观色彩和政治偏见。加洛林王朝鼎盛时期的许多历史作品都存在着一种敌视前朝、拥护当今的政治倾向,而加洛林帝国内战时期的一些史学作品则由于作者分属不同的政治阵营而政治立场迥然相异,针锋相对。On evaluating the operating mechanism of the medieval west historiography and comparing the operating mechanism of ancient west historiography with the operating mechanism of ancient Chinese historiography, it is usually believed in domestic academic circles that there is no close relationship between western historiography and secular power in the middle ages. In fact, the opinion doesn＇t conform to the actual situation. In the Carolingian period, Carolingian historiography was tainted with the strong subjective color and political bias because that the Carolingian royal court supported and influenced historiography. In the heyday period of the Carolingian dynasty, many historical works all had a political tendency hostile to Merovingian dynasty and supported Carolingian dynasty. In the civil period of the Carolingian dynasty, the political positions of the many historical works were widely different and were in diametrical opposition to each other because that their authors belonged to different political camps.

关 键 词：中古西方史学 加洛林时代 历史文献 政治倾向性 年代记 查理曼 

分 类 号：K131[历史地理—历史学]