《礼书》来源问题论衡  

On the Source of Lishu

作　　者：王衡[1] 

机构地区：[1]渭南师范学院人文学院,陕西渭南714099

出　　处：《渭南师范学院学报》2017年第21期59-63,74,共6页Journal of Weinan Normal University

基　　金：文化部项目:关陇地方戏文化生态调查研究(13DB09)

摘　　要：当前,有关《礼书》的来源问题,主要有四种说法:一是仅强调《礼书》为有录无书者之一,其来源问题还未被高度关注;二是《礼书》由褚少孙取荀卿《礼论》补写而成;三是《礼书》为司马迁草创之文;四是《礼书》未必为褚少孙所补,而是后人妄增之作。我们认为,《礼书》辑录前人著述以成就一家之言是情理之中的事情。一方面,厥协六经异传,整齐百家杂语,成一家之言,是司马迁著史的基本策略;另一方面,究天人之际,通古今之变,是司马迁作"八书"乃至著史的基本目标。There are four main arguments of Lishu at present. Firstly,they emphasize the real Lishu which has already been lost,and the origin of Lishu has not been highly concerned. Secondly,they consider Lishu was supplemented by Chu Shaosun from Xunqing's Lilun. Thirdly,Lishu was written by Sima Qian informally. Fourthly,Lishu wasn't supplemented by Chu Shaosun but by the later people. We believe it is reasonable that they extracted the previous works and then wrote the book of Lishu. On the one hand,it is the basic strategy of Sima Qian's written history that he extracted from achievements of our predecessors. On the other hand,it is the basic target of Sima Qian's Bashu and Historical Records that he researched the relationship between Heaven and people,the laws of change in ancient and modern times.

关 键 词：司马迁 《礼书》 文化渊源 

分 类 号：K207[历史地理—历史学]