姚振宗《七略别录佚文》略论  

The Brief Discussion on Yao Zhenzong’s Lost Articles of Qilue Bielu

作　　者：傅荣贤[1] 房亮 Fu Rongxian;Fang Liang

机构地区：[1]扬州大学文学院,江苏扬州225002

出　　处：《大学图书馆学报》2022年第3期122-128,共7页Journal of Academic Libraries

基　　金：2021年江苏省研究生科研与实践创新计划项目“姚振宗《别录》《七略》辑本体例订误”(编号:CX11117)研究成果之一。

摘　　要：清人姚振宗《七略别录佚文》虽以“佚文”为名,但并不从辑佚学的角度“以搜辑佚文为事”;而是从目录学的角度“推寻端绪”,努力复原《别录》的体制,其《七略别录佚文》也成为最接近《别录》本来面目的文本。具体而言,他将《七略》《别录》作为“二书”分别写录,揭示了两者一为校雠学、一为目录学的学科分殊;分析《别录》成书始末,显示《别录》存在两个版本,一是“随竟奏上,皆载在本书”的单篇叙录,二是“时又别集众录”而成的第二个版本。以此为据,可知第一个版本只有基于校雠分工的简单分类,第二个版本则完整地承绪了《七略》的分类体系。此外,姚振宗收录《战国策》等八篇相对完整的叙录,也反映他的灼见。然而,姚振宗也存在以荀悦《汉纪》“为《辑略》之文”、因没有认识到《汉志》班固注兼取《别录》《七略》而将班注全部移录为《七略》佚文等方面的不足。Although the work by Yao Zhenzong of the Qing dynasty is named after “lost articles”, it didn’t “search for the collection of lost articles” from the perspective of compilation;instead, it was from the perspective of bibliography to “seeking clues” and trying to restore the system of Bielu. He wrote the Qilue and the Bielu as “two books” separately, established the chapter framework of the Bielu according to the classification structure of the Hanzhi, and listed the “Warring States Policy Records” as the narrative of Bielu, which shows Yao’s outstanding insight beyond other complilatists. Its Lost Articles of Qilue Bielu has also become the text closest to the true face of the Beilu, which provides a more reliable premise for future generations to further understand the relationship between the Bielu and the Qilue, as well as the Bielu of the Jilue, classification, and narrative. However, Yao Zhenzong also had some deficiencies in using Xun Yue’s Hanji as the text of the Jilue and transferring all the Ban Gu notes of the Hanzhi to Qilue(instead of the Bielu).

关 键 词：姚振宗 《七略别录佚文》 目录学 

分 类 号：G257[文化科学—图书馆学]