扬雄的“圣”与“非圣”--以东汉初期桓谭、王充、班固的评价为考察中心  

Yang Xiong’s“Holiness”and“Non-Holiness”:Focusing on the Evaluations of Huan Tan,Wang Chong,and Ban Gu in the Early Eastern Han Dynasty

作　　者：杨胜宽[1] YANG Shengkuang(School of Literature and Journalism,Leshan Normal University,Leshan Sichuan 641000,China)

机构地区：[1]乐山师范学院文学与新闻学院,四川乐山614000

出　　处：《重庆文理学院学报(社会科学版)》2025年第2期80-92,共13页Journal of Chongqing University of Arts and Sciences(Social Sciences Edition)

摘　　要：关于扬雄的评价问题历来分歧很大,特别是围绕其“圣”与“非圣”的争议,自西汉末期以来就一直存在,且迄今未止。基于对史料的考释,重点考察东汉初期桓谭、王充、班固三位颇具代表性历史人物对扬雄的评价背景和具体内容,揭示这些分歧和争议源于扬雄形象本身的多面性与论者评价尺度的差异性。其中王充从地位属性和身份特征实事求是地还原扬雄“文人”的本来面目,较为客观地看待其一生追求与成就,评价较为公允。后世对扬雄的形象与贡献的批评,亦当在此。There have always been significant differences in the evaluation of Yang Xiong,especially the controversy on his“holiness”and“non-holiness”,which has existed since the late Western Han Dynasty and has not ceased to this day.Based on the interpretation of historical materials,this article focuses on the evaluation background and specific content of Yang Xiong by three representative historical figures in the early Eastern Han Dynasty,Huan Tan,Wang Chong,and Ban Gu.These differences and controversies stem from the multifaceted nature of Yang Xiong’s image itself and the differences in the evaluation standards of scholars;among them,Wang Chong truthfully restored Yang Xiong’s true image as a“literati”based on his status attributes and identity characteristics,objectively viewed his lifelong pursuits and achievements,and evaluated him fairly.The criticism of Yang Xiong’s image and contributions in later generations should also be judged fairly,too.

关 键 词：扬雄 桓谭 王充 班固 “圣”与“非圣” 

分 类 号：I206[文学—中国文学]