刘国民. 《史记·淮南衡山列传》辨疑——兼论汪春泓先生的相关论点和论据[J]. 《信阳师范学院学报(哲学社会科学版)》, 2021, 41(1): 1-8. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-0964.2021.01.001
引用本文: 刘国民. 《史记·淮南衡山列传》辨疑——兼论汪春泓先生的相关论点和论据[J]. 《信阳师范学院学报(哲学社会科学版)》, 2021, 41(1): 1-8. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-0964.2021.01.001
LIU Guomin. To Disabuse the Case of LIU An in Records of the Grand Historian: Huainan Hengshan Biography——Comments on the Relevant Arguments of Mr. WANG Chunhong[J]. The journal of xinyang normal university (philosophy and social science edition), 2021, 41(1): 1-8. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-0964.2021.01.001
Citation: LIU Guomin. To Disabuse the Case of LIU An in Records of the Grand Historian: Huainan Hengshan Biography——Comments on the Relevant Arguments of Mr. WANG Chunhong[J]. The journal of xinyang normal university (philosophy and social science edition), 2021, 41(1): 1-8. DOI: 10.3969/j.issn.1003-0964.2021.01.001

《史记·淮南衡山列传》辨疑——兼论汪春泓先生的相关论点和论据

To Disabuse the Case of LIU An in Records of the Grand Historian: Huainan Hengshan Biography——Comments on the Relevant Arguments of Mr. WANG Chunhong

  • 摘要: 汪春泓认为,《史记·淮南衡山列传》不是司马迁所作,而是参与治淮南狱的宗正刘受与刘德依据“定谳之词”而写,后经刘向、刘歆的修改而成。因为司马迁对刘安颇为欣赏和同情,且认为他的谋反被诛乃是冤案。笔者认为,《史记·淮南衡山列传》虽有嫌疑之处,但不足以否定此传的作者是司马迁。刘安在帝室中是二世含冤的一支,一方面祖母、父亲的冤死在他的心中种下复仇的种子;另一方面他因受到汉廷的窥伺、压制和逼迫,而负有沉重的压力感,不得不生谋反之心。强烈的复仇情绪有时遮蔽理性,故刘安的某些行为不合常情常理。司马迁基本上认定刘安因谋反被诛,也指出他有“谋反形”,即有谋反的动机和目的且为谋反暗地做了一些实际的准备工作,但并没有公然地举兵反叛。汉廷断淮南狱以《春秋》之义正之,深文周纳,穷究党羽,严刑酷罚。而司马迁是持批评态度的,认为刘安之谋反被诛是有一定冤屈的。

     

    Abstract: WANG Chunhong thought that Records of the Grand Historian: Huainan Hengshan Biography was not written by SIMA Qian, but by Zongzheng LIU Shou and LIU De according to the case file, who participated in the administration of Huainan Prison, and then modified by LIU Xiang and LIU Xin. Because SIMA Qian had great admiration and sympathy for LIU An, and thought that his treachery was an unjust case. The author thinks that although there are some suspicions in Records of the Grand Historian: Huainan Hengshan Biography, it is not enough to deny that the author of this biography is Sima Qian. LIU An was the second generation who suffered a wrong in the royal family. On the one hand, his grandmother and father died of injustice which planted the seeds of revenge in his heart; On the other hand, he was monitored, suppressed and forced by the Han Dynasty, so he felt heavy pressure and had to rebel. Sometimes strong feelings of revenge could overshadow one's reason, so LIU An's behavior was irrational. Sima Qian basically concluded that LIU An had been sentenced to death for rebellion. He also pointed out that LIU An had the motive and purpose, and made some practical preparations for rebellion, but he did not openly rebel. The Han Dynasty judged the case of Huainan Prison according to Spring and Autumn Annals, carefully making framed-up arguments and punishing severely his henchmen. SIMA Qian was critical and thought that the death of LIU An for his rebellion had done him some injustice.

     

/

返回文章
返回