论文部分内容阅读
先前,笔者以《蒲槃生平考略》《蒲槃为子析箸》考得蒲槃生于明万历十一年癸未(1583)卒于清康熙三年甲辰(1664年)及康熙二年癸卯(1663年)季春主持诸子析箸。邹宗良先生以《蒲槃生平考辨》提出异议及指教,认为予拙文考论多有脱离文献记载的推测之辞,且一些说法不够审慎。笔者认为,研究者有责任依据相关史料厘清事实,还历史以本来面目,并与邹先生商榷。故再次作文以深入考论分析,期还事实真相。笔者将蒲家《重修七圣庙碑》所刊碑记与《族谱》所载蒲松龄为其父蒲槃所撰小传云及《三续淄川县志》所载蒲立德为其曾祖蒲槃小传所云,分析三者的史料作用,析出三者间的异同之距,认为《三续淄川县志》中蒲立德为其曾祖小传有误记之嫌。
Previously, the author of “A survey of life on Pu”, “A study of Pu” “A study of Pu Yu was born in the Ming Dynasty 11 Years (1583) died in the Qing Emperor Kangxi three years (1664) and Kangxi two years Mao (1663) Ji Chun presided over the analysis of shackles. Mr. ZOU Zongliang disagreed with and pointed out ”Life Discernment of Pu Xun“. He thought that there are some speculations about giving clumsy essay from the literature, and some of them are not cautious enough. The author believes that the researchers have the responsibility to clarify the facts based on the relevant historical data, but also the history of the past, and discuss with Mr. Zou. Therefore, writing again to analyze the analysis, period also the truth. The author will be Po House ”rebuild seven temple monument“ inscription and ”genealogy“ contains Pu Songling for his father Pu 槃 small biography of the cloud and ”three Zichuan County,“ contained in Plitvick Pu Lide as a great ancestor, Analysis of the historical role of the three, the separation of the similarities and differences between the three distances, that ”Pilgrim Zichuan County," Polaroid for his ancestor biography mistaken suspicion.