论文部分内容阅读
康熙《开封府志》附《杞县志·李公子辨》等经考证,断定《樵史通俗演义》和《明史纪事本末》中记载的李岩,是“野史氏子虚乌有”。曾引起过人们的讨论。蒋祖缘同志在《东岳论丛》1984年第6期《李岩不是“子虚乌有”的人物》一文中提出了自己的看法。
Kangxi “Kaifu Fu Zhi” with “Qi County, Li Gongzi discrimination” and other textual research, concluded that “Qiaoshi history popular romance” and “Ming Chinglish” in the records of Li Yan, is “non-history”. Has aroused people’s discussion. Comrade Jiang Zuyuan put forward his own views in his article “The Dongyue Era”, No. 6, 1984, “Li Yan is Not a Taleless Person.”