前清文人中最富於傳敍文學底意義者,要推全祖望,——這不是因爲他底敍述攸關明末死事諸人,而是因爲精神上的契合。本來從碑銘傳狀的成就看,曾國藩集中的作品,也許更完密,更充實,而且所記諸人,也比較更重要,但是曾國藩所寫的是同時諸人,事實清楚,敍述也容易,全祖望所寫的是七八十年前的故事,從渺茫錯亂的傳説中,加以考核和訂正,便需要更大的天才。當然,在祖望底時代(康熙四十四——乾隆二十年),傳敍文學底精神還没有被人意識到,所以祖望底作品,還是和史傳接近, It is not because he is at the end of the story about people who do not die at the end of the Ming Dynasty, but because of the spiritual fit. Originally from the inscriptions achievements, Zeng Guofan concentrated works may be more complete, more substantial, and remember the people, but also more important, but Zeng Guofan wrote at the same time all the people, the facts are clear, the narrative is also easy, What Quan Zu Wang wrote is the story of seventies and seventies, from the legend of the insignificant confusion, to be assessed and revised, we need more genius. Of course, in the era of ancestral hope (Emperor Kangxi forty-two years of Qianlong), the spirit of the narrative literature has not yet been realized, so the works of ancestry, or close to the historical biography,