论文部分内容阅读
清季以来，论者对《史记》征述《左传》的情况多有怀疑，特别是对《史记》本纪部分之《五帝本纪》、《夏本纪》、《周本纪》、《秦本纪》诸篇尤多诘难。在一定程度上，淆乱了对《史记》、《左传》及二者之关系的正确理解。《五帝本纪》叙说举十六族、去四凶事乃径袭《左传》文公十八年文。崔适则谓此节非司马迁所述，而乃后人窜入，并举“乖异者”五条以证其说。言似有据，而实诬谬。此节与司马迁属意之五帝序列相抵牾。《夏本纪》叙说刘累豢龙事本于《左传》昭公二十九年。《周本纪》载事多参稽《左传》。《秦本纪》记穆公事多本于《国语》，而《左传》载秦穆公事迹亦详，故司马迁颇参用之。
Since the end of the Qing Dynasty, many doubts have been expressed about the circumstance of “Zuo Zhuan” in the Records of the Historian, especially the “Five Emperors of the Five Emperors”, “Xia Benji”, “Zhou Benji” and “Qin Ben Ji” All the more difficult. To a certain extent, confused the correct understanding of the relationship between the Records of the Historian, Zuo Zhuan and the two. The “Five Emperors of this century,” Syria cited the XVI, go to the four fierce culprit is attacking “Zuo Zhuan” eighteen years of the public. Cui Wei said that this section of non-Sima Qian said, but the descendants fleeing, citing “deformity” five to prove it. It seems that there is evidence, but falsely. This section and Si Ma moved the meaning of the five opposition series. “Xia Ben Ji” Narrative Liu tired 豢 Long things in the “Zuo Zhuan” Zhao Gong twenty-nine years. “Zhou Benji” contains more “Zuo Zhuan”. “Qin Benji” Mo Mu official mostly in the “Mandarin”, and “Zuo Zhuan” contains Qin Mu Gong deeds also detailed, so Sima Qian quite involved.