历史教材的体例 历史教材(即教科书)的体例,是一个值得深入探讨的问题。一般的有关学术著作,都容易把它简单化,划分为所谓“通史体”和“史话体”两种。这也是现在历史教学研究者们的普遍观点。历史教科书的写作体例,似乎还可以考虑另外一些因素,按照汉语辞典的解释,所谓“体例”,应指“著作的编写格式,文章的组织形式。”若照此理解,那么目前的各类历史教科书(包括海内外的),早已远远超过了一般常说的“通史”格式和形式。当然也决不是“史话”体所能包含得了的。 “通史”的名称,自古有之,清人章学诚在《文史通义》中就称赞郑樵的《通志》:“盖承通史家风,而自为经纬,成一家言者”。史学家把司马迁的《史记》、司马光的 The style of historical textbooks The style of historical textbooks (textbooks) is a question worthy of in-depth exploration. The general academic works are easy to simplification, divided into the so-called “general history” and “history” two. This is also the current view of the history teaching researchers. As for the writing style of history textbooks, it seems that some other factors may also be considered. According to the interpretation of the Chinese dictionary, the so-called “style” should refer to “the format of the writing of the work and the organization of the article.” If you understand this, then the current history of various types Textbooks (including those at home and abroad) have long gone far beyond the commonly used “General History” format and format. Of course, it is definitely not what the “history” body can contain. The name “General History” has been known since ancient times. Qing Ren Zhang Xuecheng praised Zheng Xie’s “Annals” in his “Literature and History Tongyi”: “Gai Chengtong’s Shi Jia Feng, and since it was Jingwei, he has become a speaker.” Historians regard Sima Qian’s “Historical Records” and Sima Guang’s