Title

Sima Qian & the author-function : a review of The history of a historian : perspectives on the authorial roles of Sima Qian, by Esther Sunkyung Klein

Document Type

Online resource

Source Publication

Dissertation Reviews.

Publication Date

3-4-2013

Abstract

Sima Qian 司馬遷 (ca. 145 or 135 BCE-86 BCE) once famously declared that his monumental Shiji 史記 (ca. 91 BCE) is intended not for readers in his own time but for those in posterity. The reason for such an authorial gesture, unusual in the early Chinese corpus, is unclear, but in any event he would not have been disappointed had he been able to witness the tremendous reception of the Shiji in the last two millennia. It is fair to say that the Shiji is one of the most widely read texts in the entire Chinese literary tradition. This is easily attested by the staggering amount of commentaries on it throughout the imperial period as well as the numerous articles and monographs devoted to its study over the last century. This voluminous scholarship represents an expectedly diverse range of readings of the Shiji, with the nevertheless common goal of articulating the significance of the Shiji as intended by its compiler Sima Qian by reconstructing an accurate and relevant context for its composition. Readings that disagree on the significance of the Shiji are essentially disagreements over how it should be properly contextualized in relation to its author and/or the supposed historical condition of the early Han, and over the last two millennia as many contexts motivating Sima Qian have been imagined as there have been readers of the Shiji.

Publisher Statement

Copyright © 2013 Dissertation Reviews. Access to external full text or publisher's version may require subscription.

Full-text Version

Publisher’s Version

Recommended Citation

Leung, V. S. (2013, March 4). Sima Qian & the author-function: A review of The history of a historian: Perspectives on the authorial roles of Sima Qian, by Esther Sunkyung Klein. Dissertation Reviews. Retrieved from http://dissertationreviews.org/archives/2279