其他篇名 Alternative Title
Historiography, epigraphy, and contesting canons : on Han Yu and Ouyang Xiu’s tomb inscriptions in Ming-Qing dynasties
The ranking of great authors has always been a core subject of the canonization of a certain literary genre. As for beizhi 碑誌 (tomb inscription) written in guwen 古文 (ancient-style writing), competition between the mode of Han Yu 韓愈 and that of Ouyang Xiu 歐陽修, is the most controversial issue for Ming-Qing scholars. This article aims to explain the theoretical basis upon which such debates were generated. Scholars who insist on the superiority of Ouyang Xiu generally consider tomb inscription as a sub-genre of historical writing and therefore regard Sima Qian’s 司馬遷 Shiji 史記 (Records of the Grand Historian) as not only the origin but also the supreme canon of tomb inscription prose. Supporters of Han Yu, on the other hand, emphasize the distinction between epigraphy and historiography, assert that Han has established a novel genre of tomb inscription that derives from, while independent of, the great historiographic tradition. Epigraphic knowledge has thus become a new source for understanding and learning tomb inscription prose. Apart from the classic works of Han and Ouyang, the interest in collecting and studying jinshi 金石 (bronze and stone), which was nurtured during the early to mid-Qing period, has introduced the stele inscriptions and grave memoirs in the Han to Wei dynasties as another competitive canon. Through my analysis of the debates and discussions on the tomb inscription prose, I hope to explore how literary critics has been intertwined with the interest in the knowledge of antiques.
碑誌, 義例, 金石學, 清代學術史
版權聲明 Copyright Statement
參考書目格式 Recommended Citation
胡琦 (2019)。史家風神與金石體制 : 以明清時期的韓、歐碑誌高下論爲中心。《嶺南學報》，第十一輯，頁217-255。檢自 http://commons.ln.edu.hk/ljcs_new/vol11/iss1/10
Available for download on Sunday, March 01, 2020