淸代 ꡔ史記ꡕ 연구의 두 방향─ 梁玉繩의 “志疑”와 崔述의 “考信”

Abstract

During the Qing dynasty, the status of historical scholarship was raised. Many scholars buried themselves in Textual Criticism(考證), and made many great achievements. Researches in Sima Qian’s ꡔShiji(史記)ꡕ were also very active. Liang Yusheng(梁玉繩)’s ꡔShiji Kaozheng(史記考證)ꡕ and Cui Shu(崔述)’s ꡔKaoxinlu(考信錄)ꡕwere their representatives. Liang thought that the text of Shiji was credible. He just tried to find historical evidences and correct the flaws in the process of transmitting the text. However, he was overly dedicated to finding historical evidences. As a result, he had attitude of doubt, and in many cases it was in vain. His evidential research about 「Baiyi Liezhuan(伯夷列傳)」 was an example of that attitude. Meanwhile, Cui maintained that some parts of Shiji was not credible, and denied the system of the Five Emperors in 「Wudi Benji(五帝本紀)」 entirely. But Cui was excessively obsessed by the sageness of Confucius(孔子). He defended Confucius by using a book he himself didn’t trust as an evidence of Confucius’s sageness. He was criticized for being irrational in defending the sage. That was his weak point.

During the Qing dynasty, the status of historical scholarship was raised. Many scholars buried themselves in Textual Criticism(考證), and made many great achievements. Researches in Sima Qian’s ꡔShiji(史記)ꡕ were also very active. Liang Yusheng(梁玉繩)’s ꡔShiji Kaozheng(史記考證)ꡕ and Cui Shu(崔述)’s ꡔKaoxinlu(考信錄)ꡕwere their representatives. Liang thought that the text of Shiji was credible. He just tried to find historical evidences and correct the flaws in the process of transmitting the text. However, he was overly dedicated to finding historical evidences. As a result, he had attitude of doubt, and in many cases it was in vain. His evidential research about 「Baiyi Liezhuan(伯夷列傳)」 was an example of that attitude. Meanwhile, Cui maintained that some parts of Shiji was not credible, and denied the system of the Five Emperors in 「Wudi Benji(五帝本紀)」 entirely. But Cui was excessively obsessed by the sageness of Confucius(孔子). He defended Confucius by using a book he himself didn’t trust as an evidence of Confucius’s sageness. He was criticized for being irrational in defending the sage. That was his weak point.