傅增湘藏宋本通典目录辨析兼论日藏北宋本卷帙分合.docVIP

  • 16
  • 0
  • 约1.19万字
  • 约 21页
  • 2018-08-19 发布于福建
  • 举报

傅增湘藏宋本通典目录辨析兼论日藏北宋本卷帙分合.doc

傅增湘藏宋本通典目录辨析兼论日藏北宋本卷帙分合

傅增湘藏宋本《通典》目录辨析兼论日藏北宋本的卷帙分合   摘 要 现存《通典》的宋代刻本,最著名的莫属原藏傅增湘双鉴楼,今属日本天理图书馆一百七十三卷本和原藏日本帝室图书寮,今属日本宫内厅书陵部的一百九十七卷本。然其中一些问题尚未澄清:关于傅增湘藏本,傅氏在断代上有南宋、北宋的差异。论文参照相关目录资料以梳理傅氏思想变化的轨迹,进而推测其断代依据和变化原因,并由此论及两种目录成书特点等相关问题;关于图书寮藏本,凭借多种目录关于日本宫内厅所藏北宋本所载的卷数差异,即由原百卷刻本配补百卷钞本,演变成今一百七十九卷刻本配补十八卷钞本,进而提出其卷帙存在变动的新观点,并梳理其卷帙分合的过程。   关键词 傅增湘 《通典》 宋本 古籍整理   分类号 G256.22   DOI 10.16810/j.cnki.1672-514X.2016.06.017   Abstract The most famous two existing editions of Tongdian are the edition of 173 volumes, which was inscribed during the period of Southern Song and kept by Fu Zengxiang, and the edition of 197 volumes, which was inscribed during the period of Northern Song. The former is now kept in the Tenri Library of Japan, and the latter is also in Japan and kept by the Emperor Library. However, there are still some issues about the two editions to be clarified. For the edition of Fu Zengxiang, the dating is divided into Northern Song and Southern Song. This paper reveals the change of the academic methods of Fu applied to his conclusion about the edition and the reason why he wrote two different catalogues. What is more, the features of the two catalogues reveal deeper questions about the features of compiling processes of the Song Edition of books. For the edition kept by the Emperor Library of Japan, different ideas about the number of its volume among many catalogues―from 100 volumes of block-printed books with 100 volumes of hand-written copies to 179 volumes of block-printed books with 18 volumes of hand-written copies throw light on the questions about how the volumes combine with each other or divide into smaller parts.   Keywords Fu Zengxiang. Tongdian. Edition of Song Dynasty. Collection of ancient books.   现存《通典》的宋代刻本,最著名的有二:其一为原藏傅增湘双鉴楼,今属日本天理图书馆一百七十三卷本(因其为傅氏旧藏,以下简称“傅宋本”);另一为原藏日本帝室图书寮,今属日本宫内厅书陵部的一百九十八卷本(依照傅氏习惯,以下简称“寮藏本”)。然而,围绕这两部宋本的具体信息,与相关记载的目录对读比照,可以发现一些疑窦至今尚未澄清。傅氏所藏一百七十三卷本在其所著的两种目录《藏园群书题记》和《藏园群书经眼录》(以下分别简称《题记》和《经眼录》)中均有题语,但在刊刻年代断定上差异明显:一定为北宋本而一定为南宋本。那么,精通版本的傅氏为何会有两种不同的年代断定?导致年代判断结果不同

文档评论(0)

1亿VIP精品文档

相关文档