A study of Yan Shigu's commentary on the Hanshu.

摘要

Yan Shigu's commentary on the Hanshu, which was enchanced by its detailed annotations, was regarded by the editors of the Siku quanshu as a great contribution to the Hanshu. Scholars have set great store by its stylistic rules and its explanations and commentaries on the meanings of words, but their investigations always leave much to be desired. This thesis aims at accounting for the prominence and popularly of Yan Shigu's commentary by comparing it with the Three Commentaries on the Shiji.;Chapter One focuses on the commentaries on the Shiji and the Hanshu before the Tang dynasty. Since the publication of the Shiji, the book has drawn the attention of scholars and became prevalent during the Six Dynasties. According to the Suishu dynastic bibliography, the two Tangshu and Sima Zhen's postface to his Shiji suoyin, there are altogether 19 commentaries by 17 commentators in the Tang dynasty (including the Three Commentaries on the Shiji). Hanshu is well known for its abstruseness. That is why Zheng Zhao of the Three Kingdoms had to pass on his interpretation through jiafa (school discipline), and numerous scholars devoted themselves to the annotation of the book. Yan Shigu in his xuli (foreword) to the Hanshu stated that there were 23 early commentaries. As commentators of the Shiji and the Hanshu often mixed up early commentaries on the two, and some scholars commentated on them both, the commentaries on the Shiji and the Hanshu were inter-woven.;Chapter Two discusses the stylistic rules of the Three Commentaries on the Shiji, and tries to add supplementary notes to Cheng Jinzao's views on the Three Commentaries. To begin with, the Three Commentaries were published separately. It was not until the Yuanfeng period of the Northern Song that the Shiji was printed with its three commentaries: the Jijie (Collected Explanations), the Suoyin (Guiderope to Obscurities), and the Zhengyi (Correct Meaning). Zhu Dongrun in his Shiji kaosuo elaborated the stylistic rules of the Three Commentaries, but there is still room for improvement. Cheng Jinzao is probably correct in saying that the Jijie explained the text of the Shiji, whereas the Suoyin built up its explanation on the basis of the Jijie, and the Zhengyi further built up its on the bases of the Jijie and the Suoyin. However, Zhu and Cheng both neglected the relationship between the Three Commentaries on the Shiji and Yan Shigu's commentary on the Hanshu. This chapter attempts to fill this gap by examining closely the relationship between the two.;Chapter Two also introduces the stylistic rules of Yan Shigu's commentary, and reviews the influence of family members on him. As a great contributor to the Hanshu, Yan Shigu's commentary surpasses his precursors. Since Yan Shigu was the grandson of Yan Zhitui, author of the Yanshi jiaxun, and nephew of Yan Yougin, author of the Hanshu queyi , it is only natural that his family had a profound influence on his commentary.;Chapter Three compares the chapters common to the Shiji and the Hanshu and investigates the differences between the Three Commentaries on the Shiji and Yan Shigu's commentary on the Hanshu. The Shiji is a history of China from the days of the mythical Yellow Emperor down to the author's own time, viz. the end of the second BC. Whereas the Hanshu describes the history of the Western Han dynasty, beginning with the early life of its founder Liu Bang in about 210 BC, and ending with the fall of Wang Mang in AD 23. In the "Biography of Zhang Fu" of the Jinshu the achievements of the two books were compared in the light of the numbers of characters used. In the Song dynasty, Ni Si published his Ban-Ma yitong (A comparison of Sima Qian's Shiji and Ban Gu's Hanshu). From then on, the similarities and differences of the two historical works became a popular topic in the academic circle. Although scholars paid attention to the study of the texts, the commentaries remained neglected. Contemporary Korean scholar Park Chai-u made a comparison of the chapters on the Han in the Hanshu with those in the Shiji . However he did not make any research on both the texts and the commentaries. This chapter examines the relationship among Pei Yin, Yan Shigu, Sima Zhen, and Zhang Shoujue through a comparison of the Shiji and the Hanshu. As the two works have more than 60 chapters in common, this thesis puts emphasis on the textual problems of the texts of the two books, as well as the difference between their commentaries.;Chapter Four discusses the quotations from the Classics (jing ) in Yan Shigu's commentary. The Hanshu is so abstruse that scholars were tempted to interpret it, hence so many commentaries were published. Till the Tang dynasty, the study of the Hanshu became one of the three major studies, with the other two being the San Li (i.e. Zhouli, Yili, Liji) and the Wenxuan. Ban Gu tended to imitate scholars of the past in his writings, and as the Han dynasty was an era of classical studies, he often cited from the Classics in his Hanshu . Yan Shigu also cited from the Classics. His quotations fall into two categories: (1) quotations from the Classics in the text of the Hanshu which Yan Shigu tried to interpret; (2) quotations from the Classics for an explanation of the meanings of the text. This chapter also investigates Yan's quotations from the Classics, including the Shijing, the Shangshu, the way he cited, as well as the versions of Classics he used.;Chapter Five compares Yan Shigu's commentary on the Hanshu with Li Shan's commentary on the Wenxuan. According to Zhai Yi's Nian 'er shi zhaji (Critical Notes on the Twenty-two Histories), the study of San Li, Hanshu and Wenxuan drew tremendous attention in the early era of the Tang dynasty. As the three books were the centre of study, many scholars made commentaries on them. According to Zhang Fu, in dealing with the same subject, the number of characters used by the Hanshu was much more than that of the Shiji. The reason is due to the fact that the Hanshu frequently quoted essays pertaining to statecraft, as well as essays which echo the main characters of the biographies. The Wenxuan contains more than 700 pieces of prose and verse written by 129 authors from the period of the Han through the Liang dynasties. It includes 29 pieces of prose of the Western Han dynasty with commentaries by The Five Officials (that is Lu Yanji, Liu Liang, Zhang Xian, Lu Xiang, Li Zhou Han) and Li Shan. This chapter tries to explore the differences and similarities of the commentaries of Yan Shigu, the Five Scholars, and Li Shan.;Chapter Six treats the quotations of Tang encyclopedias (leishu ) from Hanshu commentaries. Leishu are reference books consisting of excerpts from primary sources. The excerpts are on a broad range of subjects arranged under various headings. The leishu are valuable to the historian because works which have long since been lost have often been preserved in whole or in part in the leishu. Leishu compiled in the Tang such as the Qunshu zhiyao , the Yiwen leiju, and the Chuxue ji, all have quotations from Shiji and Hanshu commentaries. This chapter inspects the textual and explanatory mistakes of the commentaries through a study of Tang leishu.;Finally, in the appendixes, the chapters common to the Shiji and the Hanshu are set out, and the Three Commentaries and Yan Shigu's commentary are compared and contrasted.;