| Abstract |
This paper aims to explore the first-ever historical critiques Shih-t’ung (Generality of Historiography, Liu Zhiji, 661-721, AD) in Chinese history, on how it elaborates, with 49 volumes in total, both internal and external, on the earliest chronicle historiography Shih-chi (The Records of the Grand Historian, Sima Qian, c.145~c.87 BC). Embarking on three respective aspects: historiography (outer level), the “Three Qualifications for Historian” (core level), and historical thoughts (higher level), the study tries to investigate how Shih-t’ung had lashed on Shih-chi by calling into questions the structural style, structural and explanatory examples, and the science of history materials. In addition, an in-dept examination will be made on Sima Qian’s academic talent, learning and knowledge. Finally, from the perspectives of Chinese historical philosophy of “nature and human” and the historical thought of “continuity and change,” the study further reveals that although the different approaches adopted by both authors originated from the distinct nature of the works itself, while in fact, the guiding thought behinds such discrepancy is coherent. It is through such analysis which has a great representative significance, that we may thus gain a clear grasp of the arguments proposed by Shih-t’ung and understand one of the aspects exhibited by “the Studies of Shih-chi” prevailed in the Tang Dynasty. |
