竹書紀年解謎 pdf epub mobi txt 电子书 下载 2025

☆☆☆☆☆

原文作者： David S. Nivison

圖書標籤:

• 曆史
• 竹書紀年
• 史學
• 古代史
• 紀年
• 解謎
• 文化
• 中國曆史
• 文獻
• 考古

　　This book is the result of discoveries made by Nivison beginning in 1979, It uses critically (without superseding) his monographs from 1983 through 2002, combined with his discoveries through 2008. Its main thrust is to show that the methods and results of the PRC “Three Dynasties Project” are invalid, and that recovering chronology before 841 BCE can be solved only by using the supposedly spurious Jinben Zhushu Jinian (“Modern Text” Bamboo Annals), combined with hypothesis that reign lengths of record were normally the years after completion of mourning for the preceding king. Part One presents resulting exact dates form the beginning of Xia, confirmed by discoveries in astronomy by D. W. Pankenier and Kevin Pang. Part Two criticizes the Three-years Dynasties Project and argues for the post-mourning hypothesis and the high antiquity of the three-years mourning institution. In Part Three, applying a discovery by E. L. Shaughnessy, the author reconstructs the first 303 bamboo strips of the original Bamboo Annals text (perhaps five-sevenths of the whole). In so doing he shows that the entire chronology in the Zhushu jinian is the product of Warring States manipulation of the true chronology; therefore any attempt to recover accurate dates must begin by analyzing the “Modern” Zhushu jinian – which the Project ignored completely. Appendices present more data and analysis, notably (Appendix 4) pinpointing the source of the Project’s errors in dating late Shang events.

作者簡介

David S. Nivison（倪德衛）

　　Born in Maine, U.S.A., in 1923, David Shepherd Nivison was educated at Harvard: AB summa cum laude 1946, PhD 1953. His teachers included J. Robert. Hightower, John K. Fairbank and William Hung (Hong Ye). During the War he served in the Army translating Japanese.  From 1984 on, he taught at Stanford University. In the 1950’s he collaborated in publishing with Arthur F, Wright. In 1954-55 he was a Fulbright Fellow in Kyoto, Japan. His best known book is The Life and Thought of Chang Hsueh-ch’eng (Zhang Xuecheng), 1966, awarded the Prix Stanislaus-Julien in Paris in 1967. His studies of late Shang and early Zhou inscriptions began informally with his friend David N. Keightley (Professor of History, University of California at Berkeley) in 1971. He was a Guggenheim Fellow at Oxford in 1973. In 1980 he was president of the Pacific Division of the American Philosophical Association. Other professional memberships include the Association for Asian Studies, the American Oriental Society (president, Western Branch, 1971-72), the Society for the Study of Early China and the International Academy of Chinese Culture (Beijing). Nivison retired from Stanford in 1988 as Water Y. Evans-Wentz Professor of Oriental Philosophies, Religions and Ethics. Several of his publications have been republished in Chinese: two translations of his book on Zhang Xuecheng (2003), a book of essays on Chinese philosophy (The Ways of Confucianism (1996), in 2006), and a major of monograph on chronology (1999, translation by Shao Dongfang, 2002). His students include major scholars in the United States and in the Far East. Nivison has published more than sixty professional papers.

《竹書紀年解謎》圖書簡介 《竹書紀年解謎》：跨越韆年的曆史迷霧與文獻重構 本書並非對《竹書紀年》的直接解讀或考證，而是一部以中國古代曆史文獻學、考古學及跨學科研究方法為核心，旨在探討古代史籍編纂、流傳與失落規律的學術專著。它將目光投嚮更廣闊的曆史語境，聚焦於那些在曆史長河中被遮蔽、扭麯或重構的知識體係，旨在提供一種審視古代文獻，尤其是那些涉及“異端”或“禁忌”史料的全新視角。 第一部分：史料的“失蹤”與“重構”：曆史文本的生命周期 本書的開篇，深入剖析瞭古代官方史學體係對非主流敘事的壓製與選擇性繼承機製。我們探討瞭秦漢以來，尤其是在特定曆史轉摺點，文獻是如何被“清洗”與“重塑”的。 權力與文本的共生關係： 考察瞭從甲骨文、金文到簡帛文獻的載體變遷中，權力機構如何塑造瞭官方認可的“正統”曆史框架。重點分析瞭官方史官集團在記錄重大事件（如王朝更迭、天象異動）時所采用的修辭策略與信息過濾機製。 地下文獻的“沉默”與“爆發”： 選取瞭數個古代文獻大規模齣土的案例（如馬王堆漢墓、郭店楚簡），分析這些“地下”文本如何挑戰或補充瞭地麵流傳的經典記載。書中特彆關注瞭那些與主流敘事存在顯著差異的片段，探討它們在被發現之前，是如何在民間或學術邊緣地帶保持其“活性”的。 “僞古文”的迷思： 探討瞭古代學者對“古籍”的求證過程，以及“僞古文”現象産生的深層原因——是單純的造假，還是對失落典籍的“補白”式重建？我們分析瞭魏晉南北朝時期，不同學派為爭奪學術話語權而對早期文獻進行的注釋、竄改與僞造行為的復雜動機。 第二部分：時間觀念的錯位與曆法體係的內部分裂 本書的第二部分將重點轉嚮古代中國人對“時間”的理解方式，及其在不同史書和文獻中錶現齣的差異性。這並非對具體年號的校對，而是對時間觀本身的哲學與社會學考察。 周期性與綫性的衝突： 探討瞭古代“天人感應”思想下，統治者傾嚮於采用的周期性曆史觀，以及與注重因果鏈條的綫性敘事之間的張力。我們對比瞭不同學派（如陰陽傢、儒傢、道傢）對“大一統”與“治亂循環”的不同論述。 異域時間坐標的引入： 分析瞭早期中外交流中，不同文化對曆法、紀年方式的理解差異，以及這些差異如何影響瞭本土史傢的記錄準確性。這部分內容將聚焦於文獻中對“蠻夷”或“化外之地”時間記錄的轉譯難題。 “模糊時間”的記錄藝術： 考察瞭古代文獻中大量使用的“某年”、“不知某月”、“有年無月”等模糊時間錶述，並嘗試從這些錶述背後，推斷齣史料采集的地域性限製或信息失真程度。 第三部分：文獻的傳播路徑與地方史的邊緣化 在第三部分，我們將曆史文獻的焦點從中央殿堂轉嚮瞭地方與民間。本書認為，許多關於古代重大事件的“異說”，並非憑空捏造，而是源於被官方史學邊緣化的“地方記憶”。 地方誌的“考古學”： 選取瞭數部地方誌的編纂史，分析地方精英如何利用或篡改地方史料來服務於當代的地方榮譽感和政治需求。重點考察瞭地方修誌中對災異記錄、人物傳記的誇張與刪減現象。 口述傳統的固化與變異： 探討瞭古代口頭流傳的故事（如神話傳說、英雄事跡）是如何被早期文人學者轉化為“信史”的，以及在轉化為書麵語的過程中，原始的文化內涵是如何被削弱或扭麯的。 盜墓與文獻的“意外相遇”： 藉助考古發現的旁證，分析瞭那些原本隻存在於地方野史或私人筆記中的記載，是如何在特定考古事件後被重新納入主流研究視野的。 結論：後現代史學視野下的文獻重構 全書的最終目的，是構建一套批判性閱讀古代史籍的方法論。它強調，任何單一的、被奉為圭臬的史料都無法提供曆史的“全貌”。曆史的真相，潛藏於不同史料間的矛盾、衝突與沉默之中。本書旨在培養讀者一種“曆史考古”的心態，即把每一部古代典籍都視為一個等待被挖掘、被多角度審視的“考古現場”。我們不是在尋找一個被遺忘的“真相”，而是在理解“真相”是如何被建構、維護和顛覆的復雜過程。 本書適閤曆史學、文獻學、考古學專業研究人員，以及對中國古代史學史、曆史哲學感興趣的嚴肅讀者。它以嚴謹的論證和多學科交叉的視角，為讀者提供瞭一場關於曆史文本本質的深刻反思之旅。

3 Preface (2007)
7 Introduction (2007)

Part One: Recovery of Information from the Bamboo Annals
15 Chapter One The Date of the Zhou Conquest of Shang (1997)
27 Attachment 1: The Myth of the Preliminary Campaign (2007)
31 Astrology of the Conquest Campaign (2007)
35 Chapter Two Chronology of the Three Dynasties (2000)
53 Attachment: The 853 Problem (2007)

Part Two: The Challenge of the Three Dynasties Project (1996-2000)
59 Introduction to Part Two
63 Chapter Three Getting the Dates Right: the Xia-Shang-Zhou Chronology Project
72 Criticism of the Sandai Project "Brief Report" (2000)
75 Chapter Four The Three Dynasties Chronology Project: Two Approaches to Dating
81 Chapter Five The H. G. Creel Lecture (University of Chicago 2002):
“The Three Years Mourning Institution and the Chronology of Ancient China”
101 Chapter Six “Zai Tan” (written for international conference on chronology, set for Oct ‘03, suspended): a plea for a conference on the Bamboo Annals

Part Three: Recovery of the Strip Text of the Bamboo Annals
113 Introduction to Part Three
115 Chapter Seven Recovery of Strip Text (AAS April 2006)
123 Chapter Eight Strip Text, Huang Di through Jin Wu Gong (2006)
177 Chapter Nine Evolution of Chronology and Text (2006)
193 Appendix 1: Sandai Science Survey (2000)
209 Appendix 2: Material Supporting “Two Approaches to Dating” (2002)
219 Appendix 3: Proposed Absolute Dates for Fully Dated Bronzes (2007)
229 Appendix 4: The Late Shang Ritual Cycle (2007 and 2008)

261 Bibliography
275 Index

推薦文

　　Equally versed in early classical texts, oracle bone and bronze inscriptions, archaeology as well as astronomy, professor Nivison has devoted the last 30 years to a reconstruction of Chinese chronology in high antiquity. Taking as his point of departure the authenticity of the “Modern Text” Bamboo Annals, an assumption diametrically opposite to the long received view, his approach had not only been revolutionary but also proved to be methodologically more fruitful in riddle-solving. The present volume, written almost wholly from 2000 to 2007, therefore represents what is called “the final conclusions arrived at late in life” (wannian dinglun 晚年定論) in the Chinese scholarly tradition. This book is also a vivid testimonial to its author’s moral and intellectual integrity as a scholar in defense of historical truth. In questioning the validity of the Chinese statesponsored “Three Dynasties Chronology Project” in a most serious manner, Professor Nivison has exercised the critical power of a historian to its highest possible degree. As a result his courageous fight for the purity of scholarship has not only won the support of many leading specialists of the field but also evoked, through Chinese translation, a widespread sympathetic response from the general reading public in China.

Ying-shih Yu, Professor Emeritus, Princeton University
美國普林斯頓大學退休教授 餘英時

　　倪德衛先生為美國著名漢學傢，研究中國上古史有年，著作等身，尤其是對於《竹書紀年》及夏商周年代學的研究，在學術界自成一派，具有很大影響。我非常敬佩倪德衛先生年逾八十仍筆耕不輟，並多有創見，也非常盼望早日見到倪德衛先生的新作齣版。《竹書紀年》為先秦重要史籍，圍繞該書，前人作瞭大量的研究，它不僅關乎先秦史及先秦年代學，同時它也是中國古代文獻學尤其是辨僞學的重要研究對象。近年來，夏商周年代學已然成為全世界漢學界關注的一個焦點，其中許多問題都涉及到瞭《竹書紀年》。相信隨著倪德衛先生新著的齣版，一定會給學術界帶來新的話題，同時也會使先秦史及先秦年代學的研究進一步深入。特此推薦。

Li Chen, Deputy Director of the National Library of the PRC
中華人民共和國國傢圖書館副館長 陳力

　　Since 1979, a full thirty years and more, Professor David S. Nivison has been dissecting the “Modern Text” of the Bamboo Annals (Jinben Zhushu Jinian). He has applied a broad battery of analytical techniques to the data in the text, and he has been relentless in his efforts to correlate the dates in the Bamboo Annals with materials from historical, inscriptional, and astronomical sources. Nivison’s decades-long dedication to this task has resulted in a succession of publications that have been carefully scrutinized by scholars around the world. Their criticisms have resulted in increasing refinements by Nivison. The entire process of discovery, discussion, and elaboration is now assembled in The Riddle of the Bamboo Annals, which constitutes a major contribution to the dating of events before 841 BC.

Victor H. Mair, Professor of Chinese Language and Literature,
Department of East Asian Languages and Civilizations,
University of Pennsylvania

评分☆☆☆☆☆

這本書的封麵設計就充滿瞭神秘感，墨色的竹簡圖案，仿佛承載著韆年的時光，讓人一眼便被吸引。我一直對中國古代史，尤其是那些野史和秘聞類的內容非常感興趣，而《竹書紀年》本身就帶著幾分撲朔迷離的色彩。《竹書紀年解謎》這個書名更是直接點燃瞭我探索的欲望。我非常好奇，作者會如何抽絲剝繭，將那些埋藏在史料深處的綫索一一呈現。我期待的是一種深入淺齣的解讀，而不是枯燥乏味的史料堆砌。我希望這本書能夠帶領我走進那個久遠的時代，去感受那個時代的氛圍，理解那些曾經鮮活的人物和事件。尤其想知道，那些關於夏商周的傳說，究竟有多少真實成分，又有哪些是後人的演繹。書中是否會涉及一些鮮為人知的考古發現？這些發現又能為我們理解《竹書紀年》提供怎樣的佐證？我希望作者能夠用嚴謹的態度，但又不失趣味性的筆觸，來完成這次“解謎”之旅。

评分☆☆☆☆☆

作為一個對中國古代曆史，特彆是那些影響深遠的早期王朝略有研究的愛好者，我一直認為《竹書紀年》是一部極其重要的文獻，但其解讀的復雜性和曆史爭議性也讓許多人望而卻步。當我看到《竹書紀年解謎》這本書時，內心湧起的是一種莫名的期待。我希望作者能夠站在一個全新的視角，去審視這部史書，而不是簡單地重復前人的觀點。比如，在對《竹書紀年》的真僞考證上，我相信會有非常深入的探討，也期待作者能夠提齣一些獨到的見解。同時，書中對《竹書紀年》所記載的重大曆史事件，比如夏朝的興衰、商朝的遷都、周朝的建立等等，是否會有顛覆性的解讀？這些解讀是否能夠與目前主流的學術觀點産生對話，甚至提齣新的理論？我非常期待作者能夠用宏大的曆史視野，將《竹書紀年》置於更廣闊的曆史背景下進行考察，揭示其在整個中國古代史發展脈絡中的獨特地位和價值。

评分☆☆☆☆☆

說實話，我買這本書純粹是齣於好奇心。《竹書紀年》這個名字在我腦海中停留很久瞭，總覺得它藏著很多不為人知的秘密。我平時並不是一個很專業的曆史愛好者，但對那些“野史”、“秘聞”之類的東西總是特彆著迷。我看過一些關於《竹書紀年》的零散信息，覺得裏麵的內容跟我們常聽到的《史記》之類的正史不太一樣，好像有種“另一條時間綫”的感覺。所以，《竹書紀年解謎》這個書名，對我來說簡直是量身定做的。我希望這本書能講得通俗易懂一些，不要太多古文或者專業術語，讓我這樣的“門外漢”也能看得懂。特彆是那些關於古代帝王的生平故事，還有一些奇奇怪怪的事件，我特彆想知道它們背後到底是怎麼迴事。如果能有一些有趣的考據，比如作者是怎麼找到這些綫索的，用瞭什麼方法來“解謎”的，那就更好瞭。

评分☆☆☆☆☆

我是一名曆史學的學生，平時在閱讀和研究中，經常會遇到《竹書紀年》這個名詞，也曾嘗試閱讀過相關的史料，但總覺得對於其深層含義的理解不夠透徹。因此，《竹書紀年解謎》的齣現，無疑為我提供瞭一個絕佳的學習機會。我期待這本書能夠提供一種更為係統和深入的研究視角，尤其是在文獻考證、版本辨析以及與同時期其他史料的相互印證等方麵。我希望作者能夠運用紮實的學術功底，對《竹書紀年》中的關鍵疑點進行深入的剖析，比如其中關於夏朝世係、殷商滅亡原因等章節的解讀，是否能夠提供一些新的思路，甚至是對現有學術界主流觀點的挑戰？我更希望看到的是作者如何在解讀《竹書紀年》的獨特視角下，展現齣中國早期曆史的豐富性和復雜性，以及這部史書對於我們理解中國文明起源的獨特意義。

评分☆☆☆☆☆

我一直覺得，曆史就像一個巨大的謎題，而《竹書紀年》就像是其中一個特彆難解的部分，充滿瞭挑戰和誘惑。我不太懂那些專業的曆史理論，但我喜歡聽故事，喜歡看那些能讓我眼前一亮、顛覆我固有認知的解讀。這本書的書名就寫得很直接，《竹書紀年解謎》，這完全勾起瞭我的好奇心。我希望作者能像偵探一樣，把那些隱藏在文字裏的綫索都找齣來，一點一點地把真相拼湊起來。我好奇的是，書中是否會揭示一些我們從來不知道的古代曆史的“內幕”？比如，那些在曆史上被刻意抹去或者被忽略的事件，是否會在這本書裏重見天日？還有，作者是如何判斷哪些是可信的，哪些是需要懷疑的？我期待的不是一本教條的史書，而是一場充滿智慧和探索的旅程，讓我能跟著作者一起，去“解開”《竹書紀年》的謎團。