{"resource_id":6646,"title":"唐史论断","format":"md","encoding":"utf-8","chapters":[{"id":"chapter-1","title":"《唐史論斷》　（宋）孫甫 撰","sections":[{"id":"chapter-1-section-1","title":"欽定四庫全書","paragraphs":["史部十五","史評類","唐史論斷"]},{"id":"chapter-1-section-2","title":"提要","paragraphs":["臣等謹案唐史論斷三卷宋孫甫撰甫字之翰陽翟人舉天聖八年進士厯右正言遷天章閣待制河北轉運使兼侍讀甫以劉昫唐書猥雜失體改用編年法著唐史記七十五卷其間善惡分明可為龜鑑者復著論以明焉甫沒唐史記宣取留禁中世遂不得見惟論斷獨傳於後紹興二十七年嘗鋟板於南劍州端平間舊板不存復刻於東陽郡甫生平自重此書至於盥手啟笥曽鞏歐陽修所作墓誌行狀及司馬光題跋蘇軾答李廌書亦皆推許甚至朱子語類嘗稱唐論精練說利害如身處親厯之但理不及唐鑑又稱呂伯恭晚年謂唐論勝唐鑑要之也是切於事情只是大綱卻不正了云云則極重其議論之精切而惜其不能盡衷於醇正葢甫生平以氣節自負故所論或不免稍失之偏激然於治亂得失之故指陳鑿鑿實足為考鏡之資讀史者所當與範祖禹唐鑑叅觀而互證者也","乾隆四十二年八月恭校上","總纂官 臣紀昀 臣陸錫熊 臣孫士毅","總校官 臣陸費墀"]},{"id":"chapter-1-section-3","title":"●唐史論斷目錄","paragraphs":[]},{"id":"chapter-1-section-4","title":"捲上","paragraphs":["召突厥兵","立建成為太子","殺劉文靜釋裴寂","殺劉世讓","復置十二軍","放宮人","即位改元","魏鄭公論致治不難","中書門下議事使諫官預聞","責封倫舉賢","定朝廷之制","任用房杜","殺盧祖尚","魏公不避形跡","房杜相業","魏鄭公溫彥博論處置降虜","命李靖為僕射","封禪不著於經","命李靖討吐谷渾","貶權萬紀言利","魏鄭公諫諍","以髙昌為州縣","立晉王為太子","親征髙麗","劉洎賜死","後宮不著名","降李績為迭州都督","命李績為僕射同中書門下三品","褚遂良諫廢立皇后","顯慶改元","長孫無忌黔州安置","殺上官儀","幹封改元","追尊祖宗自稱天皇后稱天后","郝處俊諫令後攝政","劉仁軌請李敬元統兵御吐蕃王師覆敗","裴炎請太后歸政太后殺之","不稱武后年名","狄仁傑薦張柬之為相","廢武后","韋后安樂公主進鴆帝"]},{"id":"chapter-1-section-5","title":"卷中","paragraphs":["景雲年","傳位皇太子使主細務","相姚元崇","開元神武皇帝尊號","酸棗縣尉袁楚客上疏諫娛樂","盧懷慎遺表薦宋璟盧從願","用李林甫平章事張九齡請斬安祿山","刑罰幾措推功李林甫牛仙客","冊忠王為皇太子","用聚斂臣王鉷","中官輔璆琳稱祿山不反","李光弼斬御史崔眾","賊陷睢陽害張巡","烏承恩為史思明所害","九節度使討安慶緒","李峴降蜀州刺史","僕固懷恩留賊將分帥河北","顏真卿降峽州","李寳臣為馬承倩所辱復叛","李棲筠卒","開陵陽渠城原州","楊炎貶崖州司馬賜死","陸贄論吐蕃疾疫退軍","盧杞奸邪","李晟論張延賞過惡疑","忌李晟","宰相崔損便僻固位"]},{"id":"chapter-1-section-6","title":"卷下","paragraphs":["李絳料魏博事勢","用裴度相","李■〈庸阝〉辭平章事","注意相","裴度罷相位","失河北","韋處厚乞相裴度","昭愍遇害","貶杜元頴","辨朋黨","制內臣","鄭覃言開成政事","不能制內臣","殺陳王安王","李徳裕讓太尉","不能駕馭李徳裕","貶李徳裕","小節","令狐綯縱賊","用韋保衡路巖相","鄭畋罷相","李克用討朱全忠","朱全忠簒逆"]},{"id":"chapter-1-section-7","title":"●唐史論斷序","paragraphs":["古之史尚書春秋是也二經體不同而意同尚書記治世之事作教之書也故百篇皆由聖人立不以惡事名雖桀紂之惡亦因湯武之事而見不特書也但聖賢順時通變言與事各有所宜為史者從而記之又經聖人所定典謨訓誥誓命之文體雖不一皆足以作教於世也春秋記亂世之事立法之書也聖人出於季世覩時之亂居下而不能治故立大中之法裁判天下善惡而明之以王制是聖人於衰亂之時起至治之法非謹其文則不能正時事而垂大典矣此尚書春秋之體所以不同也然尚書記治世之事使聖賢之所為傳之不朽為君者為臣者見為善之效安得不說而行之此勸之之道也其間因見惡事致敗亂之端此又所以為戒也春秋記亂世之事以褒貶代王者之賞罰時之為惡者眾率辯其心跡而貶之使惡名不朽為君者為臣者見為惡之效安得不懼而防之此戒之之道也其間有善事焉明其心跡而褒之使光輝於世此又所以為勸也是尚書春秋記治亂雖異其於勸戒則大意同也後之為史者欲明治亂之本謹戒勸之道不師尚書春秋之意何以為法至司馬遷修史記破編年體創為紀傳葢務便於記事也記事便則所取博故竒異細碎之事皆載焉雖貫穿群書才力雄俊於治亂之本勸戒之道則亂雜而不明矣然有識者短之謂紀傳所記一事分為數處前後屢出比於編年則文繁此類固所失不細殊不知又有失之大者夫史之紀事莫大乎治亂君令於上臣行於下臣謀於前君納於後事臧則成否則敗成則治之本敗則亂之由此當謹記之某年君臣有謀議將相有功勲紀多不書必俟其臣歿而備載於傳是人臣得專有其謀議功勲也尚書雖不謹編年之法君臣之事年代有序羲和之業固載於堯典稷契皋夔之功固載於舜典三代君臣之事亦猶是焉遷以人臣謀議功勳與其家行細事雜載於傳中其體便乎復有過差邪惡之事以召危亂不於當年書之以為深戒豈非失之大者或曰春秋雖編年經目其事傳載本末遷立紀傳亦約是體故劉餗史例曰傳所以釋紀猶春秋之傳焉此可見遷書之不失也答曰春秋聖人立法之書也立法故目其事而斷之明治亂之本所目之事或一句或數句國之典制罔不明人之善惡罔不辨左氏史官也見聖人之經所目之事遂從而傳之雖不能深釋聖人之法記事次序一用編年之體非外春秋經目獨為記也遷之為紀也周而上多載經典之事固無所發明至秦漢紀並直書其事何嘗有法紀無法傳何釋焉此乃餗附遷而為之辭也或曰史之體必尚編年紀傳不可為乎荅曰為史者習尚紀傳久矣厯代以為大典必論之以復古則泥矣有能編列君臣之事善惡得實不尚僻怪不務繁碎明治亂之本謹勸戒之道雖為紀傳亦可矣必論其至則不若編年體正而文簡也甫嘗有志於史竊慕古史體法欲為之因讀唐之諸書見太宗功徳法制與三代聖王並后帝英明不逮又或不能守其法乃有荒縱狠忌庸懦之君故治少而亂多然有天下三百年由貞觀功徳之逺也唐書繁冗遺畧多失體法事或大而不具或小而悉記或一事別出而意不相照怪異猥俗無所不有治亂之跡散於紀傳中雜而不顯此固不足以彰明貞觀功徳法制之本一代興衰之由也觀髙祖至文宗實錄敘事詳備差勝於他書其間文理明白者尤勝焉至治亂之本亦未之明記事務廣也勸戒之道亦未之著褒貶不精也為史之體亦未之具不為編年之體君臣之事多離而書之也又要切之事或有遺畧君臣善惡之細四方事務之繁或備書之此於為史之道亦甚失矣遂據實錄與書兼採諸家著錄參驗不差足以傳信者修為唐史記舊史之文繁者刪之失去就者改之意不足而有它證者補之事之不要者去之要而遺者增之是非不明者正之用編年之體所以次序君臣之事所書之法雖宗二經文意其體畧與實錄相類者以唐之一代有治有亂不可全法尚書春秋之體又不敢僣作經之名也或曰子之修是書不尚紀傳之體可矣不為書志則郊廟禮樂律厯災祥之事官職刑法食貨州郡之製得無遺乎荅曰郊廟而下固國之巨典急務但記其大要以明法度政教之體其備儀"]}]}],"toc":[{"id":"chapter-1-section-1","chapter_title":"《唐史論斷》　（宋）孫甫 撰","section_title":"欽定四庫全書","is_available":true},{"id":"chapter-1-section-2","chapter_title":"《唐史論斷》　（宋）孫甫 撰","section_title":"提要","is_available":true},{"id":"chapter-1-section-3","chapter_title":"《唐史論斷》　（宋）孫甫 撰","section_title":"●唐史論斷目錄","is_available":true},{"id":"chapter-1-section-4","chapter_title":"《唐史論斷》　（宋）孫甫 撰","section_title":"捲上","is_available":true},{"id":"chapter-1-section-5","chapter_title":"《唐史論斷》　（宋）孫甫 撰","section_title":"卷中","is_available":true},{"id":"chapter-1-section-6","chapter_title":"《唐史論斷》　（宋）孫甫 撰","section_title":"卷下","is_available":true},{"id":"chapter-1-section-7","chapter_title":"《唐史論斷》　（宋）孫甫 撰","section_title":"●唐史論斷序","is_available":true}],"plain_text":"# 《唐史論斷》　（宋）孫甫 撰\n## 欽定四庫全書\n史部十五\n史評類\n唐史論斷\n## 提要\n臣等謹案唐史論斷三卷宋孫甫撰甫字之翰陽翟人舉天聖八年進士厯右正言遷天章閣待制河北轉運使兼侍讀甫以劉昫唐書猥雜失體改用編年法著唐史記七十五卷其間善惡分明可為龜鑑者復著論以明焉甫沒唐史記宣取留禁中世遂不得見惟論斷獨傳於後紹興二十七年嘗鋟板於南劍州端平間舊板不存復刻於東陽郡甫生平自重此書至於盥手啟笥曽鞏歐陽修所作墓誌行狀及司馬光題跋蘇軾答李廌書亦皆推許甚至朱子語類嘗稱唐論精練說利害如身處親厯之但理不及唐鑑又稱呂伯恭晚年謂唐論勝唐鑑要之也是切於事情只是大綱卻不正了云云則極重其議論之精切而惜其不能盡衷於醇正葢甫生平以氣節自負故所論或不免稍失之偏激然於治亂得失之故指陳鑿鑿實足為考鏡之資讀史者所當與範祖禹唐鑑叅觀而互證者也\n乾隆四十二年八月恭校上\n總纂官 臣紀昀 臣陸錫熊 臣孫士毅\n總校官 臣陸費墀\n## ●唐史論斷目錄\n## 捲上\n召突厥兵\n立建成為太子\n殺劉文靜釋裴寂\n殺劉世讓\n復置十二軍\n放宮人\n即位改元\n魏鄭公論致治不難\n中書門下議事使諫官預聞\n責封倫舉賢\n定朝廷之制\n任用房杜\n殺盧祖尚\n魏公不避形跡\n房杜相業\n魏鄭公溫彥博論處置降虜\n命李靖為僕射\n封禪不著於經\n命李靖討吐谷渾\n貶權萬紀言利\n魏鄭公諫諍\n以髙昌為州縣\n立晉王為太子\n親征髙麗\n劉洎賜死\n後宮不著名\n降李績為迭州都督\n命李績為僕射同中書門下三品\n褚遂良諫廢立皇后\n顯慶改元\n長孫無忌黔州安置\n殺上官儀\n幹封改元\n追尊祖宗自稱天皇后稱天后\n郝處俊諫令後攝政\n劉仁軌請李敬元統兵御吐蕃王師覆敗\n裴炎請太后歸政太后殺之\n不稱武后年名\n狄仁傑薦張柬之為相\n廢武后\n韋后安樂公主進鴆帝\n## 卷中\n景雲年\n傳位皇太子使主細務\n相姚元崇\n開元神武皇帝尊號\n酸棗縣尉袁楚客上疏諫娛樂\n盧懷慎遺表薦宋璟盧從願\n用李林甫平章事張九齡請斬安祿山\n刑罰幾措推功李林甫牛仙客\n冊忠王為皇太子\n用聚斂臣王鉷\n中官輔璆琳稱祿山不反\n李光弼斬御史崔眾\n賊陷睢陽害張巡\n烏承恩為史思明所害\n九節度使討安慶緒\n李峴降蜀州刺史\n僕固懷恩留賊將分帥河北\n顏真卿降峽州\n李寳臣為馬承倩所辱復叛\n李棲筠卒\n開陵陽渠城原州\n楊炎貶崖州司馬賜死\n陸贄論吐蕃疾疫退軍\n盧杞奸邪\n李晟論張延賞過惡疑\n忌李晟\n宰相崔損便僻固位\n## 卷下\n李絳料魏博事勢\n用裴度相\n李■〈庸阝〉辭平章事\n注意相\n裴度罷相位\n失河北\n韋處厚乞相裴度\n昭愍遇害\n貶杜元頴\n辨朋黨\n制內臣\n鄭覃言開成政事\n不能制內臣\n殺陳王安王\n李徳裕讓太尉\n不能駕馭李徳裕\n貶李徳裕\n小節\n令狐綯縱賊\n用韋保衡路巖相\n鄭畋罷相\n李克用討朱全忠\n朱全忠簒逆\n## ●唐史論斷序\n古之史尚書春秋是也二經體不同而意同尚書記治世之事作教之書也故百篇皆由聖人立不以惡事名雖桀紂之惡亦因湯武之事而見不特書也但聖賢順時通變言與事各有所宜為史者從而記之又經聖人所定典謨訓誥誓命之文體雖不一皆足以作教於世也春秋記亂世之事立法之書也聖人出於季世覩時之亂居下而不能治故立大中之法裁判天下善惡而明之以王制是聖人於衰亂之時起至治之法非謹其文則不能正時事而垂大典矣此尚書春秋之體所以不同也然尚書記治世之事使聖賢之所為傳之不朽為君者為臣者見為善之效安得不說而行之此勸之之道也其間因見惡事致敗亂之端此又所以為戒也春秋記亂世之事以褒貶代王者之賞罰時之為惡者眾率辯其心跡而貶之使惡名不朽為君者為臣者見為惡之效安得不懼而防之此戒之之道也其間有善事焉明其心跡而褒之使光輝於世此又所以為勸也是尚書春秋記治亂雖異其於勸戒則大意同也後之為史者欲明治亂之本謹戒勸之道不師尚書春秋之意何以為法至司馬遷修史記破編年體創為紀傳葢務便於記事也記事便則所取博故竒異細碎之事皆載焉雖貫穿群書才力雄俊於治亂之本勸戒之道則亂雜而不明矣然有識者短之謂紀傳所記一事分為數處前後屢出比於編年則文繁此類固所失不細殊不知又有失之大者夫史之紀事莫大乎治亂君令於上臣行於下臣謀於前君納於後事臧則成否則敗成則治之本敗則亂之由此當謹記之某年君臣有謀議將相有功勲紀多不書必俟其臣歿而備載於傳是人臣得專有其謀議功勲也尚書雖不謹編年之法君臣之事年代有序羲和之業固載於堯典稷契皋夔之功固載於舜典三代君臣之事亦猶是焉遷以人臣謀議功勳與其家行細事雜載於傳中其體便乎復有過差邪惡之事以召危亂不於當年書之以為深戒豈非失之大者或曰春秋雖編年經目其事傳載本末遷立紀傳亦約是體故劉餗史例曰傳所以釋紀猶春秋之傳焉此可見遷書之不失也答曰春秋聖人立法之書也立法故目其事而斷之明治亂之本所目之事或一句或數句國之典制罔不明人之善惡罔不辨左氏史官也見聖人之經所目之事遂從而傳之雖不能深釋聖人之法記事次序一用編年之體非外春秋經目獨為記也遷之為紀也周而上多載經典之事固無所發明至秦漢紀並直書其事何嘗有法紀無法傳何釋焉此乃餗附遷而為之辭也或曰史之體必尚編年紀傳不可為乎荅曰為史者習尚紀傳久矣厯代以為大典必論之以復古則泥矣有能編列君臣之事善惡得實不尚僻怪不務繁碎明治亂之本謹勸戒之道雖為紀傳亦可矣必論其至則不若編年體正而文簡也甫嘗有志於史竊慕古史體法欲為之因讀唐之諸書見太宗功徳法制與三代聖王並后帝英明不逮又或不能守其法乃有荒縱狠忌庸懦之君故治少而亂多然有天下三百年由貞觀功徳之逺也唐書繁冗遺畧多失體法事或大而不具或小而悉記或一事別出而意不相照怪異猥俗無所不有治亂之跡散於紀傳中雜而不顯此固不足以彰明貞觀功徳法制之本一代興衰之由也觀髙祖至文宗實錄敘事詳備差勝於他書其間文理明白者尤勝焉至治亂之本亦未之明記事務廣也勸戒之道亦未之著褒貶不精也為史之體亦未之具不為編年之體君臣之事多離而書之也又要切之事或有遺畧君臣善惡之細四方事務之繁或備書之此於為史之道亦甚失矣遂據實錄與書兼採諸家著錄參驗不差足以傳信者修為唐史記舊史之文繁者刪之失去就者改之意不足而有它證者補之事之不要者去之要而遺者增之是非不明者正之用編年之體所以次序君臣之事所書之法雖宗二經文意其體畧與實錄相類者以唐之一代有治有亂不可全法尚書春秋之體又不敢僣作經之名也或曰子之修是書不尚紀傳之體可矣不為書志則郊廟禮樂律厯災祥之事官職刑法食貨州郡之製得無遺乎荅曰郊廟而下固國之巨典急務但記其大要以明法度政教之體其備儀","is_preview":true,"preview_page_limit":10}