论文部分内容阅读
拙稿《论明末农民起义军荥阳大会的卓越成就》(刊《历史教学》1962年2月号)一文,曾论述了这次大会与攻取凤阳的关系及其重大意义。方福仁先生对此表示异议,并从根本上怀疑荥阳大会的真实性(《明末农民军荥阳大会质疑》刊1962年7月4日《光明日报·史学》第241期,以下简称“方文”)。但拜读之后,感到“方文”并未提出使人信服的充分论据。荥阳大会,是明末农民战争史、以至中国近古史上一个重大事件,既然有人提出怀疑,通过讨论,弄清楚真象,还是非常必要的。一关于选择和解释史料的问题“方文”怀疑荥阳大会真实性的理由,是认为某些记述这一事件的史料是不可信的。因此,我们首先就从怎样选择和解释有关史料上作一些探讨。第一,“方文”认为《小腆纪年》等书中有关荥阳大会的记载,都是“从《绥寇纪略》中沿袭来的”。但并没有举出确凿可信的证据。其实,有关记述荥阳大会的史籍,并不象“方文”所列,仅只有
The book “On the Outstanding Achievements of the Peasant Uprising Army in the Ming and Qing Dynasties” (Journal of History Teaching, February 1962) addressed the relationship between this conference and the attack on Fengyang and its great significance. Fang Furen expressed his opposition to this and fundamentally doubted the authenticity of the Conference (the question of “Questioning the Conference of the People’s Liberation Army at the end of Ming Dynasty” No. 241 of “Guangming Daily Historical Science” of July 4, 1962, hereinafter referred to as “Fang Wen ”). However, after reading, I felt that “Fang Wen” did not make convincing arguments. The Shenyang Conference is a peasant war history in the late Ming and even a major event in the history of ancient China. Since some people have raised doubts, it is still very necessary to clarify the truth through discussion and discussion. A question about the choice and interpretation of historical materials The reason why the “square article” suspected the authenticity of the 荥 Yang Assembly was that some historical accounts describing the incident were not credible. Therefore, we first make some discussions on how to choose and explain the relevant historical data. First, the “Fang Wen” thinks that the records about the Shenyang Conference in the book “Year of the Ox” are all “from” Sui Kou Ji Lue. “ But did not give credible evidence. In fact, the historical records about the Shenyang Conference are not the only ones listed in the ”Fang Wen"