“泛史料”意识下史料趋于文学化,这弥补了民史史料的缺乏甚至匮乏的现状,是伴随史家“眼光向下”的治史理念应运而生的。在强调科学化、规范化的严谨分析模式下,合理的历史想象、富于文学性的历史叙事方法之勃兴拓展了史学的传播和影响力。文学化叙述描写与科学化剖析解释本不冲突矛盾,更无优劣之分,均是史学构建过程的两个方面,史家因治史理念、侧重等不同各有选择,文史界限之存在自是必然,可言辞之使用则为共通,在维护史学本质的基础上或执其一端或兼融相通,都应被历史研究所包容,毕竟多元方可能造就生机。 Under the consciousness of “pan-historical material”, the historical materials tend to be literary, which makes up for the lack of or even lack of historical materials of the history of the people, which is accompanied by the historian’s concept of “looking down”. Under the rigorous and rigorous analysis mode that emphasizes science and standardization, the booming of rational historical imagination and literary historical narration method has expanded the spread and influence of history. Both the literary description and the scientific analysis do not contradict each other, and there is no difference between superiority and inferiority. Both of them are two aspects of the construction of history science. Historians have their own existence due to different ideas such as the idea of ​​governing history and different emphases Necessarily, the use of rhetoric is common. On the basis of maintaining the essence of historiography or holding one end or merging with each other, we should all be embraced by historical studies. After all, pluralism may create vitality.