摘要 　　第一章為〈緒論〉，說明介紹本文的研究動機與目的，以及研究範圍與用語的意義界定。 　　第二章為〈《三國演義》的敘事認知〉，首先就明代之前關於小說文類的傳統論述，分為正統史書論述與文人評論兩大部分，依照其論述之時代順序，進行文類觀念上的說明探討，藉以檢視傳統小說文類之價值觀；其次，就傳統歷史小說的相關評論，檢視歷史演義小說敘事認知的文類觀；末節則是從《三國演義》的取材依據與敘事傳統二方面，探究《三國演義》一書所具有的敘事認知內容。 　　第三章為〈《三國演義》的文本建構〉，分別從《三國演義》文本作品的敘事藝術、敘事題材、敘事思想等層面，探討其具體呈現之文本建構內容。 　　第四章為〈結論〉，先說明中國歷史敘事傳統觀念對於小說所產生之深遠影響，接著探討歷史，小說與敘事的相互關係，最後則是就歷史小說的文類定位提出總結性看法，作為本篇論文結論。

本論文將檢視非虛構歷史記錄（史料）與虛構歷史書寫（歷史小說），全方位分析歷史意識與書寫間的關係。在考察大量非虛構歷史記錄與虛構歷史文本間的關聯與從屬性後，試圖梳理出隱晦於兩者間之互動聯繫。上述聯繫奠基於認識論、認知學、美學、語言學與本體論，而這些特性皆將於論文中詳細分析論述。 在深入介紹三位重要的歷史／文學理論家—詹明信、保羅‧呂格爾以及海登‧ 懷特—並且比較其作品之異同後，本人將於第二章提出本論文的主要發現之一，即作品中存在著本人稱為「美學倫理」的、一種不斷形塑的思維。本人認為，美學倫理是一種強大且具約束力的複合物，它連結並影響著非虛構與虛構歷史的書寫， 而書寫則涵納了道德／倫理與美學特性之實踐。美學倫理乃是動態、高度審慎的領域，其中包含個人與群體的歷史經驗，並且盤根錯節於深層美學與意識的大架構之下。在此經驗中，歷史首先實際發生，接著由歷史學家載入史料，其後由歷史小說家書寫成為故事。 在此部份，我將於論文中引述一些重要的分析家，其中最具影響力者要算是約翰‧杜威以及丹尼爾‧維克伯格，他們的「感知歷史」理論將會是重要論述因子之一。在本文理論中另一重要元素乃是人類意識敘事基礎對於虛構與非虛構歷史敘事的理解與組織模式。而這將再次點明實際的意識經驗（歷史）是如何先發生，之後由歷史學家書寫（意識）歷史，接著再由小說家撰寫故事。 第三章根據上述論證，透過敘述意識概念的細節回顧，以及意識如何建構歷史敘述之脈絡，進一步闡述理論。本研究較為獨特之處，在於對主體性、客體性與相互主體性之間，整合運作聯繫性之分析。第四章將詳細剖析各種特定的美學因子，以及這些因子在理論架構中，歷史意識兼敘述之「發展中網絡」裡所扮演的角色。此分析之重要元素乃是本人對於生活與文學中表達模式之檢視，在過去此類概念並未被充分陳述。 第五章包含真實與歷史書寫之分析。根據本人研究，仍有許多關於歷史敘述中真相之觀察與「建構」方面的細節，過去尚未有較完備之研究。透過比較異同，並整合當代多位優秀分析家與理論家之理論，本人將描繪出關於歷史真相之完整且獨特的理論。此外，本章亦將概略提出一個與論文其他分析搭配，且獨立建構的真相理論。在結論部分，將針對上述眾多概念，提出其整體重要性之論述，以及這些概念對於人類歷史意識與書寫之衝擊。 關鍵字：歷史、歷史意識、歷史學家、歷史小說家、史料、歷史小說化、史實、美學、敘述意識、道德、倫理 / This paper is an expansive analysis of historical consciousness and writing, examining the principle genres of non-fiction history (historiography) and fictionalized history (historical novels). The analysis examines a host of relevancies and affiliations that cross among fictional and non-fictional historical writing, and seeks to highlight underlying vincula linking these two narrative forms. These linkages stem from epistemological, cognitive, aesthetic, experiential, linguistic and ontological qualities, all which will be examined and related in detail. The work begins with a thorough preamble that compares, contrasts and critiques the works of three major historical/literary theorists—Fredric Jameson, Paul Ricoeur and Hayden White—and applies their theory to my own ideas, I introduce my main theses and themes, to be examined throughout the study. A principal finding of this study in Chapter Two is the existence of a conditioning conception I call the “aesthetics ethic.” The aesthetics ethic is I posit a strong, binding amalgamation that links and influences these two genres, comprised of transacting moral/ethical and aesthetic features. The aesthetic ethic is a dynamic, densely deliberative field comprising individual and community historical experience, embedded within profoundly aesthetic and conscious contexts, in which history is first lived, and historical writing by historians and historical novelists is then composed. I refer to a number of important analysts in this section of the work, perhaps most importantly John Dewey and Daniel Wickberg, whose theory of “histories of sensibilities” is an important factor. An additional important element of my theory is that the narrative basis of human consciousness maps onto historical narratives, fictional and non-fictional. This again refers to how conscious lived experience (history) is first lived, and then (conscious) historical writing by historians and novelists is then composed. I follow this examination, in Chapter Three, with a detailed review of conceptions of narrative consciousness, and how this consciousness maps onto historical narrative, proper. A unique element of this study is my analysis of a given combinatory transaction linking subjectivity, objectivity and intersubjectivity. Chapter Four is a lengthy analysis of specific aesthetic factors, and their roles in a “burgeoning matrix” of historical consciousness-cum-narrative within my overall theory. An important component of this analysis is my examination of modality in life and letters, and important conception that has not been adequately addressed in the past. Chapter Five includes an analysis of truth in historical writing—and we find that there are intricate details about the apprehension and “construction” of truth in historical narrative that have not been adequately described before. I delineate, compare, contrast and combine ideas from several premier analysts and theorists in this area, reaching what I hope is a coherent and unique theory of historical truth. In this chapter, additionally, I provide a small sketch of an independently created theory of truth that is in accord with the rest of the analysis. The work concludes with final summaries and thoughts about the overall importance of narrative historical writing, and their impact on human historical consciousness and writing.