这就是《魏略》和《九州春秋》的记载，那么这个记载它有一个问题，就是和《三国志》的说法相冲突。《三国志》有没有根据呢？有，根据就在诸葛亮的《出师表》。我们现在习惯上说诸葛亮有两份出师表，一份叫《前出师表》，一份叫《后出师表》，这个《后出师表》是不是诸葛亮的作品是有争议的，历史学家们有不同意见，有人认为这是伪作，但是《前出师表》是没有疑问的。那么《前出师表》诸葛亮说得很清楚，是刘备三顾茅庐，他才出山。另外裴松之编完诸葛亮的这个集子以后，有一个《上诸葛亮集表》里面也是这么记载的，所以裴松之在为《三国志》作注的时候，他把《魏略》和《九州春秋》的说法他注在注文里面了，同时他发了一个议论，他说历史上由于历史学家文件不同，就是他的信息渠道不同，他的信息来源不同，是会有不同的记载，这很正常，但是这个事情如此冲突和矛盾太奇怪了。
This is the record in “Wei Lue” and “Jiuzhou Spring and Autumn”, so there is a problem with this record, which conflicts with the statement in “Three Kingdoms Annals”. Is there any basis for “Three Kingdoms Annals”? Yes, according to Zhuge Liang’s “Graduation Table”. It is now customary for us to say that Zhuge Liang has two copies of his master’s table, one called “The Former Master’s Table” and the other called “The Later Master’s Table”. It is controversial whether this “The Later Master’s Table” is the work of Zhuge Liang. Historians have different opinions, and some people believe that this is a forgery, but there is no doubt about “The Former Master’s Table”. “So in” The Former Teacher’s Table “, Zhuge Liang made it very clear that Liu Bei was the only one who made his debut.”. In addition, after Pei Songzhi compiled this collection of Zhuge Liang, there was a “Table of the Collection of Zhuge Liang” that also recorded this. Therefore, when Pei Songzhi annotated the “Records of the Three Kingdoms”, he annotated the statements in “Wei Lue” and “Jiuzhou Spring and Autumn” in the commentary, and at the same time, he made a comment. He said that due to different historical documents, his information sources were different due to different sources of information, It is normal that there will be different records, but it is strange that this matter is so conflicting and contradictory.
＊关于三顾茅庐，史书《魏略》《九州春秋》和诸葛亮《出师表》里的记载大相径庭，不但如此，它还完全颠覆了人们耳熟能详的小说中的三顾茅庐。在《三国演义》里，刘备三次走进卧龙冈，拜访韬光养晦的诸葛亮，最终诸葛亮走出山林，辅佐刘备成就帝业。这一段被世代读者传唱的佳话，为什么在史书上却是另外一副样子呢？在历史的真实上，到底是诸葛亮的自我推荐还是刘备的三顾茅庐呢？这个事情为什么如此奇怪呢？
Regarding Sangu Maolu, the records in the historical books “Wei Lu”, “Jiuzhou Spring and Autumn”, and Zhuge Liang’s “Departure Table” are quite different. Moreover, it completely subverts the well-known novel of Sangu Maolu. In “The Romance of the Three Kingdoms”, Liu Bei walked into Wolonggang three times to visit Zhuge Liang, who was a reclusive figure. Finally, Zhuge Liang walked out of the mountains and helped Liu Bei achieve his imperial career. Why is this beautiful story sung by generations of readers so different in history books? In terms of historical reality, is it Zhuge Liang’s self recommendation or Liu Bei’s three steps? Why is this thing so strange?
