본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

被創造的“三監之亂”的記憶 — 以與周公旦的關係為中心 —

ebellion of the Three Supervision Being Created --Centered around the Relationship with Duke Zhou

1

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류기타인문학

초록

本文主要以與周公的關係為中心, 對西周早期發生的叛亂——被後世稱為“三監之亂”的“形象”變化, 進行探討。 據≪史記・周本紀≫記載, 周武王死後, 周公攝政, 而“管叔、蔡叔群弟”懷疑周公, 與武庚發動叛亂, 最後周公誅殺武庚、管叔, 放逐蔡叔。 但許多學者已指出, 不同時代、不同文獻所記述的叛亂內容大有不同。 比如, 不同文獻對叛亂中周公動向的描述不同。 最具代表性的是受誹謗的周公“居東”這一說法與周公親自“征伐”叛亂這一說法。 周公“居東說”與“征伐說”都是戰國時期出現的, 而且基本上不會在同一文獻中同時出現, 這表示當時文獻的撰寫者認為這兩種說法不能共存。 但是漢代以後出現了解決兩種說法矛盾的嘗試, 尤其是東漢末期以後的經學家試圖共存兩種說法。 後來許多學者立足於文獻記述具有一定的真實性這一經學“信仰”, 力求勉強解決各文獻記述內容之間的矛盾, 導出所謂“三監之亂”的眞相。 但筆者認為不可能把握所謂“三監之亂”的眞相, 解決文獻中兩種說法的矛盾是典型的經學思維方法。

Abstract

Centered around the relationship with Duke Zhou, this paper discusses the changes occurred to the images of what is known to the later generations as Rebellion of the Three Supervision, which took place in early Zhou Dynasty. According to History of the Zhou Dynasty from Shi Ji, after King Wu of Zhou died, Duke Zhou acted as regent. Duke Cai, Duke Guan and other brothers of King Wu of Zhou questioned Duke Zhou, and rebelled against him together with Wu Geng. In the end, Duke Zhou killed Wu Geng and Duke Guan, and exiled Duke Cai. However, many scholars have pointed out that in different texts the Rebellion is recorded distinctively. One of the distinction is the movement of Duke Zhou. One theory with the most representativeness is that defamed by others, Duke Zhou Ju Dong (lived in the East) and he Zheng Fa (led the war against the rebels) himself. The Ju Dong theory and the Zheng Fa theory both came into shape during the Warring States Period, and these two theories haven’t coexisted in the same text, which indicates that the authors of the texts deny the coherence of the two theories. However, since Han Dynasty, there have been endeavors to deal with the contradiction of these two theories, especially by some scholars specialized in Confucian canons. Based on the belief that all textual records must somehow be true to certain extent, they take painstaking effort to eliminate the contradiction of various textual records and extract the truth of the Rebellion. However, the author of this paper does not believe in the possibility to shed light to the truth of the Rebellion, and the paper attributes the endeavor to eliminate the contradictions to the thinking pattern not uncommon in the field of Confucian canon study

참고문헌 (20)

  1. 顧頡剛, "尚書校釋釋論, 第三册" (2005), 中華書局
  2. 屈萬里, "尚書集釋" (2014), 中西書局
  3. 杜勇, "清華簡<金縢>有關歷史問題考論", 古籍整理研究學刊, (2) (2012)
  4. 路懿菡, "≪清華簡與西周史研究≫的第4章第1節" (2018), 三秦出版社
  5. 瀧川資言, "史記會注考證 第5卷" (1999), 北岳文藝出版社
  6. 劉國忠, "走近清華簡" (2011), 高等教育出版社
  7. 劉國忠, "出土文獻 第1輯" (2010), 中西書局
  8. 李學勤, "中國經學 第8輯" (2011), 廣西師範大學出版社
  9. 李學勤, "夏商周文明研究" (2015), 商務印書館
  10. 馬衛東, "“周公居東”與<金縢>疑義辨析", 史學月刊, (2) (2015)
  11. 白川靜, "≪金文通釋≫卷一上、第二輯三", 白鶴美術館雜誌 (1962)
  12. 徐中舒, "西周史論述(上)", 四川大學學報, (3) (1979)
  13. 徐中舒, "殷周之際史跡之檢討, ≪歷史語言研究集刊≫第七本, 第二分册", ~
  14. 孫次舟, "周公史跡清理", 說文月刊, 4 (1944)
  15. 楊 寛, "西周史(上)" (2016), 上海人民出版
  16. 吳汝綸, "尚書故" (2014), 中西書局
  17. 佐藤信彌, "<三監の亂>說話の形成——清華簡<繋年>第三章より見る", 漢字學硏究, (2) (2014)
  18. 清華大學出土文獻研究與保護中心, "清華大學藏戰國竹簡(壹)" (2010), 中西書局
  19. 清華大學出土文獻研究與保護中心, "清華大學藏戰國竹簡(貳), 下册" (2011), 中西書局
  20. 彭裕商, "<尚書・金縢>新研", 歷史研究, (6) (2012)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (16건)