论文部分内容阅读
传世的《逸周书》历来不受重视,直到西晋时才有孔晁为之注,至唐宋时篇章散佚,甚者有误以为其源自汲冢周书者。到了清代时赖卢文弨、王念孙、朱右曾等人之力,比校诸本,刊定文句,广为注译,后人才得以竟读。只不过清人在校勘诸本异文并加以译注的同时,常需加以裁断并改定文句,所凭借者不外是古书中曾出现的句子,以及校注者对篇文内容的理解等,然因学者间各持之有理,也造成了传世《逸周书》版本文字或译注诸说并陈,莫衷一是的情形。而今日赖有出土文本,可让我们重新来审视清人对其书的校注之功。因此本文以《清华简·祭公之顾命》为本,先对学者间针对简文所提出的说法加以裁择,辅证之以相关铜器铭文,并予以通释串讲;接着以出土本和传本的文字做对比,进而分析传世本《祭公》文字的正误,及清人校改注译《祭公》的得失。
The handed down “Yizhoushu” has never been valued, until the Western Jin Dynasty when Kong Chao for the note, to the Tang and Song Dynasties when the chapter is lost, or even mistakenly think that it stems from Zizhong Zhou book. By the time of the Qing Dynasty, Lai Lvwen, Wang Niansun, Zhu Youzeng and others had the power of compiling texts and publishing articles. Only the Qing people in the collation of different text and to be annotated at the same time, often need to be judged and rewritten sentences, by virtue of nothing more than the ancient books have appeared in sentences, as well as school notes on the content of the article to understand, etc. Scholars each have their own reasons, but also resulted in the handed down “Yizhoushu” version of the text or translation of the comments and Chen, implausible situation. Today, there is unearthed texts that allow us to re-examine the achievements of the Qing dynasty on the book’s school notes. Therefore, this article, based on the book “Gu Ming of Tsinghua Memorial Concubine”, analyzes the scholars’ suggestions on the essay briefly, supplements them with the inscriptions on bronze inscriptions, And the transfer of the text to make a comparison, and then analyze the handed down the “sacrifice for the public,” the correctness and error, and the revision of the Qing Dynasty “sacrifice of the public” gains and losses.