《左傳》「弒君敘事」舉隅－以趙盾、崔杼為例

The Narration of Regicide in the Zuozhuan 左傳: Taking Zhao Dun 趙盾 and Cui Zhu 崔杼 as Examples

10.6239/BOC.201012_(48).01

李隆獻(Long-Shien Lee)；蔡瑩瑩(Ying-Ying Tsai)

左傳 ； 敘事 ； 弒君 ； 趙盾 ； 崔杼 ； Zuozhuan ； Narrative ； Regicide ； Zhao Dun ； Cui Zhu

國文學報

48期（2010 / 12 / 01）

1 - 33

繁體中文

「趙盾弒其君」與「崔杼弒其君」乃春秋時代兩件重大而著名的史事。《左傳》對此二事件的載述，素為中國傳統史學－尤以「倫理」、「德行」為核心概念的史學理論－所津津樂道。本文則由敘事學的角度切入，首先分析此二弒君事件的情節，探討事件的背景、弒君的原因；其次由人物方面，比較《左傳》刻畫趙盾、崔杼此二「弒君之臣」的形象異同；復次則藉由探討《左傳》對弒君事件的態度，說明《左傳》敘事力求平衡「公眾秩序」與「個人德行」的意義所在：既顯揚個體德行的價值，又維繫君臣倫理的穩固，兩者相輔相成，既呼應先秦儒家學說的理論基礎，也呈顯《春秋》的微言大義與《左傳》的敘事特質；文末則透過與西方歷史學／敘事學的比較，凸顯《左傳》敘事的意義與特色：在史事遷流中，求索恆常不變的倫理關懷與道德價值；在時代顛沛中，堅持褒善貶惡的史官精神。

The deaths of the rulers of Jin (晉) and Qi (齊), at the hands of their prominent ministers Zhao Dun and Cui Zhu respectively, were high-profile regicides in the Spring and Autumn period (722-468 B.C.). The Zuozhuan narrates these two instances of regicide in particularly fine detail, because they exemplify the problems of social order and personal character taken up by Chinese traditional historiography as the heart of its concerns. This paper studies the narrative perspectives employed by the Zuozhuan to play out these concerns. First, the paper analyzes the background factors leading up to the regicides. Then it proceeds to compare and contrast the figures of Zhao Dun and Cui Zhu as portrayed in the Zuozhuan. Subsequently, it explores the various attitudes toward regicide as held by different characters within the text, so as to present the Zuozhuan's efforts at establishing a position with regard to the difficult balance between maintaining social order and encouraging the assertion of personal talent and ability. The implications of these efforts are such that the Zuozhuan both affirms individual endeavor and upholds the stability of lord-minister relations as, ideally-speaking, two sides of the same coin. Examining the interplay and tension between these twin values will also help us better appreciate the following: the foundation of Pre-Qin Confucian ideals reflected therein; the standards of judgment exercised by the Chunqiu (春秋Spring and Autumn Annals); the narrative qualities of the Zuozhuan; as well as the Zuozhuan's composite use of a range of opinions from different commentators-such as the Gentleman (junzi 君子) and Confucius (Zhongni 仲尼)-to put together its system of ethical principles. Lastly, this paper suggests that referencing Occidental historiographical tradition and narrative theory can also shed light on the properties and significance of the Zuozhuan as a historical narrative with ethical purposes: that is, though the course of history may flow on, with its turbulences and changing circumstances, the Zuozhuan insists on searching for laws of constancy in their midst, because it refuses to relinquish its power to arbitrate between good and evil as a historical witness.

1. 李隆獻(2010)。左傳「仲尼曰」敘事芻論。臺大中文學報，33
   連結：
2. ［日］瀧川資言：《史記會注考證》，東京：東京文化學院東京研究所，昭和7 年（1932）。
3. 三國•吳韋昭(1998)。國語解。上海:上海古籍出版社。
4. 元楊維楨(1965)。東維子集。臺北:臺灣商務印書館。
5. 宋邢昺(1976)。論語注疏。臺北:藝文印書館。
6. 宋孫奭(1976)。孟子注疏。臺北:藝文印書館。
7. 唐孔穎達(1976)。左傳正義。臺北:藝文印書館。
8. 唐徐彥(1976)。公羊注疏。臺北:藝文印書館。
9. 唐楊士勛(1976)。穀梁注疏。臺北:藝文印書館。
10. 漢司馬遷(1972)。史記。臺北:新安書局。
11. 漢班固(1974)。漢書。臺北:鼎文書局。
12. 王叔岷(1988)。莊子校詮。中央研究院歷史語言所研究專刊，88
13. 王叔岷(1982)。史記斠證。中央研究院歷史語言所研究專刊，78
14. 竹添光鴻(1969)。左氏會箋。臺北:古亭書屋。
15. 李隆獻(2010)。先秦傳本／簡本敘事舉隅—以「三郤之亡」爲例。臺大中文學報，32，31-78。
16. 李隆獻、國立臺灣大學中國文學系主辦(2008)。敘事理論與實踐—以《左傳》爲對象•敘論。經典詮釋教學與研究方法座談會
17. 李隆獻、張以仁指導(1992)。晉史蠡探：以兵制與人事爲重心。國立臺灣大學中國文學研究所博士論文。
18. 徐復觀(1969)。中國人性論史•先秦篇。臺北:臺灣商務印書館。
19. 張雙棣(1997)。淮南子校釋。北京:北京大學出版社。
20. 勞思光(2005)。新編中國哲學史。臺北:三民書局。
21. 過常寶(2008)。原史文化及文獻研究。北京:北京大學出版社。
22. 顧頡剛(1990)。顧頡剛讀書筆記。臺北:聯經出版事業公司。