Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

Title: 《左傳》「獻捷」、「獻俘」、「獻功」事例的省察與詮釋
Discussion on the Examples of Xianjie, Xianfu, and Xiangong in Zuozhuan
Authors: 李隆獻
Lee, Long-Shien
Keywords: 《左傳》;獻捷;獻俘;獻功;義例
Zuozhuan;xianjie (offerings of victory);xianfu (offerings of captives);xiangong (offerings of contribution);martial rituals;yili
Date: 2015-12
Issue Date: 2017-11-01 11:45:05 (UTC+8)
Abstract: 本文以《左傳》為核心,聚焦春秋軍禮之「獻捷」禮儀,析論其名義、類型等相關問題,勾勒「獻捷」在春秋時代的具體樣貌與儀節之政治意涵,並藉由獻捷實況與《左傳》比勘,探論《左傳》「獻捷義例」是否符合春秋實況及其時代意義。本文之〈二〉針對《左傳》「獻捷」、「獻俘」、「獻功」三詞交叉分析,可知三者皆指將戰爭俘獲轉送第三方的儀節。所獻品物以生俘、死獲的馘首與車馬為主,又以生俘最為常見。〈三〉則區分春秋時代「獻捷」為諸侯獻捷天子與諸侯相互獻捷兩種,其政治意涵有所區別:諸侯獻捷天子旨在凸顯己方遵奉王命征討四方的正當性,同時也確立君臣關係,蓋源自西周;諸侯相互獻捷的原型應是小國獻捷大國,除宣示效忠,也代表獲得大國/盟主認可征伐的正當性;但齊、楚二大國向魯「獻捷」則是藉以誇耀軍功,威逼魯國臣服。〈四〉則探討莊公31 年《左傳》「獻捷義例」的相關問題。《左傳》載述之獻捷原則有三:一、諸侯對蠻夷戎狄有征伐之功,當獻捷於王,二、華夏諸侯互相征討,無需獻捷天子,三、諸侯不相遺俘;但此義例與春秋時代獻捷實況多有未合,顯現《左傳》前後立場並不一致。其可能原因,一是《左傳》之「獻捷義例」或許源自較早的禮儀傳統,《左氏》迫於時空轉變的現實,只得如實載錄;另一種可能則是《左傳》並非一人撰成,故而前後立場不一。
This paper will focus on a military ritual of xianjie (victory offerings) existing in Zuozhuan during Spring-Autumn period, trying to examine in detail its form and content as well as its political meanings. What’s more, the paper will compare the principles of xianjie and its examples found in Zuozhuan, discussing what the actual practices might be and their significance at the times. The core of this paper is to analyze the three interrelated terms in Zuozhuan: xianjie (victory offering), xianfu (captive offerings), and xiangong (contribution offerings). All the three terms signify the rituals where war captives are offered to the third party besides the battling parties. The offerings include the captives in most cases, and also the heads cut off from the bodies as well as carriages and horses. This paper will also compare the two kinds of xianjie according to different political contexts and discuss their meanings: offerings given from feudal baron to the emperor; or from one feudal baron to another. Xianjie offered by feudal baron to the emperor means to claim the legitimacy to send an army to battle in the name of the emperor, while that offered by one feudal baron to another represents a small state’s allegiance to a bigger state. But there is one exception: the Qi State and Chu State give offerings to Lu State, because the two more powerful states mean to show off their military prowess and bring Lu to submission. Finally, this paper will examine the relevant issues on yili (case studies) of xianjie in Zuozhuan. There are three principles of xianjie recorded in Zuozhuan: (1) When feudal barons overcome the barbarians, they offer xianjie to the emperor. (2) When feudal barons fight one another, there is no need to offer xianjie to the emperor. (3) Feudal barons do not offer captives to one another. However, these principles do not correspond to the actual situation in Spring-Autumn period, which points to the inconsistency of Zuozhuan. It is likely that the principles in effect come from an even earlier ritual tradition, or this book is written by more than one author.
Relation: 政大中文學報, 24,129-166
Data Type: article
Appears in Collections:[政大中文學報 THCI Core] 期刊論文

Files in This Item:

File Description SizeFormat
24(129-166).pdf3432KbAdobe PDF172View/Open

All items in 學術集成 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.

社群 sharing