论历史上的“三良观”  

On the View of “San-Liang” in the Chinese History

作　　者：刘冬妮[1] 

机构地区：[1]宝鸡文理学院历史文化与旅游系,陕西宝鸡721013

出　　处：《咸阳师范学院学报》2015年第5期1-4,共4页Journal of Xianyang Normal University

摘　　要：历史上对"三良"从死穆公一事形成了三种观点:第一种观点认为"三良"被迫从死,"三良"之死罪在穆公;第二种观点认为"三良"主动从死以追随明君;第三种观点认为"三良"从死罪在康公。三种观点中,"三良"主动从死穆公的可能性较大。Historically there were three viewpoints about the death of ＂San-liang＂. The first was that Mu-gong should be responsible for the death of ＂San-liang＂; the second was that ＂San-liang＂took the initiative to die so as to be with their wise king; the last one was that Kang-gong was the man who should be responsible for the death of ＂San-liang＂. Among the three views, it is more likely that ＂san-li- ang＂ took the initiative to die with their king.

关 键 词：“三良”从死 穆公 《诗经·黄鸟》 

分 类 号：K231[历史地理—历史学]