清华简《系年》与“周公东征”相关问题考  

Research on the Tsinghua Bamboo-slips Xi Nian and Duke Zhou'Eastward Conquest

作　　者：刘光胜[1] 

机构地区：[1]上海师范大学人文与传播学院

出　　处：《中原文化研究》2016年第2期70-79,共10页The Central Plains Culture Research

基　　金：国家社会科学基金重大项目"清华简<系年>与古史新探"(10&ZD091);上海市教委创新项目"<清华大学藏战国竹简(壹)>整理研究"(12YS048)阶段性成果

摘　　要：学界对于清华简《系年》,主要从它与传世文献及青铜器铭文的相同之处考察其价值的可贵,而对于它们之间的差异,却未仔细地梳理。清华简《系年》第三章与太保簋不能对接,真正与《系年》对应的是《逸周书·作雒》篇。《系年》是珍贵的战国文献,但它所记的史事:武庚立于成王时期,三监全部被杀死,商邑之民自己发动叛乱,与管、蔡无关,皆不可信。《系年》第三章与《史记·周本纪》及《尚书》中《蔡仲之命》《金縢》《大诰》等篇存在明显矛盾,它只是提供了西周史事的一种说法,仅为一家之言,并不是无条件、必须相信的历史。The scholar mainly observe the similarities between Tsinghua Bamboo-slips Xi Nian and ancientliterature and inscriptions on bronzes. The differences between them have not been observed. The third chapter of XiNian is confirmed by ＂Yi Zhou Shu- Zuo Luo＂, not Da Bao Gui. Xi Nian is the precious literature of the WarringStates period. But the historical events in the book of Xi Nian： Wu Geng was supported in Cheng Wang period, SanJian were all killed, Shang Yi people in their rebellion have nothing to do with San Jian, which were all not credible.The third chapter of Xi Nian only provides a historical events of the Western Zhou Dynasty, which we might notbelieve.

关 键 词：清华简《系年》 三监 太保簋 飞廉 

分 类 号：K877[历史地理—考古学及博物馆学] K221[历史地理—历史学]