戰國縱橫諸子公孫衍、張儀、蘇秦行年事迹攷辨

文化大學機構典藏 CCUR > 文學院 > 史學系暨研究所 > 博碩士論文 > Item 987654321/27959

jsp.display-item.identifier=請使用永久網址來引用或連結此文件: https://irlib.pccu.edu.tw/handle/987654321/27959

题名:	戰國縱橫諸子公孫衍、張儀、蘇秦行年事迹攷辨 An Examination and Analysis of the Annual Deeds of Philosophers ofPolitical Strategy in the Warring Statea Periods—Based on anInvestigationinto the Live of Gong Sun Yan,Zhang yi,and Su Qin
作者:	黎明昌 Li, Ming-Chang
贡献者:	史學系
关键词:	戰國縱橫家先秦諸子戰國策戰國縱橫家書史記司馬遷蘇秦公孫衍權變 the Warring States Period Zong Hen Jia the Pre-Qin Philosophers Zhan Guo Ce Zhan Guo Zong Heng Jia Shu Su Qin Zhang Yi Gong Sun Yan Si Ji Sima Qian Contingency
日期:	2014-06
上传时间:	2014-09-04 11:17:17 (UTC+8)
摘要:	戰國史由於史事錯雜缺竦，素稱難治。而在有限條件下，利用諸子來釐清戰國史事，則是歷來不二法門。諸子百家中，有九流十家之名，其可觀者九家而已。班固與章學誠咸以「縱橫」一詞來綜括牢籠戰國史的發展，遽可知縱橫諸子涉入諸國形勢發展與演進既廣且深。是以在釐清戰國史之諸子中，理應最具關鍵地位。然縱橫家言，多為游士馳騁游說之巧辭，語多不經。故自古未為學者所重，史家亦多略而不采。縱橫諸子事迹，徒然湮沒於傳聞異辭之中。而戰國史實，亦因此霾翳莫明。蓋戰國史實與縱橫諸子互證之效已如上述。論及縱橫家者流，莫不首推張儀、蘇秦，二子影響戰國史實甚鉅，司馬遷乃云：「此兩人真傾危之士哉！」然蘇、張事迹多亦游士附會飾托，司馬遷於是又說：「然世言蘇秦多異，異時事有類之者皆附之蘇秦。」又景春問孟子曰：「公孫衍、張儀豈不誠大丈夫哉」；《資治通鑑》云：縱橫之術「而儀、秦、衍最著。」戰國縱橫諸子中似乎蘇、張之外，公孫衍其名亦顯。張儀政敵當為公孫衍，而蘇秦為晚出後生之輩。然歷來論戰國縱橫皆以蘇、張耦比，乃出於公孫衍與蘇秦間於合縱事迹之舛誤。因此攷訂三子其行年事迹，抑關乎縱橫家與戰國史實之大者。復次，縱橫諸子以談說顯名、辮詐相高，希榮取寵，致位富貴。故國史上視縱橫家者流，多邪人為之，且誇誕無學，不足以列於九流十家。然縱橫諸子之傳聞附會，符合顧頡剛層累造成說，並在短時間積累荒誕異辭，足以熒惑後人視聽。除去傳聞異辭，縱橫諸子不但有術有學，並與諸子能相通互濟。其所長之權變源於上古，其所說本於古代史官之學。縱橫諸子之行事足徵王官學之遺存，因此司馬遷曰：「然戰國之權變亦有可頗采者，何必上古」蓋有其深意矣。《史記》之列傳實收辨彰學術，考鏡源流之效。戰國列傳多以縱橫諸子，及其餘長於權變諸子各家為主。是能認清現實並與理想結合，「作先合，然後引之大道」的階段性功能思維。政治與學術互為表裏，「然戰國之權變亦有可頗采者」，足以體現戰國政治的現實與學術的理論，並確實完成時代任務。太史公博物洽聞，將兩者結合於《史記》戰國列傳中，不但足見其識之高，亦可知其獨視縱橫諸子之重。本文亦由縱橫諸子行事與學術之一隅，來應證與發揮章學誠、劉師培所謂諸子出於古學史官說。 The historical events of the Warring States Period are too complicated to clarify. Using Zhu Zi’s（諸子） point of views to make things clear has become a unique way to apply. Among Zhu Zi, Jiu Liu Shi Jia(九流十家) are the most famous; however, only nine of them are worth of analyzing. Ban Gu(班固) and Zhang Xue Chen(章學誠) has adopted the term, Zong Hen(縱橫), to conclude the development of the Warring States Peried, and, accordingly, Zhu Zi was involved broadly and deeply with the development and evolution of each country concerned. Therefore, understanding Zhu Zi’s theories is the key to discover the history. What Zhu Zi said, however,were regarded as intention of lobbying, so they were usually discarded by historians and scholars, when doing the researches. Gradually, Zhu Zi’s speeches, in conjunction with the history of those countries, have been significantly veiled. As mentioned above, the history of Warring States Period and Zhu Zi can be mutually demonstrated. When it comes to Zong Hen Jia(縱橫家), Zhang Yi(張儀) and Su Qin(蘇秦) have been deemed as the most influential in the Warring States Period, as Sima Qian said ”both are the most important figures.” However, the stories of Zhang Yi and Su Qin were mostly told by general public in that period; therefore Sima Qian said “there are different sayings related to Su Qin because different things that occurred at different times were mistakenly applied to him.” And Jing Chun(景春) asked Mong Zi(孟子) “Aren’t Gong Sun Yan(公孫衍) and Zhang Yi great people?” Zi Zhi Tong Jian(資治通鑑) mentioned that concerning the methods of Zong Hen, ”Zhang Yi, Su Qin, and Gong Sun Yan are the most famous.” Among Zhu Zi in the Warring States Period, it seems that besides Su Qin and Zhang Yi, Gong Sun Yan is famous, too. Gong Sun Yan was the political opponent against Zhang Yi, and Su Qin belonged to younger generation; but regarding Zong Hen Jia in that period, we often compare Su Qin with Zhang Yi due to some fallacies happening. Uncovering the truths among these three people is highly important to discovering the historical validity between Zong Hen Jia and the Warring States Period. Moreover, Zong Hen Jia made their fortune by high-profile speeches, debating, and sensationalism, so from the historical view, they were deemed as people too crooked to be listed in the Jiu Liu Shi Jia. Nonetheless, the hearsays of Zong Hen Jia correspond to what Gu Jie Gang said, accumulating those errors one by one in a short period and misleading. Removing those hearsays, Zhong Hen Jia has its own reasonable theories and can communicate within Zhu Zi. Its distinct theories were from the former generation and basing them on the historiographers. What Zong Hen Jia did can be regarded as the heritage of Wang Guan Xue(王官學) and hence “the contingency theory was adoptable as well in the Warring States Period, with no need to involve officials in”, said Sima Qian. Lie Zhuan(列傳) in Shi Ji(史記) could demonstrate scholarship and verify their origins. Lie Zhuan listed most of those who were Zong Hen Jia or who were skilled at handling contingency. Recognizing the reality and combing it with ideas is a functional thinking, “a condescending way leading to the right track.” Politics and scholarship are two sides of one body. “The contingency theory was adoptable as well in the Warring States Period”, sufficient to highlight the reality of the period and theories of the scholarship, and to complete the missions of era. Sima Qian can see things other people cannot see through and put the two into Lie Zhuan of Si Ji, proving that he not only was a man of wit but also exclusively put much weight on Zhong Hen Jia.
显示于类别:	[史學系暨研究所] 博碩士論文

文件中的档案:

没有与此文件相关的档案.

检视Licence

在CCUR中所有的数据项都受到原著作权保护.

数据加载中.....