論《繫年》的性質與規範化：以戰争與弭兵書寫爲例

The Nature of the Chronology and its Standardization: The Writing about Battles and Ceasefire Treaties as Examples

Abstract

LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.

本文以《繫年》的“性質”與“規範化”爲論述焦點，並以“戰争”與“弭兵”爲例，比較《繫年》《春秋》《左傳》《國語》等書的書寫體式與書寫目的之異同，説明《繫年》的價值與侷限。全文計分八節：一、指出《繫年》的五個問題，並説明本文所欲探討的焦點。二、《繫年》内容述略。三、《繫年》研究述略。四、《繫年》性質述論：以《春秋》《左傳》《國語》爲參照。五、《繫年》與《左傳》性質的異同：以戰争書寫爲例。六、《繫年》與《左傳》兩次弭兵書寫的異同。七、論《繫年》的規範化。八、結論。

Focusing on the “nature” of the Chronology (Xinian) and its “standardization,” and utilizing its writing about battles and ceasefire treaties as examples, this article is a comparative analysis of the recording practices and aims of the Chronology, Spring and Autumn Annals, Zuo Tradition, and Guoyu, etc., to evaluate the value and limitations of the Chronology. The article is comprised of eight sections, as follows: 1) Introduction; 2) The contents of the Chronology; 3) Existing research on the Chronology;4) The nature of the Chronology, as compared with that of the Spring and Autumn Annals, Zuo Tradition, and Guoyu; 5) The similarities and differences in writing about battles between the Chronology and Zuo Tradition;6) A comparison of the ways in which the Chronology and the Zuo Tradition record the ceasefires between the states of Jin and Chu, which took place in 579 BCE and 564 BCE;7) Standardizations in the Chronology; and 8) Conclusion.