摘要
一些学者根据“漆耳杯铭文”与“鸠杖”论定墓主是“楚太子的老师” ,又有“陈良”、“屈原”等推测。据金文、简牍、帛书对“不”、“”二字有不同写法 ,漆耳杯铭文应为“东宫之杯” ,而非“东宫之师” ;据《左传》等典籍 ,楚国太子的老师应称为“傅”或“太傅”。据《周礼》、《礼记》、《吕氏春秋》 ,“八十九十 ,加赐鸠杖”之礼始于汉代 ,而楚系墓葬中出土的各种“杖”的形制特点 ,可证明此墓“鸠杖”不是手杖。屈原未担任过太子之傅 ,郭店一号楚墓墓主与屈原无关。
Based on an inscription on an eared lacquer cup and “Jiu Zhang”, some scholars confirm the owner of the grave to be “ a teacher of the crown prince of Chu”. Others conjecture he might be “Chen Liang” or “Qu Yuan”. But since there were different ways of writing the words “Bu” (不) and “Bi” (币) in Jinwen (inscriptions on ancient bronze objects), bamboo slips and silk cloth, the inscription on the lacquer cup should read “cup of Eastern Palace” and not “teacher of the crown prince”. In “Zuo Zhuan”, the teacher of the crown prince of Chu should be named Fu (傅) or Tai Fu (太傅). “Zhou Li”, “Li Ji” and “Lüshi Chunqiu” recorded that, starting from Han dynasty, an official whose age is more than eighty or ninety would be given a stick (Jiu Zhang) the finial of which is in the shape of a turtledove. The various sticks unearthed from the graves are not in the shape of a “Jiu Zhang”. So we can safely say that the “Zhang” unearthed from the grave are not walking sticks. Furthermore, Qu Yuan had never been a teacher (Fu) of the crown prince of Chu; hence the owner of the no. 1 grave in Guodian cannot have been Qu Yuan.
出处
《历史研究》
CSSCI
北大核心
2000年第5期12-23,共12页
Historical Research
