期刊目次

加入编委

期刊订阅

添加您的邮件地址以接收即将发行期刊数据:

Open Access Article

Modern Social Science Research. 2026; 6: (8) ; 9-15 ; DOI: 10.12208/j.ssr.20260253.

The narrative functions and political memory in the Chu bamboo slips Jigengzi Questions Confucius and Confucius Meets Ji Huanzi
论上博简〈季庚子问于孔子〉、〈孔子见季桓子〉的叙事功能与政治记忆

作者: 陈曙光 *

香港教育大学中国语言学系 香港

*通讯作者: 陈曙光,单位:香港教育大学中国语言学系 香港 ;

本文属于《观乎人文》(第三辑)专题特刊稿件

发布时间: 2026-08-05 总浏览量: 114

摘要

传世文献如《论语》、《礼记》里的孔子,往往呈现道德教化的傾向。即使《论语》有季康子向孔子问政的记载,往往只为表达儒家的重要政治主张。惟在战国的出土文献里,编者透过孔子与季氏的问答,却呈现出孔子作为“政治顾问”的形象。本文以战国出土的上博简〈季庚子问于孔子〉、〈孔子见季桓子〉为核心材料,运用叙事学与文化记忆理论,分析楚简“孔子与大臣”问答方式的叙事功能与当中的政治记忆。这些文献记载孔子与鲁国实际掌权者季氏父子的政治对话,其叙事呈现稳定的结构。本文认为这些文本是战国时期,儒家学派通过建构“虚心问政”的场景,将孔子定位为“重要的政治人物”。而文本里季氏大臣更被塑造出类近孔门弟子的形象,包括谦逊、好学等。这种稳定的问答方式具有明确的记忆功能,它为战国儒家参与实际政治提供典范,将孔子的权威转化为政治话语权。本文进一步运用阿斯曼的文化记忆理论,分析这些文献从口传到书写的转化过程,分析文本的集体认同功能,以及汉代以后被“有意识遗忘”的原因。

关键词: 出土楚简;孔子;弟子;文化记忆;叙事

Abstract

The transmitted classics such as the Analects and the Rites often portray Confucius in a predominantly moral and pedagogical capacity. Even where the Analects recorded Jikangzi’ s question to Confucius about governance, the account is usually framed primarily to express Confucianism’s central political ideas. By contrast, in excavated manuscripts from the Warring States period, the editors use the Q&A between Confucius and the Ji’s family to construct an image of Confucius as a “political consultant.” Drawing on narrative and cultural memory theories, this paper put fucus on the Jigengzi Questions Confucius (〈季庚子问于孔子〉) and Confucius Meets Ji Huanzi (〈孔子见季桓子〉) from the Shanghai Museum Chu Bamboo Slips. It analyzes the narrative functions of the Chu slips’ “Confucius and minister” mode of questioning and the political memory embedded. These texts record political dialogues between Confucius and the Ji’s family; their narrative structures are relatively stable. This paper argues that, during the Warring States period, the Confucian school positioned Confucius as an “important political figure” by constructing the minister humble inquiry to Confucius. Within these texts, the Ji ministers are shaped into figures resembling Confucian disciples, characterized by virtues such as humbleness and a love of learning. The stable Q&A format performed a clear mnemonic function; it provided a model for Ru scholars’ engagement in real politics and converts Confucius’s authority into political discourse power. The paper further applies Assmann’ s cultural memory theory to examine the transformation process from oral to written form. It analyzes the texts’ functions in generating collective identity, and to explain why certain images were selectively “forgotten” after the Han dynasty.

Key words: Excavated Chu bamboo slips; Confucius; Disciples; Cultural memory; Narrative

参考文献 References

[1] (汉)司马迁.《史记》[M]. 北京:中华书局, 1959:1905-1948及杨伯峻.《论语译注》[M]. 北京:中华书局, 2009:166.

[2] Michael Hunter. Confucius beyond the Analects [M]. Leiden: Brill, 2017.

[3] 杨朝明.〈今天应当怎样研究「孔子遗说」〉[N].《人民政协报》.2014-08-25.

[4] 本文所引用的戰國出土楚簡的文本、编联和释读,除了參考原整理者的意見外,也整理逾百位不同学者的主张而成,详见陈曙光:《新出土战国楚简「孔子与时人对答」 读本》数据库[DB]

https://lin20875.github.io/Confuciusand-Contemporary-Figures-in-Chu-Manuscript/. 

[5] 顾史考.〈古今文献与史家之喜新守旧〉,《中国研究集刊》2004(36):57-74. 

[6] 李隆献:〈先秦两汉的历史叙事〉,载《数理人文》, http://yaucenter.nctu.edu.tw/periodical.php.

[7] 详见陈曙光:《新出土战国楚简「孔子与时人对答」读本》数据库[DB]:https://lin20875.github.io/Confucius-and-Contemporary-Figures-in-Chu-Manuscript/.

[8] 许慜慧:《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(五).季庚子问于孔子研究》[D],台湾师范大学硕士论文,2008年.洪淑玲:《上博六.孔子见季桓子研究》[D],台湾师范大学硕士论文,2008年.

[9] 顾史考.《上博竹书孔子语录文献研究》[M], 北京:中西书局,2021.

[10] Gérard Genette, Narrative Discourse: An Essay in Method[M], Cornell University Press. 1983. 

[11] Jan Assmann, Cultural Memory and Early Civilization: Writing, Remembrance, and Political Imagination[M], Cambridge University Press, 2012.

[12] 杨伯峻.《论语译注》[M]. 北京:中华书局, 2009:20, 136,137,137.

[13] 杨伯峻.《论语译注》[M]. 北京:中华书局, 2009:125-126.

[14] 胡平生、张萌译注:《礼记译注》[M],北京:中华书局,2017: 977-983. 

[15] 马承源主编. 《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(五)》[M]. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2005.

[16] 马承源主编. 《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(六)》[M]. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2007.

[17] 马承源主编. 《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(六)》[M]. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2007.

[18] 马承源主编. 《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(六)》[M]. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2007.

[19] 马承源主编. 《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(五)》[M]. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2005.

[20] 马承源主编. 《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(五)》[M]. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2005.

[21] 马承源主编. 《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(三)》[M]. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2003.

[22] 复旦吉大古文字专业研究生联合读书会:〈《上博八.颜渊问于孔子》校读〉,

https://www.fdgwz.org.cn/Web/Show/1592.

[23] 陳劍:〈上博八.颜渊问于孔子补释两则〉[J],《简帛》第七辑,上海:上海古籍出版社, 2012:33-42.

[24] 杨伯峻.《论语译注》[M]. 北京:中华书局, 2009:130,130.

[25] 马承源主编. 《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(八)》[M]. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2011.

[26] 邢昺疏.《孝经注疏》[M]. 北京:中华书局, 1999:1.

[27] 马承源主编. 《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(三)》[M]. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2003.

[28] 马承源主编. 《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(五)》[M]. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2005.

[29] 马承源主编. 《上海博物馆藏战国楚竹书(五)》[M]. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2005.

[30] 杨伯峻.《论语译注》[M]. 北京:中华书局, 2009:24,121.

[31] (汉)司马迁.《史记》[M]. 北京:中华书局, 1959:1905-1948. 

[32] 柯马丁着;顾一心、姚竹铭译:〈早期中国诗歌与文本研究诸问题:从《蟋蟀》谈起〉,《文学评论》[J],2019(4):133-151. 

[33] 夏含夷着,周博群等译:《重写中国古代文献》[M], 上海:上海古籍出版社, 2012:213-214.

[34] Mark Edward Lewis, Writing and Authority in Early China: Albany[M], (State: University of New York Press, 1999:4.

[35] Jan Assmann, Cultural Memory and Early Civilization: Writing, Remembrance, and Political Imagination[M], Cambridge University Press, 2012.

[36] Walter J. Ong, Orality and Literacy: The Technologizing of the Word[M], London: Methuen, 1982.

[37] Jan Assmann, Cultural Memory and Early Civilization: Writing, Remembrance, and Political Imagination[M], Cambridge University Press, 2012.

[38] (汉)司马迁.《史记》[M]. 北京:中华书局, 1959:1905-1948. 

[39] 杨伯峻.《论语译注》[M]. 北京:中华书局, 2009:11,137.

[40] 王国轩、王秀梅译注.《孔子家语译注》[M].北京:中华书局, 2011:354-361. 

[41] 卢元骏译注.《说苑今注今译》[M], 台北:商务印书馆, 1979: 190-228.

[42] 顾颉刚.〈春秋时的孔子和汉代的孔子〉[J].《古史辨》第2册. 上海:上海古籍出版社, 1982:139.

引用本文

陈曙光, 论上博简〈季庚子问于孔子〉、〈孔子见季桓子〉的叙事功能与政治记忆[J]. 现代社会科学研究, 2026; 6: (8) : 9-15.