摘要
《管子》主要部分的产生当早于银雀山《王兵》,本文从三方面论证银雀山《王兵篇》为割裂之作:《七法》、《地图》、《参患》篇章独立,结构完整;《管子》相关篇章与《王兵》篇章结构和语句作比较,可以考证《王兵》是删减《管子》篇章而成;《<守法><守令>等十三篇》引用了《老子》、《墨子》、《尉缭子》及《周礼》的语言,可以推断《王兵》非独立成书,系抄录当时的传本,加以整理而成。《管子》主体部分当成书于春秋末年,《管子》抄袭《王兵》的观点不能成立。
The paper holds that the three components of Wangbing are separate works, each making up an independent unity. Qifa, Ditu and Canhuan are combined to make Wangbing as we know today. A comparative investigation of Guanzi and Wangbing shows that the latter is derived from parts of the former. Linguistic similarities between some of the chapters of Wangbing to Laozi, Mozi, and Zhou Rituals indicate that Wangbing was a work of many sources. Guanzi was completed in the late Spring and Autumn Period, which means that it cannot be derived from Wangbing, which came into being much later.
出处
《兰州大学学报（社会科学版）》
CSSCI
北大核心
2006年第6期61-66,共6页
Journal of Lanzhou University（Social Sciences）
基金
国家社科基金(06BZS017)资助
关键词
银雀山汉简
《王兵》
《管子》
Bamboo trips in the Han Dynasty Tomb in Yinque hill
Wangbing
Guanzi
