Spring and Autumn

One of the Five Classics, the Confucian scriptures, it is a chronicle that summarizes important national events over a period of 242 years and 12 dukes, from the first year of Duke Yin of Lu (722 BC) to the 14th year of Duke Ai (481 BC). In the second part of the "Duke Teng Wen" chapter of the "Mencius," it is said that Confucius wrote the "Spring and Autumn Annals" out of concern for the decline of the moral code and the rampant spread of false teachings. This book is believed to have been created by Confucius based on the records of the state of Lu. Since the "Spring and Autumn Annals" is a chronological historical book, it is thought that the "Spring and Autumn Annals" refers to one year of the four seasons: spring, summer, autumn, and winter. Furthermore, the "Mencius" states, "The Jō of Jin, the Touko of Chu, and the Spring and Autumn of Lu are one" (Lilō, second volume), and it is known that the historical records of each country were called Jō (meaning to record events), Touko (meaning to record evil deeds and serve as a warning), or Spring and Autumn. The Spring and Autumn is a simple text with only around 1,800 articles and a few thousand characters, but in creating it, Confucius is said to have entrusted the "Spring and Autumn" with the royal law to bring order to times of chaos, with a spirit of encouraging good and punishing evil. Sima Qian wrote about this in the Records of the Grand Historian, "Confucius knew that words were not used and the Way was not practiced, and for 242 years he made every effort to do so, thereby making it a model for the whole world" (Preface to the Tai Shigong).

In order to understand Confucius's intentions from the simple texts of the Spring and Autumn Annals, various interpretations were created. According to the "Arts and Scriptures" section of the Book of Han, during the Han dynasty there were five traditions: Zuo, Gongyang, Guliang, Zou, and Jia. However, the Zou family had no master to pass on their teachings, and the Jia family was not written down, so only the other three traditions existed. The Zuo family tradition (Spring and Autumn Annals Zuo family tradition), the Gongyang family tradition, and the Guliang family tradition are called the "Three traditions of the Spring and Autumn Annals." "Zuo family tradition" means "interpretation." Of the three histories, "Gongyang Zhuan" was the earliest, written by Gongyang Gao, a disciple of Confucius' disciple Zi Xia, and is said to have been compiled by his 5th-generation grandson Gongyang Shou during the reign of Emperor Jing of the Former Han Dynasty (reigned 157-141 BC) through dialogue with his disciple Hu Mu Sheng and others. "Gu Liang Zhuan" was written by Gu Liang Chi of Lu and is said to have been bestowed upon Xunzi, but as it quotes texts from "Gongyang Zhuan" and corrects theories about it, it is believed to have been written later than "Gongyang Zhuan." "Zuo Shi Zhuan" is said to have been written by Zuo Qiuming, a disciple of Confucius, but the author and date of its creation are unclear. Kamata Tadashi speculates that "it was probably created around 320 BC by a certain Zuo, a historian of Wei who was influenced by Zixia's Spring and Autumn Studies" (The Establishment and Development of the Zuo Zhuan, 1963).

These three works form the study of the Spring and Autumn Annals, but while the first two explore the inherent meaning of the recorded facts philosophically, the Zuo Zhuan takes a historical approach to clarifying historical facts. However, since there are many articles that are unrelated to the scriptures, some say that it is a separate history book from the Spring and Autumn Annals. Furthermore, Liu Fenglu (1774-1829) of the Qing Dynasty pointed out that the Zuo Zhuan contained texts that had been altered by Liu Xin of the Western Han Dynasty, opening the door to the theory that the Zuo Zhuan was a forgery, and the debate over this continued. Tsuda Sokichi also wrote A Study of the Intellectual History of the Zuo Zhuan, in which he argued from the perspective of intellectual history that the Zuo Zhuan contained forgery by the Liu Xin school.

The three traditions were established by scholars in the Han Dynasty and existed in parallel, but Zuo's Zhuan was dominant before the mid-Tang Dynasty, and after the activities of Tang's Tu Zhuang and Zhao Kuang, Gongyang Zhuan and Guliang Zhuan were dominant until the Northern Song Dynasty. The academic style of the time advocated abandoning the Zhuan and following the Jing (books written by sages), but in reality, they were discussed in the style of Gongyang Zhuan and Guliang Zhuan. Zuo's Zhuan was compiled by Du Yu (222-284) of the Jin Dynasty in his Collection of the Spring and Autumn Classics. When Kong Yingda of the Tang Dynasty compiled the Five Classics Zhengyi under imperial command, he regarded the Spring and Autumn Annals of Zhengyi as the orthodox text and used Du Yu's annotations. Later, Xu Yan selected the Spring and Autumn Annals of Gongyang Zhengyi (annotated by He Xiu of the Han Dynasty's Judgement on the Spring and Autumn Annals of Gongyang), and Yang Shixun selected the Spring and Autumn Annals of Guliang Zhengyi (annotated by Fan Ning of the Jin Dynasty's Judgement on the Spring and Autumn Annals of Guliang), which were included in the Commentaries on the Thirteen Classics and became widely circulated. The "Spring and Autumn Annals" section of the "Shikoku Quanshu Zongmudi Yao" evaluates the Zuo Zhuan's historical accuracy based on the records of Lu and sets a benchmark for evaluating the Spring and Autumn Annals, but the philosophical interpretations of the other two texts had a major influence on the intellectual world after the Han dynasty.

[Yasui Kozan]

"Spring and Autumn Annals by Takeuchi Teruo (1942, Nippon Hyoronsha)" ▽ "Complete Commentary on the Chinese Classics Series 4-6, Spring and Autumn Annals: Zuo Zhuan, Volumes 1-3, Translated and Annotated by Takeuchi Teruo (1974-75, Shueisha)" ▽ "The Establishment and Development of the Zuo Zhuan by Kamata Tadashi (1963, Taishukan Shoten)" ▽ "A Study of the Intellectual History of the Zuo Zhuan by Tsuda Sokichi (1935, Heibonsha, Toyo Bunko)"

Source: Shogakukan Encyclopedia Nipponica About Encyclopedia Nipponica Information | Legend

儒教の経典である五経の一つで、魯(ろ)の隠公(いんこう)元年（前722）から哀公(あいこう)14年（前481）に至る、12公、242年間の国家的大事を略記した年代記。『孟子(もうし)』の「滕文公(とうのぶんこう)」下篇(げへん)に、孔子(こうし)が世道衰え、邪説横行するのを憂えて『春秋』をつくったとあることから、この書は、魯国の記録を基にして、孔子が制作したものとされている。『春秋』とよばれるのは、編年体の史書であるので、春秋をもって春夏秋冬の1年を意味したものと思われる。さらに『孟子』には、「晋(しん)の乗(じょう)、楚(そ)の檮杌(とうこつ)、魯の春秋、一なり。」（「離婁(りろう)」下篇）とあり、それぞれの国の史書を、乗（行事を記録するの意）、檮杌（悪事を記録して戒(いまし)めとするの意）、春秋などといっていたことが知られる。『春秋』の経文はわずか1800余条、一万数千字の簡略なものであるが、その制作にあたって孔子は、勧善懲悪(かんぜんちょうあく)的な精神をもって、乱世をただす王法を『春秋』に託したとされている。司馬遷(しばせん)はこのことを『史記』に、「孔子、言の用いられず、道の行われざるを知り、二百四十二年の中を是非(ぜひ)し、以(もっ)て天下の儀表と為(な)す」（太史公自序）といっている。

　簡略な『春秋』の経文から、孔子の意図するものを汲(く)み取るため、各種の解釈書がつくられた。『漢書(かんじょ)』の「芸文志(げいもんし)」によると、漢代には左(さ)氏、公羊(くよう)、穀梁(こくりょう)、鄒(すう)氏、夾(きょう)氏の五伝があったが、鄒氏はそれを伝える師がなく、夾氏は書物になっておらず、他の三伝だけがあったことを伝えている。この『左氏伝』（春秋左氏伝）、『公羊伝』、『穀梁伝』を「春秋三伝」といっている。伝とは解釈書という意味である。三伝のうちでは『公羊伝』の成立がもっとも早く、孔子の門人の子夏(しか)の弟子である公羊高(くようこう)がつくり、5世の孫の公羊壽(くようじゅ)が前漢景帝(けいてい)（在位前157～前141）のとき、門人胡母生(こむせい)らと問答して一書としたとされる。『穀梁伝』は魯の穀梁赤(せき)の制作で、荀子(じゅんし)に授けたといわれるが、『公羊伝』の伝文を引用したり、その説を是正したりしているので、『公羊伝』よりあとのものとされている。『左氏伝』は孔子の門人の左丘明(さきゅうめい)の作とされるが、作者や成立年代は明らかでない。鎌田正は「子夏の春秋学に影響された魏(ぎ)の史官左氏某が、紀元前320年前後ころに制作したものではないか」（『左伝の成立と其(そ)の展開』1963）と推考している。

　この三伝が春秋学を形成するのであるが、前二者が記録された事実の内在的な意味を哲学的に究明するのに対して、『左氏伝』は史実を歴史的に明らかにしていく方法をとっている。しかし、経文と無関係な記事が多いため、『春秋』とは別個な歴史書ではないかという説もある。また清(しん)の劉逢禄(りゅうほうろく)（1774―1829）は、『左氏伝』には前漢の劉歆(りゅうきん)の竄入(ざんにゅう)した文のあることを指摘して『左氏伝』偽作説の端(たん)を開き、これをめぐる論争が続いた。津田左右吉(そうきち)も『左伝の思想史的研究』を著して、思想史のうえから、『左氏伝』に劉歆一派の偽造にかかるものがあることを論述した。

　三伝は漢代においてそれぞれ学官にたてられ、並行して存立していたが、中唐以前においては『左氏伝』が優勢で、唐の啖助(たんじょ)、趙匡(ちょうきょう)らの活躍以後北宋(ほくそう)に至るまでは『公羊伝』や『穀梁伝』が優勢であった。そして当時の学風は、伝(でん)を廃して経(けい)（聖人の述作した書物）に従うことを主張したが、実際には『公羊伝』や『穀梁伝』の筆法によって論じていた。『左氏伝』は晋(しん)の杜預(どよ)（222―284）が『春秋経伝集解(けいでんしっかい)』を著して左氏学を集大成した。唐の孔穎達(くようだつ)が勅命を奉じて『五経正義(せいぎ)』を作成したとき、『春秋正義』は『左氏伝』を正統とし、杜預の注を用いた。その後、徐彦(じょげん)が『春秋公羊伝正義』（注、漢の何休(かきゅう)『春秋公羊伝解詁(かいこ)』）を、楊士勛(ようしくん)が『春秋穀梁伝正義』（注、晋の范寧(はんねい)『春秋穀梁伝集解』）を選し、これらは『十三経注疏(じゅうさんぎょうちゅうそ)』のなかに入れられて広く通行している。『四庫全書(しこぜんしょ)総目提要』の「春秋類敍(るいじょ)」では、『左氏伝』が魯の記録に基づいた史実性を評価し、春秋学の評価の目安をたてているが、他の二伝の哲学的解釈は漢代以後の思想界に大きく影響した。

［安居香山］

『竹内照夫著『春秋』（1942・日本評論社）』▽『竹内照夫訳註『全釈漢文大系4～6　春秋左氏伝　上中下』（1974～75・集英社）』▽『鎌田正著『左伝の成立と其の展開』（1963・大修館書店）』▽『津田左右吉著『左伝の思想史的研究』（1935・平凡社・東洋文庫）』

出典　小学館　日本大百科全書(ニッポニカ)日本大百科全書(ニッポニカ)について　情報 | 凡例