SHUN 舜 AND THE INTERPRETATION OF EARLY ORTHOGRAPHICAL VARIATION

Abstract Ji Xusheng's 季旭昇 account of the character 〈舜〉 as a derivative of 〈夋〉 and ultimately of 〈允〉 by reference to Warring States excavated manuscript evidence, recently elaborated by Adam Smith in these pages, appears to clear up the mystery of Shun's 舜 doppelgänger—Jun 俊—in the Shanhai jing 山海經. However, while Ji's observations are of value, there is danger in treating early orthographical variation of this kind with one eye on an interpretive problem from the received texts. In this case, attested variation shows clearly that the form 〈舜〉 was no such derivative, its peculiar origins arguably “large and useless” from a textual critical point view. 提要 季旭昇教授將“舜”字理解為“夋”、“允”字的變體或分化字似乎進一步旁證了舜與《山海經》中帝俊之間的關係，上一期《古代中國》中 Adam D. Smith (亞當)教授又拓展了這種分析。此說法雖能解釋一些問題，但藉傳世文獻中未解之謎推斷異體字演變順序的方法有時難免失於牽強。本文闡述了“舜”字並非源於此種分化字，證明了“舜”字的神奇來源於校勘學其實是“大而無用”的。