“岛夷”还是“鸟夷”--刘起釪先生《尚书校释译论·禹贡篇》商榷

《尚书·禹贡》将天下分为九个州,其中冀州和扬州之下记载了两处"岛夷"。《禹贡》的内容被司马迁和班固分别写入《史记·夏本纪》和《汉书·地理志》。《史记·夏本纪》引用《禹贡》时,冀州作"鸟夷",扬州作"岛夷",《汉书·地理志》引用《禹贡》时,冀州、扬州均作"鸟夷"。《史记》和《汉书》都是权威著作,遂引起千年争论。刘起釪先生《尚书校释译论》是当今《尚书》学集大成之作,在处理这一千古悬案时,认为冀州之下作"鸟夷"没错,但是扬州之下应该作"岛夷"。一字之差,却关系到中国上古史的根本大局。本文分析了刘先生提出的论据,认为刘先生主张的"扬州岛夷"说是错误的。

Commentary on Mr.Liu Qiyu's Yugong chapter of Shangshu Jiaoshiyilun

Yugong chapter of Book of Documents divides the world into nine states, of which two"Daoyi"s are recorded under Jizhou and Yangzhou. The content of Yugong was written into Historical Records and Hanshu by Sima Qian and Ban Gu respectively. When Historical Records quoted Yugong, Jizhou was Niaoyi, Yangzhou was Daoyi, and Hanshu quoted Yu Gong, Both Jizhou and Yangzhou were Niaoyi.Historical Records and Han Shu are authoritative works, causing a thousand-year debate. Mr. Liu Qiyu’s Shangshu Jiaoshiyilun is a masterpiece of today’s Book of Documents study. When dealing with this ancient unsolved case, it is believed that the Niaoyi under Jizhou is correct, but under Yangzhou is Daoyi. The difference between words is related to the fundamental situation of Chinese ancient history. This paper analyzes the arguments put forward by Mr.Liu and believes that the"Yangzhou Daoyi"advocated by Mr.Liu is wrong.