從詞彙運用角度探討毛公鼎銘文的真偽問題

The Question of the Authenticity of the Mao Kung Ting Seen from the Use of Its Vocabulary

根據張光裕教授的考證，現藏臺灣故宮博物院的毛公鼎是陳介祺當日（1852）所得的原器；又根據張光遠、萬家保、張世賢分別所作的科學研究，故宮的毛公鼎器身並無偽作的痕跡。從這兩點可見陳介祺當日所獲的毛公鼎器身確是真品，但這並不能排除毛公鼎器身雖出西周晚期，而銘文卻有後人偽刻的可能。因此辨偽的方法只有從銘文著手，看是否有作偽的痕跡。前人辨別銅器銘文的真偽鮮有以詞彙為研究對象，本文在這方面作一個新嘗試。選擇毛公鼎銘文十個詞彙或短語作一番考釋，以求通讀，然後就其出現的時代和語言環境加以討論。結果發現毛公鼎銘文的詞彙不少都是西周習用語，其中更有只見於近年出土的銅器（如「貈夙夕」只見毛公鼎與一九七六年出土的𤼈鐘），所以在陳氏獲得毛公鼎時根本沒有人能夠鈔襲尚未出土的器物上的用語，因此毛公鼎銘文也就不可能出於偽作。本文並將毛公鼎銘文與時代相近的傳世文獻及同期銅器銘文作出比較，也得出同樣的結論。因為銘文不出於偽作，在真器上刻鑄偽銘的可能性就不存在。從此得出一個結論：現藏故宮博物院的毛公鼎不是偽器。

The Mao Kung Ting, a bronze ritual vessel of the Western Chou, was first introduced to the world by the Ch'ing scholar and official Ch'en Chieh-ch'i 陳介祺. In the fifth month of the second year of Hsien-feng 咸豐 (1852) Ch'en made an ink rubbing of the inscription of the Mao Kung Ting as well as a partial transcription, and gave a description of the vessel. Unfortunately, he did not elaborate in his record on the date of its discovery but merely stated that it was recently unearthed in Ch'i-shan 岐山 (district in Shensi 陝西). During the period when the Mao Kung Ting was in Ch'en's hands (1852-1884) rumors circulated that the Mao Kung Ting was a forgery. One of the reasons for the suspicion might have been due to the secrecy surrounding the bronze vessel. None of his friends was permitted to view this particular item. Only a few ink rubbings were available. Two were sent to his closest associates Hsü T'ung-po 徐同柏 and Wu Shih-fen 吳式芬 to be deciphered. The first scholar who took the view that the Mao Kung Ting was not a genuine Chou bronze vessel was Chang Chih-tung 張之洞, and subsequently Wei Chü-hsien 衛聚賢 took the same view. The points of their criticism are, however, considered groundless by most Chinese scholars and archaeologists today.