《左傳》晉人賈君身分辨析

An Analysis of the Identity of Jia-Jun in the Zuo-Zhuan

本文辨析僖公十五年《左傳》賈君身分，杜預謂其乃晉獻公次妃，東漢人唐固始主張是申生之妃。本文從賈君名號、《左傳》「烝」、「報」、「淫」、「通」詞例、晉惠公改葬大子申生三層面辨析，證成杜預之見為確。《左傳》所見女性稱「君」者，一為諸侯正妻或諸侯之母，二係以庶子身分稱嫡母。穆姬稱賈君乃因是晉獻公次妃，既表彰尊榮身分，又體現其為穆姬與晉惠公之嫡母。其次，《左傳》「烝」字乃子輩對母輩之性關係，若賈君是申生之妃，《左傳》當記以「通」字。《左傳》既書晉惠公「烝」賈君，則賈君係晉獻公次妃。再次，僖公十年《左傳》申生之鬼曰「夷吾無禮」，乃緣晉惠公為申生立「共」謚而發。《逸周書．謚法》「既過能改曰恭」，晉惠公藉此構陷申生有弒殺晉獻公之意圖，為贖罪而自殺。「夷吾無禮」既非指晉惠公「烝」賈君，從賈君名號與《左傳》「烝」字用法，皆證賈君當非申生之妃。綜上所述，當以杜預之見為確。

This article analyzes the identity of Jia-Jun in the fifteenth year of Duke Xi of Lu. Du-Yu identified her as a secondary consort of Duke Xian of Jin, while the Eastern Han scholar Tang-Gu initially proposed that she was the consort of Shen-sheng. This study examines Jia-Jun’s title, the usage of the terms“zheng,”（烝）“bao,”（報）“yin,”（淫）and“tong”（通）in Zuo-Zhuan, as well as Duke Hui of Jin’s reburial of Crown Prince Shen-sheng, to demonstrate that Du-Yu’s interpretation is correct. In Zuo-Zhuan, women addressed as“Jun”（君）fall into two categories: (1) principal wives of feudal lords or mothers of feudal lords, and (2) concubines honored as legitimate mothers due to their sons’status. Mu-Ji referred to Jia-Jun in this way because Jia-Jun was a secondary consort of Duke Xian of Jin, signifying her esteemed status and acknowledging her role as the legitimate mother of both Mu-Ji and Duke Hui of Jin. Furthermore, in Zuo-Zhuan, the term“zheng”（烝）denotes sexual relations between a son and a mother figure, whereas“tong”（通）is used for relations between a man and his wife or concubine. If Jia-Jun had been the consort of Shen-Sheng, Zuo-Zhuan would have described Duke Hui of Jin’s actions using“tong”rather than“zheng.”Since Zuo-Zhuan records that Duke Hui of Jin“zheng”-ed Jia-Jun, this confirms that she was a secondary consort of Duke Xian of Jin. Once again, in the tenth year of Duke Xi of Lu in the Zuo-Zhuan, the ghost of Shen-Sheng says,“Yi-wu was disrespectful.”This accusation arises from the fact that Duke Hui of Jin bestowed the posthumous title Gong（共）upon Shen-Sheng. According to the Yi-Zhou-Shu,“One who corrects his mistakes is called Gong（恭）.”Duke Hui of Jin exploited this principle to frame Shen-Sheng, insinuating that he had harbored intentions of murdering Duke Xian of Jin and had committed suicide as a means of atonement. The phrase“Yi-wu was disrespectful”does not refer to Duke Hui of Jin engaging in illicit relations（zheng,烝）with Jia-Jun. From both Jia-Jun’s title and the usage of the character zheng in the Zuo-Zhuan, it can be established that she was unlikely to have been Shen-Sheng’s consort. In conclusion, Du-Yu’s interpretation should be regarded as correct.