君臣关系是西周春秋时期等级贵族社会中普遍存在的现象。天子与诸侯、天 子与大夫，诸侯与天子、诸侯与大夫，大夫与诸侯、大夫与天子之间存在着多重 的君臣关系。认识这些关系，对于理解当时的贵族等级社会结构和生活于其中的 贵族的社会处境和精神面貌具有不可多得的学术意义。不过，要想很好地认识这 些关系并不容易。今天的读者要了解当时的这些关系，主要靠阅读古代典籍。可 问题是，古代典籍也是书写的作品，作者在呈现、解释和评价君臣关系时必然带 有成见。怎样通过这些带有成见的作品来了解历史上君臣关系的真相，就成了研 究者必须思考的大问题。 《国语》成书于春秋战国之际，它以“谏”“论”“曰”“言于”等所表示的 箴谏活动为主要内容，通过卿大夫群体的视角展现了西周中后期和春秋时期的君 臣关系，表达了以卿大夫为主体的高级贵族阶层的经济利益和政治诉求。从这个 意义上说，《国语》的君臣关系是卿大夫的君臣观的自然流露。《国语》的文体是 叙事，叙事的基本原则却是礼义，对人物和事件的解释和评论往往出于当时贵族 所认同的伦理道德。因此，它和其他许多上古文化典籍一道，成为具有贵族精神 的传统文化的源头，对后世产生了深远的影响。阅读这部书，如果不加批判，得 到的无非是对传统礼义文化的洗礼和认同。要想把握《国语》所记述的西周春秋 时期君臣关系的本质，就必须以唯物史观为指导，结合对当时历史背景的考察， 在前人研究的基础上，悉心研读，深入思考，才有可能拨开传统礼义的迷雾，挖 出隐藏在文字背后的社会历史根源。本文将以此为努力的方向。 全文由七部分组成。 第一部分是绪论，交代关于《国语》及西周春秋时期君臣关系和君臣观的学 术史，说明以往学术界对《国语》作者、成书时间、文献学属性、思想特征以及 西周春秋时期政治制度和思想做了大量研究，取得可观成果。但在《国语》的君 摘要 II 臣关系方面，特别是通过箴谏活动的记录了解当时的君臣关系方面，仍有较大研 究空间，因此，本文选题的必要性或学术价值就显而易见了。在方法上，本文在 唯物史观指导下，在研究西周春秋社会历史条件的基础上，通过梳理《国语》中 以“谏”“论”“曰”“言于”等为主要内容的历史叙事，希望能在说明西周春秋 时期政治制度和思想的特点、说明《国语》君臣关系的社会历史根源等方面作出 一定的学术贡献。 第二至第六部分是正文的五章。 第一章是西周春秋时期箴谏活动得以展开的历史背景。西周春秋时期井田制 为基本土地制度，但越来越走向解体；农业、手工业、商业和城市经济得到一定 发展。政治上实行区分统治族群和被统治族群的国野制；在统治族群内部，以分 封制、五服制、宗法制为基本政治制度，世卿世禄是职官制度的核心内容；笼罩 在社会最上层的是礼乐文明的观念形态。周天子权威不断下降，诸侯和大夫的力 量不断增强成为这个时代最引人注意的大趋势。以上诸方面构成了《国语》所记 载的等级贵族/等级君主行事和思考特别是表现君臣关系本质的箴谏活动得以展 开的现实基础。 第二章是身处箴谏活动之中的周王。据《国语》记述，与周天子直接相关的 君臣关系，绝大多数是通过高级贵族的箴谏活动得以展现的，偶尔也有天子对个 别诸侯僭越礼制的严词拒绝和严肃批评。在《国语》作者看来，周王的暴戾恣睢 是导致众叛亲离、分崩离析的根本原因。然而，从探究社会历史的角度出发，结 合前人研究，我们认识到，周王朝所面对的“蛮夷戎狄”的外部压力，周朝统治 阶层内部的利益冲突，却被这种描述所遮掩。今天的学术研究，理应突破《国语》 作者制造的道德神话，把华夷对抗、周天子与身为高级贵族的臣子之间的利害冲 突这类深层次的社会历史原因揭示出来。 第三章是诸侯和大夫怎样在箴谏活动中展现亦君亦臣的双重角色。《国语》 关于大夫活动的文字最多，他们通过多种方式参与政治生活，是当时最有活力、 最有创造性、最有前途的群体，是政治舞台上的主角。《国语》也有许多关于诸 侯的描述，虽然有时他们也表现得像是主角，叱咤风云、扭转乾坤，其实他们的 很多功业离不开大夫的出谋划策和身体力行。《国语》所记载的诸侯和大夫的行 事——主要是箴谏活动，是当时处于不断变革中的社会现实的真实反映。 摘要 III 第四章讨论《国语》所记载的箴谏活动的内容及其变化规律。分析可知，在 《国语》中，西周和春秋前期，臣子据《诗》《书》等传统资料要求君主遵守礼 制，加强德性修养，以为包括贵族在内的民服务为职志。很显然，此时的箴谏活 动以对君主权力形成制衡为主要作用。春秋中后期，臣子则更多地是通过对现实 政治博弈的理性分析，晓以利害，提出建议，供君主（主要是诸侯）采纳，对君 主权力的辅弼渐渐成为臣子的主要职责。从侧重制衡到侧重辅弼，箴谏方式及其 性质的悄然变化，反映了天子权力式微和诸侯权力增强的总的历史趋势。 第五章讨论叙事，以说明《国语》关于箴谏活动的表达方式的特点。《国语》 的君臣关系其实是作者的君臣观的表达，自然有它的叙事策略。本文列出四条予 以展现：其一选材。《国语》选材偏重于以箴谏为核心内容的君臣互动。其二引 述。在《国语》所记述的箴谏活动中，人物表达观点喜欢使用引述方法，但在内 容和方法上西周后期春秋前期和春秋后期有明显不同。其三修辞。《国语》行文 喜欢用带有浓烈道德色彩的词汇，以直陈方式表达作者的价值观。其四评论。《国 语》也运用“君子曰”等对所述史事作出评价。《国语》的叙事当然表现了作者 的写作技巧，但更重要的是反映了等级贵族的道德观念和阶级立场。同时也说明， 叙事总会有与之相应的社会历史条件作为决定力量，两者是不能割裂的。 第七部分是结语。《国语》通过记述箴谏活动来展现西周春秋时期的君臣关 系，目的是宣扬传统礼义，表达以卿大夫为主体的贵族阶层的经济利益和政治诉 求，体现了古代的贵族共和精神。它说的是历史，但强调的却是传统礼义，对于 社会历史根源并未给予重视。与其说它是一部充满礼义道德的古代史书，不如说 它是一部以讲说历史的方式宣扬传统礼义的道德教化典籍，更为恰当。

The king-minister relationships were a prevalent phenomenon in the hierarchical aristocratic society of the Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn periods. There were multiple layers of king-minister relationships, such as between the king and the vassals, the king and the high officials, the vassals and the king, the vassals and the high officials, and the high officials among themselves. Understanding these relationships holds invaluable significance for grasping the social structure of the aristocratic society of that time and the real-life situations and mentality of the aristocrats who lived within it. Nonetheless, comprehending these relationships is no easy task. Today's readers rely mainly on reading ancient classics to gain insight into these relationships. The question is, how did the ancient classics present, explain, and evaluate these relationships? Can contemporary readers understand the social and historical origins of these king-minister relationships by reading these classics? This is evidently a crucial issue that researchers in the present day must be concerned about. The Guoyu was compiled during the Spring and Autumn period, focusing on admonitory activities such as persuasion as Jian, Lun, Yue. It offers insights into the king-minister relationships of the late Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn periods from the perspective of the group of high officials and ministers, expressing the economic interests and political demands of the aristocratic group primarily consisting of high officials. In this sense, the king-minister relationships in the Guoyu are the natural expression of the high officials' perspective on these relationships. The literary style of the Guoyu is narrative, and the fundamental principles of narration are rooted in ritual propriety(Liyi). The explanations and comments on characters and events often align with the ethics recognized by the aristocracy of the time. Therefore, like many other traditional classics, it constitutes a source of aristocratic culture with profound implications for later generations. When reading this work, without a critical approach, one may only receive a reaffirmation of traditional ritual and moral culture. To gain a deeper understanding of the Guoyu, one must approach it with a materialist historical ABSTRACT V perspective, combined with an understanding of the historical context of the late Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn periods. By building upon the work of previous scholars, a careful and critical reading can help penetrate through the veil of ritual propriety(Liyi), capturing the social and historical origins of the king-minister relationships of that era. This is the direction in which this paper strives to make efforts. This paper has seven parts: Part one is the introduction, providing an overview of the Guoyu and the academic history of king-minister relationships and perspectives during the Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn periods. It illustrates that the academia has conducted significant research regarding the authorship, date of compilation, textual attributes, ideology characteristics, and the political system, ideologies, and king-minister relationships of the Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn periods. However, there is still substantial room for research specifically regarding the king-minister relationships and perspectives within the Guoyu. The necessity of the chosen topic in this paper is wellfounded. Methodologically, guided by a materialist historical perspective and based on an examination of the historical contexts of the Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn periods, this paper intends to contribute to the academic discourse by analyzing the historical narratives in the Guoyu focusing on expressions like Jian, Lun, Yue. It aims to shed light on the political system and ideology characteristics of the Western Zhou and Spring and Autumn periods, as well as the societal and historical roots of the kingminister relationships/perspectives within the Guoyu. The main body of this paper consists of five chapters. The first chapter introduces the academic history of the Chinese and the relationship between monarchs and ministers in the Western Zhou dynasty and the Spring and Autumn period, and explains that a great deal of research has been done on the authorship, time of writing, philological attributes, and ideological characteristics of the Chinese Dynasty in the past, as well as the political system and ideology of the Western Zhou dynasty and the Spring and Autumn period, and has made brilliant achievements. However, there is still a large research space in the view of the monarchs and subjects in Guoyu, which provides the necessity for the selection of topics in this paper. Based on the study of the historical conditions of the Western Zhou dynasty and the Spring and Autumn period, this paper uses the materialist view of history to explore the concept of the monarchs and the subjects with persuasion as Jian, Lun, Yue as the core content in Guoyu, which is expected to make certain academic contributions to ABSTRACT VI explaining the political system and ideological characteristics of the Western Zhou dynasty and the Spring and Autumn period and the essence of the concept of the monarchs and subjects in Guoyu. Chapter Two is about the King of Zhou as the supreme ruler as Zhou Tianzi. According to the Guoyu, the king-minister relationships directly relating to the King of Zhou revolve around the high-ranking nobles’ admonitory activities in most cases, with occasionally the King’s rebukes of certain vassals for transgressing ritual norms. The fundamental cause of the widespread disintegration and internal strife within the Zhou Dynasty was the King's tyrannical and unrestrained behavior. The actual challenges faced by the dynasty and the conflicts of interest within the ruling class were, however, concealed. Chapter Three discusses the vassals and high officials as both rulers and subjects. In the text of the Guoyu, there is a substantial focus on the activities of high officials. They engaged in admonitory activities towards their rulers through various means like Jian, Lun and Yue. This reveals that they were the most dynamic, creative, and promising group during that period, taking on prominent roles on the political stage. The Guoyu also provides numerous descriptions of vassals. While at times they may appear as central figures, wielding influence and changing the course of events, much of their actions relied on the counsel and practical efforts of high officials. Chapter Four focuses on the Guoyu’s records of remonstrance as the admonitory activities. During the Western Zhou and early Spring and Autumn periods, ministers, alluding to traditional sources like the Shi and Shu, urged the monarchs to uphold ritual norms, enhance their moral and ethical cultivation, and aim to serve the people including the nobility. In the later Spring and Autumn period, ministers increasingly relied on rational analysis of political maneuvers, weighing advantages and disadvantages, to offer advice for the ruler's consideration. Assisting the authoritative power of the monarch became a growing responsibility of the ministers. The subtle shift in the methods of admonition reflects the historical process of the downfall of the monarchs and the rise of the vassals in terms of authority and power. Chapter Five is about the narration of the Guoyu. The king-minister relationships in the Guoyu are, in essence, an expression of its perspectives on king-minister dynamics, and they are conveyed through specific narrative techniques. There are approximately four main aspects. The first one is the material selection. The Guoyu tends to narrate the king-minister interactions that revolve around admonition. The ABSTRACT VII second one is the quotation. Characters in the Guoyu often express their views by quoting others, and there are noticeable differences between the early Western Zhou and early Spring and Autumn periods in this regard. The third one is the rhetoric. The Guoyu utilizes vocabulary with strong moral undertones. The fourth one is the commentary. The Guoyu employs expressions like "Junzi Yue" (a gentleman says) to provide commentary on the historical events it narrates. These four techniques are indicative of the social atmosphere of the aristocratic society and the historical trends of that era. Lastly, the conclusion. The Guoyu primarily focuses on the depiction of monarchvassal and king-minister relationships, with the purpose of promoting traditional ritual norms and conveying the economic interests and political aspirations of the aristocracy, mainly comprised of high officials. It embodies the republican spirit of the ancient aristocracy. While it narrates historical events, it emphasizes ritual propriety, giving little regard to the historical origins of society. It is more apt to describe it as a book that propagates ritual propriety through the mode of historical storytelling, rather than a historical text steeped in ritual propriety.