本論文隸屬互文研究，以「和漢歷史敘事的再現與文學想像」為題，內容
著眼於「《平家物語》與日本中世〈蘇武〉文學的想像世界」的比較研究。歷
年來，有關《平家物語》〈蘇武說話〉的比較研究，通常著重在原典或版本時
間先後的影響關係，對於個別再現文本的文學操作雖有觸及，但數量相當有限，
其內容也多強調日本〈蘇武說話〉未受中國文學影響的部分。有鑑於此，本論
文從肯定及質疑前述研究概況的立場出發，首先針對影響日本〈蘇武說話〉較
深的《漢書》（Kanzyo）《蒙求》（Mougyu）與《琱玉集》（Chougyokusyu）
等中國文學作品架構、主題及再現關係探討，接著運用這些中國文學作品的研
究成果作為實際分析再現文本《平家物語》〈蘇武說話〉的基礎，探討先行研
究中鮮少為人討論的文本操作及文學想像等議題。再者運用文本分析結果，作
為文本「和漢混淆」的對照參考，從中討論文本再現的目的及指涉意義。其中，
西方文學理論的套用雖然不是本論文的重點，但將配合導論中所述及的互文、
新歷史主義、敘事話語等理論概念，以及出現在《平家物語》〈蘇武說話〉先
行研究的概念作為文本分析的參照，藉此達到符合「和漢」或「中日」比較研
究的傳統精神，以及確實掌握「和漢混淆」歷史敘事脈絡的目的。換言之，論
文主要分為「漢」的中國文學與「和」的日本文學的文本分析。因此，第一章
主要針對中國文學的再現情形探討，而第二章至第四章則著眼於日本文學的文
學想像、再現目的及「和漢混淆」意義等面向討論。各章相關內容簡介如下：
第一章主要從中國文學傳統脈絡下的〈蘇武說話〉切入，思考原典《漢書》
〈蘇武傳〉的繼承、創新及其權威性（即參照文本未被磨滅的故事原型，在此
視為一種「事實」）、借用與挪用等問題。內容以熱拉爾‧熱奈特引述亞里斯
多德的概念：「詩人的創造力……體現在虛構層面，即創作並安排故事的能力」
概念，觀看《琱玉集》〈蘇武鴈通文字〉及《蒙求》〈蘇武持節〉等再現文本
如何繼承並確立〈蘇武說話〉的不變「事實」，以及如何在故事原型的不變「事
實」下，掌握改寫契機，並創作及安排出另一新的再現文本。當中涉及時間、
空間及主題的掌握，也涵蓋借用、挪用及組合方式的運用。而所謂的事實亦指
再現文本與參照文本的共同架構，它可以跨越時空、疆界，作為不斷「復述」、
「追憶」「改寫」的依循脈絡，亦即長存於文本，始終如一的「情節骨架」及
「故事本質」，亦即佐伯真一所說：「不管新態蘇武談如何地流傳，正統的《漢
書》及《蒙求》蘇武談應該不可能消聲匿跡的」。藉此章節的探索及檢驗，作
為日本〈蘇武說話〉文學的探討基礎。
第二章主要先以日本〈和漢混淆文〉與〈和漢混淆〉的意義及定位出發，
接著再以〈和漢混淆文〉的代表作品《平家物語》為對象，聚焦於「語本系」
《平家物語》的探討。《平家物語》雖分「語本系（Kataribonkei）」與「讀本系
（Yomihonkei）」，但「語本系」又包含「一方流（Ichisakaryu）」與「八坂流
（Yasakaryu）」，本章主要先著眼於八坂流中的《屋代本》及一方流中的《覺
一本》探討。內容上除了探討〈和漢混淆文〉的演變脈絡，藉此讓論文的〈和
漢混淆〉對照概念及意義明確化外，也透過深入的文本分析，探究《屋代本》
與《覺一本》如何在〈蘇武說話〉不變的「事實」下，以繼承、「繼承的創造」
及創新的概念及方式，透過文學的操作與想像，再現出一個異於中國文學與其
他《平家物語》版本的獨特文本。此外，在文本分析的前提之下，〈和漢混淆〉
對照的再現層面與歷史敘事的指涉意義也將是本章的探討重點。
第三章主要還是以《平家物語》「語本系」作為探討對象，然選定的版本則
是「八坂流」中被視為較早期的作品《百二十句本》，以及被認為較後期的作品
《城方本》。探討重點延續第二章，包含「繼承與創造」的面向，以及「〈和漢
混淆〉對照與再現歷史觀點」面向。在「繼承與創造」的層面上，主要聚焦於
《琱玉集》與《平家物語》兩個文本，探討〈蘇武說話〉的繼承、「繼承的創造」
等「權威性」的再現、消解、扭曲與虛構等創新問題。其中，有關《平家物語》
版本間的影響脈絡，及存在於文本中的不合理或斷裂現象觸動敘事者（或編者）
採用「拼貼」、「補述」或「注釋」等文學操作進行改寫的狀況，以及再現文本
及展現在文本上的「繼承的創造」（或「繼承的創作」）等面向也是本章探討的
重點。另一方面，有關〈和漢混淆〉對照與再現歷史觀點的層面上，主要是運
用文學批評理論「再現是為了歷史觀點」、「實在的事件只是存在，實在的事
件可以充當話語的指涉物及被談論的對象」及「兩個嫁接與組合的文本可以產
生一種有機的作用，從中喚起一種實質及再現一個歷史觀點」等概念，檢驗蘇
武說話〈和漢混淆〉對照的再現觀點及指涉意義。此外，由於《城方本》的再
現及文學操作手法獨特，所以本章也特別針對該版本的再現與文學想像進行較
深入的分析與討論。
第四章主要以讀本系《平家物語》中的《源平鬪諍錄》與《延慶本》等兩
個版本作為討論對象。在《源平鬪諍錄》中以「昔蘇武作五言詩止母戀，今康
賴讀二首歌（慰）親思」說明詩歌的功能，而《延慶本》中則結合「和歌」與
「漢詩」延展敘事流動。因此，本章試圖先以〈和漢混淆〉對照的前提下，觀
看「和歌」與「漢詩」在讀本系《源平鬪諍錄》、《延慶本》及中世注釋世界的
說話敘事中，如何再現及「作用」出特有的文學想像。當中包含蘇武、王昭君
及李陵等相關歷史敘事文本，其如何藉用日本平安時代的「歌物語」形式進行
文學操作，並以特有的文學想像再現〈蘇武說話〉。再者，由漢詩與和歌〈和漢
混淆〉對照的框架下所呈現出的和漢意識、主體意識及文本策略等問題也是本
章關注的範圍。
在中國文學影響的關係中，雖然有如本論文第一章探討的《琱玉集》與李
翰《蒙求》等繼承或「繼承創新」《漢書》〈蘇武傳〉傳統的歷史敘事作品，也
有如李白〈蘇武詩〉、李商隱〈茂陵詩〉、溫庭筠〈蘇武廟〉、王 維〈隴頭吟〉
及明代戲曲〈蘇武牧羊記〉等詠嘆《漢書》〈蘇武傳〉歷史敘事的跨文類作品，
但就數量及流傳的廣度而言，似乎沒有論文關注的日本〈蘇武說話〉多與廣。
當然本論文並非著眼於日本再現文本與中國參照文本的比較上，也不是要以完
全區隔日本〈蘇武說話〉和中國文學關係的立場切入，而是以肯定及質疑的立
場出發，著眼於《平家物語》〈蘇武〉與日本中世文學的相關作品及歷史敘事，
隨機參照中國文學的相關作品，進行雙向跨越與交叉比對。主要目的是希望於
〈和漢混淆〉對照的比較前提下，運用較深入的文本分析，探討〈蘇武說話〉
的文學操作、文學想像、指涉意義、時代性及〈和漢混淆〉對照的主體意識。
由於筆者的背景與探討視域有限，所以較無法採用較大面向及格局切入，
而以實際的文本分析作為主要的論述模式。再者，使用的材料多為距今久遠的
古代文獻資料，對此筆者雖已在可能的範圍內盡量全面確定，但當中恐仍陷入
「誤讀」而傳遞出另一個新的台式〈蘇武說話〉，以及提供出另一個不同文學想
像的台式〈蘇武說話〉。另外，本論文採用中文書寫，藉由古代文本，由「漢」
到「和」，再從「和」至「漢」，回歸漢語「本土化」的研究論述，內容著重「繼
承」「繼承的創新」、「創作」面向及日本〈蘇武說話〉的傳承與再現特性。因此，
基於延續及傳承目的，本論文也全面將引用的古代文獻及作品原文全面翻譯成
中文，希望藉此提供論文讀者閱讀及引用。

The main purpose of the present study, an intertextual research, is to compare
the imaginative worlds of The Tale of the Heike（《平家物語》） and medieval
Japanese“Su Wu”（〈蘇武〉）narratives. Previous comparative studies between
The Tale of the Heike and “Sobu Setuwa” (〈蘇武説話〉The Narrative of Su Wu)
focus on the relationship between the original and its various versions. Even though
the literary operation of individual re-written texts is mentioned in some of the
previous studies, studies of that kind are few and far between, and the emphasis is
mainly on the part of Japanese “Sobu Setuwa” that is not influenced by Chinese
literature. In contrast, the present study begins by approving of and then questioning
the previous studies. Firstly, I discuss the framework, themes and relationships of
representation among those Chinese literary works which have deeply influenced
Japanese “Sobu Setuwa” such as The Book of Han (《漢書》, also known as
Chronicles of the Han Dynasty ), Mengqiu （《蒙求》, a collection of stories for
educating children written by Li Han (李瀚) of the Tang Dynasty） as well as
Diaoyuji (《琱玉集》, a collection of stories written by an anonymous writer of the
Tang Dynasty). Secondly, I analyze the textual representation of The Tale of the
Heike and Japanese “Sobu Setuwa” based on those findings and investigate thetextual operations as well as literary imagination which are rarely discussed in
previous literary. Thirdly, I discuss the purpose and the referential meaning of the
textual representation from the perspective acquired from my textual analysis as a
contrastive reference of texts written in “Sino-Japanese mixed style（和漢混淆、
Wakankonkou）.” Even though Western literary theories are not employed as the
basis of discussion, some concepts such as intertextuality, new historicism, and
narrative discourse are utilized in my analysis. Besides, some concepts used in
previous studies concerning the textual analysis of The Tale of the Heike and
Japanese “Sobu Setuwa” will also be utilized in the present study in order to capture
the traditional spirit of the contrastive analysis of “Kan and Wa” or literally
“Chinese and Japanese” and gain a firm grasp of analyzing historical narratives
written in the Sino-Japanese mixed style. In other words, the analysis in the present
study is divided into two categories: analysis of Chinese literary texts, referred to as
“Kan” (漢) and analysis of Japanese literary texts, referred to as “Wa” (和). The
dissertation consists of four chapters: the first chapter discusses the representation of
Chinese literature, and the second through the fourth chapters deal with the various
aspects of Japanese literature, including literary imagination, the purpose of
representation and the meaning of “Sino-Japanese mixed style.” The following is a
brief introduction to each chapter.
In the first chapter, I begin with a discussion of Japanese “Sobu Setuwa”
along the lines of traditional Chinese literature, considering its inheritance, renewaland
the authority (i.e. regarding it as a kind of “fact” based on the original version)
of the “The Saga of Su Wu” (〈蘇武傳〉) in The Book of Han. The literary techniques
of borrowing and appropriation are also incorporated in the discussion. Based on
Aristotle’s concept, “the creative powers of a poet... presented in imagination, are in
other words the ability to create and arrange stories,” as explained by Gerard
Genette, I view the represented texts of “Letters Delivered by Wild Geese” (〈蘇武
鴈通文字〉) in Diaoyuji as well as “Su Wu’s Allegiance” (〈蘇武持節〉) in Mengqiu,
and investigate how they inherit and maintain the unchangeable “fact” presented in
Japanese “Sobu Setuwa.” I also examine how re-writing opportunities were grasped
and new represented texts created and re-arranged on the basis of the original edition.
Representation involves grasp of time, space and themes, and it also employs
practice of the techniques of borrowing, appropriation and composition. The
so-called “fact” means the mutual construction shared by the represented texts and
the referential texts, which transcends time, space and boundaries, and provides a
trace for “re-narration,” “re-thinking,” and “re-writing.” In other words, “fact” is not
only the everlasting “story structure” but also the “innate character of the story,” and
as Shinichi SAEKI（佐伯真一） asserted, “No matter how newly created “Su Wu”
tales circulate, the orthodox “Su Wu” tales from The Book of Han and Mengqiu will
never disappear.” The investigations in this chapter form the foundation of the
following discussion on Japanese “Sobu Setuwa.”
The second chapter starts with the meaning and definition of “texts written in
Sino-Japanese mixed style” and of the “Sino-Japanese mixed style,” and investigates
The Tale of the Heike, the representative work of “texts written in Sino-Japanese
mixed style,” by focusing on its “Kataribon Line” (〈語本系〉, books for telling). As
one may know, The Tale of the Heike is divided into the “Kataribon Line” (〈語本
系〉, books for telling) and the “Yomihon Line” (〈読本系〉, books for reading), and
the “Kataribon Line” is further divided into the “Ichikata School” (〈一方流〉) and
the “Yasaka School” (〈八坂流〉). This chapter initially discusses the Yashiro-bon
Version (《屋代本》, the version compiled by Hirotaka YASHIRO) of the “Yasaka
school” and the Kakuichi-bon Version (《覚一本》, the version compiled by Kakuichi
AKASHI) of the “Ichikata School”. It deals with the development of the
“Sino-Japanese mixed style” so as to clarify the meaning of the concept as used in
the present study. This chapter, through an in-depth textual analysis, investigates
how the Yashiro-bon Version and the Kakuichi-bon Version re-create, under the
unchangeable “fact” of Japanese “Sobu Setuwa,” a unique text different from
Chinese literature and the other versions of The Tale of the Heike—all by means of
inheritance, “inherited creation,” and renewal, as well as literary operations and
imagination. Besides, under the prerequisite of textual analysis, both the
representation of “Sino-Japanese mixed style” and the referential meaning of
historical narratives are discussed in depth.
In Chapter Three, the “Kataribon Line” of The Tale of the Heike is still the
theme of discussion; however, the texts inspected are two newly selected versions
from the “Yasaka School,” one edited in an earlier period, called Hyakunizyukuhon
Version (《百二十句本》), and the other in a later period, Zyokatahon Version（《城方本》）.
Following the discussion in Chapter Two, the discussed points include the
aspect of “inheritance and creation” and the aspect of the “contrastive concept of
‘Sino-Japanese mixed style’ as well as the perspective of historical representation.”
As to the aspect of “inheritance and creation,” I mainly deal with the issues of
inheritance, “inherited creation” and renewal with regard to representation,
disappearance, distortion and inventions of “authority,” by focusing on two texts:
The Tale of Heike and Diaoyuji. Furthermore, the following issues are also included
in the scope of the discussion: ⅰ) the influence of various texts of The Tale of the
Heike on each other; ⅱ) re-writing by narrators (or editors) by means of literary
operations such as “scraping pieces together,” “complementing,” and “annotating”
when they found unreasonable or disconnecting parts in the existing texts; and ⅲ)
various represented texts and “inherited creation” shown in the newly created
versions. With regard to the “contrastive concept of ‘Sino-Japanese mixed style’ and
the perspective of historical representation,” I investigate the representation
viewpoint and referential meaning of “Sino-Japanese mixed mtyle” employed in
Japanese “Sobu Setuwa,” based on the following notions of literary criticism, ⅰ)
“the purpose of representation is for historical annotation,” ⅱ) “real events are just
existence and can be used as referential objects of discourse as well as subject of
discussion,” and ⅲ) “a text coming from grafting and combining may produce
some kind of organic function, which arouses reality and represent a historical
viewpoint.” Moreover, I deepen the analysis and discussion of representation as well
as of the literary imagination of Zyokatahon Version due to its emergence and unique
literary operation.
Chapter Four is concerned with two versions of “Yomihon Line,” namely
Genpei Tozyoroku (《源平闘諍録》, A Record of Genpei Battles) and Engyobon(《延慶本》) of
The Tale of the Heike. In Genpei Tozyoroku, the function of poetry is
explained by this statement: in ancient times, Su Wu (〈蘇武〉) tried to stop thinking
of his mother by composing poems of five-character lines, and now Yasuyori (〈康
賴〉) tries to console himself for missing his parents by singing two Japanese waka;”
while in Engyobon, the plots of stories are composed by using “Waka” (〈和歌〉,
traditional Japanese poetry) and “Kanshi” (〈漢詩〉, Chinese poetry). Therefore, my
aim in this chapter is to observe, in Genpei Tozyoroku, Engyobon and medieval
Japanese Setsuwa narratives, how “Waka” and “Kanshi” represent and produce
specific literary imagination under the prerequisite of contrastive concept of
“Sino-Japanese mixed style”. Also studied in this chapter are historical narrative
texts such as Su Wu, Wang Zhaojun (王昭君、Oushoukun) and Li Ling (李陵、
Riryou), and questions as to how literary operations were conducted by means of
“uta-monogatari” (〈歌物語〉, poem-tales) in Japan’s Heian period and how “Sobu
Setuwa” was represented with specific literary imagination. Moreover, issues like
“Wa-Kan consciousness” (〈和漢意識〉, consciousness of Sino-Japanese), “subject
consciousness,” and “textual strategy” derived from the contrastive concept of
“Sino-Japanese mixed style” in the form of Chinese poems and Japanese poems are
also included in the discussion.
In Chinese literature, there are historical narratives which inherited or
“inherited and re-created” the tradition of “The Saga of Su Wu” of The Book of Han,
such as Diaoyuji, Mengqiu written by Li Han (李翰); there are also cross-literary
works which sing praises of the historical narratives of “The Saga of Su Wu” in The
Book of Han, such as “Su Wu Poem” (〈蘇武詩〉) by Li Po (李白), “Maoling Poem”
(〈茂陵詩〉) by Li Shangyin (李商隱), “ Su Wu Temple” (〈蘇武廟〉) by Wen
Tingyun (溫庭筠), “Longtou Singing” (〈隴頭吟〉) by Wang Wei (王 維), and thedrama “The
Record of Su Wu’s Shepherding Sheep” (〈蘇武牧羊記〉) of the Ming
Dynasty. However, literary works concerning “The Tale of Su Wu” are less than
Japanese “Sobu Setuwa” in terms of quantity and circulation. The main purpose of
the present study, of course, is not to compare Japanese-represented texts and
Chinese referential texts, nor is it to make a distinction between Japanese “Sobu
Setuwa” and Chinese literature. The study is intended as a positive though
questioning inquiry into “Su Wu” in The Tale of the Heike and related works as well
as medieval Japanese historical narratives, crossing beyond the border of Japanese
and Chinese literatures in both directions and making cross checks of these two
fields. It is an attempt to examine literary operations, literary imagination, referential
meaning, temporal spirit, and the subject consciousness of the contrastive concept of
“Sino-Japanese mixed style” presented in “The Tale of Su Wu.”
Because of my background and the limited topics dealt with in the present
study, rather than discussing from a wide range of angles and aspects, I focus my
examination and statement on textual analyses. Most of the materials utilized in this
study are ancient literature; I have made every effort to confirm the contents of the
books; however, I might have committed misinterpretations resulting in a localized
version of Japanese “Sobu Setuwa,” and offered a localized version of Japanese
“Sobu Setuwa.” with a different literary imagination. In addition, the dissertation is
written in Chinese and the research process is like a journey of “indigenization,”
going from ancient texts from “Han” (〈漢〉, Chinese) versions to “Ho” (〈和〉,
Japanese) versions, and then from “Ho” versions to “Han” versions, and finally back
to Chinese statements. The study, therefore, is characterized by the aspects of
“inheritance,” “renewal of inheritance,” and “creation,” as well as the aspect of
inheritance and representation of Japanese “Sobu Setuwa.” Hence, for the purposeof
continuation and inheritance, I have translated all the ancient literature and works
cited in my dissertation into Chinese in the hope that they will be of use for the
readers.