晉文公「蒐於被廬」「作三軍」，一般學者多以為只是擴充軍備，並未 正視其中重要癥結，即這是貴族的一奪權行動，迫使晉文公放棄軍事指極及一般 行管理權。 本文就「被廬之蒐」的內外因素，及其後果著手分析，認為晉自「作三軍」後， 國君就失去軍事指揮等一切權力。「作三軍」不但造成日後晉國六卿專權，即日 後三家分晉，乃至戰國七雄，都與晉文公的這次改革，有密不可分的關係。 晉文公「作三軍」，不僅影響本身，也造成其他諸侯國貴族的仿效，魯國是最明 顯的例子。又由魯國「作三軍」及其所造成的結果來看，也可以反證晉國「作三 軍」的結果，確如本文所論證，即國君失去一切權力。此二國先後呼應，值得治 春秋史者深切注意。

　　　　　Most scholars regard Jin Wen-kung's "Sou Yu PiLu" and "TsoSan Chun" as only an act to enlarge his armaments. Such consensusof opinions, however, fails to see the kernel of this issue. That is, itis an act in which the aristocrats tried to snatch power and force JinWen-Kung to abandon his martial power and administrative power. This article means to deal with the internal and external causestriggering off the act and its result. After the act of "Tso SanChun," the Lord of Jin was actually deprived of martial andadministrative claims. Later on, "Tso San Chun" not only made thesix War lords in Jin possessed of too much power, but also made thethree greater ones divid Jin. Even in Chan Kuo period, the sevenpowers were also influenced by Jin Wen-kung's innovation. Jin's "Tso San Chun" not only affected the country itself, butalso caused emulation from other countries. Lu's counterpart was acase in point. Viewed from the consequence, Lu's "Tso San Chun"could justufy the former one in Jin. As my argument goes, the Lordwas shorn of all power. These two countries took concerted action.The issue is worthy of the Chun Chiu scholars' attention.