On the Variation of the Versions of Zhouyi zhu shu and Additional Remarks on Ruan＇s Version of Zhouyi zheng yi

《周易》的注、疏合刻始于南宋茶盐司八行本,自此以后,又有十行本。阮元的《重刊十三经注疏》即是以十行本为依据。十行本为元刻明修本,这一点已为学者所指出。然而,不同的十行本,其先后传承仍然是需要辨明的。阮元所依据的十行本,乃是十行本中错讹最多的一个本子。由此我们审视阮元的重刻,其主要失误在于选择底本的错误而非刊刻工作本身。同时,由《周易正义》的情况来看,十行本与闽、监、毛本的关系亦并非仅仅是前贤所认为的递相传承。闽本实际出自元刻九行本,且此元刻九行本反倒是十行本明代补版所从出。在《周易注疏》的众版本中,武英殿本及四库本较易被忽略,然而这个版本从分卷到校勘却是比较有特色的。The combination in inscribing WANG Bi＇s Annotations and KONG Ying-da＇s further explanations of the Zhouyi started from the eight-line version of the Southern Song Tea Salt Department. Then,there also appeared ten-line versions. It was based on ten-line versions that RUAN Yuan＇s Chong kan shisan jin zhu shu （Re-inscribed Annotations and Further Explanations of the Thirteen Confucian Classics） was completed. Scholars had pointed out that ten-line versions were inscribed in the Yuan dynasty and revised in the Ming dynasty. However,we should clarity the transmission of different ten-line versions. The ten-line version on which RUAN Yuan＇s version was based was a version which contains most errors. By examining RUAN＇s re-inscription,we can find that the mistake occurred in the selection of the master copy but not in the inscribing works. Meanwhile,basing on the case of Zhouyi zheng yi （Rectification of the Meanings of the Zhouyi）,it can be seen that the relationship between the ten-line version and Min,Jian,and Mao＇s versions is not merely a successive transmission asserted by the past literati. As a matter of fact,Min＇s version was based on a nine-line version inscribed in the Yuan dynasty from which the revised ten-line version of the Ming dynasty was derived. In the multitude of versions of the Zhouyi zhu shu,the version of Wu yin dian （Hall of Martial Valor） and that of Si ku （Four Treasuries） are easily neglected,whereas these versions are characteristic both in the collation and division of volumes.中文核心期刊要目总览(PKU)中国社会科学引文索引(CSSCI)0439-4