【摘要】 自孔颖达以来，儒家学者大都援引《周礼》乡遂之说以释《费誓》“三郊三遂”；至近人研讨古史，又翻过来将《费誓》“三郊三遂”视为乡遂制度曾经实行的关键证据。因“郊”与“乡”的性质截然不同，而《左传》《周礼》关于“遂”（隧）的记载又颇有参差，所以上述推论皆面临一些难以逾越的诠释障碍。《周礼》乡遂之说与伏生郊遂之解迥然有别，但均非记录旧史的可靠文字。《费誓》所言“三郊三遂”，须置于周代生产生活的社会实践中，始能求得合理解释。周以农业立国，四郊农业生产是维持统治中心正常运转的物资保障。隧（遂）原为田间沟渠、入井通道、君王墓道的习称，渐演为力役团队组织之名。《费誓》所载伯禽训令，征之于“三郊”者为物资，征之于“三遂（隧）”者为力役。更多还原

【Abstract】 Since Kong Yingda, Confucian scholars have often cited the Xiangsui system recorded in Zhouli to interpret the “Sanjiao Sansui” in Bishi. In recent years, when people studied ancient history, they in turn regarded the “Sanjiao Sansui” in Bishi as the key evidence for the implementation of the Xiangsui system. Because the nature of “Jiao” is different from that of “Xiang”, and the records of Sui(tunnel) in Zuozhuan and Zhouli are obviously different, the above inference faces some insurmountable interpretation obstacles.The theory of “Xiangsui” in Zhouli is quite different from Fu Sheng’s interpretation of “Jiaosui”, but neither of them is a reliable record of old history. The phrase “Sanjiao Sansui” in Bishi can only be reasonably explained by combining the production and living practices of the Zhou Dynasty. In the Zhou Dynasty, agriculture was the foundation of the country, and agricultural production in the four suburbs was the material guarantee to maintain the normal operation of the ruling center. Tunnels(Sui), formerly known as field ditches, well access, and royal tombs, have gradually become the name of the labor force organization. According to the instructions of Boqin recorded in Bishi, what was collected from the “Sanjiao” was military supplies, and what was collected from the “Sansui” was military labor.更多还原