由於秦本《蒼頡篇》至今未見，因此，現今所見出土《蒼頡篇》便衍生不 少異文問題，如字形抄訛、通假、秦本與閭里書師本之修訂程度等，不過，近 年在北大簡完整內容與居延簡新圖版之發表後，許多問題可以得到進一步解 決。因此，本文擬在此基礎上，討論幾個問題，包括： 一 北大簡與英藏簡《蒼頡篇》「悉」字之釋讀。 二 居延簡「悉」字異文應為「迷」字試說。 三 《蒼頡篇》「悉」字與清華〈尹至〉簡「料」字之關係。 四 阜陽簡「己（已）」字所透露之版本訊息。

Since the “Cang Ji Pian” of Qin edition has not been seen so far, the “Cang Ji Pian” unearthed today has generated a lot of foreign issues, such as the copying of glyphs, the leave, the revision level of Qin Ben and the master’s book. However, in recent years, after the publication of the complete content of Peking University Jane and the new edition of Ju Yanjian, many problems have been further solved. Therefore, this article intends to discuss several issues on this basis, including: 1. Interpretation of the word “Xi” in the “Cangyu articles” of Peking University and British Tibetan Bamboo Slips. 2. Ju Yanjian’s variant of the word “Xi” should be tried and tested. 3. The relationship between the word “Xi” in “Cang Ji Pian” and the word “material” in Tsinghua “Yin Zhi”. 4. Version information disclosed by Fuyang Jian’s “self (already)”.

出土《蒼頡篇》;悉;迷;料;北大簡;阜陽簡;居延簡;英藏簡。

Unearthed “Cang Jie Pian”; Xi; Mi;Li; Peking University’s Bamboo Slip; Fuyang’s Bamboo Slip;Juyan’s Bamboo Slip; and British Tibetan’s Bamboo Slip;Peking University’s Bamboo Slip “Cang Jie Pian”