本文針對《史記》「父死子繼，兄死弟及，天下通義也」，與「一繼一及，魯之常也」之說，對宋國和魯國的繼承制予以討論。證明宋國君位繼承制不為父死子繼制與兄終弟及制並行，而魯國也並非「一及一繼」制，兩國都是以父死子繼為常。兄終弟及只是因應政治之變的繼位現象，在當時並非一種制度。因此，一繼一及不為魯之常，兄死弟及也不為宋國繼承制度之通義。

In this paper, we will focus on the records which it’s a common law that the father is succeeded by his son (“fu-szu-tzu-chi” 父死子繼), and the elder brothr was succeeded by his younger brother (“hsiung-chung-ti-chi”兄終弟及) in Shiji (史記), and will investigate the institution of succession in Sung-kuo (宋國) and Lu-kuo (魯國). We try to evidence the institution of succession didn’t put “fu-szu-tzu-chi” and “hsiung-chung-ti-chi” “together into practice in Sung-kuo, and “fu-szu-tzu-chi” was conventional in the two countries. “Hsiung-chung-ti-chi” was carried out in the special political situation; it wasn’t kind of institution of succession then. Therefore, “i chi i chi” wasn’t conventional in Lu-kuo; “hsiung-chung-ti-chi” wasn’t conmmon law of succession in Sung-kuo.

一繼一及; 父死子繼; 兄終弟及; 繼承制度; 宋宣公; 叔牙

I chi i chi; Fu-szu-tzu-chi; Siung-chung-ti-chi; Institution of succession; Sung, Hsuang-kung; Shu-ya