宋人不言慶曆“新政”“新法”“變法”考———基於觀念史的個案研究
志弘 馮
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24112/sinohumanitas.362707
2023-07-01
Abstract:LANGUAGE NOTE | Document text in Chinese; abstract also in English.
宋人雖常以“新法”“變法”“新政”賅括熙豐政事,但未曾以這些詞彙歸納慶曆之政;當代文史著作常言“慶曆新政”,這説法卻不見於清代以前文獻,原因何在?本文考析宋人慶曆書寫,指出:(1)熙豐變法時期宋人從未直接比較范、王改革主張,也不曾認爲慶曆、熙寧更革是可比的對象,這些聯繫待朱熹而後始。今人或曰熙豐變法之時,慶曆革新派趨於保守,這固屬當代觀點,卻非宋人認識;(2)范仲淹故後,對其顯有貶評者只有梅堯臣、宋神宗、王安石三例,後二者對范的批評,反映熙豐變法主事者並不完全認同慶曆改革;(3)歐陽修等慶曆當事人認爲范仲淹改革失敗皆因“群言營營,卒壞於成”,可是徽宗朝以後卻出現“慶曆之治”説法,其内涵又被簡化爲仁宗能“開納直言,善御群臣,賢必進,邪必退”。這説法無法揭示慶曆之政真正特色,又故意忽略慶曆改革主事者因“衆訾成波,擠落在外”的事實,卻有利於范仲淹作爲忠義第一人形象的建立;(4)宋人從不曾認爲慶曆之政有違祖宗之法,這是宋人不言慶曆“新”政的根本原因。南宋以後論者以范仲淹爲“守我宋之家法者”,進一步確立這觀點。
When Song-Dynasty people summarized the political situation of the Xining (1068-1077) and Yuanfeng (1078-1085) eras, they used the terms “new laws,” “reform of laws,” and “new policies,” but the Qingli era (1041-1048) was never treated in the same way. The term “New Policies of the Qingli era” is commonly used in contemporary scholarship of Chinese history, but this term was not in existence in the literature before the Qing Dynasty. What is the reason for these phenomena? The present study analyzes Song people’s writing on Qingli and makes the following arguments:
(1) During the Xining-Yuanfeng reform, Song people had never directly compared the reformist advocacy of Fan Zhongyan (989 1052) and that of Wang Anshi (1021-1086), nor had they ever considered the Qingli and Xining-Yuanfeng reforms comparable, until Zhu Xi (1130-1200) made such a comparison. Today’s view that the Qingli reform advocacy was deemed conservative during the Xining-Yuanfeng reform movement was never so perceived by Song people. (2) After Fan’s death, he was explicitly criticized by Mei Yaochen (1002-1060), Emperor Shenzong of the Song (r. 1067 1085), and Wang Anshi only. The criticisms by the latter two indicate that the Xining-Yuanfeng reform leaders did not completely agree with the Qingli reform. (3) Ouyang Xiu (1007-1072) and the other leaders of the Qingli reform held that Fan’s failure was due to the extensive wave of criticisms the reform had triggered. However, during the reign of Emperor Huizong (r. 1100-1126), a positive view emerged, coming with it inarguable narratives that describe the reform as a sign of Emperor Renzong’s (r. 1022-1063) willingness to accept advice. Unable to reveal the Qingli reform’s true features, this opinion deliberately ignores the historical fact that the Qingli advocates were lambasted and thus demoted, but helps construct Fan’s personal image as a most loyal person. (4) Song people had never considered that the Qingli reform violated the ancestral custom of the Song Dynasty, and this is the very reason why they had never referred to it as “new policies.” This argument was further supported by the opinion of Southern Song critics, who viewed Fan as a protector of the traditional norms laid down by the ancestors of the Song Dynasty’s royal house.