> > > 國立清華大學的李卓穎（Li Cho-ying）與The University at Albany的Charles > Hartman （蔡涵墨）在最新一期的《Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies》（70 > 卷2期，頁387-448；2010年12月）上發表了一篇論文，題名為 “A Newly > Discovered Inscription by Qin Gui: Its Implications for the History of > Song /Daoxue/”（新近面世之秦檜記文及其在宋代道學史中之意義），探討新近 > 面世的秦檜（1090-1155）〈宣聖七十二賢贊像記〉與宋代道學的關係。兩位作 > 者願意在此介紹其中的要點，以饗學界先進與同好。 > > > 現存於杭州孔廟的「宣聖七十二賢贊像」的系列石碑共有十五塊，在最後一塊石 > 碑上，原本刻有秦檜所撰的〈宣聖七十二賢贊像記〉。我們非常幸運地在明初學 > 者吳訥（1372-1457）的文集中發現了此一記文的文本。根據吳訥自己的說明， > 他於1427年（宣德二年）下令鑿去秦檜的記文，並代以自己所作之記，但在採取 > 這些行動之前，他已將秦檜的記文錄下，後來並收入其文集中。我們的論文提供 > 了一份經過校勘的文本，進行英譯，同時，也深入探討其內容、修辭，以及背景。 > > > 其中，最為重要的，是秦檜的記文約莫寫成於其死前不到三個月，並且他用「道 > 統」一詞來指稱宋高宗與周文王及孔子的關係。此一文本也包含了許多道學的語 > 彙及概念。目前學界一般認為「道統」一詞乃是朱熹在1181年（淳熙八年）創造 > 的，因此，秦檜記文的面世，對於我們了解宋代思想史將有幾個重大的意義。首 > 先，我們發現「道統」一詞有著豐富的「前史」，且可追溯至北宋末期。其二， > 在早期的用法之中，就如在秦檜的記文中一樣，「道統」是用來稱說從古代聖／ > 王傳承至徽宗及高宗的文化／政治權威，是公的、著落於君王與體制的「道 > 統」。其三，朱熹所創造的私的「道統」，卻將同一個權威歸諸個別的學者而非 > 君主身上，從而有二程之興起，與他自己的繼起，以傳承「道統」；這對於當時 > 既已建立的帝王權威修辭來說，是個強硬而嚴厲的挑戰。其四，這也就可以部分 > 地解釋，何以宋代君王以及其他較為保守的儒者，對朱熹於1189年（淳熙十六 > 年）在〈中庸章句序〉陳述的「道統」觀充滿敵意。第五，在十三世紀初，朱熹 > 所創造的私的「道統」觀和較早出現的帝王「道統」觀並存著，且處於相互競爭 > 的張力中。儘管理宗在1241年（淳祐元年）認可道學為國家正典，然而，仔細分 > 析此一認可過程所產生的文件，我們發現君王仍然堅持他們才是道的合法傳承者。 > > 我們的論文現在已由《Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies》出版，並可透過網 > 路自Project Muse的連結取得。Project Muse的連結如下： > > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/harvard_journal_of_asiatic_studies/summary/v070/70.2.li.html > > > 倘若您無法自Project Muse取得而有意賜鑑我們的論文，歡迎您與兩位作者之一 > 聯繫，我們將非常樂意為您提供一份電子版論文。我們的聯繫方式是： > > Li Cho-ying李卓穎: ftcy2002@gmail.com <mailto:ftcy2002@gmail.com> > > Charles Hartman: Hartman@albany.edu <mailto:Hartman@albany.edu> > > 最後，我們正在將這篇論文翻譯為中文，希望不久的將來，能以此與更多的先進 > 與同好分享我們的研究成果，以及得到更多的批評與指教。 > > ----------------------------------------- > Li Cho-ying李卓穎 (National Tsing Hua University) and Charles Hartman > (The University at Albany) announce the publication of their article, > “A Newly Discovered Inscription by Qin Gui: Its Implications for the > History of Song /Daoxue/,” /Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies /70.2 > (December 2010): 387-448. > > The last in a series of fifteen Song dynasty stelae known as > /Portraits and Eulogies of Confucius and his Seventy-Two Disciples > /(Xuan sheng qishier xian zan xiang 宣聖七十二賢贊像), now in the > Confucian Temple in Hangzhou, originally contained an inscription by > the Song chief councilor Qin Gui秦檜 (1090-1155). We have recovered > Qin Gui's original text from the collected works of the Ming official > Wu Ne 吳訥 (1372-1457) who transcribed the text before he ordered it > ground off the stone and replaced with his own inscription in 1427. > Our article presents a collated edition of the inscription together > with a translation and study of its content, rhetoric, and historical > background. > > Most significantly, Qin Gui's inscription is dated less than three > months before his death in 1155 and uses the expression /daotong/ 道統 > to describe the relationship between the reigning Emperor Gaozong 高宗 > and Zhou dynasty paragons such as King Wen 文王and Confucius. The text > also contains other vocabulary and ideas present in /daoxue/道學 > writings. Since present scholarship considers that Zhu Xi coined the > term /daotong /in 1181, the inscription carries major implications for > Song intellectual history. Our research on Qin Gui’s inscription has > revealed: 1) The term /daotong/ has a rich "pre-history" dating to the > late Northern Song. 2) In this early usage, as in Qin Gui's > inscription, /daotong/ denotes a transmission of political and > cultural legitimacy from ancient authority figures to the Song > emperors Huizong 徽宗and Gaozong in a "succession of the Way." 3) Zhu > Xi's creation of a "private" /daotong/, in which the same authority > passed not to the monarch but to private scholars, such as the Cheng > brothers and ultimately to himself, thus presented a stark challenge > to the established rhetoric of imperial authority. 4) This challenge > partially explains the hostility of the Song monarchs and other more > conservative Confucians toward Zhu Xi's developed concept of the > /daotong/, as articulated in his 1189 "Preface to the /Doctrine of the > Mean/" (/Zhongyong zhangju xu/ 中庸章句序). 5) In the early thirteenth > century, Zhu Xi’s concept of the /daotong/ as a “private” transmission > co-existed and competed with the older, imperial conception. A close > reading of formal documents surrounding Emperor Lizong’s 理宗 > recognition of /daoxue/ as state orthodoxy in 1241suggests that, > despite this accommodation, the monarch continued to view himself as > the legitimate “successor of the Way.” > > Our article is now available in the /Harvard Journal of Asiatic > Studies/ 70.2 (December 2010): 387-448 and may be obtained online > through Project Muse via the following link: > > http://muse.jhu.edu/journals/harvard_journal_of_asiatic_studies/summary/v070/70.2.li.html > > > If you do not have access to Project Muse and would like a copy of the > article, please contact either of the authors directly at: > > Li Cho-ying李卓穎: ftcy2002@gmail.com <mailto:ftcy2002@gmail.com> > > Charles Hartman: Hartman@albany.edu <mailto:Hartman@albany.edu> > > We are currently preparing a Chinese version of our article in order > make our research on the inscription more widely available to our > colleagues in China. >