中国宋学之门：法律考试的社会史

约翰·查菲的《中国宋学之门》探讨了宋朝（960-1279）形成时期的中国公务员考试体系的历史和社会背景。该书最初由剑桥大学出版社于1985年出版，是1980年代中期出现的关于中国中期历史的系列丛书之一，受到罗伯特·哈特威尔对社会变革的开创性研究《人口，政治和社会转型》的影响中国。其中最重要的是帕特·埃布里对“伊安·蔡”社会生活准则的评论，罗伯特·海姆斯对精英的解剖，罗文斯顿和文官制度的详细分析。梅原考鲁斯和托马斯·李的教育研究对所讨论的案文有如此重要的补充。

这些作品标志着中国对西方中期研究的一次革命。他们从传统的对制度和思想史的传统研究开始转向过去，而传统的对制度和思想史的研究曾占中期研究的主导，而对社会和文化问题的关注则是他十年来的中期研究的核心以来。在追求这些问题时，作者探索了新的数据来源，例如家谱，当地历史（方治）并收集了作品被早期学者未充分利用甚至忽略。结果是开拓了该领域迄今未曾想到的研究领域，并引导中期研究朝着全新的方向发展。

现在，为了使中国的所有历史学家都感到满意，在这些影响巨大的研究中，使用最广泛，最重要的研究之一桑尼·盖茨在剑桥大学绝版之后被纽约州立大学出版社重新发行除了增加了新的前缀外，当前的量与原始量相同。前言结合了对宋代教育和考试工作的简短书目回顾，以及自最初出版以来产生的关于宋代社会的一些更重要的著作，以及查菲十年后对他的著作的反思。

当然，《中国宋学之门》之前已经过审查和评论。 因此，结构和评论的简短摘要就足够了。 这项工作分为三个部分。 第一部分首先介绍宋文化中的考试主题，包括作者相对于文学程度的文字定位，我将在下面讨论这个问题。下一章概述了宋朝官僚的几种招募途径。上面提到的两位学者的详细研究已取代了许多关于过程的简短讨论。然而，查菲对招聘的社会背景更感兴趣，而不是占据罗湖和梅原的大部分地区的制度化过程，他对诸如志仁的地位和文人的成长等问题的讨论，这些人的生活重点是教育和考试准备仍然很重要。

第二部分由三章组成，按时间顺序对宋代考试的历史进行了考察。开国皇帝太祖（960-76年）和太宗（976-97年）阐述了他们从唐朝继承来的考试制度，以发展一个可以作为精英官僚招聘的主要途径。查菲首先叙述了唐朝制度的调整，以满足宋朝统治第一世纪的宫廷需要，当时后来的皇权制度的许多基本轮廓都已经到位。然后，他转向了王朝的最后两个世纪，考察了文人对制度的适应以及他们为保持自己的家族地位而不断发挥优势的同伴尝试。他首先研究了11世纪中叶和后期的改革运动，以及政府资助的私立教育的传播。然后，他考察了南宋（1126-1279）期间肆虐该系统的虐待行为，特别是那些偏爱特定文人团体（例如帝国家庭的附属成员）的虐待行为，这些虐待行为在第十二和第十三届后期占据了主导地位个世纪。

对于读者来说，最后一部分是整本书中最有趣，最原始的部分，着眼于参与和成功的地理模式以及考试的“文化”。在地理讨论中，查菲关注考试中区域配额的发展以及某些区域在较长时期内胜过其他区域的能力。通过对Skinner宏观区域结构的适应，他发现东南部表现最强，东南部被定义为包括Skinner的下扬子和东南沿海宏观区域以及邻近清溪的坎河河谷。这不足为奇。它符合广泛的经济和社会数据，以证明这些地区的突出地位。然而，令人惊讶的是东南海岸的强劲表现，该海岸以福建省为中心，还包括梁车和匡通的相邻地区。这个宏伟的地区甚至胜过长江下游，而长江下游通常被认为是宋的文化中心。不幸的是，查菲试图解释东南沿海的突出之处只是短暂而又没有说服力。最终，他的目标不是进行解释，而是进行演示。最后，他转向了他所谓的“考试文化”。这是围绕考试而发展起来的有关仪式和传统的信息，包括正式的和受欢迎的。尽管该材料（包括从考试术语的讨论到附带的仪式到鬼魂的通俗故事）的内容不尽如人意，但在本书中却是最引人入胜的。

但是，在重新阅读旧文本时，面临的挑战是，要少解释其含义-查菲的书是大多数中古历史学家所熟知的，而不是考虑现在的贡献。 简而言之，为什么值得重新发行？查菲本人在结束他的新序言时间接地承认了这个问题的重要性：“随着读者今天来到《棘手的大门》，自从十多年前写出来以来，某种过时的质量是不可避免的”。 他提供了三个答案：1）考试在当时很重要； 2）考试的影响力扩展到中国以外甚至可能影响西方； 3）我们今天都参加考试，因此可以从过去的考试系统中学习。 我建议查菲未能解释这三点的重要性，而不是解释这本书值得继续获得和流通的真正原因。

我首先要提到的是这本书对有关中期社会的性质及其中考试的作用的学术辩论的贡献。这场辩论的根源是罗伯特·哈特威尔在1970年代发表的两篇未发表的文章，其要点在1982年的“变革”文章中进行了总结。在争论中，爱德华·克拉克和何平提的早期工作是他在芝加哥大学的导师，他们认为考试是主要的流动性因素，哈特威尔坚持认为，他找不到在任何情况下考试都能提供向上流动的途径。他们最多确认了已经实现的机动性。这个论点后来被罗伯特·海姆斯接受，并成为中世纪社会“哈特威尔·海姆斯范式”的重要组成部分，该论点认为，精英之间的连续性远远超过了引进新血统。但是，卡菲对此持反对态度。正如他在他的新序言中指出的那样：“我研究宋考试越多，我就越确信我占据了极为重要的社会和政治联系。”他在案文中反对这种范式“无视南宋文人。他挤满了考场，特别是在那些东南部的州，一次有成千上万的考生参加州考试”，并列举了三个具体问题：有充分的证据表明非精英人士参加考试；精英哈特威尔辩称，“血统”垄断了考试，很可能掩盖了社会地位的广泛差异；该论点忽略了教育在宋文化中的中心地位。

关于宋代社会的社会流动性质的争论，显然是我们对那个时代的理解的核心，至今仍未解决。尽管Hartwell Hymes范式中的许多内容经受了后来的审查，并且仍然是我们理解的核心，但是查菲的挑战在其他地方也得到了回应。值得注意的是，贝弗利·博西尔坚持认为，范式所确定的同质精英应该被视为“地位和声望的高度整合的连续体，其中财富，办公室，社会和亲戚关系，个人魅力以及许多其他属性可以结合起来确定一个人的位置”。我自己对富建南部闽南地区新兴精英的研究发现，有大量证据证明社会流动性围绕考试展开。查菲本人总结了辩论的现状如下：“关于考试的社会作用的共识正在日益增长；首先，考试通常是为了维持精英统治而不是削弱精英统治；其次，考试是核心统治。在社会秩序中具有重要意义，既提供了等级体系，又在一个庞大的帝国中提供了共同的文化；第三，通过教育和考试进入精英阶层的希望，尽管比现实更虚幻，但在政治上是必要的和强大的神话”。

我要说的是，《中国宋学之门》值得再出版和继续发行的第二个原因是其主题的重要性。伴随着沃尔夫冈·弗兰克对帝国末期改革和废除考试的论述以及宫崎一田对明末清朝成熟体系的研究等经典著作，本书成为中国研究的一个里程碑。哈特威尔·海姆斯范式在将考试作为社会流动的纽带边缘化时是否正确，是一千年来中国政治体系和文化结构的中心部分，我们无法理解中国的政治体系或不了解考试的中国文化，如果没有考试的中心性，那么18世纪著名的考试文化模仿鲁林·威士到底是什么意思呢？其他人则剖析了宋制的政治和制度历史。没有人像查菲那样全面或有效地处理其社会和文化影响。最初出现的文字是：“棘手的盖茨是出现在中国近现代历史上的最重要的书之一hellip;hellip;我很少读过一本书，我发现其中有很多值得欣赏的东西”。我相信，《中国宋学之门》经受了时间的考验，仍然是中期史学的核心内容。

外文文献出处：www.onacademic.com

输入The Thorny Gates of Learning in Sung China后点搜索

搜索结果第一篇

附外文文献原文：

The Thorny Gates of Learning in Sung China: A Social History of Examinations by John Chaffee

John Chaffees Thorny Gates of Learning in Sung China explores the history and social context of Chinas civil service examination system through its formative years during the Sung dynasty (960-1279). Originally published by the Cambridge University Press in 1985, it was one of a series of books on middle period Chinese history to appear in the mid-1980s that were influenced by Robert Hartwells seminal study of social change, 'Demographic, Political, and Social Transformations of China, 750-1550'. Among the most significant of these were Pat Ebreys commentary on Yiian Tsais Precepts for Social Life, Robert Hymess dissection of the elite of Fu-chou (Chiang-hsi), the detailed analyses of the civil service and bureaucratic systems by Winston Lo and Umehara Kaorus, and Thomas Lees study of education that is such an important complement to the text in question.

These works marked a revolution in the study of Chinas middle period in the West. They initiated a departure from the traditional focus on institutional and intellectual history that had dominated middle period studies previously, toward a wholly new line of inquiry focused on questions of society and culture that has been at the heart of middle period historiography in the decade since. In their pursuit of these issues, the authors explored new sources of data such as genealogies (tsu-pu, chia-pu, tsung-pu), local histories (fang-chih), and collected works (wen-chi) that had been underutilized or even ignored by earlier scholars. The result was to open up heretofore unimagined lines of inquiry in the field and to steer middle period studies in wholly new directions.

Now, in a development that should please all historians of China, Thorny Gates, one of the most widely used and important of these hugely influential studies, has been reissued by the SUNY Press after going out of print at Cambridge. Except for the addition of a new preface, the current volume is unchanged from the original. The preface combines a brief bibliographic review of work on Sung education and examinations as well as some of the more important works on Sung society produced since the original publication with Chaffees reflections on his text ten years later.

Thorny Gates, of course, has been reviewed and commented upon befores. A brief summary of structure and comment, therefore, should suffice. The work is divided into three parts. Part I opens with a general introduction to the topic of examinatio

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

John Chaffees Thorny Gates of Learning in Sung China explores the history and social context of Chinas civil service examination system through its formative years during the Sung dynasty (960-1279). Originally published by the Cambridge University Press in 1985, it was one of a series of books on middle period Chinese history to appear in the mid-1980s that were influenced by Robert Hartwells seminal study of social change, 'Demographic, Political, and Social Transformations of China, 750-1550'. Among the most significant of these were Pat Ebreys commentary on Yiian Tsais Precepts for Social Life, Robert Hymess dissection of the elite of Fu-chou (Chiang-hsi), the detailed analyses of the civil service and bureaucratic systems by Winston Lo and Umehara Kaorus, and Thomas Lees study of education that is such an important complement to the text in question.

These works marked a revolution in the study of Chinas middle period in the West. They initiated a departure from the traditional focus on institutional and intellectual history that had dominated middle period studies previously, toward a wholly new line of inquiry focused on questions of society and culture that has been at the heart of middle period historiography in the decade since. In their pursuit of these issues, the authors explored new sources of data such as genealogies (tsu-pu, chia-pu, tsung-pu), local histories (fang-chih), and collected works (wen-chi) that had been underutilized or even ignored by earlier scholars. The result was to open up heretofore unimagined lines of inquiry in the field and to steer middle period studies in wholly new directions.

Now, in a development that should please all historians of China, Thorny Gates, one of the most widely used and important of these hugely influential studies, has been reissued by the SUNY Press after going out of print at Cambridge. Except for the addition of a new preface, the current volume is unchanged from the original. The preface combines a brief bibliographic review of work on Sung education and examinations as well as some of the more important works on Sung society produced since the original publication with Chaffees reflections on his text ten years later.

Thorny Gates, of course, has been reviewed and commented upon befores. A brief summary of structure and comment, therefore, should suffice. The work is divided into three parts. Part I opens with a general introduction to the topic of examinations in Sung culture, including the authors positioning of his text relative to the extent literature, an issue to which I shall return below. The following chapter is an overview of the several routes of recruitment into the Sung bureaucracy. Much of the brief discussion of process has been superceded by the detailed studies of Winston Lo and Umerhara Kaoru mentioned above. Chaffee, however, is more interested in the social context of recruitment than the institutional processes that occupy much of Lo and Umehara, and his discussion of issues such as the position of chii-jen and the growth of the literati, those whose lives focused on education and preparation for the examinations, remains important.

Part II, composed of three chapters, is a chronological survey of the history of the examinations under the Sung. The founding Sung emperors Tai-tsu (r. 960-76) and Tai-tsung (r. 976-97) elaborated upon a system of examinations they had inherited from the Tang dynasty to develop an institution that could function as the primary route of elite bureaucratic recruitment. Chaffee first recounts the adjustments made to the Tang system to meet the needs of the court through the first century of Sung rule when many of the basic outlines of the later imperial system were put in place. He then turns to the last two centuries of the dynasty, looking at the accommodation of the literati to the system and their companion attempts to perpetuate advantages to ensure their familys continued prominence. He first deals with the reform movements of the mid and late eleventh-century, as well as with the spread of government-sponsored and private education. Then he looks at the abuses that crept into the system during the Southern Sung (1126-1279), especially those that favored specific literati groups such as the collateral members of the imperial family, who came to dominate the lists in the later twelfth and thirteenth centuries.

The final part, which to this reader is the most interesting and original section of the entire book, looks at geographic patterns of participation and success and the 'culture' of the exams. In the discussion of geography, Chaffee is concerned with the development of regional quotas in the examinations and the ability of certain regions to outperform others over extended periods of time. Using an adaptation of Skinners macroregional structure for his framework, he finds the southeast, which he defines to include Skinners Lower Yangtze and Southeast Coast macroregions as well as the valley of the Kan River in adjacent Chianghsi, performed the strongest. This is not surprising; it conforms with extensive economic and social data to demonstrate the prominence of these regions. What might surprise, however, is the extremely powerful performance of the Southeast Coast, which centers on Fu-chien province and includes adjacent regions of Liang-che and Kuang-tung as well; this macroregion outperformed even the Lower Yangtze, which is commonly thought to have been the cultural heartland of the Sung. Unfortunately, Chaffees attempt to explain the prominence of the Southeast Coast is brief and not fully convincing; it is not, ultimately, his goal to explain but to demonstrate. Finally he turns to what he calls the 'examination culture.' This is a melange of information on ceremony and tradition, both formal and popular, that developed around the examinations. While the material, which includes everything from a discussion

剩余内容已隐藏，支付完成后下载完整资料

资料编号：[274153]，资料为PDF文档或Word文档，PDF文档可免费转换为Word