宋江本事考述

Research on Song Jiang

英雄色彩濃郁的《水滸傳》在「忠義堂」聚義之後，繫年之跡仍然殘存文本之中。南宋中葉，說話四家之「小說」家的「說鐵騎兒」類，講述著「士馬金鼓」之兵戎時事，隸屬「新事說話」。〈宋江三十六人畫贊〉映現了南宋市井說話的情景，說話人抉擇宋江捏入時事之中，使之作為抗金義軍的領袖，除了肇源外緣因素之外，亦有文學的內部動能。何以說話人以歷史人物統攝時人抗金事蹟呢？本文考述宋江本事，其中「受招安」、「征方臘」成為近代論辯的焦點，部分學者操持唯物主義的研究方法，並且從泛文本的悖述否定其事。兩宋改隸之際，泛文本難免乖謬，若以其局部舛誤力證受招安、征方臘之非，則有失公允。深究兩宋文、史話語可知：起初，文人以抑盜視域引述宋江作為對立符碼，史官則秉筆直書其事。逮至南宋，編年史家收編日曆實錄、書牘詩文，以及耆老傳聞等史料，採取「牽連書之」檢覈其事，宋江遂在文本複述下擴編為簡略的小史，而且是書寫的進行式。然而當宋江之行紛錯在興亡大事之中，呈現的是斷續留白的文本，難以置入紀事本末的格式之中，充其量只是斷簡殘編的史綱，正因為留白而有言說的可能，史官顯揚其名寓藏著式而不斷的義法，後代說話人、小說家則藉此摶入飛馳的奇情想像。

The leader of the 108 heroic characters in the Water Margin (Shuihu zhuan 水滸傳), Song Jiang 宋江, has long been a favorite of those who engaged in the art of shuohua 說話 (the monologue form of storytelling). Since these 108 characters gathered together in the Zhongyi tang 忠義堂 (a hall where they made a vow to stay friends forever), numerous Chinese literary works have featured anecdotes about Song that modified or embellished his historical exploits. One such anecdote, titled the Eulogy to Song Jiang and his Thirty-six Followers, demonstrates how storytellers in the Southern Song adapted Song Jiang’s legends to their oral performances. Due to the combined influence of internal literary motives and the external political situation in the Southern Song, Song Jiang came to be portrayed as a rebel leader, fighting against their enemy, the Jin. This study explores the interplay between Song Jiang the literary figure and the historical records describing his rebelling against the Jin. Contemporary debate on this issue has focused on two aspects: Song’s reception of amnesty from the Song government; and his campaign against Fang La 方臘. Some scholars have used materialist arguments to assert that Song Jiang and the historical events in which he played a role are fictional. However, during the turmoil accompanying the fall of the Northern Song and establishment of the Southern Song, it was inevitable that errors would find their way into the historical record. Denying the veracity of historical events tied to Song on the basis of such mistakes is unfair. Moreover, while Song dynasty authors tended to disparage bandits such as Song Jiang, Northern Song court historians still accurately recorded historical events. In the Southern Song, historians collected relevant records, articles, and oral statements from elderly witnesses, reexamined these historic events, and included this information in their historical chronicles. Yet, not all of the data they collected could be included therein, and thus later generations lacked a complete picture. This left much room for later authors to insert a good deal of invented material into their literary works on Song.