「情貴神州」與「所業唯官」－－論唐代家族的遷徙與仕宦

On the migration and bureaucratization of the families and clans in Tang China

本文透過對世家大族「情貴神州」和「所業唯官」兩種取向的觀察，闡述唐代政治社會格局的變化，以及世家大族如何因應現實環境的轉變而調整發展策略，藉此保持長期以來所享有的聲勢威望；寒門小姓在這兩方面的表現，也在論說之列。初唐時期，不少世家大族對遷徙京畿抱持著保留態度，並不認同這一種遷徙取向是發展家族勢力的先決條件。相對而言，寒門小姓一開始即能以踴躍積極態度投入這種遷徙潮流。到了唐玄宗天寶年間，山東士族為了接近權力中心以便開展仕途，紛紛向京畿進行遷徙，遷徙京畿的風尚遂在這個階層確立起來。對於唐代仕宦之家而言，遷徙京畿與家族官僚化兩者有極為密切的關係：遷徙京畿為家族仕宦提供方便，家族官僚化同時亦將遷徙京畿的取向固定下來。然而，單憑仕宦之家普遍歸葬京師，並不足以充分說明遷徙京畿的內容；要更準確瞭解，便必須充分認識許多來自北方的世家大族與原籍失去聯繫的同時，卻在南方州縣產生了新的生活關係的事實。這個事實，在他們歸葬地點與生活區域之間的差別充分表現出來。在進行官僚化的過程中，部份世家大族與政治新貴聯婚，甚至接受他們攀附，若以此作為大族的沒落象徵，未免言之尚早。從唐代政壇新貴以至王室成員皆積極謀求與世家大族締婚的情況來看，傳統名族所散發的政治社會魅力，依然歷久不衰。 This paper, based on the observation of two inclinations namely feelings for the capital districts and being bureaucrats as the only profession, attempts to explain the changes of social and political frameworks in Tang China, together with how aristocratic clans and families readjusted their development strategy in response to actual situation as a way to maintain their prestige and status. How did the humble clans and families act in the aspects of migration and bureaucratization is also a focus of attention in this paper. In the early Tang era, there were some aristocratic clans and families which held the usefulness of capital-district-bound migration in suspicion; due to commitment to native place, they were not ready to identify such kind of migration as a prerequisite for developments. Humble families and clans relatively were not bound by any traditional restrictions; they were able to follow the trend actively from the start. Not during the reign of Emperor did the clans and families in general adopt the capital-district-bound migration practice as a way to keep close to the origin of the imperial authority. Migrating to the capital districts and bureaucratization sounded closely connected with each other to the clans and families which lived on bureaucracy: migrating to the capitals might enable people to have a better chance to be officials while bureaucratization had very much to do with the consolidation of inclination of capital-district-bound migration. Only focusing on burial at the capital districts however is not sufficient enough to understand the historical context of capital-district-bound migration. Instead we need to be aware of the fact that while losing affinity to the native place, a substantial number of clans and families which were originated in North China lived in the south. This historical fact was manifested in the deviation between burial locations and living areas of families and clans. In the process of bureaucratization, some aristocratic families and clans formed marital ties with political upstarts or acquiesced in their attachment. But it would be premature to assert that aristocratic families and clans were in decline simply based on such happenings. The social advantages enjoyed by prominent families and clans seemed to remain unshakable as members of the imperial family and political upstarts were eager to form marital ties with them.

This paper, based on the observation of two inclinations namely feelings for the capital districts and being bureaucrats as the only profession, attempts to explain the changes of social and political frameworks in Tang China, together with how aristocratic clans and families readjusted their development strategy in response to actual situation as a way to maintain their prestige and status. How did the humble clans and families act in the aspects of migration and bureaucratization is also a focus of attention in this paper. In the early Tang era, there were some aristocratic clans and families which held the usefulness of capital-district-bound migration in suspicion; due to commitment to native place, they were not ready to identify such kind of migration as a prerequisite for developments. Humble families and clans relatively were not bound by any traditional restrictions; they were able to follow the trend actively from the start. Not during the reign of Emperor did the clans and families in general adopt the capital-district-bound migration practice as a way to keep close to the origin of the imperial authority. Migrating to the capital districts and bureaucratization sounded closely connected with each other to the clans and families which lived on bureaucracy: migrating to the capitals might enable people to have a better chance to be officials while bureaucratization had very much to do with the consolidation of inclination of capital-district-bound migration. Only focusing on burial at the capital districts however is not sufficient enough to understand the historical context of capital-district-bound migration. Instead we need to be aware of the fact that while losing affinity to the native place, a substantial number of clans and families which were originated in North China lived in the south. This historical fact was manifested in the deviation between burial locations and living areas of families and clans. In the process of bureaucratization, some aristocratic families and clans formed marital ties with political upstarts or acquiesced in their attachment. But it would be premature to assert that aristocratic families and clans were in decline simply based on such happenings. The social advantages enjoyed by prominent families and clans seemed to remain unshakable as members of the imperial family and political upstarts were eager to form marital ties with them.