宋代明州士人家族的形態

Types of Elite Families in the Ming Prefecture of Sung China

本文以明州為例，討論研究宋代家族的方向和方法。首先，要區分家庭、家族和宗族，才能避免把家庭誤當家族。區分的準則，包括同籍共財、教令權、異籍別財、直系或旁系親屬，和五服制等。其次，也要區分家族的不同形態，例如義居型家族、聚居型家族和共祖屬群。區分的準則，包括分家分產、家族傳統、旅譜、族祭、有組織性的互助活動、非組織性的互助活動、分化分裂的誘因等。根據這七個準則，明州最有名的士人家族大多是組織鬆散的共祖屬群，例如樓氏各代在父母去世後都分家分產，雖有義莊的設立，但只是創建者樓璹一家的家產，並非他和兄弟各家的共產，它只提供臨時的幫助給五服之內的族人，看來並不幫助經常性的族學、族祭或參加科舉。這種形式的幫助很難說是與族的「共財」，而僅是出自私人的「通財」，它當然不是始自宋代，也不是宋代士族所獨有。這些著名的家族擁有最多的優勢，跟提倡重建家族的理學家也有密切的關係，假如連它們都沒有從共祖屬群發展成聚居型家族，那麼我們有理由相信，其他的家族也只是共祖屬群居多。總之，明州家庭發展的基調是從家庭分裂為共祖屬群，變奏是從家庭發展成聚居型家族。跟今天一樣，明州社會最基本和最重要的單位是家庭，不是家族，更不是宗族。明州士人沒有很強的家族意識、家族組織或家族規範，並沒有出現家族社會。以「家族」為出發點研究當地士大夫的合作，恐怕是一個假議題，因為他們背後的力量主要是家庭而非家族。同樣，以「家族」為單位挑戰社會流動，恐怕也是一個假議題，因為科舉成功背後的力量也主要是來自家庭而非家族。

This essay, using the Ming prefecture as an exemplar, discusses directions and methods in the study of lineages in the Sung dynasty. First, we should distinguish lineage from family and clan, taking particular care not to confuse family with lineage. The points of distinction include whether the members were registered in a single household and subscribed their incomes to the control of the household head, whether the head had the legal power of ''order and discipline'', whether the members were registered in separate households and had separate registered properties, whether the members were lineal or collateral relatives, and whether they were within or outside of the five mourning grades. Second, we should distinguish different types of lineages, such as communalized lineages, localized lineages, and descent groups/agnates. The points of distinction include whether the members divided up the household and common properties, whether they maintained a legacy, whether they compiled genealogies, whether they worshiped their ancestors together, whether they had institutionalized mutual assistance, whether they had non-institutionalized mutual assistance, and whether they could withstand the factors leading to division. Based on these seven distinctions, most of the so-called ''lineages'' of the most renowned scholar-officials in the Ming prefecture can only be considered loosely organized descent groups. In the Lou lineage for example, members of each generation divided households and common properties after the death of their parents. The charitable estate established by Lou Shou was strictly a family property owned and controlled by his sons, not lineage property owned or controlled by his family and his brothers' families. The estate only provided improvised assistance to the poor lineage members within the five mourning grades; it abstained from assistance related to regular education, ancestral sacrifices, or attempts to pass the civil examinations. This kind of financial assistance offered by one family to other families can hardly be called ''corporate'', but is in fact ''private''. This phenomenon neither originated with the Sung dynasty, nor is it particular to the Sung ''lineages''. If these renowned ''lineages'', which enjoyed many privileges and held close relations with the neo-Confucian scholars who advocated for lineage reorganization, failed to develop from mere descent groups into institutionalized lineages, we have no reason to believe that most other ''lineages'' fared differently. In sum, the dominant mode of family development in the Ming prefecture was the breaking up of families into descent groups, while the varied mode was the development of families into institutionalized lineages. Just like today, the most basic and important unit of society was the family, not lineage or clan. The local scholar-officials did not have strong lineage consciousnesses, lineage organizations, or lineage regulations. Thus, a lineage society failed to manifest itself. Resources supporting joint ventures between scholar-officials came mainly from their families, not from their lineages. In a similar vein, it may be wrong to use ''lineage'' as a unit to study social mobility, because the resources behind success in the examinations chiefly came from families, not lineages.