金代地方廟學興修中的朝廷、官員、百姓

The Court, Officials, and the Populace in Jin-Period Temple-School Construction

目前可得86篇金代地方廟學的興修碑記，有77篇可見記文，有56篇可見經費籌措的記載。本文將先從經費籌措的情形分析金代廟學興修的經費來源型態，之後則利用經費運用及興修過程的各種狀況，觀察朝廷、官員、百姓的參與，並說明他們的表現及其意義。本文指出，雖然金朝的辦學政策推動了地方文教的發展，但因補助有限，越是基層的地方，廟學興修越需仰賴以文官為主的地方官員及以士人為主的社會百姓的支持，官員捐俸與百姓贊助是重要的經費來源。不過地方還是設法積極爭取朝廷的經費，不在辦學政策照顧範圍內的基層地方便可利用朝廷要求修繕孔廟的規定申請補助。有心者努力推動之際，金代仍有許多不支持廟學興修的官員與百姓，有些政壇高層仍未認同辦學政策，許多官員意願不高，部分百姓也是態度消極。不願支持的意見在金代的環境中似乎更有機會浮現，這是廟學興修的阻力，也是金代官民多元態度的呈現。

A total of eighty-six extant commemorative inscriptions record the construction and renovation of local temple schools in the Jin period. Among these, seventy-seven preserve full texts and fifty-six contain information on the raising of funds. This article first analyzes patterns of financial mobilization in order to identify the principal sources of funding for temple-school construction and repair in the Jin dynasty. It then examines the allocation of resources and the processes of construction to assess the respective roles played by the court, local officials, and commoners, as well as the significance of their participation.
This study argues that although state educational policies in the Jin dynasty promoted the development of local cultural and educational institutions, limited governmental subsidies meant that temple-school projects in lower-level localities relied heavily on the support of local officials—primarily civil officials—and members of local society, especially the literati. Contributions from officials, often in the form of donated salaries, together with financial support from the populace, constituted crucial sources of funding. At the same time, local communities actively sought to secure state resources. For example, grassroots localities that lay outside the direct scope of educational policy could take advantage of court mandates requiring the repair of Confucian temples to apply for subsidies.
Nevertheless, many officials and commoners in the Jin period did not support temple-school construction and renovation. Some high-ranking political figures did not fully endorse state educational policies, many officials showed limited enthusiasm, and segments of the populace also adopted a passive stance. In the Jin context, negative opinions regarding temple school construction seem to have found a greater opportunity of surfacing; this not only posed an obstacle to construction and renovation but also reflects the diversity of attitudes among officials and local society.