論「李善長案」的形成與性質－從《昭示姦黨錄》的重構切入分析

《昭示姦黨錄》為太祖（朱元璋，1328-1398，1368-1398在位）針對洪武二十三年（「李善長案」而編的審訊1390）供詞，唯是書流傳不廣，今已亡佚，致使論者闕如，所聞匱乏。今論此案者又多以《明太祖實錄》或《明史》為據，然錢謙益（1582-1664）早於《太祖實錄辨證》揭櫫實錄錯謬，故欲探討此案真相，則須從原典著手。唯《昭示姦黨錄》今已散佚，錢謙益《太祖實錄辨證》的節錄成為現今唯一可靠根據。故本文將以此為綱，並對照早於《昭錄》逾月而成的「庚午詔書」，藉著分析兩者之異同、矛盾，從而說明「李善長案」之形成，乃經歷了牽連、合理化的「塑造」過程。而這正好揭示此案並不盡是太祖設計。太祖雖有除去功臣之心，但其實功臣涉案的時間、情由，錯綜複雜，難以一概而論，而《昭示姦黨錄》正是為了給予此案一合理的官方解釋。要之，透過仔細辨析昭錄，則可深入瞭解這宗太祖剷除功臣之黨案。

關鍵字

《昭示姦黨錄》；明太祖；李善長；胡惟庸案；功臣

並列摘要

The lost Record of Denouncing Treacherous Factions, included the confessions from the purge of Li Shanzhang. Modern discussions of this record are primarily based upon the Veritable Record s of Ming Taizu (Ming Taizu shilu) and the History of Ming (Ming shi). During the late Ming and early Qing, Qian Qianyi raised criticisms regarding the veracity of these accounts, and his excerpts found in the Investigation of Taizu Veritable Records (Taizu shilu bianzheng) remain the only known text of the narrative to survive. This paper attempts to recover the structure and content of the Record of Denouncing Treacherous Factions from Qian's work, and examines the formation and nature of the purge when compared with the ＂Imperial Edict of the Gengwu Year (1390).＂ The differences and conflicts between the two sources demonstrate that the purge was not solely arranged by Taizu, but indirectly involved several meritorious officials. As a result, the Record of Denouncing Treacherous Factions was an effort to create a tenable official explanation for the complex set of arrangements and interests pertaining to the purge. A close reading of these records shows the measures undertaken by Taizu to consolidate his regime by uprooting meritorious officials during the late Hongwu era.