岳飛－從史學史和思想史來看

Yueh Fei-An Analysis in Historiography and Intellectual History

劉子健(James T. C. Liu)

《中國學人》 2期 (1970/09) Pp. 43-58+ap3

https://doi.org/10.30187/CS.197009_(2).0007

並列摘要

Yueh Fei (1103-41), eulogized and mythologized in history, poetry, vernacular literature, plays, and temples in several cities, is as strong a symbol of loyalty among the Chinese even today as he has been through the centuries. Not yet highly regarded in the Southern Sung, his standing began to rise under the Mongol occupation and reached its zenith during the Ming. The Ch'ing or Manchu government used some manipulation in its treatment of him: it allowed him great social popularity but excluded him from official worship. During World Ward II, Yueh Fei attained even wider acclaim. His famous patriotic poem became a popular song. A standard biography in Chinese appeared in 1955, followed by an article in English in 1962 (H. Wilhelm, ＂From Myth to Myth: the Case of Yuch Fei's Biography,＂ Confucian Personalities, pp. 146-161, and in a 1964 paperback, Chinese Confuscianism and Civilization, ed. A. F. Wright, pp. 211-226). However, the most relevant question at the present time is the one of loyalty: is it personally loyal to the supreme ruler or is it a group loyalty akin to patriotism and nationalism? The present essay analyses intellectual history, with particular emphasis upon historiography. Most traditional historians agree that the responsibility of concluding a humiliating peace lay more with Emperor Kao-tsung than with his chief councillor Ch'in Kuei, but a large number of them blame Ch'in Kuei for the death of Yueh Fei. Only a few eminent Ch'ing historians and one outstanding playwright in late Ming pointed out that peace did not necessarily lead to the death of Yuch Fei. It was still the emperor who, being suspicious of Yueh Fei, killed him as an example to instill fear among all the military men. Ch'in Kuei was only the scapegoat. Most important of all, the attitude of scholar-officials in Sung times was hardly discussed, as if they had had nothing to do with the case. This essay finds them to be a crucial factor. They upheld the emperor's policy of gathering all military power, and supported the principle of civilian control and the ideal of scholarly generals. None of them said a word in an effort to save Yuch Fei. Afterwards, Chu Hsi, the great neo-Confucian master, praised Yueh Fei for knowing Confucian principles but maintained that he was a rather arrogant military fellow, much below the standard of scholar-official. Some officials even called him a peasant. Again, according to Chu Hsi, the emperor had to be obeyed like a father and death through observance of ethics was a proper fate. The case actually pointed up a great dilemma in Confucianism. Wang Fu-chih, the great Ch'ing scholar on the Sung, commented that Yueh Fei should have retired, saved himself, and waited for future opportunities. He realized that loyalty in all matters is right. If the supreme ruler is wrong, one should wait for the future, and there will be another ruler.