宋代官員對於農業依賴商業的認知──農本主義的反思

Statesmen’s Understanding of Agricultural Dependence on the Commodity Economy in Song China: A Reflection on the “Agricultural Foundation” Ideology

楊承叡(Cheng-Jui Yang)

指導教授 ： 梁庚堯

國立臺灣大學/文學院/歷史學研究所/碩士(2014年)

https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU.2014.00387

摘要

摘要

帝制中國的士人菁英與政府組織，其對民間商業活動的觀感究竟如何？關於這個大問題一個簡單的答覆，是學界使用了很久的「重農抑商」（或稱「重本抑末」）一詞。它由於散見於官員言論、政府詔令，因此說官員「有重農抑商的觀念」是一種很安全的講法，但卻也含糊不清，究竟這類詞彙想要表達的是什麼意思？具體的特徵為何？它和我們習慣上說的以農為本、農本主義（本文統稱為「農本商末」）又有什麼不同？學界一般不會去區別古時的「重農抑商」和「農本商末」觀念有什麼不同，或者認為，「重農抑商」根源於以農為本、以工商為末的偏頗思維，是比「農本商末」更為激進、視商業更負面的態度。但筆者以為不是如此，透過考察一個筆者心目中的關鍵環節──對於客觀上農業依賴商業的情形，官員有多少認識，我希望能說服讀者能重新考慮一些不同的可能性。

學界對古代「抑商」觀念的想像並不一致，彼此間對史料上的「抑末類用詞」想要表達的意涵為何，也缺乏有效的標準，至於這類用語本身在古文中的使用，亦不夠統一、明確。然而這些用語卻成了古人「抑商」、「輕商」的主要證據。首先，如果古人只是把「本末」的思維套到農商關係上，則並無輕視商業的意涵；此外，宋代官員認為商業不如農業重要，同時卻也十分在乎商業的好壞。這兩點先確認之後，筆者想釐清「抑末類用詞」的宋代語意，以及新法「抑末」的性質，勾勒出一個和今天重商觀念全然不同的重視商業模式，並解釋它的原因。

論文內容可以分作兩個層次。就古人對現實的認知情形進行評估，構成了本文的第一層內容。希望對於這些評估的討論，能讓我們對宋人的商業觀念有較「抑商」、「輕商」、「重商」這類概括性用語更為細膩的理解。此外，綜合這些討論，筆者也發展了一個推論，構成本文較為激進的第二層內容：「農本商末」的思維方式，它自身已是宋代重商傾向充分必要的原因（necessary and sufficient condition），雖然還可能有其他因素促成了對商業的重視，但這些解釋策略在知識上都是多餘的。

關鍵字

農本 ； 重農 ； 抑商 ； 抑末 ； 輕商 ； 重商 ； 商業觀 ； 經濟思想 ； 本末 ； 商人地位

並列摘要

Abstract

What was the perspective of the government and the elite on commercial activities in imperial china? An simple answer to this big question is the term “Chung nung I shang”(重農抑商)(literal translation “emphasize agriculture and restrain commerce”), or “Chung Pen I Mo”(重本抑末)(“emphasize the root and restrain the branches”). Due to the widespread use of such terms in edicts or statesmen’s discourses, it is safe to assume that the statesmen held the belief of “Chung nung I shang”. However, the saying itself is an ambiguous statement—what is the precise meaning of this linguistic practice? What are its concrete traits? What is the difference between “Chung nung I shang” and the more commonly used “Agricultural Foundation” ideology(以農為本、農本主義)? In general, the two terms are not distinguished within academia. Some scholars that perceive the two as different believe the former to have originated from the latter. The latter views agriculture as root and industry or commerce as branches, whereas the former is a more radical idea that discriminates against commerce. The author would like to offer a different interpretation by examining a crucial question—how did those statesmen understand the dependence of agriculture on the commodity economy—one may realize the possibility of a different interpretation.

In academia, the term “I-Shang”(抑商) can be interpreted quite differently. The actual meaning of “I-Mo(抑末) type terms” in historical materials is also very ambiguous in academic texts as there lacks an effective standard to examine the word’s usage. Nevertheless, such historical linguistic practice constitutes the main evidence that the ancient Chinese believed in “I-Shang”(抑商) or “Ching-Shang”(輕商)( literal translation “disdain commerce”). First, if the ancient Chinese simply applied the “root and branch” analogy to agriculture and commerce, there is no implication of a negative connotation. Secondly, even though statesmen in Song China thought commerce was less important than agriculture, they took the health of commerce seriously. Once these two points are established, the author intend to clarify the meaning of “I-Mo(抑末) type terms” in Song Dynasty and the characteristic of “I-Mo(抑末)” idea in Wang An-shi’s political reform and then depict and explain the pattern to emphasize commerce at that time.

This study constitutes two layers. The first estimates the statesmen’s understanding of the economic reality in Song China. Discussions brought forth in this estimate aim to further understanding of their perception towards commerce beyond literal translation of the previously mentioned terms. Furthermore, discussions in the first layer leads to the argument in the second layer—“Agricultural Foundation” ideology(農本主義) itself was a necessary and sufficient condition that prompted the emphasis on commerce in Song china. There may be other factors that resulted in such perspective, but they are redundant explanations.

並列關鍵字

restrain commerce ； indifference to commerce ； agriculture ； agrarianism ； Merchant status

參考文獻

李滌生，《荀子集釋》。台北：台灣學生書局，1979。

余英時，《中國近世宗教倫理與商人精神（增訂版）》。台北：聯經，1986。

林劍鳴，《新編秦漢史》。台北：五南，1992。

梁庚堯，《南宋的農村經濟》。台北：聯經，1984。

蔡文地，《宋代勸農文之研究》。台灣大學碩士論文，2007。