元代族群分類的演變

族群身分在蒙古統治下的中國 (1206–1368) 是個重要的課題。無論是任官、法律刑罰還是科舉考試，不同的族群享有不一樣的待遇，據此，族群分類成為蒙古統治的核心理念。我們甚至可以說，在蒙古統治下的中國，族群身分在政治、法律制度的重要性遠超過其他朝代。這種依照族群身分進行差別待遇的制度，過往被視為一種族群歧視，並進一步被學者歸納為「四等人制」，意即官方將帝國麾下的所有臣民，由上至下分成四等族群。這四等族群當中，蒙古地位最高，色目第二，其次是漢人，南人則居於最底層。按照「四等人制」的說法，蒙古、色目在任官、法律、科舉考試等方面都享有更優渥的待遇，漢人、南人則必須面對仕途升遷的天花板、較嚴苛的刑罰以及較困難的考試題目。長期以來，「四等人制」是學術界的主流論述，但至於二十世紀最後十年，陸續有學者開始質疑「四等人制」的正確性。這些學者提出了許多新史料和新詮釋，主張「四等人制」不過是一種靠不住的理論假設，既非官方明文規定的制度，也不能準確地詮釋元代的族群關係。本文的主題即是圍繞這個學術爭議，希望能解決當中有關族群分類的議題。透過本文研究，可以發現元代族群分類有幾個重要的特徵：第一，元代的族群分類形式十分多樣，並不都按照「四等人制」的方式分類。第二，前四汗時期 (1206–1259) 至元代滅亡的這段歷史中，族群分類的形式、標準經過多次改變。換言之，不存在一個從一而終的分類體系。第三，在進行族群分類的過程中，帝國統治者以及臣民，因各種利益考量，嘗試去更改外族或是自身的族群身分。這些策略，最終促使某些族群改變了原先的族群身分。明朝建立後 (1368)，元代的族群分類體系遭到棄用，但改變族群身分的策略為明朝的皇帝和臣民所繼承。換言之，明朝接納越來越多族群成為「漢人」。據此，前四汗時期至明初的這段歷史，可說是東亞族群身分重組的關鍵期。

關鍵字

元代；蒙古帝國；族群分類；四等人制；色目人

並列摘要

Ethnic identity was a critical issue for China under Mongol rule (1206–1368). From official recruitment and the civil service exam to the legal and penal system, the Yuan government treated people differently according to their ethnic identity. It seems that ethnic classification was at the core of Mongol rule. It is appropriate to say that the importance of ethnic identity in politics and legal systems was much higher in Mongol-era China than in many other dynasties. People often refer to such institutional differentiation as a form of ethnic discrimination. More specifically, many scholars posit that there was a “quadripartite system” (sidenren zhi), in which the Yuan government divided all of its subjects into four categories, with the Mongols on top, followed by Semu people, then Han Chinese (who had lived in the north), and finally the Southerners. According to this theory, the Mongols and the Semu people enjoyed privileges at court, in law, and even in the civil service exam. In contrast, Han people and Southerners faced a ceiling in their official career advancement, harsher punishment in law, and more difficult questions in the civil service exam. This understanding had been received wisdom for a long time, but scholars since the last decade of the twentieth century have been questioning its accuracy. With new sources and new interpretations, these scholars argue that the quadripartite system was an unwarranted theory that neither coincides with the ethnic categories in Yuan’s official regulations nor represents the reality of ethnic relations faithfully. In response to this ongoing debate, this thesis attempts to solve, in particular, the question of Yuan ethnic categories and reaches the following conclusions. First, the methods for ethnic classification were diverse. Many ethnic categories in use did not coincide with those in the quadripartite system. Second, from the establishment of the Mongol Empire to the end of the Yuan dynasty, both the criteria used in ethnic classification and the ways ethnic categories worked changed frequently. In other words, there was not a single, consistent system that persisted from the beginning to the end. Third, while it appeared that there was general consensus about major ethnic categories, the rulers and the subjects, out of various interests, often attempted to strategically change the ethnic identity of themselves or others. These strategies sometimes resulted in a permanent change of some groups’ ethnic identities. After 1368, the newly established Ming empire abandoned the Yuan’s ethnic classification. However, the Ming did inherit the strategic change of people’s ethnic identities as part of its political repertoire. In short, the Ming court accepted more and more ethnic groups to be part of the “Han” Chinese people. To sum up, the period from the Mongol Empire to early Ming witnessed the critical formation and reconstitution of ethnic categories in East Asia.