晚清江南社會的紳權與信任危機：以常熟為中心

十九世紀，大清王朝陷入全面危機，中國社會在內憂外患的衝擊下走向近代轉型之路。在此過程中，國家與地方權力格局的轉變尤其受到關注。一般認為，自嘉慶至道光年間，士紳階層在地方事務中的角色愈發重要，而咸同之際的太平天國戰爭與地方軍事化進一步推動了紳權擴張。「同光中興」時期，公共領域、菁英能動主義在縣以下的地方社會更為彰顯，這一趨勢一直延續到清末民初。此後，日益加速的現代化、城市化與國家政權建設導致知識菁英外流、鄉土意識淡漠，地方文化權力網絡遭到破壞。然而學界在考察十九世紀的地方主義、菁英能動主義時，往往只關心自上而下賦予紳權的合法性，忽視地方社會對士紳的信任與認可度。本文通過對常熟地區日記、筆記、方志、歌謠等文獻的解讀，揭示菁英能動性的局限，以及地方社會對公共領域中活躍人物的極端不信任。本文認為，江南地方社會的渙散至遲在十九世紀已經出現，基層行政中「由下而上」的軌道早已失效。紳權上升非但未能摶聚社區，反導致輿情激變。無法彌縫的信任危機也阻礙了解決社會問題的可能性。因此，二十世紀初的地方失序不完全是近代化、城市化或國家政權建設對基層社會衝擊所改造的結果，同時也是十九世紀本土歷史發展的積累與延續。

關鍵字

晚清；江南；紳權；信任危機

並列摘要

The transformation of the power relations between state and society during China's crisis-ridden nineteenth century has long drawn scholarly attention. It is generally accepted that from the Jiaqing reign, the gentry class played an increasingly significant role in local administration. During the Restoration period under the Tongzhi and Guangxu emperors, the public sphere and elite activism further developed on the district level until rapid urbanization, modernization, and state-building in late Qing and early Republic period exacerbated the outflow of educated elites and their sense of local identity declined, thereby destroying the cultural nexus of power. However, in discussions of localism and elite activism, scholars usually focus solely on the legitimacy of gentry power granted by the state, but ignore the problem of public trust from below. Through close reading of diaries, private narratives, gazetteers, and ballads, this article examines Jiangnan society and the gentry-society relationship from local perspectives, revealing the limitations of gentry mobilization and the popular distrust towards figures who were active in the managerial public sphere. The fragmentation of local community was already evident in the nineteenth century, and the bottom-up channel of local administration lost its effectiveness. The increase of gentry power could not unite the community but rather caused even more popular protest instead. The trust crisis also offset various efforts to solve problems. The conditions of the early twentieth century thus not only resulted from urbanization, modernization, and state-building, but also from the continuation of local historical trends rooted in the previous century.