魏晋南北朝“吏户”问题四献疑

Four Questions about Clerical Officials in Wei-Jin-Southern-Northern Dynasties

长沙走马楼吴简面世之后,我根据这一崭新资料对于传统"吏户"论重新审视,发表了《吏户"献疑——从长沙走马楼吴简谈起》,认为从吴简观之,吏、民的户籍被混合编制于地方基层乡里,不存在单独编制的"吏户",吏与民同样享有平等的经济、政治乃至文化等方面的权利和应尽的义务,吏的地位还略高于普通编户民,表明当时并不存在地位低于普通编户民、另外编籍的所谓"吏户"。此后十余年发表的几篇坚持"吏户"论的文章,虽然举出了一些似是而非的资料和论据加以辩解,但是并没有举出有说服力、足以否定我的质疑的新旧史料或论据,以驳倒拙文所阐述的基本观点。由此而派生的学风问题却并不为少,其中可以孟彦弘先生为代表,他将"吏户"论关于"吏"有单独的户籍、地位低于普通编户民的基本观点加以阉割,认为这与"吏户"论没有"必然联系",而吏的"身份性"才是"吏户"本质的似是而非的孟氏"吏户"论,以回避"吏户"论的要害。但是在为其"吏户"论辩解时,却以"吏"的户籍和地位问题作为论据,从而陷入自相矛盾的逻辑混乱之中。为了驳倒笔者对于"吏户"论的质疑,他又将这一学术问题引向个人治学"思路"问题中,试图从贬低这一质疑的学术创新以达到维护"吏户"论的目的。

Since the bamboo slips about Wu Kingdom from Changsha Zoumalou were unearthed,the author of the present paper re- examined the traditional concept of ＂Li hu（ the registered Chinese ancient people whose status is lower than the common people） ＂ on the basis of these new bamboo slips and published the paper ＂Query on ‘Li hu＇ ——From Banboo Slips about Wu Kingdom from Changsha Zoumalou＂,thinking that the family register of ＂li＂（ Chinese ancient officials） and＂Min＂（ common people） are all compiled in local township,enjoying the equal economic,political even culture rights and fulfilling the same obligations. The status of ＂Li＂is a little higher than the common people,but there is no existence of so- called ＂Li hu＂whose status is lower than the common people and their family registers are established separately. Ever since then,there are still some papers persisting in the theory of ＂Li hu＂by citing some specious materials and arguments to justify. Whereas these materials and arguments are not strong and persuasive enough to deny the author＇ s query and refute the basic arguments of his paper. It still derives a lot of academic problems. Take the theory of Mr. MENG Yan- hong as a representation. On one hand,in order to avoid the crucial point of＂Li hu＂theory,he deprives the basic arguments of＂Li hu＂regarding ＂Li＂has separated family register and the status is lower than the common people and insists on his own specious ＂Li hu＂theory regarding it has no ＂necessary connection＂with ＂Li hu＂theory while the ＂identity＂of ＂Li＂is the essence of ＂Li hu＂. On the other side,in order to refute this author＇ s query on ＂Li hu＂theory,he distorts the academic problem to the personal research ＂thought＂problem,tending to depreciate the academic innovation of this author＇ s query to maintain his own theory.