契丹“二税户”问题发覆

A Textual Criticism of One Record about Khitan Double-Tax Payers

头下军州“二税户”仅见于元好问《中州集·李承旨晏》,一直以来,学者将其作为一条孤立“史料”反复使用,却从未有人考证整个小传的史源。问题症结在于,《中州集》所叙李晏履历总体不出许安仁撰《李晏神道碑》和《金史·李晏传》范围,然而元好问却把原始史文提到的“二税户”调整提前,似是妄加释义,最大的漏洞是,所称“大定初,一切免为民”难以与上文头下户之定义相衔接。此八字之义当指《金史·食货志·户口》“大定二年”条,该条实际追述历史渊源——辽人佞佛“多以良民赐诸寺,分其税一半输官,一半输寺,故谓之二税户”。循此线索,将《食货志》置于整个志书编纂脉络中加以考察,可考证出它应该是元末史官摘录诸帝实录相关条文编成的。如此,《食货志·户口》关于“二税户”的记载不仅有权威的史料来源,也符合世宗、章宗两朝屡次释免寺院奴婢为良人的历史背景。据此,本文结合辽代石刻论证寺院“二税户”能够成立,而《辽史·食货志》“凡市井之赋,各归头下,惟酒税赴纳上京,此分头下军州赋为二等也”乃是指商税,与二税户田赋交纳方式无涉。元好问所谓头下奴婢“输租为官,且纳课给其主,谓之二税户”则成悬疑。

Digging into the historical records such as the treatises on economy inHistory of LiaoandHistory of Jin,the present paper contends that the double-tax payers referred to Khitan residents who simultaneously paid tax to the government and Buddhist monasteries rather than those who paid commercial taxes to the central and local governments and thus concludes that one piece of well-known record in Yuan Haowen’s anthology is dubious.