论明代士大夫的“靖难”史书写

On the Historical Writings about "Jing Nan" by Scholar-officials in Ming Dynasty

明廷官方与民间有关“靖难”史的书写可谓截然对立:明官方极力美化明成祖、丑化明惠帝君臣,民间则反其道而行之。明代士大夫在书写策略上改弦更张,同时美化明成祖与明惠帝君臣,试图以此调和双方的矛盾。为此,明代士大夫在“靖难”史书写中提出“成祖宽仁论”“天命论”“事功论”“建文逊国论”等论述。然而,明官方在为明惠帝正名的问题上始终表现消极,民间也继续歌颂明惠帝君臣、排斥明成祖,致使士大夫的调和书写沦为空谈。民间的书写成为后人对“靖难”史的集体记忆。

The Ming court and the public held opposite views to each other on the history writings of"Jing Nan"The Ming court tried its best to Praise Ming Chengzu and smear Emperor Jianwen,while the public did the opposite.So scholar-officials chose to modify their narrative strategies,trying to"reconcile"the contradictions related to Emperor Ming Chengzu and Emperor Jianwen,so as to eliminate the public′s dissatisfaction towards Emperor Ming Chengzu.To this end,they put forward a series of discussions about"Chengzu′s Theory of Mercy","Destiny Theory","Merit Theory",and"Emperor Jianwen′s Abdication Theory",etc.However,the Ming court had always been negative in correcting the name of Emperor Jianwen,while the public chose to sing praises of Emperor Jianweng and his Subordinates and disapprouing Emperor Chengzu,thus making the"reconciliation"narrative of scholar-officials turn into empty talk.The opposition writings of civil society has become the collective memory of the history of"Jing Nan".