《关于施耐庵籍贯“习称”及其他》辨——再与莫其康先生商榷

Discussion on“Popularly Regarded Native Place of Shi Nai'an and Others”——Questions to Mo Qikang

《水浒传》作者施耐庵究竟是不是元末明初的苏北施彦端?马成生先生的《杭州与水浒》经过详细的考证,无可辩驳地证明《水浒传》作者是个长期生活于杭州的南方人,明人记载的"钱塘施耐庵"是可信的,《水浒传》作者与苏北施彦端没有任何联系。莫其康先生不认同马先生的说法,特撰《关于施耐庵籍贯"习称"及其他——与马成生先生商榷》一文予以驳斥。莫氏之文看似有理有据,然详加推敲,却是破绽连连。苏北施彦端与钱塘施耐庵根本不能"合一"。

Is Shi Nai’an and Shi Yanduan the same person? They are labeled respectively as author of W ater Margin and scholar of Northern Jiangsu in the late Yuan dynasty and early Ming dynasty. In Hangzhou and W ater Margin, Ma Chengsheng, through detailed research, indisputably proved that the author of W ate r Margin was a southerner, living in Hangzhou for a long time. What the scholars in the Ming dynasty recorded-Shi Nai’an was a man in Qiantang, is believable. The author of W ate r Margin has nothing to do with Shi Yanduan of Northern Jiangsu. Mo Qikang disagreed with Ma Chengsheng, and wrote an article entitled“Popularly Regarded Native Place of Shi Nai’an-Consulting with a Chengsheng”to refute Ma’s argument. Mo’s article seems reasonable and well-grounded at the first sight, but it has many loopholes when carefully examined. Shi Yanduan of Northern Jiangsu and Shi Nai’an of Qiantang is not at all the same person.