文武糾結的困境─宋代的武舉與武學

The Dilemma of Recruiting Military Talent through Literary Approaches: The Military Examination and Military Academy in Song China

10.6253/ntuhistory.2004.33.01

方震華(Cheng-Hua Fang)

武舉 ； 武學 ； 文武關係 ； 宋代 ； 軍事教育 ； 兵學 ； civil-military relationship ； military learning ； military academy ； military examination ； Song dynasty ； military academy education

臺大歷史學報

33期（2004 / 06 / 01）

1 - 42

繁體中文

武舉和武學在宋代的制度化，是文士將讀書和科考的理念應用於武官選任制度的結果。倡議者期待透過學校教育與考試制度，選拔「知書之將」，以改善武官的素質。但是，以書本教育與紙筆考試選拔將才的結果，卻與設立的宗旨大異其趣。參與者大多數是受挫於文科考試的士人，他們對於軍事工作並無興趣，只是以武舉和武學作為求取官職的另一途徑。因此，武舉進士多半不願加入軍隊，只想尋找改換文階的機會。從北宋到南宋，武舉進士不願從軍的現象日益嚴重，就軍事層面而言，武舉的功能是隨著時間而遞減。 儘管在軍事層面上的效果有限，武舉與武學仍然持續運作直到南宋滅亡。這是因為這兩個制度兼具象徵意義與現實功能。武舉和武學代表政府對於「武」的重視，使宋朝具備「文武兼隆」的外貌，並可確立讀書有益於統兵的觀念，合理化文官對軍隊的掌控。在現實層面上，武舉為受挫於文舉的士人提供出路，減少科舉競爭的壓力，由於牽涉到眾多讀書人的利益，政府儘管對武舉的成效感到不滿，卻難以將其廢除。 武舉與武學的名不符實，顯現軍事知識在宋代尷尬的地位。文士提倡軍事之學，卻不肯承認「武」自有其學術體系和價值觀念，只想以「文」的理念來應付「武」的問題，致使「武」成為「文」的附庸，限制了整個國家在軍事頜域的發展空間。

In Song China, the recruitment of military officials and the training of martial talents experienced a new development, as the government established the military examination and the military academy. These two new institutions originated from the fact that while the civil elite controlled the Song government, they tried to apply their own value system to military fields. Based on the idea that military leadership derived from book learning, civil official established the military examination and academy to cultivate military talents through literary methods. To pass the military examination, the candidates had to possess literary talents and knowledge, so most participants were literati, who previously failed civil examination, and attempted to use the military examination and academy as an alternative to obtain official titles. Due to their civil identity, most military degree holders had little intention in a military career, instead eagerly sought any opportunity to transfer to civil posts. Although the government prohibited the taking of both civil and military examinations, this order was not followed. Because most military degree holders did not serve in the armies, the military examination made little influence on the Song military forces. Although the originally designed functions of military examination and academy were never fulfilled, these two institutes still existed until the end of the Southern Song, due to some non-military factors. To the civil elite, the establishment of the military examination and academy confirmed the opinion that military leadership was based on literary learning, which legitimized civil officials' authority on military affairs, These two institutions also caused the Song Empire to coincide with the traditional idealism that developments in civil and military affairs had equal importance to a country. Moreover, the growing number of literati intensified the competition of the civil service examination, so failed candidates needed an alternative to gain an official title, and the military examination offered this opportunity. Because the abolishment of the military examination would damage the benefits of many literati, no official dared to advocate this idea. From the military perspective, the Song civil elite's efforts on improving military recruitment were unsuccessful. The main factor causing this failure was that most civil officials overlooked the academic value of military knowledge and martial arts. The education of military academy did not develop its own academic system, therefore it was difficult to differentiate military academy education from that of other official schools which provided literary education. The students of military academy concentrated their efforts on preparing examination rather than learning the military abilities useful in battle fields. Although the Song government created the first military school in Chinese history, military study failed to become an independent discipline, but was subordinate to literary learning. Under this circumstance, the establishment of the military examination and academy mostly related to the benefits of literati, but failed to inspire a military education meaningful to the armies.

1. 元馬端臨(1987)。文獻通考。
2. 元脫脫(1983)。宋史。
3. 北宋余靖(1988)。武溪集。
4. 北宋李覯。旴江集。
5. 北宋蘇轍(1990)。蘇轍集。
6. 宋王之道。相山集。
7. 宋王洋。東牟集。
8. 宋王稱(1979)。東都事略。
9. 宋王應麟(1986)。玉海。
10. 宋宋敏求(1962)。宋大詔令集。
11. 宋李心傳(2000)。建炎以來朝野雜記。
12. 宋李心傳。建炎以來繫年要錄。
13. 宋李燾(1979)。續資治通鑑長編。
14. 宋杜大珪(1969)。名臣碑傳琬琰集。
15. 宋杜範。清獻集。
16. 宋周密(1983)。齊東野語。
17. 宋周應合(1980)。景定建康志。
18. 宋姚勉。雪坡集。
19. 宋范仲淹。范文正公集。
20. 宋章如愚(1992)。山堂考索。
21. 宋曾公亮。武經總要。
22. 宋趙汝愚(1970)。國朝諸臣奏議。
23. 宋劉宰。漫塘集。
24. 宋劉敞。公是集。
25. 宋蘇洵。嘉祐集。
26. 宋蘇舜欽(1984)。蘇學士集。
27. 宋蘇軾(1986)。蘇東坡全集。
28. 宋蘇頌。蘇魏公文集。
29. 明林世遠(1988)。姑蘇志。
30. 南宋朱熹(1967)。宋名臣言行錄。
31. 南宋李石。方舟集。
32. 南宋陳耆卿(1980)。嘉定赤城志。
33. 南宋程俱。北山集。
34. 南宋葉適(1974)。葉適集。
35. 南宋劉克莊。後村先生大全集。
36. 南宋樓鑰。攻媿集。
37. 南宋潛說友(1980)。咸淳臨安志。
38. 清徐松(1976)。宋會要輯稿。
39. 方震華, Cheng-hua(2001).Power Structures and Cultural Identities in Imperial China: Civil and Military Power from Late Tang to Early Song Dynasties (A. D. 875-1063).
40. 王?(1981)。燕翼貽謀錄。
41. 何忠禮(1992)。宋史選舉志補正。
42. 高明士(1989)。第一屆國際唐代學術會議論文集。
43. 陳志學(1988)。唐代武舉述論。四川大學學報，1988(4)，94-99。
44. 陳傅良。止齋集。
45. 華岳(1987)。翠微北征錄。
46. 楊康蓀(1985)。宋代武舉述略。中國史研究，1985(3)，49-61。
47. 翟汝文。忠惠集。
48. 綦崇禮。北海集。
49. 慕容彥逢。摛文堂集。
50. 歐陽守道。巽齋文集。
51. 鄭岳(1988)。莆陽文獻。

1. 陳安迪(2019)。北宋陣圖問題再檢討。漢學研究，37(2)，95-131。
2. 湯志傑(2014)。文明與暴力共存的弔詭︰從蹴鞠、擊鞠與捶丸的興衰管窺華夏文明的文明化歷程。文化研究，19，91-152。
3. 吳挺誌(2014)。北宋士人對「文臣統兵」的合理化論述。清華學報，44(4)，589-628。
4. 吳挺誌(2015)。北宋中後期文帥的任官分析：以陝西的軍政類安撫使為例（1041-1125）。東吳歷史學報，33，95-152。
5. (2006)。軍務與儒業的矛盾—衡山趙氏與晚宋統兵文官家族。新史學，17(2)，55-126。
6. (2007)。「拔卒為將？」─試論宋代「轉員」之制的形成背景。中正歷史學刊，10，201-227。