主管:教育部
主办:中国人民大学
ISSN 1002-8587  CN 11-2765/K
国家社科基金资助期刊

journal6 ›› 2018, Vol. 0 ›› Issue (4): 36-47.

• 学术专论 • 上一篇    下一篇

清代缙绅录史料价值的检讨——以所载“各省额中举人名数”为例

  

  1. 中国人民大学历史系
  • 出版日期:2018-12-05 发布日期:2018-12-05
  • 作者简介:张瑞龙(1979—),男,中国人民大学历史系副教授,北京 100872;zhangruilong08@ruc.edu.cn

An Evaluation of the Historical Value of the Jinshenlu :The Example of Data for Scholars Who Passed the Provincial Exam

  1. Department of History, Renmin University of China
  • Online:2018-12-05 Published:2018-12-05
  • About author:ZHANG Ruilong (Department of History, Renmin University of China; zhangruilong08@ruc.edu.cn)

摘要: 清代缙绅录中的“各省额中举人名数”,有两个固化的名数系统:一是乾隆中期到咸丰八年,沿用乾隆二十九年宝名堂刊本所载名数,该系统应是采用乾隆十五年至二十七年间某科乡试各省取中的举人数。二是光绪十一年冬季荣禄堂刊本所载名数,该系统采录光绪八年壬午科乡试各省取中的举人数,被此后不同坊刻本缙绅录中广泛载录,甚至在科举停废后仍然沿用。在此之间的缙绅录,虽有少数省份的“额中举人名数”变动不居,但无法反映晚清朝廷因推行捐输乡试广额政策导致各省历届乡试中额剧烈变动的真实情况。故缙绅录中的“各省额中举人名数”,不仅与各省乡试实际取中举人数无涉,而且资讯采录偶然、随意,不具典型性和代表性。清代缙绅录所载各类资讯的史料价值和局限,值得研究者警惕。

Abstract: There were two methods for compiling the number of scholars who passed the provincial examination in Jinshenlu. One method followed from the middle period of Qianlong reign until 1858 used data from the Baomingtang which was published in 1764. This method utilized data for the provincial examination from each province between the years1750 to 1762. The second method used data compiled in the publication Ronglutang in the 1885 for provincial examinations in each province in 1882. This system was widely adopted in different editions of Jinshenlu available in the street stalls and it continued until abolition of the imperial examination system. Although there were many changes in number of degree holders in several provinces, the figures still did not reflect the real situation. There were acute fluctuations in the number of the provincial degrees after the Qing government implemented the policy of increasing the quota of provincial degrees available for sale. Therefore, the quota for degrees in each province not only had nothing to do with actual number of scholars in the provincial examinations, but also occasionally was arbitrary and untypical of reality. Researchers should be aware of the historical value and the limitations of various categories of information recorded in Jinshenlu.