Abstract: The legitimacy of Emperor Yongzheng's succession to the imperial throne has been a controversial issue among Qing historians since the early 20thcentury． Those scholars who hold the view that his 14 th brother was originally the designated heir by Emperor Kangxi，but Yongzheng usurped the throne through devious means． One version of the “usurpation theory ” is that Yongzheng had first stolen his 14th brother's name and made it to be his own，while at the same time fabricated a new name———Yun-ti———for his 14th brother in order to cover up the illegitimate nature of his throne． However，their findings are altogether erroneous because they failed to find out the 14 thbrother's name from the Zongshi Yudie ( Genealogy of the Imperial House) ． On the other hand，scholars who hold the view that Yongzheng's throne was indeed legitimate and the change of names among his brothers was simply atraditional practice under the imperial institution． They identified the original name of the 14 th brother from the Zongshi Yudie． This article is intended to be a critical review of the historical sources used by both sides of the scholars．

摘要： 雍正帝继位后,康熙十四子"胤祯"更名"允禵"的问题,曾作为持雍正继位"窜立说"学者们的一个有力证据。其实他们的"求证"只不过是利用"次等史料"来证明了十四子的名字曾经是"胤祯"的史实,而没有能证明十四子出生后的"原名"就是胤祯。不但如此,他们对允禵更名与雍正继位问题也找不到任何关系。本文考订了解决皇子更名问题最具权威性的史料——皇室玉牒,结合康熙朝满汉融合中政治文化变迁的背景,深入与十四子更名有关史料中的语境与情境,阐明了持雍正继位"合法说"学者们根据皇室玉牒对十四子胤祯改讳允禵问题的研究成果,进而化解了他们在此问题上关于史料解读的分歧,最后也试图对他们共同遗留的"未决"问题提供答案。