秦稱戎狄——秦人的文化形構剖析

Abstract

本文以戰國時期文獻中東方列國稱秦為戎狄的現象，作為剖析秦人文化形構的綫索，從秦人的起源論述、文化面貌以及秦文化變革中的禮制轉型等面向，探討在秦人崛起歷程中秦人文化結構的內涵，時間跨度為西周中葉至秦統一天下，空間則主要在關中地區及甘肅東部。 全文除卻〈緒論〉與〈結論〉共分三章。〈緒論〉指出本文的問題意識在學界相關研究中的定位，以及界定本文的研究對象及若干概念。第一章〈東周時期列國對秦人的描述〉指出「秦稱戎狄」這個現象，界定文獻中戎狄、夷狄的所指，並解釋這類描述在戰國晚期國際局勢下的意義。第二章〈秦人起源論述的形塑與文化面貌〉更進一步從秦人的起源論述，分析兩周之際秦與華夏及戎狄間的複雜關係。秦的文化性質在於上下階層文化取向存在差異，秦上層階級深受華夏影響，但下層階級包含相當比例的戎狄族群，並雜染戎俗。第三章〈秦文化變革中的禮制轉型—咸陽地區的仿銅陶禮器墓析論〉從考古學的視角審視與「秦稱戎狄」現象同時期的關中地區的物質文化。以秦文化變革中的禮制轉型為背景，根據仿銅陶禮器器型及器類搭配方式的變化，論證秦傳統禮制的消失，新禮制的形成。 本文主張「秦稱戎狄」雖直接反映秦獨大的戰國晚期國際局勢，但考察秦人崛起的歷史情境，亦能夠從其文化特質，回應「秦稱戎狄」這類描述。例如，秦上層的華夏化及源自東方的族源論述，或許為重建族群認同、攀附華夏族群的一種表現。秦下層則深受戎俗影響，人口雜有戎狄，這一方面說明秦的文化性質有階層差異，另一方面也是構成「秦稱戎狄」的客觀理由。此外，秦文化變革含有「禮制轉型」的傾向。在戰國中期以降，秦文化中於春秋時代曾受西周晚期影響的禮制因素消失，呈現斷裂的發展。此斷裂性與文化差異反應在秦文化中的仿銅陶禮器，此較之於同時期東方地區呈連續性的發展，有很大的區別。這種與東方迥異的禮制發展軌跡或許亦是致使「秦稱戎狄」的因素。

The thesis discusses the cultural formation of Qin by tracing how the Qin people was depicted as barbarians（Rong-di, 戎狄）in the contemporary historical texts. For decades, historians considered the portrayal of Qin as barbarians in them as a proof that the Qin people descended from or were related to the barbarians. However, this only appeared during the late Warring-States-period and cannot be traced back to the earlier Springs-and-Autumns-period. It seems that the depiction and perception of Qin as barbarians is a complex historical event. It inspires me to analyze the cultural formation of Qin by examining the term in its historical context. The discussion on the historical context of the term is divided into three parts. First, Qin was not described as barbarians in the texts until it has outgrown the Eastern polities during the Warring-States-period. Second, the historical truth concerning whether Qin originated from the barbarians cannot be settled on solely by the discourse on the origin of Qin in Shi ji Qin benji（史記秦本紀）. Qin was no doubt culturally affected by the Northwestern barbarian tribes. Though the upper class of Qin was much under the influence of Hua-Xia（華夏）, the lower class, in contrast, retained some cultural characteristics similar to them. Third, from archaeological evidence, a ritual transformation occurred contemporaneous with the reformation of Qin culture during the late Warring-States-period. It can be detected in the changing characteristics of ritual bronze and ceramic vessels found in the tombs on the Wei River basin. In fact, the portrayal of Qin as barbarians reflected the international situation in the Warring-States-period China. As the Qin polity became powerful and prosperous, the Eastern polities dreaded the consequences of being annexed by it, and they used the derogatory term to formulate an ideology against it. Nevertheless, the portrayal was not without foundation: it was fostered by the fact that the Qin polity controlled part of the population of the Northwestern barbarian tribes. Cultural differences existed between Qin and the Eastern polities. During the late Warring-States-period, Qin underwent the reformation enacted by Shang Yang（商鞅）; in the meantime, a ritual transformation also occurred, especially at Xianyang（咸陽）. The traditional ritual system of Qin was radically transformed into a new one. I regard these as the historical context in which Qin was depicted as barbarians by the texts.