兩晉不鑄幣政策與長期通貨緊縮—兼論魯褒〈錢神論〉

Abstract

晚近逐漸出現一種觀點，認為晉代雖以布帛等實物為交易媒介，但錢幣的使用依然頻繁，故仍屬於一個貨幣經濟的金融環境；西晉魯褒〈錢神論〉為該說主要論據之一。本文根據考古資料與文獻證據反駁這個論點。史籍中「晉氏不鑄錢，後經寇戎水火，耗散沈鑠，所失歲多」等記載，以及眾多考古資料的證據，證明兩晉面臨錢幣不足、通貨緊縮的困局，因此不可能出現健全的貨幣經濟。另一方面，西晉自武帝開國，由於帝王之顢頇、朝政之頹廢以及士風之貪鄙，「公卿世族，豪侈相高，政教陵遲」，因此貪墨成風，貨賂公行。正由於貨幣上「錢重物輕」，以及政治上「官以賄成，位以錢獲，囚以貨生，獄以幣解」這兩項因素，遂出現「錢」可以成為「神」的現象。魯褒〈錢神論〉屬典型的諷刺之作，所反映的其實是司馬氏政權底下，朝政士風的腐敗和經濟上的通貨緊縮，而非貨幣經濟的發達。兩晉的不鑄幣政策造成長期通貨緊縮，使得自然經濟模式更為僵固，實物貨幣的時程因之延長，為南北朝社會經濟發展的遲滯埋下了伏筆。

Some scholars have recently contended that during the Jin Dynasty(266~420), although cloth and other in-kind as mediums of exchange werecommon, money was still frequently used, and that period remained a monetized financial environment. Lu Bao’s “Chienshen Lun” (“Money God Treatise”) 魯褒錢神論is raised as one of the main proofs for this view.However, there is much textual and archaeological evidences to show thatduring the Jin money was scarce and so coins were expensive, and that the deflationary cycles made it was impossible to develop a sound monetaryeconomy. Furthermore, under emperor Wu of the Jin, political decadence and bureaucratic greed increased greatly. Since coins were expensive and politicalcorruption was rampant, money could become viewed as a god. But this had little to do with the situation of the monetary economy.Lu Bao’s irony Chienshen Lun, in fact, reflects the current environment of political corruption and deflation, rather than a well-developed monetaryeconomy. The Jin policy of “no minting” caused long-term deflation, and it thus made the natural economic model more rigid and extended its lifespan.