本文是對劉光臨〈市場、戰爭和財政國家──對南宋賦稅問題的再思考〉一文對拙作《宋代地方財政史研究》提出批評的回應。劉文關於拙作未能考慮物價上漲因素等批評是合理的，但核之於南宋端平以前物價長期平穩的史實，國家財政收入並未如劉文所言「不增反減」，而是明顯持續遞增。此外，關於福州、連州兩個地區兩稅實際徵收額的案例分析，以及榷利收入實際負擔者的問題，劉文由於未能深入了解相關制度，對這些議題都存有誤解。南宋國家的財稅制度，有與物價互動、相應調整的機制。因此，應該透過史籍記載的表面信息，深入分析國家制度的真實內容，來做出對歷史的歸納，不應僅從理論出發演繹歷史。希望劉文對拙作的批評，能有助於良好學術批評風氣之形成。

This paper is a response to “Warfare, Markets and the Fiscal State: A Reconsideration of Southern Song Taxation and Finance” by Guanglin William Liu, which criticized my book, A Study of Local Financial System of the Song State. Liu was certainly correct when he pointed out that long term inflation should be taken into consideration while accounting the tax revenue, but the stable commodity prices during the years 1127-1234 could not support his assumption that the tax revenues of the Song state were decreased instead of increased. Liu misapprehended the case studies of Fuzhou and Lianzhou, as well as the actual taxpayers of the state income from monopoly commodities too, because he failed to understand the Song fiscal system in more detail. Actually, the Song state was quite capable of keeping its tax revenue in step with the long term inflation, if not of manipulating it. In the field of financial history of traditional China, induction based on a careful decoding of historical records might be much more important than deduction from certain set hypotheses. It is expected that Liu’s paper will be a good example to scholars of how to make academic criticism more professionally.

宋代；兩稅；徵榷；物價

Song China；Two Seasons Tax；Monopoly System；price