唐仗内教坊及中唐教坊合署问题考辩  

A Research on the In-court Imperial Music Office and the Merging Controversy in the Tang Dynasty

作　　者：左汉林[1] 

机构地区：[1]中央财经大学文化与传媒学院,北京100081

出　　处：《中国文学研究》2015年第4期47-52,66,共7页Research of Chinese Literature

基　　金：国家社科基金一般项目"唐代音乐活动与乐府诗关系研究"(13BZW062);中央高校基本科研业务费;中央财经大学学院科研支持计划(2015)项目阶段性成果

摘　　要：学界对文献中记载的"仗内教坊"的性质有多种意见。从字义看"仗内"指宫廷之内,从位置看"仗内教坊"和教坊同在一处,而"仗内教坊使"同教坊使一样均由宦官担任,其乐工在身份上也同教坊无异。所以,所谓"仗内教坊"当即是唐代宫廷的教坊,"仗内教坊"只是教坊的别称。目前学界多主教坊在元和中期"合署"之说,因中唐只有一个教坊存在,所以教坊"合署"之说亦属不当。In the academic circle, there are different opinions about the nature of the ＂In-court Imperial Music Office＂ recorded in documents. The literal meaning of ＂In-court＂ was in the court; about its location, the in-court imperial music office was located the same as imperial music office. The instructors were held by the eunuchs; and their status was alike. The so-called ＂In-court Im- perial Music Office＂ was actually another name of the imperial music office. At present most scholars consider that they merge into one section in the Yuanhe Period, while there was only one section in the Mid-Tang Dynasty, so it is not proper to say they merged into one.

关 键 词：唐代 教坊 仗内教坊 合署 考证 

分 类 号：I206.2[文学—中国文学]