《字林星期周刊》时评：曾国藩之死

转自公众号《曾国藩的故园》

同治十一年二月初四日（1872年3月12日），曾国藩在两江总督衙署遽然病逝。消息一出，清廷震悼，曾氏门生故旧纷纷表达惋惜、悲痛之情。相关总结、怀念曾国藩及其生平事迹的祭文、联语、诗文等盈千累万，使曾氏葬礼备极荣哀。在这类充满传统文化特色的中国式书写中，曾国藩是奖掖后进的人伦师表，也是卫道周孔的当世大儒，更是底定东南的中兴元老。曾国藩逝世后第十天，即1872年3月21日[①]，上海英文媒体《字林星期周刊》（The North China Herald，前译《北华捷报》）（第四版）发表时评：“曾国藩之死”。与中式视角不同的是，洋媒竟意外把曾国藩逝世，与往届六任江督死于职任联系起来，将之视为一种宿命；相同的是，在洋人眼中，曾国藩以其身上品格成功赢得下属和百姓的尊重，他在清廷的成就和地位亦无人可比：“几年前，十八行省中，有一半督抚承认他是他们地位和成功的源泉”——看来所谓“天下督抚，半出曾门”，这在当时就广为流传，已成公论。

结尾处，该时评重提同治六年（1867年）中英筹议修订《天津条约》时曾国藩所上密折，将其中主张与倭仁为代表的顽固保守派主张相比较，终于较为客观地肯定了曾氏的外交观。而在此之前，该刊则评价曾国藩“过于自负或愚昧”（vain enough or foolish enough）以及“向以极端保守著称”（has always had the reputation of being intensely conservatives）[②]。该时评大胆预言，曾国藩的离世必定给中国政治留下巨大空白，李鸿章则将接替曾氏，成为帝国中最有权势的人。最后，该刊还对清代世袭制进行了评价，再一次佐证文化差异势必带来中西隔膜。以下，是该篇时评的原文及译文。因笔者英文水平有限，加之该刊流传日久，一些字词漫漶不清，错漏之处，在所难免，敬请方家指正[③]。

原文：

THE DEATH OF TSENG KWO-FAN

THE Chinese will soon believe that a fatality attaches to the Nanking viceroyalty.It is remarkable that nearly every Mandarin who has held the post during the last quarter of century has died in office.To go back seven stages,Tao-shu died in office;Chen-nuan committed suicide;Li Chien-yin was killed by the rebels;I-liang died in office;Ho Kuei-ching was beheaded,at Peking;Ma-hsing-I was assassinated, and now Tseng Kwo-fan has died suddenly,in harness. Li Hung-chang,who held office for a year between the late viceroy's two terms,escaped the influence;but his term was short. In a less matter,less evidence would suffice to convince the Chinese;but the importance of the post will probably overcome even Celestial superstition,and persuade the next candidate that,in his case,the Fung-shuey will be propitious.

In the meantime Fate has removed a statesman than whom scarcely one stood higher in the Chinese Empire.There are some who hold higher title;some who have more showy talent—but not one possessing so great influence or so high a general reputation.He shares with Li Hung-chang the honor of having crushed the Taeping rebellion,and had earned therefore a military reputation almost equal to that of his great protege.Li's successes over the Nien-fei in Shantung have perhaps given him a fresher reputation;but it would be hard to eclipse the glory of capturing Nanking and finally crushing the Taepings,which Tseng Kwo-fan shares with his brother Tseng Kwo-chuan,in the eyes of the Chinese.“Had it not been that Tseng Kwo-fan carefully considered his plans,and disposed his troops with judgment,”says the Imperial Edict acknowledging his success,“and that Tseng Kwo-chuan and his officers in person braved arrows and stones in inciting their men to the attack,such wonderful results could never have been accomplished.The joy and congratulations of the Court are such as could not be expressed.

”But though the extinction of the Taeping rebellion in Kiangsu,under his Viceroyalty,may have had much to do with exalting his fame,this has lately subsisted independently of his military renown.He was unquestionably the first Chinaman in the Empire—the man of all others most looked up to by his own countrymen;and his weight with the Peking Government was of course commensurate with this popular influence.A few years ago,half the Viceroys and Governors throughout the eighteen provinces acknowledged him as the source of their position and prosperity.And it is acknowledged that he was popular with his subordinates,as well as with the people whom be ruled.The opinion of those who serve under a man is no bad criterion by which to estimate him;and the Chinese verdict is that,tried by this test,Tseng Kwo-fan appeared to advantage.He was as vigilant in his rule as stern in manner,but he seemed to have a capacity for selecting his men,and he insisted on their performing the duty he expected—a combination of discretion and firmness which made his rule respected,and kept his subordinates from laxity and consequent trouble.It will be understood that we are writing of the late Viceroy from a Chinese,and not from an abstract,view of excellence.He was able and just,relatively to his compeers;and these qualities gained him the respect of his countrymen.That he was popular with his subjects,the ovation given him,on the occasion of his departure from Nanking,three years ago,to assume the viceroyalty of Chihli,was a proof.“There was no noisy demonstration,”wrote a correspondent of the N.-C.Herald at the time,“yet the manner in which the people showed their respect for the aged Governor was not less marked.There was no shout,no huzza,as would have been the case in the West,no triumphal arches had been erected over the way through which he passed out of the city;but all along the road from the viceregal palace to the West Gate,a distance of some miles,altars with incense and candles burning had been erected;and before these,in two long rows,the people again and again bowed down and worshipped him as if he had been a God.Women held up their children to him as they do when the image of their city God is paraded in the streets;but the most affecting sight was when the elders of the city,about 100 in number,white-haired men of from 60 to 70 years of age,came forward and detainingly laid their hands on the chair,and refused for a time to let the old man pass.The conduct of the people reminded one of some high religious festival,and might easily have been mistaken for such,had it not been for the gay appearance of the Thespian stages which,at different places on the route,had been erected for the representation of such bright characters in the country's history,as Tseng had copied or surpassed in his official career.The crowd,headed by the elders,closed in after the chair,and flowed after it like a river,through the city gate and down to the place where the viceregal barge awaited him.There,the people collected in such numbers that only the want of standing ground prevented the city from being entirely emptied.”Nor must it be thought that this was an empty display.The ceremonial may have been a rehearsal;but the outburst of popular feeling as genuine;for it is no uncommon thing with the Chinese to proceed to the opposite extreme,and to assail with every kind of missile known to Western mobs,an unpopular official,under similar circumstances.Since the departure of Lin Tseh-chü in the days of Taokwaug,no similar manifestation had been made in Nanking,and even that was said to have come far short of the triumph given to Tseng Kwo-fan.

On Tseng Kwo-fan's views of Foreign intercourse,we touched only a few weeks ago;and do not purpose now to travel over the ground again.More or less doubt must always attach to the real creed of a Chinaman.His actions are hardly a criterion,for he has to shape a course;but we are safer in judging by his expressed thoughts—expressed at an important crisis,under the seal of privacy.Tseng Kwo-fan’s memorial to the Emperor on the proposed revision of the English Treaty,dated October 1867,is such a document.And a comparison of this paper with the virulent diatribe of Wojên,written on the same subject,will probably enable us to form a fair estimate of Tseng Kwo-fan's foreign policy.His memorial is by no means progressive;it condemns railways,steamers,and extension of trade,as fraught with injury to the popular interest;but he accepts the present position,he makes no objection to proselytism,and advises the concession of the right of audience so soon as the Emperor shall take up the reins of Government.This is far from meeting the foreign view;but it also differs vastly from the bitter hatred of Wojên,whose memorial actually seethes with rage and hatred,and points to the extermination of the intruders as the only feasible issue.

Tseng Kwo-fan's death leaves a great gap in the Chinese body politic,and leaves Li Hung-chang without a rival—the most powerful man in the Empire.Such an event is sure to be fruitful in intrigue;and we may venture a few words on this head,on another occasion.In the meantime,we have endeavoured to sketch very briefly the position held by the great Viceroy who has so suddenly been snatched away;without venturing to trench on the future.Of all his honors,the earldom is the only one,that descends to his family.Tseng's eldest son will succeed to this title of his father. And here is another instance of the false ideas regarding China which have to be unlearned,in the West.It is commonly believed,at home,that title invariably trends back through past generations,but never descends to the future.

1872 年 3 月 21 日，《字林星期周刊》第四版刊登《曾国藩之死》。

译文：曾国藩之死

中国人很快就会相信南京总督身上有一种宿命。令人感到惊异的是，在过去25年里，担任这一职务的政府大员几乎都是在职期间去世。倒回过去七个阶段，陶澍在任上病逝；陈銮自杀；陆建瀛被叛军杀害；怡良死于任上；何桂清在北京被斩首；马新贻被刺杀，现在曾国藩又在正常工作时突然去世。只有在已故总督的两届任期之内任职了一年的李鸿章[④]，摆脱了这种影响；但是他的任期很短。因为是关系不大，缺乏能够足以说服中国人的证据；但这个职位的重要性甚至可能克服天界的迷信，并使下一个候选人相信，在他的情况下，风水将是有利的。

与此同时，命运已经让中华帝国的一位政治家消失了，这名政治家的地位几乎无人可及。有人拥有更高的头衔；有人拥有更耀眼的天赋——但没有一个人能拥有如此巨大的影响力或如此高且普遍的声誉。他与李鸿章分享了镇压太平天国叛乱的荣誉，也因此赢得了几乎可以与他那最得力门生相媲美的军事声誉。李在山东成功镇压捻军，或许已经给他带来了全新声誉；但在中国人的眼中，这还是很难掩盖夺取南京并击败太平天国的光环，后者曾国藩则只和他的弟弟曾国荃共享。帝国诏书肯定了他的成功：“要不是曾国藩对自己的计划深思熟虑，并明智地部署了他的部队，以及曾国荃和他的部将督率士兵，亲冒矢石，如此完美的结局是不可能实现的。对此，朝廷之欣慰是无以言表的。”

但是，尽管在他担任总督期间，或许他的声望得以提升，与平息江苏境内太平天国叛乱大有干系，不过近来他的声誉得以维持，却与他的军事名望并无关联了。毫无疑问，他是帝国的第一人——是他的同胞最尊敬的人；他在北京政府眼中的分量，当然与他在民众中的影响力是相称的。几年前，十八行省中，有一半督抚承认他是他们地位和成功的源泉。众所周知，他在下属和被统治的人民当中都很受欢迎。下属的意见固然是评价他的一个不错标准；但经过这次测试，中国人民评价曾国藩的意见，就显得更有优势了。他的规矩既谨慎又严厉，但他似乎有能力挑选他的士兵，他坚持让他们履行他所期望的职责——谨慎和坚定的结合使他的统治受到尊重，并使他的下属免于松懈和随之而来的麻烦。可以理解的是，我们是从一个优秀的中国人的角度，而非抽象的角度，来写已故总督的。相比其他同僚，他既能干又公正；这些品质使他赢得了同胞的尊敬。三年前，当他离开南京前往担任直隶总督时，人们为他热烈鼓掌，这证明了他很受欢迎。“当时没有喧闹的游行”，《字林星期周刊》的一名记者写道，“但人们对这位年迈总督表达尊重的方式同样令人记忆深刻。没有像西方人那样大喊大叫，山呼万岁，在他出城的路上，也没有竖起庆祝成功的拱门；但是从总督府到西门外的几英里路上，人们已经竖起燃烧着香和蜡烛的神坛；而在这些之前，人们排成两排，一次又一次地朝他叩头，犹如敬拜天神。当他的身影经过大街时，妇女们会像其他人一样，朝她们的城市之神举起自己的孩子；但最令人感动的景象，是大约100名左右的白发苍苍的老者走上前来，用手攀住他的轿子，拦住一段时间，不让他离开。如果不是因为在路上的不同地点，为该国历史上如此杰出人物搭建的舞台呈现出欢快状态，人们的行为很容易让人误以为这是某个重要的宗教节日，正如曾氏在其仕途中所效仿或超越的那样。在老人们的带领下，人群如河流般涌动，紧紧跟随在轿子后面，穿过城门，一直跟随到在等候总督的驳船边。在那里，人们聚集得如此之多，以至于城市被塞得满满当当，缺少站立的地方”。当然，也不能认为这只是一场空洞的表演，尽管仪式可能是事先排练过的，但是民众迸发出的情感却是真实的。在类似情况下，如果是一个不受欢迎的官员，中国人就会很常见地走向相反的极端，用一切投掷物砸向他，就好像对待那些来自西部的暴民。自从林则徐[⑤]在道光朝离开以来，南京就没有再发生过同类情形，甚至还有人说，就算有，也远不及曾氏的成功。

有关曾国藩的外交观，我们几周前才刚接触；现在不打算再深入谈论。对于一个中国人的真正信条，或多或少要有所怀疑。他的行为几乎不是一个标准，因为他必须执行的是一条路线；但从他的想法来看，我们更安全——这种想法是在一场重大危机中秘密表达出来的。曾国藩于1867年10月就修订英国条约向清廷所上的奏折，就是这样一份文件[⑥]。把这份文件与倭仁关于同一主题的恶毒攻击相比较，也许能让我们对曾国藩的外交政策作出公正的评价。他的奏折绝不是进步的；它反对铁路、轮船和扩大贸易，认为这些损害了人民的利益；但他接受目前的立场，他不反对传教，并建议一旦皇帝亲政，就允许觐见[⑦]。尽管这与外国观点相去甚远；但毕竟与倭仁的刻骨仇恨还是有很大区别，倭仁的奏折[⑧]里满是愤怒和厌恶，并指出消灭入侵者是唯一可行路径。

随着帝国最有权势的人离世，曾国藩的死给中国政坛留下了巨大空白，李鸿章也由此变得无可匹敌。这样的事一定会在密谋中收获丰硕；就这个问题，我们可以在另一个场合谨慎地说几句话。与此同时，我们已经努力去简要勾勒出这个一直被突然逝世的伟大总督所占据的职位；不必冒险开拓未来。在他所有的荣誉中，侯爵是唯一能传袭到他家族的。曾的长子将继承他父亲的这个头衔。这是西方以错误观念看待中国的又一例证[⑨]，这些观念必须被抛弃。在国内，人们普遍认为，这一头衔总是追溯到过去几代人，但永远不会沿袭至未来。

（整理、翻译：刘少波、李霞）

注明：

[①]《字林星期周刊》每周一刊，1872年3月共7日、14日、21日、28日4期，考虑到通讯、写作、印刷等环节耗费时间，21日时评系该刊第一时间报道并评论曾国藩死讯。

[②]见《字林星期周刊》1868年6月13日第2版、第3版。

[③]本文眭达明老师、曾伟湖老师曾给予指教，提出了宝贵意见，特此致谢。

[④]陶澍，字子霖，湖南安化人，晚清名臣，累任至两江总督，道光十九年（1839年）病逝于两江节署；陈銮，字仲和，湖北江夏人，道光十九年陶澍病危，陈銮以江苏巡抚署理两江总督，不意至该年末病卒，非自杀；陆建瀛，字立夫，湖北荆州人，道光二十七年（1847年）以江苏巡抚署理两江总督，后实授。咸丰三年（1853年）太平军攻破江宁城，陆建瀛被杀；怡良，字悦亭，瓜尔佳氏，满州正红旗人，陆建瀛死后授两江总督，咸丰七年（1857年）因病开缺，同治六年（1867年）卒，非死于任上；何桂清，字根云，云南昆明人，怡良因病开缺后，何桂清以二品顶戴署两江总督，寻实授。咸丰十年（1860年），太平军二破江南大营，何桂清弃城逃走，被革职拿问，同治元年（1862年）在北京菜市口被斩首；马新贻，字谷山，山东菏泽人，同治七年（1868年）由闽浙总督调补两江总督，同治九年（1870年）被刺客张文祥刺杀身亡；李鸿章，字少荃，安徽庐州人，晚清名臣。同治四年（1865年）五月曾国藩奉命北上“剿捻”，两江总督由李鸿章署理，至次年十一月，因久战无功，清廷命曾国藩回任两江，授李鸿章钦差大臣，专办“剿捻”事宜。

[⑤]林则徐，字少穆，福建侯官人，晚清名臣，道光十五年（1835年）至道光十六年（1836年）曾两次以江苏巡抚署理两江总督。

[⑥]同治六年九月，为做好中英《天津条约》修约谈判的前期准备工作，清廷总理各国事务衙门奏请滨海、沿江各省将军、督抚并南、北洋通商大臣等共十八人，就请觐、遣使、铜线（即电报）和铁路、内地设行栈和内河驶轮船、贩盐和挖煤（实为开矿）、开拓传教六个方面焦点问题发表意见。曾国藩于该年十一月十五日（阳历12月10日，非10月）上呈密折：《遵旨预筹与外国修约事宜密陈愚见以备采择折》，主张答应请觐、遣使、开拓传教三事，挖煤也不妨试办，其余电报、铁路、行栈、轮船、贩盐各事，则以有害百姓生计为由，予以拒绝。该密折后被泄露，《字林星期周刊》于1868年6月13日发表时评两篇，对曾氏密折要点进行了评论，旋更于1868年9月11日全文刊载了曾氏密折的英译本。

[⑦]中英修约谈判六个方面的焦点问题中的第一条是“请觐”，即驻外公使直接面见中国皇帝。这本是一个外交礼仪问题，但因洋人不愿跪拜，总理衙门倾向于以同治皇帝年幼尚未亲政（彼时由慈安、慈禧两宫太后垂帘听政）为由暂缓施行。

[⑧]中英修约筹议时清廷征求意见的十八人中并无倭仁，而在同治八年（1869年）正月初三日醇郡王奕譞奉命上折就修约问题发表意见，他主张“驱除洋人”，并拟定六条建议。对于奕譞的奏折，清廷命大学士倭仁等人会商妥议。初七日，倭仁等上折复奏，基本赞同奕譞意见。此处所说倭仁奏折，大约指此复奏折。在洋务问题上，倭仁向以盲目排外著称。

[⑨]明清时有诰封、诰赠制，一定品级官员出仕，可诰封、诰赠其父母、祖父母等人以光禄大夫、诰命夫人等虚衔，而公、侯、伯、子、男等爵位则可由后代世袭，官员去世后，一般由其长子承袭。大约是洋人以前不懂此二者区别，故有误解，这也是中西文化差异所致。