Old pictures of Lo-nguong and Lieng-kong from Anglican missionaries

Recently, I came upon a series of articles and photographs related to Fuzhou left by missionaries in the Church Missionary Society (CMS) of the Anglican Church before the 1950s. I was surprised by the richness of the materials, and even more astonished when I found 100 year-old pictures about Lo-nguong (羅源，Luoyuan) and Lieng-kong (連江，Lianjiang) that I believe have not been seen by the natives for a long time. These pictures even preceded the one taken by Emily Susan Hartwell in the 1920-30s. Some of these pictures were taken by Anglican reverends, and some by deaconesses who had continued to contribute to the missionary work in Lo-nguong and its vicinity. Some of these materials are articles published in periodicals such as India's Women and China's Daughters, and Church Missionary Gleaner; some are digitized images from the missionaries such as Rev. William Charles White, the former Anglican Bishop of Honan who worked as a pastor in Lo-nguong for a few years at the beginning of the 20th century. There are still a rich pile of materials with the Cadbury Research Library at the University of Birmingham in England that await exploration. I have started to look at these materials and hope to dig out more exciting history about Lo-nguong.

No wonder, among all the protestant missions, CMS has the richest materials about Lo-nguong, because it is the dominant protestant church in Lo-nguong before the 1950s, which left important legacy and contributed to the modernization of the town. Churches, schools, leper asylum and hospitals were built by the Anglican missionaries in Lo-nguong. The 1998 Edition of the Luoyuan County Annals (罗源县志，1998年版) even contains a short biography of a female missionary, Florence Mary Cooper (顾玛琍) of the Church of England Zenana Missionary Society (CEZMS), who founded the Luoyuan Women's Hospital and helped save many lives in the town. This unusual record reflects the importance of CMS activities in the local history, because county annals in communist China seldom records foreigners, let alone missionaries, in the biography section. Sadly, the information about Florence Mary Cooper in English is still limited, and I do not even know when and where she died after she left China for England after the breakout of the Pacific War. I will talk about her in a separate article.

But to give you a flavor of the CMS materials, here are a few pictures found in the September Issue of the Church Missionary Gleaner in 1911:

(1) the West Gate of Lienkong in 1911; (2) a Tang dynasty pagoda (仙塔); (3) the missionary compound in Lienkong (according to my father, it looks like a Zhu Xi Temple in the town of Dangyang/Dang-iong); (4) the River Lien (敖江) near the South Gate of Lienkong.

圣公会Church Missionary Gleaner杂志1911年9月刊上刊登的4幅连江县的照片：

(1) 1911年时的连江西门和城墙；(2) 凤城镇仙塔街的唐代仙塔，现为福建省级文物保护单位；(3) 连江县圣公会传教士的大本营(据我父亲讲，看上去有点像丹阳镇的朱熹祠); (4) 连江南门外的敖江。

國會圖書館福州舊相片 Some Pictures of Old Fuzhou from Library of Congress

今旦有閒洽美國國會圖書館網站上使關鍵字"Foochow"去尋，討遘幾張有味其舊相片。 Did a quick search on Library of Congress' website using keyword "Foochow", found some interesting pictures.


五月節辰候其閩江（約1905年）。
View of the River Min at Dragon Festival (Ngô-nguŏk-cáik, 五月節), c1905. The picture was likely to be taken from Chŏng-săng (倉山) towards the north. Lots of Tanka (疍民/曲蹄) boats on the river then.

中洲島（1910-1915年左右）。當年中洲島其橋厝構造佈局何其精緻，可惜仱已經面目全非。
The island of Dṳ̆ng-ciŭ Dō̤ (中洲島) seen from the north (between ca. 1910 and ca. 1915). This shooting angle has probably been used by many photographers. But every time I see the old Dṳ̆ng-ciŭ Dō̤ from this angle, I'm deeply impressed by the delicacy of the architectures and depressed by the fact that the island has lost all of its original structure.

祖先牌位（1905年）。
Ancestral tablets, c1905. The ancestral tablets (祖先牌位) are often placed in the main hall of a traditional residence or the living room of a modern apartment to commemorate the family's ancestors. Most tablets used by Foochow families today seem much simpler than these ones.

福州蜀隻陳姓（Dr. Ding）其教書先生透底未鉸過其指甲（1906年）。
According to the description, these are the finger nails which are never cut of Dr. Ding (probably 陳), a teacher in Foochow, China (c1906). Although I have known that the upper class women of older generations have long finger nails, but I have never seen such long nails.

夏詠美共福州女基督徒其相（1903年）。我好像洽George Ngu許塊看見過。
Photo of Emily Susan Hartwell, an American Congregational missionary in Foochow, with local Foochow women, c1903. I remember seeing this photo somewhere, probably from George Ngu's blog or Wikipedia.

結婚宴懸頂其樂師演奏（1905年）。
Chinese musicians playing at a wedding feast in Foochow, c1905.

Islam in Hokchew (Fuzhou)

Islam has never been a mainstream belief at any period in the history of Hokchew (Fuzhou), and it may be difficult to trace the Islamic history of Hokchew to the very beginning. One important record of the early Islamic history of Hokchew is the inscriptions on a 16th century stone stele in Hokchew Mosque (Fuzhou Mosque), claiming that the first mosque in Hokchew was built in 628 AD. This can be doubtful, since 628 AD is too early even for many Islamic countries in the Middle East, like Iran and Egypt, and it is widely believed that Islam was first introduced to China in 650. However, according to the Book of Min (閩書) by He Qiaoyuan (何喬遠) in 1620, Muhammad sent 4 disciples to China by sea between 618-626, two of them resided in Hokchew, and the other two in Guangzhou and Yangzhou respectively. The two disciples finally died in Hokchew and buried in Ling-sang (灵山). If this is true, Hokchew can be one of the Chinese cities that has the earliest contact with Islam. Despite the disputes, we still learn that Islam arrived at Hokchew in the 7th century. Since Hokchew was already an important port in early Tang Dynasty, there was a considerable foreign population in the city, mostly from the Middle East (Persians and Arabs), therefore, a mosque was indispensable for them.

However, the heyday of Fuzhou as a commercial port did not last very long, and her importance was gradually surpassed by the Southern Min city of Chôan-chiu (AKA Quanzhou, 泉州), known as Zayton (刺桐) by the Persians and Arabs. Chôan-chiu became the largest port in China in the Song Dynasty (10th-13th century), and even the largest in the world in the Yuan Dynasty (13th-14th century). Most Persians and Arabs chose to live in Chôan-chiu, rather than Hokchew. As the Muslim population dwindled, the early Hokchew Mosque gradually went decrepit. It was not until the Yuan Dynasty that Hokchew saw an increase of her Muslim population. So when the main prayer hall of Hokchew Mosque collapsed due to the lack of maintenance in the mid-14th century (Yuan Dynasty), the muslims, even some high ranked officials in Hokchew helped to rebuild the mosque. In early Ming Dynasty (14th century), it was again renovated, and the famous Sah Family in Hokchew also donated money for the renovation.

The classical Foochow saddleback gable in the Hokchew Mosque (Fuzhou Mosque)

The main prayer hall of the Hokchew Mosque

In 1541, after the Hokchew Mosque was destroyed in a fire, the local muslim rebuilt the mosque in the form of classical Foochow architecture style, which is today's Hokchew Mosque. If anything unique can be found in the Hokchew Mosque, it must be that the Hokchew Mosque is the only mosque in the world in classical Foochow style. Here you can find Foochow saddleback gables in a mosque! The pic on the left shows what the Foochow saddleback gables in the mosque look like. Certainly, you can also find Arabic inscriptions and Chinese stone stele accompanying the oriental main prayer hall. The only thing that reminds a non-native of the religious function of the building is its facade with a dome (in the pic), but this was added to the original mosque only in 1989, and in my opinion, this recent modification was such a bad idea that harmed the integrality of the building.

Added to the original building only in 1989, the dome of Hokchew Mosque doesn't look in tune

Chinese inscription in the Hokchew Mosque

Arabic inscription in the Hokchew Mosque

During the Qing Dynasty (1644-1911), Hokchew Islam was again heavily weakened due to the shrink of Hokchew muslim population. In hundreds of years, the Hokchew Mosque was maintained by the muslim officers in Hokchew from other Chinese provinces appointed by the emperor. We only saw significant muslim immigration to Fujian after the installation of the communism in 1949, when some muslims from north China came to Hokchew following its occupation by the communist army, whose solders were mostly Northern Chinese. Since the 1980s, the booming economy of Fujian attracted many muslims from northwestern China to Hokchew. These new immigrants "revived" the Hokchew Mosque. Currently, the Ulama of Hokchew Mosque is a Hui (回族), and the Hui people and Uyghur people constitute the majority of the worshippers here.

A 15th century stone stele in the Hokchew Mosque, which conveyed the Yongle Emperor's decree to protect Islam

However, following the increase of Muslim population in Hokchew is the uneasy relation between the local Foochow Han Chinese and the muslims, particularly the Uyghur, just like what is going on in many other Chinese cities. I'd like to go a little deeper into the issue. Many of the Uyghur people in Hokchew are from Southern Xinjiang, the poorest region in Xinjiang and one of the poorest in China. The arid land and bad economy drove many Uyghur there to the eastern coast of China to look for jobs and better lives. But some of them did this in an illegal way: they brought many Uyghur kids from southern Xinjiang to eastern China by promising their families a better income, even by kidnapping. But it turned out that these criminals used the little kids, mostly about 10 years old, as thieves to steal for them. The money the kids stole finally went to the adult criminals' pockets and the kids were only provided their basic needs. There are also some notorious Uyghur peddlers who try to sell by force, threatening the customers to buy their things (usually some good-looking cakes), otherwise the customers may get beaten up. Such problems rapidly damaged Uyghur's reputation and brought tension between them and the local people. Unfortunately, many Han Chinese do not know where the Uyghur people are from. They simply take them as the typical example of all Uyghur, and consequently consider most Uyghur as thieves or evil peddlers. This is so sad.

Today, to most Hokchew residents, Islam is such a strange and somewhat mysterious religion, even though the Hokchew Mosque locates on one of the busiest street at the heart of the city. The mosque itself is listed as a relic protected by the city of Hokchew and open to the public, but it seems that very few Foochowese have ever set foot in it. When I and my friends visited the mosque, I met a clergy who kind of vigilantly asked: "What are you doing here?" When I answered :"I'm a tourist." He stopped asking questions any more. When I took photos in front of a small door, I didn't notice that I was in the way of a person who murmured something to me seemingly in Uyghur, obviously, he was grumbling. I don't know if we are also strange to them as they are strange to most Foochowese.

自家其土地，汝有行透未？（福州語）

有蜀回放假著厝辰候，共朋友攀講講遘旅游計劃，我就講：“若有閑，第一想將閩江由頭遘尾行透，由建寧閩江源直頭行遘閩江口五虎礁。是總款蜀回旅行，無十工行賣完，時間實在無。”伊聽了，講：“我無甚乇興趣。有茲時間，固是去外省名勝客調。”伓是我見覺其他位處無仂囝意思，㑚是自家骹底茲土地有茲夥有味其位處我固未了解，有茲時間，固是無辜負茲塊神奇其土地，使自家其雙骹去實實在在了解伊。㑚退悔做細佮厝未多行，仱著茲遠也無再夥機會，㑚忖偌工轉去，好好行伊蜀環，將許閩北閩南閩東閩西，榕泉漳汀，甚乇土樓、廊橋、宮廟、大厝、茲江許溪、茲山許嶺，統統行透。許，無一定著使我蜀世時間，㑚因茲地是茲般深厚。

一张民国时期的罗源照片

2009年时，我在南加州大学网上图书馆（USC Libraries）里的国际传教士档案里（Internet Mission Photography Archive）偶然发现了这张照片，原址在这里 ，标题为Laiyuan, Fujian, China, ca. 1930，显然，单从标题上看，大概谁也不会想到这个Laiyuan竟是Luoyuan之误。但当我第一次见到它时，瞬间便有一种难以言表的亲切感，仿佛似曾相识，几乎在1秒钟内，我立刻就怀疑起图书馆人员在录入资料时是否有误。在阅读了照片的描述和资料来源之后，我的怀疑愈深。

这幅照片实体的收藏者是耶鲁大学神学院图书馆（Yale Divinity School Library），是艾米莉·苏珊·夏威尔女士收藏文献（Emily Susan Hartwell Papers）中的一部分，时间在1920-1937之间，照片的描述为：The town is completely enclosed by a fortified stone wall. The ramparts and gatehouses of the wall are visible. Rice paddies dominate the foreground. Mountains loom over the background. This photo is from the papers of Emily Susan Hartwell, an American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions missionary stationed in Foochow, Fukien from 1884.大意是：“该城完全由坚固的石墙环绕。墙体和城门楼清晰可见。前景由稻田占据。而背景则浮现重重山峦。该照片来自于由1884年起便驻于福建福州的美国公理会差会的艾米莉·苏珊·夏威尔的文献。”那么，这个艾米莉·苏珊·夏威尔究竟是谁，又凭什么鉴定这照片的拍摄地点和时间呢？

实际上，这位艾米莉·苏珊·夏威尔女士是一位美国女性，她是在福州传教的美国基督教新教传教士夏察理（Charles Hartwell）的女儿，也在福州从事传教工作。这位夏察理先生还是位语言学者，就像那个年代在榕的许多外国人一样，他能说一口流利的福州话，不仅如此，他还参与了将《圣经新约》和三字经翻译为福州语（平话字）的工作以及第二版《福州话-英语词典》的编撰。1905年，夏察理逝世后，他的女儿艾米莉·苏珊·夏威尔留在福州继续传教工作。艾米莉·苏珊·夏威尔女士应该有一个汉文名字，但我至今没有找到。夏女士在榕期间，到过许多地方，也拍摄了大量照片，这些照片如今就以艾米莉·苏珊·夏威尔女士收藏文献的名字收录在耶鲁神学院图书馆中。

让我怀疑该照片为罗源城的理由先是来自于我血脉里藏着的直觉，对罗源旧城格局的了解，以及对照片描述的合理怀疑。夏女士活动范围主要在福州一带，而福州一代并没有一个名叫Laiyuan的城镇，就算放眼全福建，也只有龙岩有一个赖源乡，但那种小乡显然不具备如此大的规模以及完备的城墙的。为了求证，我在海墘闽语论坛上将照片发布于此处：，并询问罗源籍的网友mdese，这可能是这张照片自问世以来第一次出现在大学图书馆以外的网络上。作为户外爱好者的mdese一眼就认出背景的山脉就是罗源城南的莲花山脉，还特地从原照片的角度拍摄了一幅今日的罗源面貌照片，背景的山形完全一致，终于还这幅照片一个完美的答案：这就是罗源城！

注意到照片右下角占地颇大的建筑，应当是今日的岐阳天主教堂，但照片上的天主堂并没有今日天主堂的钢筋混凝土结构。由于1931年岐阳天主堂被台风损毁，现今的岐阳天主堂的钢筋混凝土结构是1932年由福州教区的宋金铃主教主持重修的，也是罗源第一处钢筋混凝土建筑，那么，可以确定这幅照片的拍摄时间一定早于1931年。而考虑到照片描述中1920-1937年的时间区间，这幅照片拍摄时间应该在1920-1931年之间。至于Luoyuan-Laiyuan之误，在抄录的时候，对相关历史和地理缺乏了解的工作人员出现这种错误是很正常的。如今，这幅照片已经传到了闽语论坛之外，在罗源卡溜帮论坛上也被转载，不知道是否还转载到其他地方。我也把它上传到了维基百科上，希望日后能在编纂词条时加以利用。


最后，我还是在上图中对这幅照片里的一些景物做一些描述吧。图中标示1的是罗源城南的莲花山；标示2的地方据说是过去的灰炉厂，我估计如今的妈祖庙也在那附近；标示3的略有白顶建筑则是基督教新教教会创办的慈善机构“一善堂”；标示4的为罗源文庙旁的文昌阁，其故址就在今天的罗源县实验小学内；标示5的城门就是今天罗源北门的城头面（Siang-tau-meng）地区；而标示6则是今天的岐阳天主堂。就像当时所有的福州城邑一样，连绵的马鞍封火墙构成了罗源城美丽的天际线，城里的人们和他们喜怒哀乐的诸般故事，种种美丽，今天却已不存，让人空感悲切，唏嘘不已。另一幅图是闽语论坛上的mdese君去年在同一角度所摄的对比照片，真是物非人亦非，真不知我们摧毁了多少可以留恋的美。我常在梦境里徘徊于罗源故城，水城内的小桥过舟，盈满街巷的罗源话，抬眼可见的封火墙，这消逝的一切却在2009年的一天偶然撞见，不知冥冥中是何机缘安排。

迷雾中的1927年福州仁慈堂事件

1927年1月14日，在福州曾经发生过这么一个事件，即国民党福建省党部筹备处和福州学生联合会宣称市区澳尾巷的天主教仁慈堂（育婴堂）有大规模杀婴的恶行，并随后引发了从福州到厦门的大规模冲击包括新教在内的各基督教会的社会风潮。80多年过去了，在绝大多数福州人脑中，对1927年的福州的了解几乎已经为零，唯独这育婴堂事件却还被一些人记起，或作为控诉“帝国主义”在华劣迹的谈资（尽管这个“帝国主义国家”居然是当时深陷危机的西欧穷国西班牙）。早前的《福州，1927年》一文曾经提到过当时北伐入闽的国民党新政权于1927年在半个中国推动大规模反帝运动的背景，也提及了这次事件，但对这次疑团重重仁慈堂事件，我觉得还是有必要花些笔墨讲讲，一些被扭曲了80多年的事情，总归还是要厘清的，也不至于让这么一个被妖魔化的小小仁慈堂背负那么多也许不该由它担下的罪责。

当时大的历史背景，可以从前面《福州，1927年》文中找到线索，简单的说，就是国共合作的北伐战争节节胜利。而1926年底，由于天津英租界协助北洋政府逮捕国民党人，导致南方的国民政府和英国交恶，更进一步引发了1927年1月3日国民政府反动20万群众占领并最终收回汉口英租界，并形成了国民党主导的中国反帝运动的高潮。福州在1926年12月13日就被北伐军攻下，而社会各阶层的反帝运动也在福州国民党党部的组织下有条不紊的进行着。这便是当时风起云涌的历史大背景。

再回头说说仁慈堂，这座小小的育婴堂却也有着不短的历史，它于1847年由西班牙籍的天主教神父创办于福州南门外澳尾巷中，当时的福建溺婴习惯盛行，许多贫困家庭往往将抚养不起的婴儿（主要是女婴）溺死或者抛弃。而1840年代，教禁初开，天主教会也想着手创办社会慈善事业，并扩大教会影响，收养这些弃婴这也成为仁慈堂创办的初衷。福州的天主教会长期是由西班牙籍神职人员主导的，这座仁慈堂也正是由他们所办。在随后的数十年时间内，许多来自福州、福清、长乐、连江、霞浦、宁德等地贫民家庭的婴儿被仁慈堂收养。但当时外国人在中国创办的所有育婴堂都免不了的事，便是猜疑和传言。几乎中国所有的教会办的育婴堂都被民间可怕的传说所笼罩，这些传说多是育婴堂拿小孩炼丹制药、秘密杀戮、或是做科学实验，尽管细节不一，但各个版本故事的梗概在大江南北却惊人的一致。给我的感觉，无非是民间拿白莲教的恐怖传说套用到基督教会育婴堂之上，就如同读《闽都别记》中白莲教的邪恶行径一般。这个故事在福州的版本则是：“教士们收容幼童不过是想将她们放在蒸笼上煮熟，用蒸出的液体制药”，“教士们常挖出儿童心肝眼睛配药，以求得长生不老。”由于教会和非信徒的百姓之间难以言喻的隔膜，这种谣传就在民间不胫而走。

在福建省档案馆资料中，这次“仁慈堂事件”的经过据说是这样的，福州西门外一个名叫陈亘的女性早就听当地坟场的墓工说育婴堂挑夫常常会挑婴尸上马鞍山来埋，而附近的乡民见到挑夫就避让，于是陈亘就在1927年1月14日清晨带领数十人在西门外荷花亭附近路上拦截仁慈堂的挑夫盘问，当场从挑夫袋中发现11具婴儿尸体，并逼问该挑夫说出其家庭三代替仁慈堂挑婴尸埋葬。随后，这些人便领着婴尸到政府部门控诉，随后就有大批群众冲击仁慈堂。据说传教士还用枪和玻璃抵抗，但最终没能挡住，而从后门逃走，到底传教士有没有用枪这事死无对证，反正冲击教堂的人没有一个伤亡的。攻入育婴堂后，群众又发现了14具婴儿尸体和几十个据说待遇恶劣的婴孩。当日就在福州城就爆发了“打倒帝国主义，打倒基督教、天主教假慈善事业、惩办惨案杀婴孩凶手及赔偿生命损失”的大型运动，第二天，福州就组织了各界代表联席会并向全 国通电案情，紧接着国民党福州市党部和闽侯县党部便联合发布《福州仁慈堂惨案经过情形》文告。随后，国民党部组织群众没收了仁慈堂，并冲击了福州所有的基督教（新教）和天主教机构，还将澳尾巷天主教堂捣毁。而这一事件波及的不仅仅是福州，厦门也组织了“厦门各界反抗福州天主教惨杀华童委员会”，最终导致了从福州到厦门许多基督教会神职人员的离境。仁慈堂被没收后，改为福州贫民教养院。再后面的事，不妨也说一说，就是在仁慈堂事件打击了福州各个基督教会声誉之后，是国民政府从福州的基督教会手中夺取各大学、中学教育资源的“收回教育权运动”，而“仁慈堂事件”就像是个前奏曲，再后来，原仁慈堂好像又被还给天主教会，而由德国的天主教会建成了德撒医院。然而，这件事还有一个更遥远的尾声，这次与国民党无关，而是共产党在1951年福州的镇反运动中，组织群众在福州西北郊马鞍山挖出据说是“数以万计”的婴孩骷髅，称其“万童坑”，并以此作为基督教会的罪行，将所有“虐杀中国婴孩”的外国传教士全部驱逐出境。

好了，这就是事情的来龙去脉，非常熟悉的调调：帝国主义残害中国儿童，最终被眼睛雪亮的群众揭露、并被义愤填膺的群众驱逐。当然，换一个大清国百姓熟悉的调调，大概就是：洋教以邪术惑众，图谋不轨、居心叵测，假育婴堂之名残害孩童。但这背后，却有不少说不清道不明的地方，第一就是这次事件背后非常明显的福州国民党部精心组织的痕迹，从1月14日清晨陈亘率众发现婴尸到几个小时后福州市大规模游行和冲击捣毁教会、再到第二天国民党福州市和闽侯县党部向全国通电案情，并在全省爆发冲击基督教会和驱逐教会人员的运动，这时据陈亘发现婴尸大概不过三十个小时，没有良好的组织，不可能有如此迅捷的反应和巨大的规模。

当然，事件背后国民党组织的推手仅仅会部分削弱一些报道的可靠性，但并不真正影响是否存在虐婴的事实。就虐婴来说，还是来关注几个问题：（1）仁慈堂中婴儿的待遇问题；（2）仁慈堂中婴儿死亡数量的问题；（3）所谓“万童坑”究竟如何。

从史料记载来看，当时仁慈堂中儿童的生活条件大概真的很差，福建省档案馆根据群众口述记载的情况是：仁慈堂中抚养几十个存活婴儿的只有一个神经失常的女傻子和一个哑巴（实际上应该还有神父，否则按该文所述孩子们会念经，这两个人显然没能力教），孩子的年龄在1、2岁到7、8岁间，在冬天仅穿薄衫一件，并排睡觉，合盖短薄棉被一床，头脚露在外，婴儿仅食用一罐糊糊，由女傻子以竹片给婴儿们抹食。年纪大的孩子整日足不出户在仁慈堂中念经，据说没有生活经验，连猪羊都不认识。不过，这些记录的最大缺憾就来自于地方档案馆中这种在特定政治历史环境下的记录，往往是选择性的，只捡取那些能用于控诉“帝国主义或伪善教会的罪行”的部分，而缺乏一个全面的记录，这让想了解事件全部的人感到为难。从以上描述来看，如果属实的话，我们大概可以知道：（1）婴儿的生活条件相当艰苦，缺乏营养；（2）保育者素质恶劣；（3）孩童受到有限教育，可能不是文盲（会念经），但缺乏生活知识和技能。但当时儿童的死亡率原本就很高，而且据说许多被遗弃的婴孩被送入育婴堂中时已经奄奄一息，更是降低了存活率，这样看，也可能仁慈堂内的婴儿死亡率并非高于当时的平均水平；另外一点便是，和以美国和英国传教士主导的基督新教教会不同，福州的天主教会长期是以西班牙籍神职人员为主，而当时内患重重的西班牙是西欧最穷的国家之一，天主教会的财力难以匹敌新教，可以想见起育婴堂的条件不会好到哪里去。据说当时仁慈堂内有法国神父，但我一直没有找到相关的详细资料，颇为遗憾，不过即使有一两个法国教士活动，也难以改变福州天主教会由西班牙神职人员主导的局面。至于究竟有没有虐婴，我想可能已是难以澄清的事情了，从地方档案馆当方面的描述来看，也许不能排除教会人员渎职、导致婴儿保育条件恶劣、死亡率高的情况发生。期冀日后能找到当时教会内人员对此的记述，以了解事情的另一面，不知道当时的福州主教宋金鈴（Francisco Aguirre）是否留下什么文字的回忆呢？至于民间流传的仁慈堂拿婴儿炼丹、做科学实验的谣传，因为过份不实，连国共两党的政宣部门也不敢拿来使用。熟悉基督教的人应该知道保守的教会（比如当时在福州活动的天主教会道明会）是大力反对堕胎的，而在中世纪连解剖尸体的科学家都要被天主教宗教裁判所判火刑处决的，这种谣言中荒诞不经的故事，只不过是民间对教会缺乏了解的一种反应罢了。

而对于仁慈堂中死亡婴儿的多少，地方档案中的记录有着明显的问题。该材料称仁慈堂挑夫供称“他自己也干十来年了，每月十余次,每次八九具至十余具不等,如遇虎年则加倍。”这么一算，小小仁慈堂每月死亡数超过100人，一年至少要超过1200人，而1934年福州市（鼓楼、台江、仓山三区）婴儿出生数量仅有1536人，假设1927年福州的婴儿出生率也在这个数量级，也就是说仁慈堂死亡的（还不包括存活的）婴儿数量就占到福州市区新生婴儿总量的将近一半，这可能吗？再比对
1934-1936年福州市区人口死亡数1640、3330、3410，这样的数量就更显得难以成立。而这么大量的婴儿流入仁慈堂显然不靠谱，且不用说仁慈堂是否能受得了如此多的尸体。更荒唐的就是陈亘等人所“得知”的“一段历史”：“远在满清，当地乡民险些被‘屠乡’，就因为有一个乡人发现每天早晨挑过这里的麻袋里面满满地装着婴儿的尸体！接着‘外国神父害死婴儿’的惨闻传开了。当时的天主教外国传教士立刻威胁满清地方政府，要严禁乡民不得胡乱传说，否则以‘屠乡’对付，所以当地乡民告诫子孙们再也不敢撞碰这种担子。”从清初起屡被政府屠戮的西班牙来的天主教会有能力屠乡，这种在清末中国所未见的故事，大概是这里面最大的笑话。这种漏洞百出的档案可信度有多少，大概只有记录者自己才知道了。

就像1927年的仁慈堂事件一样，“万童坑”故事的背后有着更为明显的政治推手。1951年正逢镇反运动腥风血雨之时，福州正在大规模驱逐外国传教士，好像1927年国民党利用“天主教仁慈堂事件”，连基督教新教教会的声誉也顺带打击，进而铺平了各界学生群众收回教育权运动一样，1951年的“发现万童坑”，只不过为驱逐“帝国主义传教士”又找了一个冠冕堂皇的理由。但什么是万童坑？我还是先介绍一下所谓的“万童坑”所在的福州马鞍山。马鞍山在福州西北郊，又叫“奉教山”、“曲蹄山”，叫做“奉教山”，是因为这里是从明末以来大批来福州的天主教（在福州被成为“奉教”）传教士和教徒的墓地所在，有点天主教专用墓地的意思，这里埋葬过的最著名的人物当属明末来华的著名传教士、“西来孔子”艾儒略了。而“曲蹄山”则得名于许多在此埋葬的福州疍民，疍民是福州江河湖海中终生居住在船上的族群，在民国之前他们被视为贱民，受到不准上岸、不准科举、不准和汉人通婚的诸般歧视，被陆地汉人贬称为“曲蹄”（福州话：Kuóh-dà̤），其中福州闽江段的一些疍民就将墓地设在马鞍山。换句话说，马鞍山原本就是个大坟场。而据1990年代的福州地方志记载，“1949年前，福州市人口出生率为25‰～33‰，婴儿死亡率最高达200‰”“民国27年福州(今鼓楼、台江、仓山区)婴儿死亡率为78.8‰”这么来看这个至少有数百年历史的大坟场里能有多少婴儿尸体呢，应该是个很大的数目，在1951年那种政治背景下，想把这些尸体全部嫁在某个教会头上，并不是件难事。

对于那段久远的历史，想来很多事实也许已经理不清了，因为混杂了太多的政治、传言和偏见，究竟哪些话能信、哪些话不能，实在难以说清，也许仁慈堂确有其责、也许政客们难辞其咎。人是有嘴的，但逝去的儿童不能开口、那个年代的有些人不敢开口、某些人开了口却不如不开口、被赶走的教士们也没机会开口了，那能开口的我们呢？在希望过去夭折的孩子们灵魂安息的同时，也希望曾经被有意无意的信口者蒙上迷雾的这一事件，能够有破雾的一天，有过者当负罪、诬人者当蒙羞、清者自清、浊者自浊，历史是不该有过多的雾霭的。

福州忠懿閩王祠匆匆行 A Visit to the King of Min Memorial Temple

還是在09年夏天，約好某日下午和GnuDoyng見面，地點就選在了福州閩王祠。因為有事耽擱，4點才從臺江十四橋附近出發，叫了輛的士，上車說：“去閩王祠”，司機：“哪里？”，我：“慶城路閩王祠，鼓樓區那邊”，司機：“慶城路？慶城路是哪里？”，我：“五四路那邊啊”，片刻，司機：“是十九中那邊嗎？那里好像有個什么廟”，我：“Bingo！”終于出發了。(左圖：閩王祠大門)




(左圖：閩王祠前庭後墻) 如今許多人連閩王祠也不認識，多少有些數典忘祖的味道，但就像我常說的那樣：這是一段在近幾十年被遺忘的歷史，即便這就是我們族群自己的歷史。盡管閩人習慣將先祖入閩的歷史追溯到晉代的八姓入閩，但在福建歷史上最輝煌的一次入閩移民潮還是唐末五代時的“十八姓從王”。9世紀末黃巢亂唐之後，中原陷入又一波大規模戰亂，當時光壽兩州（如今的河南固始和安徽壽縣）的兵士在王緒的帶領下，南下轉戰福建，但是由于王緒暴虐，士兵們怨聲載道，秘密擁護軍中品行良好的王潮、王審知兄弟發動兵變，囚禁王緒。王氏兄弟于是就率領兵士民人平定了福建各派勢力，統一全閩，入主閩都福州。這次跟隨王潮、王審知兄弟南下入閩的光壽兵民據說共有十八姓，這便是十八姓從王。王潮去世後，王審知繼而主政，並在909年被後梁冊封為閩王，開創了五代十國中的閩國，這也開啟了真正意義上閩族群的歷史。這個忠懿閩王祠，就是祭祀王審知的祠廟。(右圖：唐代“恩賜瑯琊郡王德政碑”)

慶城路是一條不寬的街道，雖在市中心，交通也不擁擠，車進慶城路，立即就看到一座古建筑紅色的正立面，問都不用問，這就是閩王祠了。雖說王審知是五代時期的人物，這座閩王祠卻是明代所建，不過這個選址確實是選在了五代時王審知舊居故址之上。在抱怨同胞們對本族群歷史漠視的時候，我也沒忘了自己也沒有多乖，因為這也是我第一次拜訪閩王祠，即便我對它其實牽掛已久，一問家住鼓樓區的GnuDoyng，原來他也是第一次造訪這里，那么也好，大家都帶著新鮮感來參觀了。

(左圖：閩王祠正殿) 雖然掛著“閩王祠”這么威風的頭銜，但這座祠堂其實并不大，占地面積為1840平方米，福建比它更大的家族祠堂應當不在少數。閩王祠的正立面，也就是大門，采用的是福州本土祠堂常用的一種大門形式，門墻中間高、兩側低，上為兩端挑起的燕尾脊顶，三個門洞，正門大、兩儀門小，大門上方有“奉旨祀典”碑和“忠懿閩王祠”額，左右儀門上方分別書“报功”、“崇德”。進門就是前庭，整座閩王祠里最古老的物件就在前庭中，就是碑亭里的那座906年的黑色唐代“恩賜瑯琊郡王德政碑”，要知道這祠堂現建筑也不過400來年歷史（1601年），而這方碑比這厝要早了將近700年。從文物價值上可以說這碑比祠貴，閩王祠中的省級文物保護單位不是這祠，而是這碑。（右圖：閩王祠內的王審知像）


(左圖：閩王祠內陳列的閩國宮殿遺物) 前庭那“紹越開疆”後墻後面就是閩王祠的主體——後庭，像所有的福州古典建筑一樣，後庭是由兩側的廂房和正面的正殿圍出一個天井的空間。今天的閩王祠，似乎並沒有祠堂的功能，而純粹是作為一座小型博物館開放的。正殿里除了正中那座王審知雕塑，其余的空間擺放的是各色有意思的文物，比如五代閩王宮建筑遺物（多是瓦當、地磚之類）、王審知妻子尚賢夫人墓志銘和“拜劍臺古跡”碑。不過在描述文物的“閩王宮建筑遺物”牌子上面，我發現了很搞笑的一個細節：吳越國的“國”字竟然被加上了引號，成了：閩亡後，吳越“國”將其拆除。在中國歷史上確確實實存在過的十國之一的吳越國竟然成了吳越“國”，天哪，不知是否是館方草木皆兵、敏感過度了。另外一個有意思的地方是，我在閩王祠并沒有發現福州式古典建筑典型的馬鞍形封火墻，按理說明代的建筑也該有馬頭墻吧，如果這是當時的工匠們考慮到閩王的中原出身以及其年代早于馬頭墻出現的年代，那我倒真的很佩服他們。

由于閩王祠只開放到5點，這次訪問也就匆匆結束，不過由于閩王祠確實很小，這點時間倒也足夠把它參觀得透透的了。其實相比前兩年去過的空無一人的華林寺，閩王祠還是有些游客的。也許這得益於福州市現在大小博物館一律免門票參觀的政策。我不得不說，這是市政府做的一件大好事，不但給福州的文化愛好者們更大的便利，也讓對相關知識不甚了解的民眾們有更多的機會接觸和了解我們自己的歷史和文化。(右圖：搞笑的“吳越‘國’”)



The King of Min Memorial Temple locates at Qingcheng Road, a less busy road in urban Fuzhou. It was built for commemorate Wang Shenzhi (in Foochow: Wong Sing-di), the founder and the first king of the Kingdom of Min in the 10th century. Wang Shenzhi and his brother Wang Chao (in Foochow: Wong Dieu) were the leaders of immigrants (soldiers and civilians) from Gwangchow (光州, currently Gushi 固始 in Henan Province) and Shouzhou (寿州, currently Shouxian 寿县 in Anhui Province) in Central China to Fujian, to flee the exhausting wars in Central China. The Wang brothers finally united and took full control of the entire land of Min (Fujian) in 893 AD. After Wang Chao's death, Wang Shenzhi took over power and was conferred the King of Min by the emperor of Later Liang in 909. Wang Shenzhi was known as an excellent leader who developed Fujian from a poor frontier region into a highly civilized kingdom, and remembered by many ethnic Min as the Founding King of Min (開閩王).

Although Wang Shenzhi is one of the most important figures in the history of Fujian, his memorial temple is not large – only 1840 square meters (~19800 square ft), even smaller than many family temples found in this area. The temple was built on the site of the former house of Wang Shenzhi, but its current structure was rebuilt in 1601 (Ming Dynasty). Its façade (front gate) is of one typical Foochow style (Eastern Min style), which is higher in the middle and lower at both sides. Behind the façade is the front courtyard, where stands the most precious relic in this temple: the Bestowed Stele for the Merits of King Langya (恩賜瑯琊郡王德政碑), given by the last Emperor of Tang Dynasty to Wang Shenzhi in 906. The inner court behind the 紹越開疆 wall has a typical traditional Foochow style layout. The main hall behind the atrium is now an exhibition room. Besides the statue of Wang Shenzhi in the middle, you can find fragments from the archaeological site of the 10th century Min Palace and the epitaph of Wang Shenzhi’s wife. The temple is so small that you can finish it less than half an hour, but in my opinion, it is still a must-visit place in Fuzhou for those who seriously want to know the history of Fujian and ethnic Min. In some way, it is a cultural shrine to the Min people, even though many Min today have almost forgot the place.