古代王朝更迭时,前朝货币都去哪儿了?******
提及中国古代货币,人们脑海里不禁浮现出经典的“圆形方孔铜钱”模样。若是定睛一看,环绕着方形孔洞赫然有四个大字——“开元通宝”,再配上铜币上的点点斑驳,来自一千三百余年前的古朴与厚重感扑面而来,仿佛唐代物产琳琅满目、商客络绎不绝的景象都由这一枚小小的钱币所见证。
然而,开元通宝只能在唐朝使用吗?
今人的印象里,货币只是一个时代的符号,随着政权的更迭,这个王朝创造的货币也便逐渐埋入深窖,或是进入古玩收藏家的柜阁,不复流通。就好比在当下,谁也不会在市场上掏出一枚民国银元去买东西。
事实上,这枚唐钱也有可能流通于明代市场。晚明人姜绍书在笔记中写道:“余幼时见开元钱与万历钱参用,轮廓圆整,书写端庄,间发青绿砾斑,古雅可玩,背有指甲痕,相传为杨妃以爪拂蜡模,形如新月。”(《韵石斋笔谈》)依照此人的描述,开元钱居然能在明朝正常使用。
这样看来,古代货币的生命力似乎比创造它的政权顽强许多。那么同理,鼎鼎有名的汉五铢会不会也曾畅行于唐人的生活之中?那些印有年号的“通宝”在改元换代之后命运又如何?古代朝代更迭时,前朝的货币都去哪儿了?
五铢钱,凭实力流通七百余年
中国古代的货币,长期是一种“金钱本位”,即较大数额的交易使用黄金,较小数额则使用铜钱。因此,在人们的日常生活之中,铜钱往往更多地用作流通手段,也无疑更为重要。
以铜铸造钱币,在春秋战国时期才广泛流行起来。这一时期,列国形形色色的铜铸币,被学者归纳为四个体系,即布币、刀币、圜钱(也称环钱)和蚁鼻钱。公元前221年,秦始皇统一全国,他废除了六国那些奇形怪状的货币,秦国圆形方孔的“半两钱”成为全国通用标准。币制的统一,既是政治军事统一的结果,也是经济文化交往融合的诉求。
其实,秦国的货币也吸收了六国货币的一些特征,铢、两成为货币单位,圆形方孔成为货币的基本形制,并非始于秦始皇,是整个战国社会发展的结果。当秦半两成为全国范围内的标准,更多意味着一个时代的终结,而非新的开始。
秦二世而亡,西汉虽在一定程度上延续着秦制,“半两”之实已然不复:中国古代铜钱的名称,一开始是以重量命名,譬如秦的“半两”、汉的“五铢”。后来,这种名称渐渐和重量分离。秦半两原重半两,吕后二年(前186)就减为八铢,文帝五年(前175)减为四铢。按照“二十四铢为两,十六两为斤”(《汉书·律历志》)的标准来换算,这“半两”铜钱足足缩水了三分之二,掂量着手中铜币的重量,自然很难再将之与“半两”之名对应起来了。
西汉八铢半两钱。来源/中国钱币博物馆
而且,由于“秦钱重难用”,汉初允许民间私铸铜钱,那些坐拥铜矿的宠臣、诸侯也凭此机会一夜暴富。(《史记·平准书》)
譬如,文帝时期有个管船的小吏名叫邓通,和文帝关系很好,甚至在文帝病时,为他吸吮痈包。当邓通被人断言“当贫饿死”,文帝看不下去了,寻思自己怎么可能让邓通贫困致死呢?便大手一挥,将蜀郡严道的铜山赐给了他。邓通籍此私铸铜钱,“邓通钱”遍布全国,而他的财产也因此超越王侯。(《史记·佞幸列传》)后来七国之乱的头子吴国,也是“即山铸钱”狠狠地发了一笔。
这种民间铸币滥行,使得市场上的货币轻重不一,物价膨胀,诈伪肆意,管理十分困难:
又民用钱,郡县不同:或用轻钱,百加若干;或用重钱,平称不受。法钱不立,吏急而壹之乎,则大为烦苛,而力不能胜;纵而弗呵乎,则市肆异用,钱文大乱。(《汉书·食货志》)
对于统一的汉王朝来说,既有的货币制度显然已不再适应时代发展的需要。元鼎四年(前113),桑弘羊提出币制改革,为汉武帝所采纳。禁止郡国和民间铸钱,各地私铸的钱币需销毁,由朝廷授权上林三官铸造新的钱币——“五铢钱”。在此次之后,五铢钱得到大规模使用,一直到唐代以后才退出流通的舞台。
海昏侯墓中出土的大量五铢钱,多达300余万枚、重达10余吨。来源/南昌汉代海昏侯国遗址公园
尽管这漫长的七百余年中,五铢钱曾遭受过新莽“禁五铢、行新钱”的挑战,却依然保持着独一无二的地位。三国两晋南北朝时,铸五铢的例子也很多,而历朝铸造的五铢钱,在市场上也有混用的情况。蜀汉政权曾经发行过“直百五铢”,这种五铢的重量不过是蜀五铢的三倍,作价则是百倍,这就使得蜀汉政权能够以等量的铜换取以往三、四十倍的物资和铸币,果然,数月之间,蜀汉府库迅速充盈起来,为诸葛亮北伐等一系列对外作战奠定了财政基础。当然,这种抬高货币的价值而掠夺民财的做法,长此以往造就的经济后果也是显而易见的。
萧梁时期,梁武帝铸梁五铢,又铸造没有外郭的另一种钱币,称为“女钱”,并且多次颁布诏书,要求全国只能适用这两种新铸造的钱。然而,效果并不理想,民间流通依然以旧钱为主,“百姓或私以古钱交易”,当时市场上流通的钱币,有“直百五铢、五铢、女钱、太平百钱、定平一百,五铢稚钱、五铢对文”等,有不少都是前朝铸造的五铢钱种类。(《隋书·食货志》)此外,南北朝时期还出现了一些以年号命名的五铢,如“太和五铢”“永安五铢”等等。
不同时期、不同版式的五铢钱,自左上至右下分别为:西汉五铢、鸡目五铢、剪边五铢蜒环五铢、东汉五铢(背四出)、蜀汉直百五铢、北魏永安五铢、北齐常平五铢、南朝梁五铢(公式女钱)、隋五铢。来源/罗文华《中国钱币的故事》
中新网评:处理核污水绝不是日本自家私事******
中新网北京1月19日电(蒋鲤)日本政府近日称,将于2023年春夏期间开始向海洋排放经过处理的福岛第一核电站核污水。日本罔顾国内民众及周边国家的屡屡反对,企图将核污水“一倒了之”,把一件关乎全球海洋生态环境和公众健康的事当成了自家私事。
资料图:日本福岛第一核电站。2011年,福岛核电站事故发生后,大量放射性物质泄漏到大气层和太平洋,对周围环境造成了难以逆转的伤害,数十万人被迫撤离该地区。时至今日,作为日本邻国之一的韩国仍未解除福岛海鲜禁令。
日本以核污水存储能力即将达到上限为由,在2021年4月13日,正式决定将福岛第一核电站核污水排入太平洋。过去一年多,日本政府和东京电力公司一直在持续推进核污水排海计划。
日本政府辩称,这些核污水经多核素处理系统(ALPS)处理后很安全,甚至“可以喝”,这样的表态无疑在愚弄大众。
事实上,经过处理的核污水仍含有多种放射性物质,核污水一旦排放入海就无法回收,长期来看,将会给海洋生态带来难以估量的潜在威胁,最终危害人类健康。
因此,核污水排海计划推出后,遭到日本民众强烈反对。日本《朝日新闻》2022年3月公布的问卷调查显示,福岛县、宫城县和岩手县受访的42个市町村长中,约六成反对东京电力公司福岛第一核电站核污水排放入海。日本全国渔业协会联合会也多次申明立场,反对该计划。
日本政府认为,核污水排海是最便宜、最省事的解决方案,但此举却将周边国家乃至全世界置于核污染风险中。太平洋非日本一家之海,核污水会随着洋流流动,其影响势必会跨越国界,危害周边国家乃至整个国际社会的公共福祉和利益。
《韩国经济新闻》发文称,相关研究认为,福岛核污水如果排放入海,约7个月后将到达济州等韩国海域,该国水产业和旅游业将遭受相当大的损失。
德国南极海洋机构也曾发出警告,若日本将所有核污水排入海中,不到半年,整个太平洋都将面临高度辐射威胁,包括远在大洋另一端的美国。太平洋地区人民更是对日本该计划持反对意见。
日本作为《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国,有义务保护海洋环境。然而,在核污水排海方案的正当性、核污水数据的可靠性、净化装置的有效性、环境影响的不确定性等问题上,日本未能作出科学、可信的说明。
国际原子能机构技术工作组虽已三次赴日实地考察评估,但尚未就日排海方案的安全性给出结论,并且对日本提出诸多澄清要求和整改意见。在此情况下,日本仍执意推进核污水排海工程建设,这是极不负责任的行为。
太平洋不是日本的下水道,日本必须正视各方合理关切,在与周边国家等相关利益方和国际原子能机构充分协商后,制定合理的核污水处理方案。日本也要着眼长远,若只顾眼前,执意将核污水排放入海,不仅其自身,周边国家乃至全世界都将为之买单,其后果必将会危害数代人。
Fukushima water disposal by no means Japan’s own business
By John Lee
(ECNS) -- Japan has announced it will release treated wastewater from the wrecked Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear Power Plant into the Pacific Ocean this year.
Although Fukushima wastewater disposal affects global marine ecological environment protection and public health, Japan has turned a deaf ear to domestic and international opposition to dumping the contaminated water into the sea, treating the "global" matter as its own business.
The Fukushima accident in 2011 had sent large quantities of radiation into the atmosphere and the Pacific Ocean, causing irreversible damage to the surrounding environment, and hundreds of thousands of people were forced to evacuate the area. South Korea still maintains its import ban on Japanese seafood from areas affected by the Fukushima nuclear disaster.
On April 13, 2021, Japan announced it had decided to discharge contaminated radioactive wastewater in Fukushima Prefecture into the sea due to dwindling storage space, with the Japanese government and plant operator Tokyo Electric Power Company Holdings Inc. promoting the release plan over the past year.
The Japanese government argues that the water treated by an advanced liquid processing system, or ALPS, is safe and drinkable, which is undoubtedly fooling the public.
In fact, the treated wastewater still includes a variety of radioactive substances and can’t be recycled once discharged into the sea, which will pose a great threat to marine ecology and ultimately endanger human health in the long run.
Therefore, the discharge plan has been strongly opposed in Japan. According to a questionnaire conducted by The Asahi Shimbun, nearly 60 percent of mayors of 42 municipalities in Iwate, Miyagi and Fukushima prefectures oppose the discharge plan. The National Fisheries Cooperative Federation of Japan has also repeatedly stated its opposition in public.
The Japanese government believes that dumping Fukushima wastewater into the sea is the cheapest and most convenient solution, but neighboring countries and even the whole world will be at risk of nuclear pollution.
The Pacific Ocean doesn’t belong to Japan and the wastewater flow along oceanic currents will surely break boundaries and endanger public welfare and the interests of neighboring countries and even the international community.
The Korea Economic Daily reported that related research concluded that if contaminated water from Fukushima is released into the ocean, it would only take seven months for the contaminated water to reach the shores of Jeju Island, with the country's aquaculture and tourism suffering considerable losses.
According to the calculation of a German marine scientific research institute, radioactive materials will spread to most of the Pacific Ocean within half a year from the date of discharge, and the U.S. and Canada will be affected by nuclear pollution. People in the Pacific region also oppose the discharge plan.
As a participant of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Japan has the obligation of protecting the marine environment.
However, it hasn’t offered a full and convincing explanation on issues like the legitimacy of the discharge plan, the reliability of data on the nuclear-contaminated water, the efficacy of the treatment system or the uncertainty of environmental impact.
Though the IAEA has yet to complete a comprehensive review after three investigations in Japan, the Japanese side has been pushing through the approval process for its discharge plan and even started building facilities for the discharge. It is rather irresponsible for Japan to act against public opinion at home and concerns abroad.
The Pacific Ocean is not a private Japanese sewer. The country must seriously heed the voices of the international community and make a reasonable plan for the Fukushima wastewater disposal after full consultation with stakeholders and international agencies.
If it only seeks instant interest and insists on discharging the contaminated water into the sea, not only itself, but also its neighboring countries and the entire world will pay for the decision and several generations will be forced to bear the consequence.
(文图:赵筱尘 巫邓炎) [责编:天天中] 阅读剩余全文() |