國立傳統藝術中心臺灣音樂館（原民族音樂研究所、臺灣音樂中心）於 2002 年自東京購入一批以工尺譜抄寫之樂譜抄本，其抄本標題包括有「南管」、 「北管」、「琵琶」及「西秦樂意」等，其中的「南管」與「北管」，尤其是數量 較多的北管類，頗令人好奇。而且「西秦」兩字，不免令人聯想起北管戲神之一 的「西秦王爺」。 這批抄本中的北管類抄本收錄有25 首基本曲目（及其他曲調），據記載係廣 東人沈星南於1878 年於長崎傳予日本清樂家成瀨清月。按「清樂」是傳自中國 東南沿海一帶的民間音樂與戲曲，於十九世紀初經由貿易路線傳到長崎，並散播 至日本各地，出版及傳抄有百種以上的樂譜。上述的25 首曲目全部可在清樂譜 本中找到，反而僅約十首見於臺灣的北管；而且從其中的《西秦樂意》抄本署名 穎川連，可知來自清樂中林德健的傳承系統。因此，這批抄本可以斷定屬於日本 清樂的範圍。 既然屬於日本清樂，為何稱之「北管」？它們是否與臺灣的北管有關？還是 另有所指？本文檢視這批抄本，並與其他清樂譜本、臺灣北管及相關樂種的樂曲 比較，以探討這批抄本的傳承脈絡、流派特色與意義，以及在這兩個不同意義的 「北管」的背後，是否有更深一層的聯結。

The Taiwan Music Institute (originally named as the Traditional Arts Research Institute of Musical Heritage, and Taiwan Music Center) of the National Center for Traditional Arts (originally named as the Preparatory Office of the National Headquarters of Taiwan Traditional Arts) purchased several hand-written gongchipu manuscripts from Tokyo in 2002. The titles of these manuscripts individually begin with “beiguan”, “nanguan”, “pipa”, and “xiqin”. Among these terms “beiguan” is quite noticeable. In addition, the “xiqin” reminds us of “Xiqin Wangye”, who is one of the music gods worshipped by beiguan practitioners. There are twenty-five major tunes and other tunes, which are listed in an appendix to my paper, included in the above-mentioned “beiguan” manuscripts. According to the prefaces and epilogues noted in the manuscripts, these pieces were transmitted from a Cantonese musician, Shen Xingnan, to the shingaku master, Naruse Seigetsu, in 1878 in Nagasaki. Shingaku is originally a type of folk music from the southeastern coastal area of China that entered Nagasaki in Japan via trade routes in the nineteenth century. Later it spread into many places and was popular in Japan. More than one hundred manuscripts, printed and written, of shingaku remain nowadays in Japan. In contrast to that only ten pieces can be found in the repertoire of beiguan in Taiwan, all of the twenty-five major pieces which are cited above can be found in many of the shingaku manuscripts. Moreover, the manuscript Xiqin Yueyi belonged to one of the two main transmitting systems of Japanese shingaku, which was Lin Dejian’s transmitting system. It is obvious that these pieces belong to the scope of shingaku in Japan. Now that we have established that the foregoing pieces are shingaku pieces, why were they called “beiguan”? Did they relate to beiguan in Taiwan? Or, was there another “beiguan” referring to another music genre? This article examines and compares the foregoing manuscripts to related shingaku manuscripts, beiguan and other related music genres in Taiwan in order to understand the context of transmission and features of the school, as well as the relationship between these two “beiguans”.