本文討論宋人紀錄中金太祖諸子「集體描述」的內容。「集體描述」是一種彙整性質的說明，旨在簡單但全面地介紹金太祖諸子的身分事蹟。其書寫形式相當制式，主要是羅列太祖諸子的基本資料，包括姓名、長幼次序、職務、官爵、事跡、親屬關係等。整體合觀，這些「集體描述」呈現了一種敘述的系統。本文觀察《金虜節要》、《松漠紀聞》、《神麓記》、《金虜圖經》、《建炎以來繫年要錄》、《建炎以來朝野雜記》、《續編兩朝綱目備要》等7種宋人文獻的「集體描述」，說明其傳承關係，並以《金史》比對其中紀錄。觀察之後有三點認識：第一，目前可見的「集體描述」，存在著以李心傳著作為樞紐的敘事系列。第二， 這些「集體描述」的取捨與內容，具備了由全面到片面，由模糊到確實的變化趨勢。第三，這些「集體描述」中的金太祖諸子描述，宗弼、宗望、宗輔、宗峻、宗幹等5人較為清楚而豐富，宗傑、宗雋、宗強、宗敏等4人的描述較為模糊而簡略，造成這種現象的主要原因，或與他們曾否參與對宋征戰，以及是否身為皇帝之父有關。

This study examines collective descriptions relating to sons of Emperor Taizu of Jin, as these descriptions are found in Sung dynasty records. The term ＂collective description＂ refers to a standard way of listing basic personal information-matters such as an individual's name, birth order, social status, accomplishments, kinship position, and so on. Examining collective descriptions enables us to come to a better understanding of the sons of Emperor Taizu of Jin. In this paper, seven historical records from the Sung dynasty are examined, namely, Jinlu jieyao, Songmo jiwen, Shenluji, Jinlu tujing, Jianyan yilai xinian yaolu, Jianyan yilai chaoye zaji, and Xubian liangchao gangmu beiyao. The information contained in these works is also compared with that found in the Jinshi, the official dynastic history of the Jin dynasty. Three major conclusions emerge from this investigation. First, the collective descriptions examined follow narrative structures found in the writings of the historian Li Xinchuan. Second, collective descriptions tend to become less all-encompassing as time goes on; the lives of fewer individuals are recorded, but the information offered tends to be more detailed and specific. Third, as far as the sons of Emperor Taizu of Jin are concerned, Zongbi, Zongwang, Zongfu, Zongjun and Zonggan are described in more concrete terms, while Zongjie, Zongjun, Zongqiang and Zongmin are described in more general terms. The difference in coverage is a result of two main factors: whether the sons had any great accomplishments (as a result of their participation in wars against the Sung dynasty), and whether they were the fathers of subsequent Jin emperors.