《水滸傳》的最大反派高俅（？-1126），在宋史裡確有其人。研究《水滸傳》及宋史的學者，過去已從宋人筆記小說《揮麈後錄》一條不足四百字的記載，找到《水滸傳》裡高俅故事的來歷。本文根據宋人官私記載， 試重新考索高俅的事跡， 並對高俅作出較客觀公正的評價。 　　據本文作者考証， 高俅是開封人， 出身市井。《揮麈後錄》說他曾任蘇軾（1036-1101）小史及王詵（1048-1104後）親隨，真確性甚高。他後來善待蘇軾後人， 亦有確實証據。至於說他因毬技了得而獲徽宗（1100-1125在位）寵信，本文作者則不敢苟同。我懷疑高俅在徽宗取得帝位事上立下大功，才是他得到徽宗一直寵信的真實原因。 　　據有限史料記載，高俅在徽宗的安排下，隨劉仲武（1048-1120）西征立下邊功，然後又隨林攄（？-1110後）出使遼國，累積功勞後，即超擢為三衙管軍，十多年間，擢至武臣最高職位之太尉，最後更晉位使相，爵封國公，位極人臣。但當金兵南侵，徽宗被逼退位後，他就隨即失勢；不過，他尚能保全首領，在金兵破城前得到善終。高俅之父名高敦復（？-1123）， 一兄名高伸（？-1127）， 一弟名高傑（？-1127後），有子四人，姪多人，都因高俅而飛黃騰達，他們都是貪婪成性之輩，但當高俅失勢，他們也就隨著衰敗，而在靖康之難中與草木同凋。 　　高俅最大的罪惡，是敗壞軍政，令京中的禁軍不堪作戰；另外又包庇親屬貪污歛財。不過，本文作者認為光是責備奴才的高俅，並不公道，把奴才放在高位，教他敗壞國事的徽宗更該受到責備。比較以蔡京（1047-1126）為首的「宣和六賊」，高俅所作的惡，還算不上十惡不赦。另外，高俅還推薦過包括南宋抗金名將劉錡（1098-1162）在內的幾個賢才，且又念舊，善待蘇軾之子。《水滸傳》作者把他寫成大奸大惡的人，說來是有點冤枉的。

　　　　　Kao Ch'iu, the Commanders-in-chief of the Palace Command during Emperor Sung Hui-tsung (r.1100-1125)'s reign, was the worst enemy of Leung Shan heroes and the most infamous figure in the novel Water Margin. An account of Kao's life has been found in Hui-chu hou-lu, a Southern Sung pi-chi, Nevertheless, quite a number of scholars have cast doubts on the authenticity of the Hui-chu hou-lu version of Kao's life. According to Hui-chu hou-lu, Kao carved out his career by first serving as a junior secretary to Su Shih(1036-1101) until 1093, when Su left the capital city. Kao stayed behind to work for Wang Hsien (1048-1104 after), a great painter in Northern Sung, a good friend of Su and most importantly, a close friend of the then Prince Tuan, and later, Emperor Hui-tsung. On one special occasion, Kao and the Prince met. Kao's great skill in playing the football had deeply impressed the Prince. With the approval of Wang, Kao resigned from his job and accepted the post of attendant offered by the Prince. The Prince had no doubt put his trust in Kao, who was first made a military officer when the Prince ascended the throne in 1100. Kao was then promoted to Commanders-in-chief of the Palace Command, and was eventually bestowed the title of the Duke of Jen. All Kao's relatives and friends (including the son of Su) had benefited from his promotions. When Hui-tsung abdicated in 1125, Kao lost his power and titles. He narrowly escaped from punishment while most of Hui-tsung's favourites were then purged by the new emperor, Ch'in-tsung(r.1126). Kao died in early 1126 before the Jur-chens seized control of the capital city. The paper has a three-fold purpose: .to concur with the view that Kao had indeed worked for Su and Wang before he became Hui-tsung's attendant; .to contend that Kao had assisted Prince Tuan in gaining ascendancy in the empire, and for this reason he had been trusted; .to account for Kao's promotions in his career path. Last but not the least, the author of this paper attempts to prove that though it is true that Kao was a corrupt and greedy official, as well as an imcompetent army commander. He should not be solely blamed for the decline of the Dynasty. Emperor Hui-tsung, who put Kao and other corrupt officials at the important positions of the government and the army, should bear the greatest responsibilites for the fall of the Dynasty.