四川大学历史系教授蒙默之论文《为僚说》以南平僚即南川、綦江之人作为其重要证据之一立论,无视于二者风俗之迥异;特别是对其所据史料之解释在时间及空间上均有错位,与实况不符。溪虽因有人而得名,但溪之人并非南平僚。溪得名在前,僚人徙居其地在溪得名之后;且南平僚所在之南平州与溪所在之南州非同一地望,故此项论据不能成立。本文还论证了宋代南平军人为播州杨保同族之另一分支。因蒙默先生另曾指认播州杨保为僚人,故本文亦难以认同。 Sichuan University professor of history Monmouth’s “as a bureaucrat” said that the south of Pingchu that Nanchuan, Qijiang people as one of its important evidence of an argument, ignoring the very different customs of the two; especially its interpretation of the historical data at the time And space are misplaced, and the actual situation does not match. Although the name of the river because of someone, but the people of the river is not Nanping bureaucrats. After the name of the river came to be known, the emigrants relocated to their place after the name of the river; and the Nanping state where the Nanping bureaucrat was located was not identical with the state of Nanzhou where the river was located. Therefore, the argument could not be substantiated. This article also argues that the Song Dynasty Nanping military is another branch of the Bao family Yang Bao. Because of Mr. Mengmeo another has been identified broadcast sowing Yang Bao as a bureaucratic, so this article is difficult to agree.