英文摘要
|
The present paper focuses on writings authored by male writers on the late Ming warrior Shen Yunying (1624-1660), as well as other military women during the Ming-Qing transition. It explores their gender reversal specifically as revealed by the differences in writing about military women versus chaste women. Moreover, this paper considers how male literati expressed their general expectations of military women through these forms of writings. This paper begins with discussion on the epitaph and biography of Shen Yunying, as written by Mao Qiling (1623-1713), which did not conform to largely practiced rules concerning writing on women. This is shown in regards to the title of the work and the specific naming of the subject. In addition, the clansmen of Shen made an exception to the general rule of excluding women born into the clan by listing Shen Yunying within the lineage when compiling their genealogy. These two forms of special treatment, seen here to be permitted by men, demonstrate the subjectivity and particularities of Shen as a military woman. Secondly, by examining the writings on Shen Yunying and other contemporary military women, this paper argues that the remarkable feats performed by these military women on the battlefield crossed gender boundaries; being described by men, however, this "crossing" still obeyed the patriarchal systems and traditional Confucian values, and was rationalized through virtues such as loyalty, piety and chastity. The subjectivities of these military women were thus not able to be freely displayed, given that their depiction is under the control of male writers.
|
参考文献
|
-
衣若蘭(2017)。明清夫婦合葬墓誌銘義例探研。臺灣師大歷史學報,58,51-90。
連結:
-
(2000).中國野史集成續編.成都:巴蜀書社.
-
(2008).金石全例(外一種).北京:北京圖書館出版社.
-
(2005).明鈔本實錄.北京:線裝書局.
-
(1974).明史.北京:中華書局.
-
(2008).金石全例(外一種).北京:北京圖書館出版社.
-
(2008).金石全例(外一種).北京:北京圖書館出版社.
-
(1991).明代傳記叢刊(附索引).台北:明文書局.
-
(1974).明史.北京:中華書局.
-
(2008).金石全例(外一種).北京:北京圖書館出版社.
-
(2010).清代詩文集彙編.上海:上海古籍出版社.
-
(1991).明代傳記叢刊(附索引).台北:明文書局.
-
(2010).清代詩文集彙編.上海:上海古籍出版社.
-
(2000).四庫未收書輯刊.北京:北京出版社.
-
(2003).錢牧齋全集(捌).上海:上海古籍出版社.
-
(1974).明史.北京:中華書局.
-
Altenburger, Roland(2009).The sword or the needle: The female knight-errant (xia) in traditional Chinese narrative.New York:Peter Lang.
-
Cass, Victoria(1999).Dangerous women: Warriors, grannies, and geishas of the Ming.Oxford:Rowman & Littlefield.
-
Pei-Yi(2002).Yang Miaozhen: A woman warrior in thirteenth-century China.NAN NÜ: Men, Women and Gender in China,4(2),137-170.
-
毛奇齡(1968).西河文集.台北:臺灣商務印書館.
-
王志芳(2014)。沈雲英故事考(詩詠篇)。湖南科技學院學報,35(4),60-66。
-
王志芳(2014)。沈雲英故事考(史證篇)。湖南科技學院學報,35(6),42-48。
-
王志芳(2014)。沈雲英故事考(緣起篇)。湖南科技學院學報,35(3),53-58。
-
王猷定(1667),〈王端淑傳〉(清‧王端淑輯,《名媛詩緯初編》,據清康熙六年清音堂刻本),《明清婦女著作》。取自 https://digital.library.mcgill.ca/mingqing/search/details-poem.php?poemID=40076&language=ch
-
合山究(2006)。明清時代の女性と文学。東京都:汲古書院。
-
衣若蘭(2015)。女性「名」分與清初傳記書寫論辯。新史學,26(1),59-104。
-
李貞德(編)(2009).中國史新論‧性別史分冊.台北:中央研究院.
-
李惠儀(2015)。女英雄的想像與歷史記憶。嶺南學報,1&2,85-108。
-
沈德符(1997).萬曆野獲編.北京:中華書局.
-
沈德潛(1975).清詩別裁集.北京:中華書局.
-
沈豫纂修(1841),《蕭山長巷沈氏宗譜》(據道光二十一年承道堂藏板翻攝),卷 5 下〈二房養素公派‧北庄二十四世至二十八世〉、卷 30〈遙祭明故夫君實授都司對庭賈公祭文〉,FamilySearch,取自 https://www.familysearch.org/search/catalog/1093616?availability=Family%20History%20Libraryhttps://www.familysearch.org/catalog/search
-
秋瑾(1985).秋瑾集.上海:上海古籍出版社.
-
胡曉真(2017).明清文學中的西南敘事.台北:台灣大學出版中心.
-
孫靜庵(編),趙一生(點校)(1985).明遺民錄.杭州:浙江古籍出版社.
-
秦燕春(2008).清末民初的晚明想像.北京:北京大學出版社.
-
袁枚(1978).隨園隨筆.台北:鼎文書局.
-
陳芸(2014).小黛軒論詩詩.北京:國家圖書館.
-
陳捷先(2017).族譜學論集.台北:三民.
-
陳捷先(1999).中國的族譜.台北:行政院文化建設委員會.
-
陳寶良(2010).中國婦女通史‧明代卷.杭州:杭州出版社.
-
章學誠(1974).文史通義等三種.台北:世界書局.
-
華瑋(2013).明清戲曲中的女性聲音與歷史記憶.台北:國家出版社.
-
華瑋(2012)。女性、歷史與戲曲:傾傳奇中王翠翹故事對史傳與小說的改寫及其意涵。中國文學學報,3,111-139。
-
黃衛總(2004)。國難與士人的性別焦慮:從明亡之後有關貞節烈女的話語說起。明清文學與思想中之主體意識與社會:文學篇(下),台北:
-
楊陸榮,吳翊如(點校)(1995).三藩記事本末.北京:中華書局.
-
楊嗣昌,梁頌成(輯校)(2005).楊嗣昌集.長沙:岳麓書社.
-
溫睿臨,李瑤(校勘)(1962).南疆繹史.台北:臺灣銀行.
-
董榕,蝸寄居士(總評)(2010).芝龕記.北京:學苑出版社.
-
趙翼,欒保群,呂宗力(點校)(2003).陔餘叢考.石家莊:河北人民出版社.
-
劉淑(2014).個山遺集.北京:國家圖書館.
-
劉翠溶(1992).明清時期家族人口與社會經濟變遷.台北:中央研究院經濟研究所.
-
潘昂霄(2008).金石全例(外一種).北京:北京圖書館出版社.
-
蕭燕婉(譯注)(2017).明清時代的女性與文學.台北:聯經.
-
鮑振方(2008).金石全例(外一種).北京:北京圖書館出版社.
-
謝曉菁(2019)。台灣大學歷史學研究所。
|