论文部分内容阅读
穆益勤先生的《明代院体浙派史料》一书辑录了大量明代宫廷及浙派画家的史料,是研究明代宫廷、浙派绘画的重要参考著作。但该书所收明代宫廷画家中有部分画家其身份并非宫廷画家,系被误收。由于《明代院体浙派史料》一书影响较大,目前有关美术史著作及相关论文在介绍明代宫廷画家时多以此书所收为准,导致一些身份并非宫廷画家的明代画家,长期被误认为是宫廷画家,其作品亦被误列入明代宫廷绘画作品中。经过考辨,该书所收的陈遇、陈铎、文震亨等十一位明代画家可以明确排除其宫廷画家的身份,而陈远、沈希远等五人的宫廷画家身份亦有疑问。
Mr. Mu Yiqin’s “Historical Material of Zhejiang School of the Ming Dynasty” recorded a large number of historical materials of the Ming court and the Zhejiang school painters, which is an important reference book for studying the court paintings and the school of the Zhejiang school in the Ming Dynasty. However, some of the painters of court painters in the Ming Dynasty received by the book were not court painters and were mistakenly accepted. Due to the great influence of the historical material of the Zhejiang School of the Ming Dynasty in the Ming Dynasty, most of the current art history books and related essays introduce the court painters of the Ming Dynasty for more than this book, resulting in the long-term mistakes made by some Ming painters who were not court painters Considered as a court painter, his work has also been mistakenly included in the court paintings of the Ming Dynasty. After examination, eleven Ming painters such as Chen Yu, Chen Duo, Wen Zhenheng, etc., of the book can clearly exclude their court painter’s identities, while the court painters like Chen Yuan and Shen Xiyuan also have questions about their status as court painters.