论文部分内容阅读
董其昌与冒襄是忘年之交,对二人的相交,现存研究多认为冒襄十四岁从教于董其昌,经对冒襄《同人集》所收董其昌书信研究证明,二人的实际相交并非始于此,更可能是在冒襄十九岁成婚之年。原因如下:(一)冒襄十四岁从教于董其昌的信息源自于冒襄自言,没有足够佐证,并和冒襄《香俪园偶存》自序中所言有自相矛盾之处。(二)从董其昌写给冒襄的书信可推知二人实际交往的大致时间,并非在冒襄十四岁时。在冒襄矛盾的背后,是晚明时期士人交游中攀附显达和自我标榜行为的普遍性反映,此行为也折射出当时社会的多面性。
Dong Qichang and Takexiang are the turn of the year, the intersection of the two. Most of the existing studies think that taking the fourteen-year-old to teach at Dong Qichang and Dong Qichang’s study on the collection of the same people by the Takexiang proves that the actual intersection of the two is not the beginning Here, it is more likely to be a year of marriage at the age of nineteen. The reasons are as follows: (i) The information that fooling around from teaching at Dong Qichang at the age of fourteen originated from taking a self-explanation and did not have enough evidence to prove that it contradicted the self-proclamation in the preface of “Xiangliyuan”. (2) The correspondence written by Dong Qichang to Madhoxou can be used to infer the approximate time for the two to actually engage, not at the age of fourteen. Behind the contradictions of taking a hodgepodge, it is a universal reflection of the attachment and self-advocacy behavior of scholars during the late Ming and early Ming dynasties. This behavior also reflects the multidimensional nature of the time.