鄧茂七之亂史料傳承考辨

The Rebellion of Deng Maoqi: A Historiographical Verification of Sources

本文通過對明正統年間的鄧茂七之亂史料記載及其傳承問題的討論和分析，認為明清以來有關鄧茂七之亂的記載，諸如《雙槐歲鈔》、《鴻猷錄》、《明史》、《明史紀事本末》等相關史書，存在混亂、矛盾，或敘述不一致局面，其主要原因就在於張楷〈監軍曆略〉的內容敘述具有虛假編造、偽造史實的成份。張楷作偽之所以能成功，並使謬誤得以流傳和延續，除了其自身作為事件親歷者的特殊身份之外，與明清撰史傳抄風氣的盛行及修史環境也關係甚密。最後，筆者還致力於梳理出相對可靠的史料，以供未來研究參考。 Based on an analysis of historical sources on the Rebellion of Deng Maoqi during the Zhengtong Emperor’s reign (1436-1449) in the Ming dynasty, this essay argues that the accounts of the Rebellion in Ming and Qing historiography derived largely from a fabricated narrative in Zhang Kai’s “Accounts of a Military Inspector” (Jianjun jilue 監軍曆略). That this version of events dominated may be attributed to two factors: 1) Zhang Kai’s claim to eyewitness testimony of the rebellion, and 2) the narrative tradition in Ming and Qing historiography. This paper discusses other historical sources, which may be used in order to gain a more nuanced version of events surrounding the Deng Maoqi Rebellion.

Based on an analysis of historical sources on the Rebellion of Deng Maoqi during the Zhengtong Emperor’s reign (1436-1449) in the Ming dynasty, this essay argues that the accounts of the Rebellion in Ming and Qing historiography derived largely from a fabricated narrative in Zhang Kai’s “Accounts of a Military Inspector” (Jianjun jilue 監軍曆略). That this version of events dominated may be attributed to two factors: 1) Zhang Kai’s claim to eyewitness testimony of the rebellion, and 2) the narrative tradition in Ming and Qing historiography. This paper discusses other historical sources, which may be used in order to gain a more nuanced version of events surrounding the Deng Maoqi Rebellion.