漢魏六朝的乳母

Wet-nurses in Late Antiquity and Early Medieval China

乳母的問題，涉及女性的職業營生、社會流動、當代對母職角色的認定，乃至於婦幼醫學的發展，是值得深入探究的問題。漢魏六朝皇室、貴族多用乳母乳哺新生嬰兒。乳母出身，雖有平民良家之例，大多則為僕婢。六朝醫方擔心乳母血氣影響乳汁，進而左右新生兒的發展，但其重點不在出身，而在挑選溫順健康的婦女，然後嚴加督導，調節飲食，防其酒醉與行房。不適任或與主人相處情況不佳的乳母，可能遭致嚴重懲罰。但也有乳母因乳哺照護、經年相處而成為主人、乳子的親信之人。乳母的影響力在這種乳子顧念恩情的氣氛中發展，一方面成為攀龍附鳳者的重要管道，另方面也成為士大夫批評的對象。以現存史料來看，漢魏六朝士人之所以反對乳母，並非因為乳母來自低下階層，血氣乳汁有窳劣之虞，也非針對產母未能克盡母職；而是擔心在宮廷政爭中，將皇子皇孫交由乳母照顧，有安全上的顧慮。對乳母角色的批評，一般也非以乳母的乳養職務為焦點，而是環繞在乳母的待遇和影響力方面。史籍記載中，評價好的乳母被形容為對乳子和主人之家盡忠保護，兼具忠僕和慈母的角色；而評價差的乳母則被形容為逾越了她原本所屬的階級和性別界線。最明顯的例子有二：魏晉士人反對為乳母服喪，是因她出身卑賤，不配有「母」之名。至於東漢士大夫反對皇帝爵封乳母，則除了乳母出身卑賤之外，又包含了男性官僚對女性參與政治的嫌惡與恐懼，所謂「專政在陰」將引起山崩地震等災異。乳母以婢僕而受封爵賞、列登官家，所仰賴者，初則為女性的生理特質──健康的乳汁，繼則為比擬於母親的照顧之情。乳子之於乳母，生時「憐焉悲之」，死則「追念號咷」。至於乳母之於乳子，雖不乏救命保護的故事，其中原因，卻可能錯綜複雜。漢魏六朝宮廷和貴族政爭頻繁，乳母和乳子禍福相倚，兩者關係難以感情深厚一言以蔽之。當一個身為婢僕的女性，被選來餵養主人的子女時，一方面她被迫出讓自己的乳汁，減少或放棄對自己兒女的付出，必須戰戰兢兢，避免犯錯導致主人家新生兒的病變死亡；另方面卻也藉此提升自己在主人家婢僕中的地位，並使自己的兒女得以攀龍附鳳。由於歷史從來不是由低下階層的婦女所撰寫、紀錄，究竟乳母的心思意念如何，千古之下，我們也只能努力揣摩而難以確知了。

Lower-class women have been employed to breast-feed and rear upper-class children in societies around the world. The blurring or crossing of class and gender boundaries that this practice produces has frequently invited critical evaluation of contemporary moralists and intellectuals. The specific attention such debates draw to issues of gender, of status, and of social advancement through the female body, have provided historians with many insights into broader politics and culture. Previous studies have shown the practices and meanings of wet-nursing in China from the Sung. This article extends our knowledge and understanding of this significant institution back to medieval China. Historical records, medical texts, and iconography are used m this article to reconstruct the selection, tasks, and treatment of the wet-nurses in imperial and aristocratic households; legal documents and stelae are applied to discuss these women's chances and limits to power. Medieval moralists and intellectuals criticized the application of wet-nursing not because upper-class women disregarded breast-feeding as the obligation of motherhood, nor because lower-class women carried inferior milk and emotions that would probably corrupt their charges. The principal reason for scholar-officials to object to the institution was in fact the shattering of conventional gender and status boundaries which resulted if a former wet-nurse was enfeoffed with aristocratic title or if her former nursling wore mourning for her. Court bureaucrats detested the idea that political dangers could arise if powerful men confided in and were influenced by these women to whom they considered they owed the debt of life. Although the bond between the wet-nurse and her charges was often depicted as a kind of mutual devotion, the reality was perhaps more complicated in view of the frequent political struggles in early medieval courts. Once a woman, slave or servant, was selected as a wet-nurse of the aristocratic new-born, she was forced to overlook her own children for the care of her master's. Meanwhile, however, she was given the opportunity to promote her families and herself through her female dispositions of milk and mothering care. Since history was never written by lower-class women, the true emotions and thoughts of the wet-nurses are probably forever beyond our grasp.