明朝有没有沈万三——沈万三及其后裔考辨

发布时间：2019-08-15 08:36

【摘要】：明代以来的各种文献中,保存了不少涉及沈万三的内容,有些具有一定的事实根据,但大多充满浓郁的传奇色彩。多年来,学者们陆续发表了一批研究成果,对沈万三及其家族人物进行考证,提出一些值得重视的见解,但也出现不少难以成立的臆说和讹误。通过对相关史料和各家见解进行系统梳理和研读,可以基本确定,被很多学者视为关键史料的王行所撰《沈荣甫墓志铭》,其实和沈万三没有任何关系;而王行《半轩集》中提到的沈达卿,应当就是沈万三的次子沈旺。沈万三很有可能活到了明朝初年,但他本人似乎并未遭遇抄家流放,世上流传的相关故事,可能是把其后裔的一些事情附会到他本人身上。当时长洲县二十六都和吴江县二十九都皆有周庄,沈万三家在两个周庄都有宅第,但其家的黄册户籍应是隶属吴江县而非长洲县。
[Abstract]:In all kinds of literature since Ming Dynasty, many contents involving Shen Wansan have been preserved, some of which have certain factual basis, but most of them are full of rich legends. Over the years, scholars have published a number of research results, made textual research on Shen Wansan and his family characters, and put forward some valuable opinions, but there are also many assumptions and errors that are difficult to establish. By systematically combing and reading the relevant historical materials and opinions, it can be basically determined that Shen Rongfu's epitaph, written by Wang Xing, who is regarded by many scholars as the key historical data, has nothing to do with Shen Wansan, and Shen Daqing, mentioned in Wang Xing's semi-Xuan Collection, should be Shen Wang, the second son of Shen Wansan. Shen Wansan probably lived to the early Ming Dynasty, but he himself did not seem to have been exiled from a plagiarist family. The relevant story spread in the world may have attached some things to him about his descendants. At that time, 26 of Changzhou County and 29 of Wujiang County had Zhouzhuang, and Shen Wanshan had a house in both Zhouzhuang, but his family's yellow register household registration should belong to Wujiang County rather than Changzhou County.
【作者单位】：北京行政学院;
【分类号】：K248

【相似文献】