放狗！after1500年欧洲中世纪妇女的工作，付原文

jijiyangyu

昨天一战亚洲大厦，数学轻敌了才47，V也考得不好。今天，稍微冷静点了，放个狗，攒RP。

昨天，考到了一篇《欧洲中世纪妇女的工作》，用几个关键词，上Google搜了一下，找到了原文出处，是一篇关于欧洲妇女工作的Review里面的（http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~judithb/histstand.pdf）。一下是根据记忆筛选出的原文，估计语句上稍微有点出入。

P1，中世纪after1500，由于社会分工，工作要求的提高，女性的工作机会，越来越少了。只能转作low skilled，low paid活，甚至在家里干活。

In the south German cities examined by Wiesner in Working
Women in Renaissance Germany, working options for women between
1500 and 1700 eroded due to a conjuncture of economic
and religious factors. As occupations in these cities became more
specialized and required more training, women lost ground because
they lacked the requisite skills and education. Working
women also encountered more explicit opposition from men, especially
those men disadvantaged by economic change. Guilds
facing economic contraction acted to restrict women's work, and
journeymen facing lifelong employment in the workshops of elite
masters refused to work alongside the daughters and wives of
these masters. And, as the Reformation inspired new moral concerns,
city councils not only closed public baths and brothels that
had employed some women but also passed legislation to ensure
that "masterless" women were forced under the authority of some
male, whether father, husband, or employer. Women never marshaled
effective, collective opposition to these losses because they
identified more strongly with their families than with other women.

P2，进一步分析补充，加强了这个现象和说法。

Perhaps the most chilling indictment of medieval women's work
comes from a comparison of two essays in Women and Work in
Preindustrial Europe -Klapisch-Zuber's "Women Servants in
Florence during the Fourteenth and Fifteenth Centuries" and
Susan Mosher Stuard's 'To Town to Serve: Urban Domestic
Slavery in Medieval Ragusa." Both conclude that distinctions between
servants and slaves were minimal and often obscured. In
other words, domestic service -probably the most important occupation
of unmarried women in medieval Europe-was often akin to domestic slavery.

P3，其实，考试时候，最后一段很短，估计GMAC缩了不少。又说其他两个中世纪学家的看法，其实并不是这样的。但是，作者说他们缺少数据和比较的依据。

To be sure, some medievalists continue to extol the "remarkable"
opportunities of women before 1500. David Nicholas in The
Domestic Life of a Medieval City: Women, Children, and the Family in
Fourteenth-Century Ghent presents an idyllic and enthusiastic image
of women's lives in fourteenth-century Ghent. But his study,
like Steven Ozment's recent work, reveals how lightly historians
trained in traditional specialties should tread when they enter the
field of social history. Nicholas has little understanding of either
the methods of social history or its historiography. He cheerfully
claims, for example, that women were "frequently found in the
business world," but his own data suggest not only that few
women traded independently of their fathers or husbands but also
that most women controlled little wealth and worked in "traditional
female occupations" (see pages 207, 84, and table 7).
Nicholas's study is valuable for the archival information that it
recites at great length, but his conclusions cannot be trusted.


Also problematic are recent positive assessments of medieval
women's work by Kay E. Lacey (for London during the fourteenth
and fifteenth centuries) in Women and Work in Preindustrial England
and Kathryn L. Reyerson (for early-fourteenth-century Montpellier)
in Women and Work in Preindustrial Europe. Although
Lacey eagerly lists the many women she has found employed in
many occupations in London, her evidence is largely anecdotal,
and she never compares the working opportunities of women to
those of comparable men.

盐水柠檬

啊呀我好爱你哦狗主么么么么

zxfjacob

谢谢！！

jijiyangyu

感觉这篇Paper（http://www-bcf.usc.edu/~judithb/histstand.pdf） GMAC挖了很多东西，大家有时间可以看看。

鱼翅年糕大侠

谢谢楼主提供的原文！

athenawujj

谢谢～狗主～～万岁！

sparklelynn

LZ你太伟大了吧！！

jijiyangyu

LZ你太伟大了吧！！

-- by 会员 sparklelynn (2013/1/22 20:38:55)

不过，貌似那个golden age的版本很多，我贴的是我碰到的，很担心误导别人。出JJ的时候请注明一下，谢谢。建议大家有空把那篇长的Review看一下，当作练习阅读好了，里面至少有10来种研究Golden Age妇女地位的学者的观点。

bluedoll

感谢！