《明史》往往被視為官修史書中之善本，關於《明史》纂修的過程，學者已有不少討論，例如從官方的立場、編纂之分期等方面來探討這部書的編修情形，然而在《明史》各式稿本中，416卷本《明史》的考訂與其中〈列女傳〉的編纂，仍有待釐清與研考。 北京圖書館藏416卷《明史》抄本，書中未註明作者，《續修四庫全書》將其撰著人列為萬斯同，但萬氏編纂《明史》的成果，自清代以來即眾說紛紜，加以其所留下的史稿殘缺不全或未註明撰者，往往難以斷定。其次，目前所存被視為萬斯同《明史》的稿本中，唯有416卷《明史》存有〈列女傳〉，其內容與通行的武英殿本《明史》稍異。本文分析416卷本《明史》〈列女傳〉編纂的特質，探究本書將明代婦女集體入傳的構想，並與王鴻緒《明史稿》、通行本《明史》〈列女傳〉二稿略作比較，以凸顯《明史》〈列女傳〉編纂的特色與其在《明史》編纂過程的意義，另也順帶考證舊題萬斯同416卷本《明史》的相關問題。

The Mingshi 明史 is considered one of the finest official dynastic histories. Existing scholarship has concentrated on how it was written, looking at such matters as the aims of the government that compiled it, the problems involved and the results of each step. Among the different versions of the Mingshi is one in 416 juan 卷 that has yet to be properly investigated, in particular its Lienu zhuan 列女傳 section. This version was written in the Qing dynasty and is the earliest full text of the Mingshi. It is held in the Beijing National Library, but with no author listed. In 1995 the compiler of Xuxiu siku quanshu 續修四庫全書 attributed it to Wan Sitong 萬斯同. Since we still know little about exactly how Wan Sitong was involved in the writing, it may be inappropriate to assume his authorship. The purpose of this paper is firstly to examine the question of authorship, secondly to analyze how the Lienu zhuan section of this book was compiled, and finally to consider the idea of writing Ming women into history. These issues will not only help to shed light on historians’ attitudes during the long process of compiling the Mingshi in the Qing dynasty, but will also answer some questions concerning the history of the Ming dynasty and historiography in Qing China.