2015年11月20日 星期五

「新清史」再思:大清是個帝國嗎?


清史研究新趨勢工作坊

2015




[報告摘要]

1.甘德星:「新清史」再思:大清是個帝國嗎?
「新清史」的學者認為大清不是中國,因為中國只是大清的一部份。大清是個包含中國和內陸歐亞的「前近代帝國」。但中國自古無「帝國」一詞。西方將中國比附為「帝國」imperium應自明代始。因此「新清史」學者所謂「帝國」乃源自滿洲之時實誤。19世紀中葉,「帝國」一詞由日本傳入中國。甲午以後,「大清帝國」一詞於非正式、非公開的場合開始流傳,清朝正式、公開改稱「帝國」是20世紀初期之事,唯其內涵與「新清史」學者所主張的「前近代帝國」並不相同。基本上,大清不是帝國。

2.米丹尼: 美國學界研究清朝邊疆之方向
淺覽今時北美史界,學者們在研究異國邊疆時常會不自覺代入西部經驗,並以「邊域牽動國家變動」(Frontier change shaped national change)與「邊疆比較研究」(Comparative frontier study)等既有視角為基調,進而審視殖民意味濃厚之「陲域開啟」(Frontier Opening)、「拓荒定居」(Settlement)及「地方管理」(Rule)問題;本報告即欲在此框架下,探討當今美國學界熱門的清代邊疆研究議題。

過往美籍學者們常將清代邊疆研究置於殖民樣板之下,並專注審勘當地的「行政管理」(State Administration)及「漢人定居」(Han Chinese Settlement)情況;此即為一般對「邊疆研究」(Frontier Studies)較為鬆散之闡述,但此空泛並缺乏理論依據的解釋在研究清朝邊域上是不適用的。歐文‧拉鐵摩爾(Owen Lattimore)是其中一位率先跳脫此狹隘框架的學者,其以「生態差異」(Ecological Differences)為核心依據審視中國西、北邊疆的研究方法,誠然為後世豎立起一個極具影響力的榜樣。

清代邊疆在過去30年裡獲得美國史學界的熱切關心,相關主題的研究方法和觀點亦逐漸成熟,為學者們所眷注之地域及議題也愈趨廣闊;舉例而言,吾人可明顯發現到現今北美史界對清朝邊域的探勘,深刻受到如「社會史」(Social History)、「文化史」(Cultural History)和「新清史」(New Qing History)等諸般新穎題材的影響。先不論此情形可否被稱為一種新「領域」(Field)的誕生,我們卻再也無法忽視邊疆研究在清史研究中那不可或缺的重要性。

在這趨勢之下,探討18世紀清廷邊疆管理政策及內陸漢人遷徙情況之研究越來越多,此流行亦促使學者們將視角拉寬至「內部陲域」(Internal Peripheries)與「非漢住民」(Non-Han Frontier People,如苗民及台灣原住民)的審視。在某些層面上,此類新式主題實質上是在排斥傳統學界過於注重「國界歷史」(Borderland History)的殖民史觀,並轉而倡導關注當地發展之「地域歷史」(Regional History),進而審視邊疆地區在因應政治核心的需求下所引發內部質變。「新文化史」(New Cultural History)學界亦開始關注探討政府彰顯統治的「工具」(Tools of Representation,如地圖及民族定義),並藉之推定當時清廷如何定義邊疆地域及其居民;更有學者將清代的「社會菁英」(Social Elites)設為主角,進而探究其思想是如何幫助朝廷於邊域建立起統治的正當性,加以審視滿清政府的「帝國認知意識」(Imperial Knowledge)。

新清史亦對美國清朝邊疆研究造成不可忽視之影響。此學派認為大清與他朝最為相異之處,即在於其甚為重視與「內亞」(Inner Asia)之間的緊密關聯,並致力打造出一個容納多元種族之「初現代帝國」(Early Modern Empire);此論點著重於中國北方邊域的探討。在其影響之下,邊疆史的研究亦開始重視「滿族殖民主義」(Manchu Colonialism)下清廷對外環發動的各項戰役,並以新的理論方法為「內亞」的範圍作出定義;由此可見,新清史或多或少地顛覆了傳統史學家看待清代邊域的方法,並提出邊疆開發實則與帝國內部發展環環相扣的嶄新觀點。

在評估美國清代邊疆研究的前程時,吾人可以清楚地預視到一連串對清屬內亞地區的探討;「清代邊域」一詞亦需更為精闢之闡釋(如該怎麼界定「內部邊域」與「外部邊域」),而清朝各邊疆間的比較討論亦存在著無窮盡的潛力。有別於以往過度重視初清與中清研究的趨勢,此持續成長之學門不但逐漸將觸手延伸至清末,更積極探究「邊域」內化為「國境」之過程,並以此為依據推敲邊疆於形塑「現代中國」(Modern Chinese Nation)上的影響與貢獻。

3. 村上信明:日本東洋史學中的《清朝史》與《清代史》
有人說,在日本的清史研究,主要使用滿文文獻來研究的人被稱作「清朝史」(一般指的是清初史)的研究者,而主要使用漢文文獻、不懂滿文的人則被稱作「清代史」的研究者。這樣的區別與19世紀末期開始的日本「東洋史」的研究傳統和歷史有密切的關係。本次報告簡介日本東洋史學中「清朝史」與「清代史」的出現過程以及現今日本的清史研究狀況。

4.孫守朋:或滿人?或漢人?——清代漢軍旗人研究回顧與探索
清代漢軍旗人研究始於二十世紀三十年代,自孟森以來,尤其是二十世紀八十年代迄今,漢軍旗人研究成果可觀。此方面研究大體分為漢軍個體與群體研究,後者比前者更體現漢軍群體特徵,主要集中在漢軍旗人組織、地位與歷史作用、文化與民族認同等方面。總體來講,近代以來的漢軍旗人研究不斷向縱深方向拓展,同時還存在對群體階層關注不夠廣泛、與其他群體關係混淆等不足。


─────────────────

附錄

Directions in North American Research on Qing Frontiers
Daniel McMahon


This presentation will discuss topics of research in North American study of Qing dynasty frontiers. It suggests that this scholarship has been influenced by American perspectives on the United States Western frontier. This includes a colonial perspective focused on frontier opening, settlement, and rule; the idea that frontier change shaped national change; and the idea of comparative frontier study.  

Older American research on Qing frontiers has tended to use colonial models focused on topics such as state administration and Han Chinese settlement. These were generally regional studies that loosely used the term “frontier” but did not always clearly define, or theorize, the Qing frontier.  One very good exception is the work of Owen Lattimore, which did create an influential model of the northern Chinese/Inner Asian frontier zone based on ideas of ecological differences.

The past 30 years have seen an enormous growth of attention to Qing frontiers. This work has become more sophisticated in its methods and perspectives, as well as has extended to a wider range of topics and regions. This includes, for example, research influenced by new trends of social history, cultural history, and New Qing history. Whether or not this is a clear “field” of study can be argued. More certain is that frontier study has become widely recognized as an important part of Qing studies.  

More recent studies have continued to be concerned with questions of Qing frontier administration and the processes of Han settlement from the Qing interior, particularly over the 18th century. This attention, however, has widened to consider internal peripheries, as well as the role played by non-Han frontier people (such as the Miao or native Taiwanese). In a few cases, it has also directly rejected traditional American colonial models to more clearly consider borderland history as regional history, rather than as an area transformed through its connection to national centers. New cultural study has also given attention to the Qing’s use of “tools of representation” (such as maps and ethnology) to show the nature of imperial borderland rule. Likewise, there is also study of the “idea” of the frontier in the ways that Qing elites have developed colonial knowledge that more clearly defined frontiers as part of Qing territory.

American study of Qing frontiers has also been influenced by New Qing History. This perspective, which sees the Qing as distinct in its connection to Inner Asia and efforts to build a multi-ethnic early modern empire, focuses on China’s northern frontier. Study of the conquest of Inner Asian territory, “Manchu colonialism,” and new technology to define Inner Asian territory all directly connect with frontier studies. As important, the New Qing History has done much to change how historians see Qing frontiers. This study demonstrates, and argues, that frontier developments were directly connected to the development of the empire overall.

As we look to future directions in the American study of Qing frontiers, we see a continuation of study of the Qing Inner Asia. There is also a call to more clearly define Qing frontiers (e.g., distinguish between internal and external borderlands), as well as advance a comparative study of Qing frontiers. Finally, this growing body of study – concerned mainly with the early and middle Qing – has led to new attention to the late Qing and the manner in which Qing frontiers became national borders, as well as contributed to the formation of the modern Chinese nation. 

North American Research on Qing Frontier History
Adas, Micheal. “Imperialism and Colonialism in Comparative Perspective.” The International History Review 20.2 (June, 1998): 371-88.
Atwill, David G. “Trading Places: Resistance, Ethnicity, and Governance in Nineteenth-Century Yunnan.” In Dragons, Tigers, and Dogs: Qing Crisis Management and the Boundaries of State Power in Late Imperial China, eds Robert J. Antony and Jane Kate Leonard. Ithaca: Cornell East Asia Series, 2002. 245-72.
Dai, Yingcong. The Sichuan Frontier: Imperial Strategy in the Early Qing. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 2009.
Di Cosmo, Nicola. “Qing Colonial Administration in Inner Asia.” The International History Review 20.2 (June, 1998): 287-309.
Edmonds, Richard Louis. Northern Frontiers of Qing China and Tokugawa Japan: A Comparative Study of Frontier Policy. Chicago: University of Chicago Department of Geography Research Paper 213, 1985.
Elliot, Mark. “Frontier Stories: Periphery as Center in Qing History.” Frontiers of History in China 9.3 (2014): 366-60.
Fletcher, Joseph. “Ch’ing Inner Asia c. 1800,” In The Cambridge History of China: Late Ch’ing, 1800-1911, v. 10, pt. 1, eds Denis Twitchett and John K. Fairbank. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978. 35-106.
---. “The Heyday of the Ch’ing Order in Mongolia, Sinkiang, and Tibet.” In The Cambridge History of China: Late Ch’ing, 1800-1911, v. 10, pt. 1, eds Denis Twitchett and John K. Fairbank. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978. 351-408.
Furniss, Elizabeth Furniss. “Imagining the Frontier: Comparative Perspectives from Canada and Australia.” In Dislocating the Frontier: Essaying the Mystique of the Outback, eds Deborah Bird Rose and Richard Davis. Canberra: ANU Press, 2006. Ch. 2.
Gaubatz, Piper Rae. Beyond the Great Wall: Urban Form and Transformation on the Chinese Frontiers. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996.
Giersch, C. Patterson. “’A Motley Throng:’ Social Change on Southwest China’s Early Modern Frontier, 1700-1880.” The Journal of Asian Studies 60.1 (Feb. 2001):67-94.
---. Asian Borderlands: The Transformation of Qing China’s Yunnan Frontier. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2006.
Harrall, Stevan. “Introduction: Civilizing Projects and the Reaction to Them.” In Cultural Encounters on China’s Ethnic Frontiers, ed. Stevan Harrell. Seattle and London: University of Washington Press, 1995. 3-36.
Herman, John. “The Mu’ege Kingdom: A Brief History of a Frontier Empire in Southwest China.” In Political Frontiers, Ethnic Boundaries, and Human Geographies in Chinese History, eds Nicola Di Cosmo and Don J. Wyatt. London and New York: RoutledgeCurzon, 2003.
---. “The Cant of Conquest: Tusi Offices and China’s Political Incorporation of the Southwest Frontier.” In Empire at the Margins: Culture, Ethnicity, and Frontier in Early Modern China, eds Pamela Kyle Crossley, Helen F. Siu, and Donald Sutton. Berkley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2006. 135-70.
---. Amid the Clouds and Mist: China’s Colonization of Guizhou, 1200-1700. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2007.
---. “Collaboration and Resistance on the Southwest Frontier: Early Eighteenth Century       Qing Expansion on Two Fronts.” Late Imperial China 35.1 (June 2004): 77-112.
Hostetler, Laura. Qing Colonial Enterprise: Ethnography and Cartography in Early Modern China. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001.
Jenks, Robert. Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou: The “Miao” Rebellion, 1854-1873. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1994.
Kim, Hodong. Holy War in China: The Muslim Rebellion and State in Chinese Central Asia, 1864-1877. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2004.
Kim, Loretta, Mathew W. Mosca, Victor Zatsepine. “Introductions: Interfaces in New Qing History.” Frontiers of History in China 9.3 (2014): 329-35.
Knapp, Ronald, ed. China’s Island Frontier: Studies in the Historical Geography of Taiwan. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1980.
Lattimore, Owen. Inner Asian Frontiers of China. New York: National Geographic Society, 1940.
---. Studies in Frontier History: Collected Papers, 1929-58. London: Oxford University Press, 1962.
Lee, Robert H.G. The Manchurian Frontier in Ch’ing History. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1970.
Leong, Sow-Theng. Migration and Ethnicity in Chinese History: Hakkas, Pengmin, and Their Neighbors. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997.
McMahon, Daniel. “Identity and Conflict on a Chinese Borderland: Yan Ruyi and the Recruitment of the Gelao During the 1795-97 Miao Revolt.” Late Imperial China 23.2 (2002): 53-86.
---. “Qing Reconstruction in the Southern Shaanxi Highlands: State Perceptions and Plans, 1799-1820,” Late Imperial China 30.1 (June 2009): 85-118.
---. “Qing Highland Precedent, Yan Ruyi, and the Defense of the Guangdong Coast, 1804-1805.” Asia Major 3rd Series 23.2 (Fall 2010): 1-32.
Meskill, Johanna. A Chinese Pioneer Family: the Lins of Wu-feng, Taiwan, 1729-1895. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1979.
Millward, James. “New Perspectives on the Qing Frontier.” In Remapping China: Fissures in Historical Terrain, eds. Gail Hershatter, Emily Honig, Jonathan N. Lipman, and Randal Stross. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1996. 113-42.
---. Beyond the Pass: Economy, Ethnicity, and Empire in Qing Central Asia, 1759-1864. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1998.
---. “’Coming onto the Map’: ‘Western Regions’ Geography and Cartographic Nomenclature in the Making of the Chinese Empire in Xinjiang.” Late Imperial China 20.2 (Dec. 1999): 61-98.
---. “The Advent of Modern Education on the Sino-Central Asian Frontier.” In Untaming the Frontier in Anthropology, Archaeology, and History, eds Lars Rodseth and Bradley J. Parker. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 2005. 261-80.
---. Eurasian Crossroads: A History of Xinjiang. New York: Columbia University Press, 2007.
Murray, Dian. Pirates of the South China Coast, 1790-1810. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1987.
Nelson, Patricia, Clyde A. Milner, and Charles E Rankin, eds. Trails: Toward a New Western History. Lawrence: University of Kansas Press, 1991.
Newby, L.J. The Empire and the Khanate: A Political History of Qing Relations with Khoqand c. 1760-1860. Leiden: Brill, 2005.
Perdue, Peter C. “Comparing Empires: Manchu Colonialism.” The International History Review 20.2 (June 1998): 255-62.
---. “Boundaries, Maps, and Movement: Chinese, Russian, and Mongolia Empires in Early Modern Central Eurasia.” The International History Review 20.2 (June, 1998): 263-86.
---. China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia. Cambridge, Mass.: Belknap Press, 2005.
---. “From Turfan to Taiwan: Trade and War on Two Chinese Frontiers.” In Untaming the Frontier in Anthropology, Archaeology, and History, eds Lars Rodseth and Bradley J. Parker. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 2005. 27-51.
---. “Coercion and Commerce on Two Chinese Frontiers.” In Military Culture in Imperial China, ed. Nicola Di Cosmo. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2009. 317-38.
Prescott, John Robert Victor. Boundaries and Frontiers. Totowa: Roman and Littlefield, 1978.
Rodseth, Lars and Bradley J. Parker. “Introduction: Theoretical Considerations in the Study of Frontiers.” In Untaming the Frontier in Anthropology, Archaeology, and History, eds Lars Rodseth and Bradley J. Parker. Tucson: University of Arizona Press, 2005. 3-22.
Rowe, William T. “Education and Empire in the Southwest: Ch’en Hung-mou in Yunnan, 1733-38.” In Education and Society in Late Imperial China, 1600-1900, eds Bejamin A. Elman and Alexander Woodside. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1994. 417-57.
Scott, James C. The Art of Being Governed: An Anarchist History of Upland Southeast Asia. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2009.
Shepherd, John Robert. Statecraft and Political Economy on the Taiwan Frontier, 1600-1800. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1993.
Skinner, G. William. “Regional Urbanization in Nineteenth-Century China.” In The City in Late Imperial China, ed. G. William Skinner. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1977. 211-49.
---. “Cities and the Hierarchy of Local Systems.” In The City in Late Imperial China, ed. G. William Skinner. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1977. 275-351.
Sutton, Donald S. “Myth Making on an Ethnic Frontier: the Culture of the Heavenly Kings of West Hunan, 1715-1996.” Modern China 26.4 (Oct. 2000):448-500.
---. “Violence and Ethnicity on a Qing Colonial Frontier: Customary and Statutory Law in the Eighteenth-Century Miao Pale,” Modern Asian Studies 37.1 (2003):41-80.
---. “Ethnic Revolt in the Qing Empire: The ‘Miao Uprising’ of 1795-1797 Reexamined.” Asia Major 3rd Series, 16.2 (2003): 105-52
---. “Ethnicity and the Miao Frontier in the Eighteenth Century.” In Empire at the Margins: Culture, Ethnicity, and Frontier in Early Modern China, eds Pamela Kyle Crossley, Helen F. Siu, and Donald Sutton. Berkley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2006. 190-228.
Teng, Emma Jinhua. Taiwan’s Imagined Geography: Chinese Colonial Travel Writing and Pictures, 1683-1895. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2004.
Thompson, Leonard and Howard Lamar. “Comparative Frontier History.” In The Frontier in History: North America and Southern Africa Compared, eds Leonard Thompson and Howard Lamar. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1981. 1-13
Turner, Fredrick Jackson. “The Significance of the Frontier in American History.” In Frederick Jackson Turner: Wisconsin’s Historian of the Frontier, ed. Martin Ridge. Madison: State Historical Society of Wisconsin, 1986.
Vermeer, Eduard B. “The Mountain Frontier in Late Imperial China: Economic and Social Developments in the Bashan.” T’oung Pao LXXVII.4-5 (1991): 300-29.
Von Glahn, Richard. The Country of Streams and Grottoes: Expansion, Settlement, and the Civilizing of the Sichuan Frontier in Song Times. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 1987.
Waley-Cohen, Joanna. “The New Qing History,” Radical History Review 88 (2004):193-206.
Wang, Xiuyu. China’s Last Imperial Frontier: Late Qing Expansion in Sichuan’s Tibetan Borderland. Lanhan: Lexington Books, 2011.
Wiens, Herold J. China’s March to the Tropics. Hamden: The Shoe String Press, 1954.





沒有留言:

張貼留言