Re-understanding the "Legitimacy" of the Qing Dynasty: Thinking Beyond Sinicization and the Inner Asia Theory

Abstract

Abstract:

The orthodox theory of most dynasties in China is based on Confucian concepts such as "inheriting the mandate of heaven" and "transforming people to virtue", and this orthodox theory was mainly inherited and interpreted by the Han nationality. In that respect, the Qing Dynasty was different from its predecessors. The territory of the Qing empire extended to areas inhabited by a variety of nonHan people, especially the vast areas in the northwest and southwest. Clearly, the Confucian orthodox view could not fully accommodate the beliefs and customs of the people in these areas. Thus, how the Qing Dynasty ruled its frontiers remains an important research topic. This article seeks to elucidate a new model of legitimacy formed respectively in the heartland and the frontier of Qing territory. The Qing emperors relied on the Confucian moral education in the heartland but utilized the belief in Tibetan Buddhism in the frontier areas where the inhabitants were mainly minorities. A new system was thus established to adapt to the unique situation in which the concept of legitimacy needed to be amended. In this respect, the meaning of "rule” can be distinguished from that of "governance." "Rule" mainly refers to the utilization and respect of the imperial power in a set of imaginary symbolic metaphors, while "governance" bears more technical meaning supported by a profound ideological background.

摘要：

中国历代王朝的正统论均建立在“承天授命”和“以德化人”的儒家思想基础之上，也主要是由汉民族加以继承和阐释。清朝与前朝的区别是其版图已延伸至许多非汉人族群聚居的地区。儒家正统观显然无法全面涵盖这些地区的民众信仰和习俗。如何理解清朝对藩部边疆地区的统治仍然是目前清史研究的一项重要课题。本文提出清朝分别针对内地和边疆形成了新型的“正统性”的统治模式，清帝在内地的统治仍然依赖儒家的道德教化，对藩部的控制则主要依靠边疆少数族群对藏传佛教的信奉，从而建立起了另一种对前朝正统性的补充性制度框架。本文特别提出要区分“统治”和“治理”的涵义，“统治”主要是指皇权对一系列带有虚构色彩的象征性隐喻系统的利用和尊崇，“治理”则是对各类象征性统治符号的技术性延伸。其背后具有相当深刻的思想史背景在起作用。

YANG Nianqun. Re-understanding the "Legitimacy" of the Qing Dynasty: Thinking Beyond Sinicization and the Inner Asia Theory[J]. Studies in Qing History.

杨念群. 清朝“正统性”再认识——超越“汉化论”“内亚论”的新视角[J]. 清史研究.

References

An Haiyan. “Zuowei ‘zhuanlunwang’ he ‘wenshu pusa’ de huangdi: zailun qianlongdi yu zangchuan fojiao de guanxi ”
(Emperor as “Cakravartin” and the “Incarnation of Mañju?r?”: The Relationship between the Qianlong Emperor and Tibetan Buddhism). Qingshi yanjiu (The Qing History Journal) (2) 2020.
An Ziang. “Qingdai zangchuan fojiao de wangchaohua ” (The dynastization of Tibetan Buddhism in Qing empire ). Doctoral dissertation of Renmin University of China, 2019.
Chen Kanli. Ruxue shushu yu zhengzhi: zaiyi de shehuiwenhuashi (Confucianism, Skills and Politics: Disastrous Social and Cultural History). Beijing: Beijing daxue chubanshe, 2015.
Chen Suzhen. Chunqiu yu “handao”: lianghan zhengzhi yu zhengzhi wenhua yanjiu (Studies on politics and political culture in the Han dynasty). Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 2011.
Dai Yi. Qianlongdi jiqi shidai (Emperor Qianlong and his era). Beijing: Zhongguo renmin daxue chubanshe, 2018.
Dali Zhabu ed. Zhongguo bianjiang minzu yanjiu (Studies of China’s frontier regions and nationalities), Vol.10.Beijing: Zhongyang minzu daxue chubanshe, 2017.
Barish, Daniel. “Han Chinese, Manchu,and Western Spaces: The Changing Facade of Imperial Education in Qing Beijing.” Frontiers of History in China 14 (2) 2019.
Brophy, David. “The Junghar Mongol Legacy and the Language of Loyalty in Qing Xinjiang.” Harvard Journal ofAsiatic Studies 73 (2) 2013.
Deng Xiaonan. Zuzongzhifa: beisong qianqi zhengzhi shulue (A brief account of politics in the early Northern Song dynasty). Beijing: Sanlian shuddian, 2006.
Perry, Elizabeth J. “Geming de chuantong yu shiyingxing yanjiu” (Revolutionary tradition and adaptive governance). Suqu yanjiu (Soviet Area Studies) (4) 2019.
Rawski, Evelyn. Qingdai gongting shehuishi (The last emperors: a social history of Qing imperial institutions).Translated by Zhou Weiping. Beijing: Zhongguo renmin daxue chubanshe, 2009.