| Part ofa series on the |
| History of China |
|---|
 |
|
Related articles |
Aconquest dynasty (Chinese:征服王朝;pinyin:Zhēngfú Wángcháo) in thehistory of China refers to aChinese dynasty established by non-Han ethnicities which ruled parts or all ofChina proper, the traditional heartland of the Han people, and whose rulers may or may not have fullyassimilated into the dominant Han culture. Four major dynasties have been considered "conquest dynasties": theLiao (916–1125), theJin (1115–1234),Yuan (1271–1368), andQing (1644–1912).
The term "conquest dynasty" was coined by the German-AmericansinologistKarl August Wittfogel in his 1949revisionist history of theLiao dynasty (916–1125). He argued that the Liao, as well as theJin (1115–1234),Yuan (1271–1368), andQing (1644–1912) dynasties of China were not really "Chinese", and that the ruling families did not fully assimilate into the dominant Han culture.[1] The "conquest dynasty" concept was warmly received by mostly Japanese scholars such as Otagi Matsuo, who preferred to view these dynasties in the context of a "history of Asia" rather than a "history of China". Alternative views to the concept of "conquest dynasty" from American sinologists includeOwen Lattimore's idea of thesteppe as a "reservoir",Wolfram Eberhard's concept of a "superstratification" of Chinese society with nomadic peoples, andMary C. Wright's thesis ofsinicization. Among historians, the labelling of "conquest dynasties" has proven to be controversial, especially when using such characterization on dynasties such as the Jin.[2] Meanwhile, not all non-Han regimes were seen as "conquest dynasties" by Karl August Wittfogel; some of these regimes, such as theNorthern Wei, were considered "infiltration dynasties" by him.[3]
In the English language, "Zhongguo ren" (中國人; "People of China") is frequently confused and conflated with "Han ren" (漢人; "Han people").[4]
The termZhongguo was used initially around the tenth century BCE and did not refer to any specific ethnicity. This ambiguity allowed different interchangeable definitions to come into existence later on. Dynasties of ethnic Han origin used "Zhongguo" (中國; "Middle Kingdom") to refer to Han areas of their empire. Non-Han founders of dynasties used the term to refer to a combined state of Hans and non-Hans.[5] TheMing dynasty usedZhongguo politically to refer to the entire country but culturally to refer to only Han areas of the empire.[6]
TheXianbei-ledNorthern Wei referred to itself as "Zhongguo" and claimed yogurt as a food ofZhongguo.[7] Similarly, theJurchen-ledJin dynasty referred to itself as "Zhongguo".[8]
In 1271,Kublai Khan proclaimed theYuan dynasty with the official name "Great Yuan" (大元) and claimed succession from former Chinese dynasties from theThree Sovereigns and Five Emperors up to theTang dynasty.Han Chinese literati during the Mongol period thought that China, after a few centuries of division and dissension, was finally reunified by the Yuan dynasty. Their view was not shared by all contemporaries, especially the Mongols and other non-Han people (Semu) who had quite different ideas about China, and the latter considered several different kingdoms or countries as having been conquered and brought under the control of the Mongols. But similar to the development inMongol Iran, native intellectuals interested in their own history interpreted the unification by the Mongols as a revival of their dynastic tradition, and the concept ofZhongguo was considered an important ideology and was further developed by the subsequent Ming dynasty. The revival of the concept of territorial unity, although not intended by the Mongols, became a lasting legacy of Mongol rule in China (and Iran).[9]: 289–292
Qing emperors referred to all subjects of the Qing dynasty regardless of theirethnicity as "Chinese" (中國之人), and used the term "Zhongguo" as a synonym for the entire Qing Empire while using "neidi" (内地; "inner regions") to refer only to the core area (orChina proper) of the empire. The Qing Empire was viewed as a single multi-ethnic entity.[10][11]
The Qing emperors governed frontier non-Han areas in a separate administrative system under theLifan Yuan. Nonetheless, it was the Qing emperors who expanded the definition ofZhongguo and made it "flexible" by using that term to refer to the entire empire.Zhongguo was also used by the Qing Empire as an endonym in diplomatic correspondence. However, some Han subjects criticized their usage of the term and usedZhongguo only to refer to the seventeen provinces of China and three provinces of the east (Manchuria), excluding other frontier areas.[12] Han literati who remained loyal to the Ming dynasty held to defining the old Ming borders as "China" and used the term "foreigner" to describe ethnic minorities under Qing rule, such as the Mongols, as part of theiranti-Qing ideology.[13] As the territorial borders of the Qing Empire were fixed through a series of treaties with neighboring foreign powers, it was able to inculcate in the Qing subjects a sense that China included areas such asMongolia andTibet due to educational reforms. Specifically, the educational reform made it clear where the borders of the Qing Empire were, even if Han subjects did not understand how the Chinese identity included Mongols andTibetans or understand what the connotations of being "Chinese" were.[14]
In an attempt to portray different ethnicities as part of one family ruled by the Qing dynasty, the phrase "Zhongwai yijia" (中外一家; "interior and exterior as one family") was used to convey the idea of the "unification" of different ethnic groups.[15] After conquering China proper, the Manchus identified their state as "China" (中國;Zhōngguó; "Middle Kingdom"), and referred to it as "Dulimbai Gurun" in theManchu language (Dulimbai means "central" or "middle", whilegurun means "nation" or "state"). The emperors labelled the lands of the Qing Empire (including present-dayNortheast China,Xinjiang, Mongolia, Tibet, and other areas) as "China" in both the Chinese and Manchu languages. This effectively defined China as a multi-ethnic state, thereby rejecting the idea that "China" only meant Han-populated areas. The Qing emperors proclaimed that both Han and non-Han ethnic groups were part of "China". They also used both "China" and "Qing" to refer to their state in official documents, international treaties (the Qing Empire was known internationally as "China"[16] or the "Chinese Empire"[17]), and foreign affairs. The "Chinese language" (Dulimbai gurun i bithe) includedChinese, Manchu,Mongol, andTibetan languages, while the "Chinese people" (中國之人;Zhōngguó zhī rén; Manchu:Dulimbai gurun i niyalma) referred to all subjects of the Qing Empire.[18]
In the 1689Treaty of Nerchinsk, the term "China" (Dulimbai Gurun;Zhongguo) was used to refer to the Qing territories in Manchuria in both the Manchu and Chinese language versions of the treaty. Additionally, the term "the wiseEmperor of China" was also used in the Manchu version of the treaty.[19]
TheQianlong Emperor rejected the earlier idea that only the Han people could be subjects of China and only Han lands could be considered as part of China. Instead, he redefined China as being multi-ethnic, saying in 1755 that "there exists a view of China (Zhongxia;中夏), according to which non-Han peoples cannot become China's subjects and their lands cannot be integrated into the territory of China. This does not represent our dynasty's understanding of China, but is instead a view of the earlierHan, Tang,Song, and Ming dynasties."[5] The Qianlong Emperor rejected the views of ethnic Han officials who claimed that Xinjiang was not part of China and that he should not annex it, putting forth the argument that China was multi-ethnic and did not just refer to Han areas.[20]
When theQing conquered Dzungaria, they proclaimed that the new land which formerly belonged to theOirat-ledDzungar Khanate was now absorbed into China (Dulimbai Gurun) in a Manchu language memorial.[21][22][23]
TheYongzheng Emperor spoke out against the claim by anti-Qing rebels that the Qing dynasty were only the rulers of the Manchus and not of China, saying "The seditious rebels claim that we are the rulers of Manchus and only later penetrated central China to become its rulers. Their prejudices concerning the division of their and our country have caused many vitriolic falsehoods. What these rebels have not understood is the fact that it is for the Manchus the same as the birthplace is for the people of theCentral Plain.Shun belonged to theEastern Yi, andKing Wen to theWestern Yi. Does this fact diminish their virtues?"[24]
According to scholar Sergius L. Kuzmin of theRussian Academy of Sciences, despite the Qing dynasty's usage of the term "China", these empires were known officially by their respective dynastic name. Non-Han peoples considered themselves as subjects of the Yuan and Qing empires and did not necessarily equate them to "China". This resulted from different ways of the Yuan and Qing legitimization for different peoples in these empires.[25][26] Qing emperors were referred to as "Khagan of China" (or "Chinese khagan") by their Turkic Muslim subjects (now known as theUyghurs),[27] as "Bogda Khan" or "(Manchu) Emperor" by their Mongol subjects, and as "Emperor of China" (or "Chinese Emperor") and "the Great Emperor" (or "GreatEmperor Manjushri") by their Tibetan subjects, such as in the 1856Treaty of Thapathali.[28][29][30] It is pointed out that Tibetan subjects regarded the Qing as Chinese, unlike the Yuan which was founded by Mongols.[31] According to Kuzmin, theLiao, Jin, Yuan and Qing were multi-national empires led by non-Chinese peoples to whom the conquered China or its part was joined.[32] Nevertheless, American historianRichard J. Smith points out "China proper" (often designated内地 meaning "inner territory" in Chinese) refers to the core eighteenth provinces of the Qing dynasty, but from a Manchu perspective, however, the concept of “China” (Chinese:Zhongguo; Manchu:Dulimbai Gurun) embraced the entire empire, includingManchuria,Mongolia,Xinjiang, andTibet.[33]
The modern territorial claims of both thePeople's Republic of China, based inBeijing, and theRepublic of China, based inTaipei, are derived from the territories that were held by the Qing dynasty at the time of its demise.[34][35][36] The nationalistic concept of theZhonghua minzu (Chinese nation) also traces its roots to the multiethnic and multicultural nature of the Qing Empire.[37]
Former history professor Hugh R. Clark presents another view on the subject. In his formulation, Chineseness centered around the culture of theCentral Plain built up over time. Each major Chinese dynasty represented the frontier of what was Sinitic, beyond which was considered uncivilized. When a new dynasty gained control of the Central Plain, elements of an outside culture would be added to what had come before. In this way, most Chinese dynasties, not just the Yuan and the Qing, can be regarded as conquest dynasties, even traditionally Sinitic ones such as theZhou and theQin.[38]
TheHistory of Qing is a project initiated by the late historianDai Yi and sponsored by theState Council of the People's Republic of China since 2002 for an official history of the Qing dynasty, as a revision of the 1928Draft History of Qing. In November 2023,Taisu Zhang ofYale Law School stated that he had learnt the work eventually failed to pass political review.[39] Following the review failure,Xi Jinping,general secretary of theChinese Communist Party (CCP), requested scholars working on the project to make changes to the tome to better align with Xi's vision for the future.[40] According to historianPamela Kyle Crossley, the CCP under Xi has rejected the concept of conquest dynasties because it could encourageseparatist sentiments inTibet andXinjiang as well as advance calls forTaiwanese independence.[40] Crossley further stated that "[a]ccording to Xi Jinping, there have been no conquests in Chinese history. Only happy unifications with people aspiring to be Chinese."[40]
{{cite book}}:ISBN / Date incompatibility (help)
