三至六世紀浙東地區經濟的發展

The Economic Development of Che-tung Area from the Third to Sixth Centuries

刘淑芬(Shu-Fen Liu)

《中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊》 58本3分 (1987/09) Pp. 485-524

並列摘要

It has long been taken for granted that Chinese civilization originated in North China, Now a number of archaeological discoveries challenge this. More and more evidence indicates that Chinese civilization may have had several simultaneous starting points, making it necessary to review and revise the monistic interpretation.
This article deals with a typical monistic interpretation that South China was highly cultivated until the late second century. We have been told that from the late second century to the sixth century large bands of immigrants coming from North China played an important role in the development and prospersity of the South. This article focuses on the development of the Che-tung area from the third century to the sixth centuries. The discussion comprises two major parts: a survey of the development of Che-tung; and an examination of the question of whether the immigrants from the North China did make such contributions to the agriculture and manufacturing industry of this area. A related question concerns conflict between these immigrants and the natives, and if any conflict did exist, whether it interfered to any extent with the development of this area.
The evidence shows that the Che-tung area had been well-developed before the northerners immigrated there. Che-tung had developed advanced techniques in the manufacturing of pottery and bronze mirrors before other areas; therefore the prospersity of this area cannot be totally attributed to the influx of immigrants. Furthermore, as the extensive cultivation of this land occurred no later than the late second century, its agricultural improvement during these four hundred years cannot be wholly attributed to the northern immigrants. Nevertheless, immigrants did invigorate commercial activities and supply manpower to farming.
There was tension between the immigrants and the natives in terms of political opportunity, but they both shared the same economic interests, making it possible for them to cooperate in developing this area.
My conclusion is that the monistic interpretation of the origin of civilization cannot fully explain the development of South China during this period. One can also infer that the historical interpretations of other periods based on monism also need to be examined carefully.