透過您的圖書館登入
IP:3.147.103.202
  • 期刊

朝貢制度與歷史想像:兩百年來的中國與坎巨堤(1761-1963)

The Tributary System and Historical Imagination: China and Kanjut, 1761-1963

摘要


本文採「領土譜系」研究途徑,探討1761至1963年間,中國與中亞喀什米爾坎巨堤之間的關係,並針對近世中國所謂「朝貢體制」,提出不同面向的理解。本研究處理中國不同歷史階段(盛清、晚清、民國、二次戰後中國、中華人民共和國)坎巨堤與中國的關係,探討坎巨堤從不被盛清朝廷正式承認為內藩或朝貢國地位的土邦,逐漸轉化成為傳統歷史藩屬之一部,最後在民國時期被中國內地官民「想像」成為一塊「已喪失」於帝國主義侵略下的邊疆領土,亟待收復。本文顯示,帝國時期的「朝貢體系」,不論就其精神或實踐層面,並未隨著帝國秩序的瓦解而停止運作,清王朝結束後,仍繼續在近代中國政治與外交舞台上扮演一定角色,並成為解決、或者製造問題的途徑之一。從中、坎歷史關係探索中,吾人亦得知晚清官員對於「藩部」或「屬國」概念的理解,與其說是來自其對帝國傳統朝貢制度之信仰,不如說是來自其與英、俄等西方強權交往互動的經驗法則。而十九世紀中葉以來,英帝國主義者將「主權」和「宗主權」等觀念引入外交領域,藉以與清廷交涉之餘,重新開啟闡釋中國傳統帝國主權與領土權的契機,並將此一新的詮釋運用於彼此外交關係的實踐當中,以謀取各自最大的利益。

並列摘要


This article examines China's relations with the Central Asian tribal state of Kanjut (also called Hunza) over two centuries. Employing a territorial genealogical approach, this research explores how Kanjut, not initially recognized during the high Qing as an inner dependency or vassal, was gradually re-conceptualized by the Qing court as a historical tributary protectorate, and then in the Republican and Nationalist eras became known as a ”lost territory” ripe for restoration. It also argues that the tributary system was not a dynastic legacy that ceased to function after 1911; rather, it was an instrument of political expediency that continued to be used in the post-imperial era. In a sense, this research offers a new way of thinking about what the ”tribute system” might really have been: a nineteenth and twentieth century reinterpretation of an older form of symbolically asymmetric interstate relations (common in one form or another throughout many parts of Asia). This reinterpretation was strongly informed by English-language terminology and formulations, including ”suzerainty” and the mistranslation of ”gong” as ”tribute” itself, and by the ways that both Britain and China manipulated the terminology in seeking to further their territorial, diplomatic, and strategic interests.

參考文獻


Fairbank, John King(ed.)(1968).The Chinese World Order: Traditional China's Foreign Relations.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
Fairbank, John King(ed.)(1978).The Cambridge History of China: Vol. 10, Late Ch'ing, 1800-1911, Part 1.Cambridge:Harvard University Press.
徐國琦(1994)。略論費正清。美國研究。2,73-95。
Womack, Brantly(2006).China and Vietnam: The Politics of Asymmetry.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
Hostetler, Laura(2001).Qing Colonial Enterprise: Ethnography and Cartography in Early Modern China.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.

被引用紀錄


張凱掄(2018)。中國對韓政策及其價值取向(1949-2008)-一個建構主義的分析〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201800698
張逸帆(2016)。「斷腕」與「劫掠」:能力落差下的戰略抉擇──以日俄戰爭為實證案例〔碩士論文,國立臺灣大學〕。華藝線上圖書館。https://doi.org/10.6342/NTU201603048

延伸閱讀