Conquest dynasty

History of China
History of China
ANCIENT
Neolithic c. 8500 – c. 2070 BCE
Xia dynasty c. 2070 – c. 1600 BCE
Shang dynasty c. 1600 – c. 1046 BCE
Zhou dynasty c. 1046 – 256 BCE
 Western Zhou
 Eastern Zhou
   Spring and Autumn
   Warring States
IMPERIAL
Qin dynasty 221–206 BCE
Han dynasty 206 BCE – 220 CE
  Western Han
  Xin dynasty
  Eastern Han
Three Kingdoms 220–280
  Wei, Shu and Wu
Jin dynasty 265–420
  Western Jin
  Eastern Jin Sixteen Kingdoms
Northern and Southern dynasties
420–589
Sui dynasty 581–618
Tang dynasty 618–907
  (Wu Zhou interregnum 690–705)
Five Dynasties and
Ten Kingdoms
907–960		 Liao dynasty
907–1125
Song dynasty
960–1279
  Northern Song W. Xia
  Southern Song Jin
Yuan dynasty 1271–1368
Ming dynasty 1368–1644
Qing dynasty 1644–1911
MODERN
Republic of China 1912–1949
People's Republic
of China
1949–present		 Republic of
China on Taiwan
1949–present

A conquest dynasty in the history of imperial China refers to a dynasty established by non-Han peoples that ruled parts or all of the China proper, such as the Mongol Yuan dynasty and the Manchu Qing dynasty.

Name

The term "conquest dynasty" was coined by the German-American sinologist Karl August Wittfogel in his 1949 revisionist history of the Liao dynasty (907–1125). He argued that the Liao, as well as the Jin (1115-1234), Yuan (1279–1368), and Qing (1662–1912) dynasties of China were not really "Chinese", and that the ruling families did not fully assimilate into Han Chinese culture. This view contradicts traditional Chinese historiography which regards "border people" such as the Khitans as essential parts of the Chinese people. The "conquest dynasty" idea 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 "conquest dynasty" from American sinologists include Owen Lattimore's idea of the steppe as a "reservoir", Wolfram Eberhard's concept of a "superstratification" of Chinese society with nomadic peoples, and Mary C. Wright's thesis of sinicization. Among historians, the idea of the Liao and Jin as being foreign or conquest dynasties is much more controversial than the same characterization of the Yuan and the Qing.[1]

Criticism of the exclusivity of "universalism" of conquest dynasties

The early Ming dynasty Emperors from Hongwu to Zhengde, who were ethnic Han, continued Yuan practices such as hereditary military institutions, demanding Korean concubines and eunuchs, having Muslim eunuchs, wearing Mongol style clothing and Mongol hats, speaking Mongolian, engaging in archery and horseback riding, having Mongols serve in the Ming military, patronizing Tibetan Buddhism, with the early Ming Emperors seeking to project themselves as "universal rulers" to various peoples such as Central Asian Muslims, Tibetans, and Mongols, modeled after the Mongol Khagan, however, this history of Ming universalism has been obscured and denied by historians who covered it up and presented the Ming as xenophobes seeking to expunge Mongol influence and presenting while they presented the Qing and Yuan as "universal" rulers in contrast to the Ming.[2][3]

A cavalry based army modeled on the Yuan military was implemented by the Hongwu and Yongle Emperors.[4] Hongwu's army and officialdom incorporated Mongols.[5] Mongols were retained by the Ming within its territory.[6] in Guangxi Mongol archers participated in a war against Miao minorities.[7]

An anti pig slaughter edict led to speculation that the Zhengde Emperor adopted Islam due to his use of Muslim eunuchs who commissioned the production of porcelain with Persian and Arabic inscriptions in white and blue color.[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16] Muslim eunuchs contributed money in 1496 to repairing Niujie Mosque. Central Asian women were provided to the Zhengde Emperor by a Muslim guard and Sayyid Hussein from Hami.[17] The guard was Yu Yung and the women were Uighur.[18] It is unknown who really was behind the anti-pig slaughter edict.[19] The speculation of him becoming a Muslim is remembered alongside his excessive and debauched behavior along with his concubines of foreign origin.[20][21] Zhengde defeated the Mongols under Dayan Khan. Muslim Central Asian girls were favored by Zhengde like how Korean girls were favored by Xuande.[22] In 1517 the Mongols were defeated by Zhengde. Mongol clothing was worn by the military enthusiastic Zhengde emperor. A Uighur concubine was kept by Zhengde like the later Qing emperor Qianlong.[23] Foreign origin Uighur and Mongol women were favored by the Zhengde emperor.[24]The early Ming Emperors from Hongwu to Zhengde continued Yuan practices such as hereditary military institutions, demanding Korean concubines and eunuchs, having Muslim eunuchs, wearing Mongol style clothing and Mongol hats, engaging in archery and horseback riding, patronizing Tibetan Buddhism, with the early Ming Emperors seeking to project themselves as "universal rulers" modeled after the Mongol Khagan, however, this history of Ming universalism has been obscured and denied by historians who covered it up and presented the Ming as xenophobes seeking to expunge Mongol influence and presenting while they presented the Qing and Yuan as "universal" rulers in contrast to the Ming.[25][26]

An anti pig slaughter edict led to speculation that the Zhengde Emperor adopted Islam due to his use of Muslim eunuchs who commissioned the production of porcelain with Persian and Arabic inscriptions in white and blue color.[8][9][27][28][29][13][14][15][16] Muslim eunuchs contributed money in 1496 to repairing Niujie Mosque. Central Asian women were provided to the Zhengde Emperor by a Muslim guard and Sayyid Hussein from Hami.[17] The guard was Yu Yung and the women were Uighur.[18] It is unknown who really was behind the anti-pig slaughter edict.[19] The speculation of him becoming a Muslim is remembered alongside his excessive and debauched behavior along with his concubines of foreign origin.[20][21] Zhengde defeated the Mongols under Dayan Khan. Muslim Central Asian girls were favored by Zhengde like how Korean girls were favored by Xuande.[22] In 1517 the Mongols were defeated by Zhengde. Mongol clothing was worn by the military enthusiastic Zhengde emperor. A Uighur concubine was kept by Zhengde like the later Qing emperor Qianlong.[23] Foreign origin Uighur and Mongol women were favored by the Zhengde emperor.[24]

Scope of China (Zhongguo)

In English language "Zhongguo ren" (中國人) is frequently confused and conflated with "Han ren" (漢人), meaning Han Chinese.[30]

Han Chinese dynasties only used Zhongguo (中國, lit. the Central Kingdom) to explicitly refer to Han areas of their empire.[31] The Ming dynasty only used Zhongguo to refer to explicitly only refer to Han areas of China, even excluding ethnic minority areas under Ming rule from being defined as Zhongguo.[32]

The Xianbei Northern Wei referred to itself as Zhongguo and referred to yogurt as a food of Zhongguo.[33] Similarly, the Jurchen Jin dynasty (1115–1234) referred to itself as Zhongguo.[34]

The Manchu referred to all subjects of the Qing Empire regardless of ethnicity as "Chinese" (中國之人), and used the term Zhongguo as a synonym for the entire Qing Empire while using "neidi" (内地) to refer only to the core area of the empire (or China proper), with the entire empire viewed as multi-ethnic.[35]

The Qing emperors governed frontier non-Han areas in a different, separate system under the Lifan Yuan and kept them separate from Han areas and administration. Rather, it was the Manchu Qing emperors who expanded the definition of Zhongguo and made it "flexible" by using that term to refer to the entire Empire and using that term to other countries in diplomatic correspondence. However, some Han Chinese subjects criticized their usage of the term and used Zhongguo only to refer to the seventeen provinces of China and three provinces of the east (Manchuria), excluding other frontier areas.[36] Ming loyalist Han literati held to defining the old Ming borders as China and using "foreigner" to describe minorities under Qing rule such as the Mongols, as part of their anti-Qing ideology.[37] Due to the Qing using treaties clarifying the international borders of the Qing state, it was able to inoculate in the Chinese people a sense that China included areas such as Mongolia and Tibet due to education reforms. Specifically, the educational reform in which geographic made it clear where the borders of the Qing state were even if they did not understand how the Chinese identity included Tibetans and Mongolians or understand what the connotations of being Chinese were.[38]

In order to show that these diverse groups were all part of one family and part of the state, the Qing used the phrase "Zhongwai yijia" (中外一家, "interior and exterior as one family"), to convey this idea of "unification" of the different ethnic groups.[39] After conquering "China proper", the Manchus identified their state as "China" (中國, Zhōngguó; "Middle Kingdom"), and referred to it as Dulimbai Gurun in Manchu (Dulimbai means "central" or "middle," gurun means "nation" or "state"). The emperors labelled the lands of the Qing state (including present-day Northeast China, Xinjiang, Mongolia, Tibet and other areas) as "China" in both the Chinese and Manchu languages. This defined China as a multi-ethnic state, thereby rejecting the idea that "China" only meant Han 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 (as the Qing was known internationally as "China"[40] or the "Chinese Empire"[41]) and foreign affairs. The "Chinese language" (Dulimbai gurun i bithe) included Chinese, Manchu, and Mongol languages while the "Chinese people" (中國之人 Zhōngguó zhī rén; Manchu: Dulimbai gurun i niyalma) were referred to as being subjects of the empire.[42]

In the Treaty of Nerchinsk the name "China" (Dulimbai Gurun, Zhongguo), was used to refer to the Qing territory in Manchuria in both the Manchu and Chinese language versions of the treaty. Additionally, the term "the wise Emperor of China" was also used within the text of the treaty in Manchu.[43]

The Qianlong Emperor rejected the earlier idea that only the Han people could be subjects of China and only Han land 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), according to which non-Han people cannot become China's subjects and their land 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 earlier Han, Tang, Song, and Ming dynasties."[31] The Manchu Qianlong Emperor rejected the views of Han officials who said Xinjiang was not part of China and that he should not conquer it, putting forth the view that China was multi-ethnic and did not just refer to Han.[44]

When the Qing conquered Dzungaria, they proclaimed that the new land which formerly belonged to the Dzungars, was now absorbed into "China" (Dulimbai Gurun) in a Manchu language memorial.[45][46][47]

According to Russian scholars Dmitriev S.V., Kuzmin S.L. despite usage of the term "China", these empires had their official names by the names of their dynasties. Non-Han people considered themselves as subjects of the Yuan and Qing states not equating them to China. This resulted from different ways of the Yuan and Qing legitimization for different peoples in these empires.[48][49] The Qing Emperor was referred to as Bogda Khan by the Mongols.

Parts of 'Northern China'

Wu Hu Era

Post-Tang

All of China

  1. Yuan (1279–1368) founded by the Mongols
  2. Qing (1662–1911) founded by the Manchus

See also

References

  1. ↑ Tao, Jing-shen. The Jurchen in Twelfth-Century China: A Study of Sinicization. University of Washington Press. pp. xi–x.
  2. ↑ http://www.history.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/documents/readings/robinson_culture_courtiers_ch.8.pdf
  3. ↑ https://www.sav.sk/journals/uploads/040214374_Slobodn%C3%ADk.pdf p 166.
  4. ↑ Michael E. Haskew; Christer Joregensen (9 December 2008). Fighting Techniques of the Oriental World: Equiptment, Combat Skills, and Tactics. St. Martin's Press. pp. 101–. ISBN 978-0-312-38696-2.
  5. ↑ Dorothy Perkins (19 November 2013). Encyclopedia of China: History and Culture. Routledge. pp. 216–. ISBN 978-1-135-93562-7.
  6. ↑ Frederick W. Mote; Denis Twitchett (26 February 1988). The Cambridge History of China: Volume 7, The Ming Dynasty, 1368-1644. Cambridge University Press. pp. 399–. ISBN 978-0-521-24332-2.
  7. ↑ Frederick W. Mote; Denis Twitchett (26 February 1988). The Cambridge History of China: Volume 7, The Ming Dynasty, 1368-1644. Cambridge University Press. pp. 379–. ISBN 978-0-521-24332-2.
  8. 1 2 Jay A. Levenson; National Gallery of Art (U.S.) (1991). Circa 1492: Art in the Age of Exploration. Yale University Press. pp. 477–. ISBN 978-0-300-05167-4.
  9. 1 2 Bernard O'Kane (15 December 2012). The Civilization of the Islamic World. The Rosen Publishing Group. pp. 207–. ISBN 978-1-4488-8509-1.
  10. ↑ http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/20024/lot/37/ Bonhams Auctioneers : A rare blue and white screen Zhengde six-character mark and of the period
  11. ↑ Oriental Blue and White, London, 1970, p.29.
  12. ↑ https://web.archive.org/web/20120321075936/http://www.fa.hku.hk/home/JenChianEssay.pdf
  13. 1 2 Britannica Educational Publishing (2010). The Culture of China. Britannica Educational Publishing. pp. 176–. ISBN 978-1-61530-183-6.
  14. 1 2 Kathleen Kuiper (2010). The Culture of China. The Rosen Publishing Group. pp. 176–. ISBN 978-1-61530-140-9.
  15. 1 2 Britannica Educational Publishing (1 April 2010). The Culture of China. Britannica Educational Publishing. pp. 176–. ISBN 978-1-61530-183-6.
  16. 1 2 Suzanne G. Valenstein (1988). A Handbook of Chinese Ceramics. Metropolitan Museum of Art. pp. 187–. ISBN 978-0-8109-1170-3.
  17. 1 2 Susan Naquin (16 December 2000). Peking: Temples and City Life, 1400-1900. University of California Press. pp. 213–. ISBN 978-0-520-92345-4.
  18. 1 2 Association for Asian Studies. Ming Biographical History Project Committee; Luther Carrington Goodrich; 房兆楹 (1976). Dictionary of Ming Biography, 1368-1644. Columbia University Press. pp. 309–. ISBN 978-0-231-03801-0.
  19. 1 2 B. J. ter Haar (2006). Telling Stories: Witchcraft And Scapegoating in Chinese History. BRILL. pp. 4–. ISBN 90-04-14844-2.
  20. 1 2 Frank Trentmann (22 March 2012). The Oxford Handbook of the History of Consumption. OUP Oxford. pp. 47–. ISBN 978-0-19-162435-3.
  21. 1 2 Frank Trentmann (22 March 2012). The Oxford Handbook of the History of Consumption. OUP Oxford. pp. –. ISBN 978-0-19-162435-3.
  22. 1 2 John W. Dardess (2012). Ming China, 1368-1644: A Concise History of a Resilient Empire. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 47–. ISBN 978-1-4422-0491-1.
  23. 1 2 Peter C Perdue (30 June 2009). China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia. Harvard University Press. pp. 64–. ISBN 978-0-674-04202-5.
  24. 1 2 Frederick W. Mote (2003). Imperial China 900-1800. Harvard University Press. pp. 657–. ISBN 978-0-674-01212-7.
  25. ↑ http://www.history.ubc.ca/sites/default/files/documents/readings/robinson_culture_courtiers_ch.8.pdf
  26. ↑ https://www.sav.sk/journals/uploads/040214374_Slobodn%C3%ADk.pdf p 166.
  27. ↑ http://www.bonhams.com/auctions/20024/lot/37/ Bonhams Auctioneers : A rare blue and white screen Zhengde six-character mark and of the period
  28. ↑ Oriental Blue and White, London, 1970, p.29.
  29. ↑ https://web.archive.org/web/20120321075936/http://www.fa.hku.hk/home/JenChianEssay.pdf
  30. ↑ Liu 2004, p. 266.
  31. 1 2 Zhao 2006, p. 4.
  32. ↑ Jiang 2011, p. 103.
  33. ↑ Scott Pearce; Audrey G. Spiro; Patricia Buckley Ebrey (2001). Culture and Power in the Reconstitution of the Chinese Realm, 200-600. Harvard Univ Asia Center. pp. 22–. ISBN 978-0-674-00523-5.
  34. ↑ Patricia Buckley Ebrey; Anne Walthall; James B. Palais. East Asia: A Cultural, Social, and Political History, Volume I: To 1800. Cengage Learning. pp. 138–. ISBN 1-111-80815-5.
  35. ↑ Barabantseva 2010, p. 20.
  36. ↑ Esherick 2006, p. 232.
  37. ↑ Mosca 2011, p. 94.
  38. ↑ Esherick 2006, p. 251.
  39. ↑ Elliott & Chia (2004), pp. 76–77.
  40. ↑ Treaty of Nanking. 1842.
  41. ↑ McKinley, William. "Second State of the Union Address". 5 Dec. 1898.
  42. ↑ Zhao (2006), pp. n 4, 7–10, and 12–14.
  43. ↑ Zhao (2006), pp. 8 and 12.
  44. ↑ Zhao 2006, pp. 11-12.
  45. ↑ Dunnell 2004, p. 77.
  46. ↑ Dunnell 2004, p. 83.
  47. ↑ Elliott 2001, p. 503.
  48. ↑ Dmitriev, S.V. and Kuzmin, S.L. 2012. What is China? The Middle State in historical myth and real policy, Oriens (Moscow), no 3, pp. 5-19
  49. ↑ Dmitriev, S.V. and Kuzmin, S.L. 2014. Qing Empire as China: anatomy of a historical myth, Oriens (Moscow), no 1, pp. 5-17
  50. ↑ Wudai Shi, ch. 75. Considering the father was originally called Nieliji without a surname, the fact that his patrilineal ancestors all had Chinese names here indicates that these names were probably all created posthumously after Shi Jingtang became a "Chinese" emperor. Shi Jingtang actually claimed to be a descendant of Chinese historical figures Shi Que and Shi Fen, and insisted that his ancestors went westwards towards non-Han Chinese area during the political chaos at the end of the Han Dynasty in the early 3rd century.
  51. ↑ According to Old History of the Five Dynasties, vol. 99, and New History of the Five Dynasties, vol. 10. Liu Zhiyuan was of Shatuo origin. According to Wudai Huiyao, vol. 1 Liu Zhiyuan's great-great-grandfather Liu Tuan (劉湍) (titled as Emperor Mingyuan posthumously, granted the temple name of Wenzu) descended from Liu Bing (劉昞), Prince of Huaiyang, a son of Emperor Ming of Han
  52. ↑ http://www.iltasanomat.fi/ulkomaat/art-1288336663684.html
This article is issued from Wikipedia - version of the Thursday, May 05, 2016. The text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share Alike but additional terms may apply for the media files.