Is the Qing Empire "Colonialism"

In recent twenty or thirty years, with global history becoming a major trend in the field of historiography, quite a number of European and American historians have put forward a view that is quite challenging to the history of China: the policy of the Qing Empire in the East towards the frontier is consistent with the foreign policies of the western empires, namely Britain, France, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands. From the perspective of global history, the expansion of the Qing Dynasty to the northwest and its return to the southwest are not only the same as those of Britain and France in the same period, but also part of the global colonial tide in early modern times, especially in the18th century. Therefore, Peter Perdue said: "The expansion of the Qing Dynasty is actually an integral part of the global history of 17 and 18 centuries. In this historical period, almost all over the world, the emerging unified empire expanded its territory through foreign military conquest, followed by immigrants, missionaries and businessmen. " And the Qing empire is very similar to the Ottoman empire. They both ruled many nationalities and vast territories, but the two empires had different endings. "They all fell into a state of collapse at the end of 19, but the territory of the Ottoman Empire was divided into several nation States, while the Qing Empire was integrated into a single national regime." In his view, if the Qing Empire conquered the West as an event in global history, then Central Asia in that era was not the "Xinjiang" of the Qing Empire and the marginal province of China later, but all kinds of religions and trade from China, Russia, India and Europe gathered here. Geographically, it is located between Russia, Zhungeer and the Qing Empire. Similarly, judging from the concept of "center-frontier" defined by China's position, the Miao and Yi nationalities in southwest China are only the areas and nationalities colonized by the Qing Empire. American scholar LauraHostetler's Colonization of Qing Dynasty: Ethnography and Iconology of Pre-modern China and John E.Herman's Clouds: China's Colonization in Guizhou, 1200 ~ 1700, are about how the Miao and Yi nationalities in southwest China were gradually transformed into a unified nation by Qing Dynasty.

Was it "conquest" for the Qing Empire to pacify the northwest? Is it "colonization" to change the land to the southwest? Furthermore, was ancient China also a "colony" of surrounding aliens? Just as western scholars disapprove of "China", China scholars are often unhappy when they talk about "colonization". China scholars will think that China has been bullied by imperialism in modern times and almost became a semi-colony. And you still call us "colonies" But I think it should be understood that they used the word "colonial cause" for another historical concept and academic background. If we don't comment on the merits and demerits of "colonization" in the sense of value, it seems that it is beyond reproach to regard "colonization" as a global historical process. Usually, China scholars will first follow the historical concept of "great unity" in ancient China and the perspective of "central-frontier"; Secondly, it will also be influenced by the national consciousness of "China is the harmony of five ethnic groups" and "the Chinese nation is one" since the late Qing Dynasty; Third, even the historical memory of ancient "Hua Yi" and "Ye Wen" and the theory of civilization evolution will remain. Therefore, I always feel that these "Miao Yi" were originally on the edge of China, and "changing customs and collaborating with China" was originally "marching forward in China", as if they had changed from barbarism to civilization. It is even considered that the ancient Han and non-Han people in China mainly "helped each other on the basis of equality, which is the mainstream of the development of ethnic relations".

However, it was well understood in ancient China that "serving people with virtue and humiliating four foreigners with punishment". Why is the empire so gentle and sincere? Although the conquered "barbarian Rongdi" was badly killed, there were countless casualties among the soldiers who went to crusade. During the mid-Tang Dynasty, Du You painfully reviewed the expansion of the prosperous Tang Dynasty in Tongdian frontier defense. He said that during the Tianbao period, Geshuhan made an expedition to Tibet, with 20,000 people on Qinghai Island, "nothing can be saved"; An Lushan crusaded against Xi and Qidan in Tianmenling, "100,000 people are exhausted"; Gao Xianzhi's expedition to Shiguo was "exhausted by seventy people" in Luochuan; When Yang went to attack Luo Feng, he "lost more than ten people" and "lost hundreds of thousands of people in foreign countries". Even Fan Wenlan, a Marxist historian, could not agree with this politicization. At the beginning of 1980, historical research published his manuscript written in 1962. In this unpublished manuscript, he said that under the rule of the ancient empire, between nations, between nations and between countries, "there is no such concept as peace, equality and unity, depending entirely on the comparison of strength". As the ancient literature said, "I will start my career, and I will do whatever I want" and "I will search for mountains and valleys, and I will exhaust my army." Taking Guizhou's "returning home" in the Qing Dynasty as an example, the Qing army "destroyed four villages in Zhenxiong, beheaded more than 2,000 people and burned down the base areas", and "rushed in and captured thousands of prisoners" in Weiyuan and New Zealand on an equal footing. This so-called "civilization" process, like the "colonization" process, is not just a crowing, but full of blood and fire.

Let's go back to the question of whether the Qing Dynasty was "colonized". It should be noted that in recent years, due to the new historical interpretation under the background of global history, it is very popular in international academic circles, and this kind of global history research has promoted a new trend, which includes historical and anthropological research on China's border areas. There are usually two kinds of research on China's frontier: one is to discuss how China's present frontier is integrated into the empire. In their words, it is how the Miao and Yi people in the southwest were "colonized" and how the Qing Dynasty "conquered the southwest, colonized and realized sovereignty control". In other words, how did these "barbarian" areas, originally managed by "Tusi", gradually become the "China" directly managed by the Empire? The other is to re-recognize those aliens on the edge of China from the perspective of anthropology and ethnography. Are they different from the Han people in mainland China in race and culture? Do they gradually develop the consciousness of "I" because of "the other" and gradually form a self-identified ethnic group? Did they disagree with the "China" or the "Manchu-Mongolian-Han" empire? In other words, they try to discuss the "essence" and "constructiveness" of the nation through this kind of research.

So, is there any reason for the Qing Empire to "colonize"? Personally, just like the theory of "China", it is half reasonable and half unreasonable. Why is it meaningful to say half? Because there is indeed a dead corner here that can cause us to reflect. /kloc-Around the 0/8th century, all the empires in the world "you sing and I come on stage". Although the Ottoman Empire and the Mughal Empire declined, the Russian Empire gradually eroded eastward and southward, while the Qing Empire rose rapidly and expanded westward. Although the Portuguese and Spanish empires that once roamed the sea declined, the British Empire in Europe was expanding eastward. It is this expansion that gradually caused the extrusion and collision of various empires. As a result of extrusion and collision, some empires shrank, some declined, some rose and some expanded. This is of course another story. But/kloc-In the middle of the 8th century, the Qing Empire was at the peak of expansion, and the so-called "Ten Martial Arts" of Qianlong was actually the "colonial expansion" of the Qing Empire. As mentioned earlier, some areas along the border of China in the Qing Dynasty could not be said to have belonged to China since ancient times, and the territory around China was also constantly changing in history. In the past, when China scholars wrote the history of China, they often mentioned the establishment of Jiuquan and other four counties in the Western Han Dynasty, Zhang Qian's voyage to the Western Ocean and Li Guangli's expedition to twenty cities (now Kyrgyzstan). They also mentioned that Zhang Qian tried to pass through Yunnan and Zhuge Liang conquered Meng Huo. Of course, they even mentioned the expansion of the four generations of the Tang Empire. It seems that these places have long been incorporated into Chinese territory. In fact, the territory of the ancient Chinese empire was constantly moving and changing. As I said, many places were foreign until the Tang and Song Dynasties, which were not really "China", not to mention the shrinking Song and Ming Dynasties. They were directly inherited by the Qing Dynasty, and many places in the northwest and southwest were not within the "Yu Yu". The so-called "western countries", even Dunhuang was not under the jurisdiction of China in the Ming Dynasty, "Jiayuguan is not my land"; The so-called "thousands of caves and hundreds of foreigners", the Miao and Yi people in Yunnan and Guizhou are basically managed by Tusi, which is different from the government management in the inland counties. The Qing Dynasty expanded the western regions into "Xinjiang", and stationed troops in Yunnan, Guizhou and other places, set up institutions and officials in marginal ethnic groups, set up a large number of schools, and collected taxes from Qi people, so that these places gradually "moved from foreign countries to old Xinjiang", which can indeed be called "colonial cause" in global history.

Then, why do I say the word "colonization" is still half unreasonable? This is because when historical researchers use the concept of colonization, they are often misunderstood by the concept of "colonization" from the west, and feel that the colonization of northwest and southwest by the Qing Dynasty is the same as that of Asia, Africa and Latin America by Britain, France, Spain and Portugal. The reason why I can't accept the concept of "colony" unconditionally is that I can't simply equate this "colony" with that "colony", and I can't equate the conquest of Asia, Australia, Africa and America by the Qing Empire and western powers with "colony". Taking "returning farmland to streams" as an example, it should be noted that the measures taken in the Ming and Qing Dynasties were basically: (1) setting up officials and "changing the border into counties" like the mainland; (2) tax, so that people from different places and mainland people can be regarded as "making up households, making everyone the same"; (3) Advocating learning, setting exams and gradually transforming different cultures with mainland culture. Therefore, comparing modern Europe's colonization by Britain, France, Portugal and Holland with China's colonization in Ming and Qing Dynasties, we should see three differences. First, whether to jump out of the mainland and go overseas, or to gradually expand from the center to the edge; Second, whether to plunder resources or be included in the empire; Third, whether to maintain the heterogeneity between the suzerain country and the colony, or let the barbarians gradually homogenize with China culture. Therefore, I quite agree that western scholars can see the similarities between Chinese and western history in the new background of global history, but I have been reminding that western scholars should pay attention to the differences between them. As Li Bingzhe's doctoral thesis "Forming an Imperial Nation" said, the change of China's national consciousness from Ming and Qing Dynasties to modern times was not from "culturalism" in the past to "nationalism" later. In his view, China and Europe represent two different models. If the European model is a colonial country model, then China is a hereditary empire model. In fact, China's ethnic policies from the Qing Dynasty to modern times continued the consistent thinking and practice in the post-imperial era.