De-Sinicization

Last updated

De-Sinicization
Chinese name
Traditional Chinese 去中國化
Simplified Chinese 去中国化
Hanyu Pinyin qù Zhōngguó huà
Literal meaningDe-Chinese-ization
Transcriptions
Standard Mandarin
Hanyu Pinyin qù Zhōngguó huà
Bopomofo ㄑㄩˋㄓㄨㄙ ㄍㄨㄛˊㄏㄨㄚˋ
Hakka
Pha̍k-fa-sṳ Hi-chûng-ket-fa
Yue: Cantonese
Yale Romanization heui jūng gwok fa
Jyutping Heoi3 Zung1 Gwok3 Faa3
Southern Min
Hokkien POJ Khìr-tiong-kok-hoa / Khì-tiong-kok-hoa / Khù-tiong-kok-hoa
Tâi-lô Khìr-tiong-kok-hua / Khì-tiong-kok-hua / Khù-tiong-kok-hua

Some Han Chinese during the Ming dynasty also joined the Manchu Eight banners and became "Manchufied". The Manchu people founded the Qing dynasty.

The Han Chinese banners were known as the "Nikan" Banners, made out of a massive number of Chinese POWs and defectors. Jurchen women married most of these Chinese since they came with no family of their own. [58] There were so many Han Chinese entering the Banners that they soon outnumbered Jurchens. [58] Attempts by Hung Taiji were made to separate Han Chinese and Jurchen banners. In Liaodong, Chinese culture mixed with Jurchen culture. Many bannermen forged genealogies of their origin since they did not have any, and then these decided whether or not they were in a Chinese or a Jurchen banner. [58] The Eight Banners were then created from the old black Han Chinese banners and Jurchen banners. From then on, Han and Jurchen banners were equal. The Mongol Eight banners were also created at this time, and anyone who was not classified into a Chinese or a Mongol banner became a Manchu, an ethnic group which Hung Taiji created. [59]

Manchu bannermen and Han bannermen were not categorized according to blood or ancestry or genealogy; they were categorized by their language, culture, behavior, identification and way of life. Many Chinese bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) were descended from Sinicized Jurchen who spoke Chinese and served the Ming, while some ethnic Manchu Bannermen (Baqi Manzhou) were of ethnic Han origins who had defected to the Jurchens, assimilated into Jurchen language and culture and lived among them in Jilin before 1618.[ citation needed ]

The Qing regarded Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) and the non Bannerman Han civilian general population (Han min, Han ren, minren) as separate. People were grouped into Manchu Banners and Chinese Banners (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) not based on their ancestry, race or blood, but based on their culture and the language they spoke. Ethic Manchu banners included Han who deserted the Ming, had moved to Nurgan (Jilin) as transfrontiersmen before 1618, assimilated with the Jurchen, practiced Jurchen culture, and spoke Jurchen, while Chinese banners (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) included descendants of sinicized Jurchen who had moved to Liaodong, adopted Han culture and surname, swore loyalty to the Ming, and spoke Chinese. Nurhaci conquered Liaodong in 1618 and created the aforementioned Chinese banners.[ citation needed ]

Before 1618, some Han actively defected to the Jurchen in Nurgan by crossing the frontier into Jurchens' territory, and scholars called these people "trans-frontiersmen." These Han then adopted Jurchen identity and later became part of Manchu Banners. In comparison, some Han in Liaodong only defected after Qing's conquest, and scholars called these people "frontiersmen." This was because Liaodong was the frontier of Ming's territory, and these people never actively tried to cross the border. After the conquest, Qing put them into Chinese Banners (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen.)[ citation needed ]

Han Chinese defectors who fled from the Ming joined the Jurchens in Nurgan before 1618 were placed into Manchu Banners and regarded as Manchu, but the Ming residents of Liaodong who were incorporated into the Eight Banners after the conquest of Liaodong from the Ming from 1618 to 1643 were placed into the separate Chinese Banners (Chinese: Hanjun, Manchu: Nikan cooha or Ujen cooha), and many of these Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) from Liaodong had Jurchen ancestry and were not classified as Manchu by the Qing. [60] Nurhaci's Jianzhou Jurchen Khanate used geography, culture, language, occupation and, lifestyle to classify people as Jurchen or Nikan. Jurchen were those who lived Jurchen lifestyle, used the Jurchen language, and inhabited the original territory. Nurhaci considered those who did the opposite as Nikan (Han Chinese.) Some of these Nikan were of Korean or Jurchen ancestry but spoke Chinese and inhabited in the villages and towns of the newly conquered territory. [60]

People from both sides often moved over the cultural and territorial division between the Ming Liaodong and Jurchen Nurgan; Han Chinese soldiers and peasants moved into Nurgan while Jurchen mercenaries and merchants moved to Liaodong, with some lineages ended up being dispersed on both sides, and the Jurchen viewed people as Nikan depending on whether they acted like Han Chinese or Jurchens. People from the same lineage, like the Sinicized Jurchen Tong lineage of Fushun in Liaodong, served both Ming and the Qing. Some, like Tong Bunian, stayed as diehard Ming loyalists, while others faithfully served the Qing after Qing's conquest of Liaodong. Qing enrolled the Tongs in the Han Plain Blue Banner. Eventually, Emperor Kangxi transferred some members of the Tong lineage, like Tong Guogang and a few of his close relatives, to the Manchu Bordered Yellow Banner because the Tongs requested the transfer. [61] [62] [63] [64]

Tong Guogang said in his application of transferring to a Manchu Banner that the Tongs were of Jurchen origin. However, the authority only transferred Tong Guogang's immediate family and company to the Manchu while leaving other Tong companies as Chinese. It was Qing's policy to transfer every closely related in-law of the emperor into a Manchu Banner, even if they were from another ethnicity. This was the most probable reason why Kangxi accepted Tong's application, despite Tong's insistence of his Jurchen origin. [65] At the beginning of its reign, the Qing was flexible and did whatever was political expedient at the time to determine people's ethnicity. Examples were Tong's transfer from a Han to a Manchu Banner and the assimilation of Han Chinese. [65]

The geographical, political, and cultural division was between the Ming Liaodong and the Jurchen-dominated Nurgan, which traded and interacted with Liaodong through Fushun. [60]

Nurhaci and Hongtaiji both viewed ethnic identity as determined by culture, language, and attitude but not by ancestry (genealogy.) People could change their identities and be transferred from one ethnic banner to another. The Qing associated Mongols with the Mongolian language, nomadism, and horse related activities, Manchus with the Manchu language and foremost being part of the Banners, and Han Chinese with their residence in Liaodong, the Chinese language, agriculture, and commerce. [59] When determining Manchu and Han identities, the Qing disregarded biological determinants and ancestry. Indeed, culture was the primary factor in differentiating between Manchu and Han, and occasionally the Qing blurred or altered people's identities. [66] Classification of peoples was not the motive behind the creation of separate Manchu, Mongol, and Han Banners. People's membership in the different banners primarily depended on whether they spoke Manchu, Mongolian, or Chinese. [67] It has been suggested that the Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) themselves were not very familiar with the exact meaning of "Hanjun", as the Qing changed the definition of what it meant to be a Manchu or a Han Bannerman. [67]

The Manchu official Duanfang had Han Chinese ancestors originating from Zhejiang- towards the end of the Ming, they had defected to the Qing and moved to southern Manchuria from their original home in Zhejiang province, they changed their surname to Tohoro from Tao to make it sound Manchu and registered it in the Manchu Plain White Banner. [68] [69] Since the Manchus were willing to accept assimilated strangers, Han Chinese who defected to the Jurchens or were captured by them had integrated well into Manchu society. [70] These Han Chinese transfrontiersman from Liaodong embraced Manchu customs and changed their names into Manchu to the point where [70] they identified as Manchu rather than Chinese and resembles Manchus in their speech, behavior, and looks. [70] It is hard for historians to tell whether a Manchu was originally a Han transfrontiersman since they no longer used Chinese names or regarded themselves as Han Chinese, Frederic Wakeman suggested that is evidence that the Manchu Dahai's ancestors were Han Chinese transfrontiersman. [70] The Jurchen headman of Turun-hoton and arch-enemy of Nurhaci, Nikan Wailan, was also suggested to be a Han transfrontiersman by Wakeman, since his name literally meant "Chinese official". [60]

The Manchu word for Han, "Nikan" was used to describe people who lived like Han Chinese and not their actual ethnic origin, the Han Bannermen (Hanjun) was not an ethnic category and the Han Banners included people of non-Han Chinese blood. [62] When Liaodong was invaded in 1619 by Nurhaci, it became imperative for the Jurchens to secure the loyalty of the Han (Nikan) in Liaodong to their cause, by treating them equally as Jurchens were treated and even seizing Jurchen properties, grains, wealth, possessions and homes to grant them to Han, and having the aristocracy expand to include Han families in order to get Han to defect to Nurhaci's side. [60]

Some Han Bannermen and their lineages became successful members of the Qing nobility and their descendants continued to be awarded noble titles, like that of Li Yongfang who was ennobled by Nurhaci as third class viscount and enrolled in the Plain Blue Chinese Banner (Hanjun, or Han Banner), and his descendants continued to be nobles to the final years of Qianlong's rule and were ennobled with even greater titles. [62] The Manchus gave extensive titles and honors and marriage to Aisin Gioro women to pre-1644 Han defectors, like the marriage of Nurhaci's granddaughter to Li Yongfang and his sons registered in the Chinese Plain Blue banner (Hanjun, or Han Banner), and the title granted to the son of a Ming defector, Sun Sike (Sun Ssu-k'o) in the Chinese Plain White Banner, (Hanjun, or Han Banner) and the marriage of one of Kangxi's daughters to his son. [64]

At the beginning of the Qing, originally the sharpest distinction was drawn by Qing policy to emphasize difference between Han civilians and all Bannermen, and not between Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) and Manchu Bannermen. The Manchus used Nikan to describe Ming subjects in Liaodong who lived a Chinese lifestyle like sinicized Jurchens, Mongols, and Koreans, and not as a racial term for ethnic Han Chinese. A person only had to be originally a Ming subject and not ethnic Chinese to get categorized as a Han bannerman so people of Jurchen origin ended up in Mongol and Chinese Banners. [64] Nurhaci used culture to categorize people and allowed Han transfrontiersmen to identify as Manchu after assimilating, and ethnicity was regarded as flexible when Han Chinese and Mongols families were moved by Kangxi to Manchu Banners from their original Mongol and Chinese Banners (Hanjun, or Han Banners). [64]

Li Yongfang's rewards for surrendering Fushun to the Jurchens and defecting included promotion in rank, Nurhaci's granddaughter as a wife, battling along with Nurhaci and induction into the Jin aristocracy as a Chinese frontiersman, which was different from how Nurhaci handled both the Han transfrontiersmen who assimilated into Manchu identity and captured Han bondservants. [70] The Chinese frontiersman were inducted into the Han Banners. [69] Nurhaci offered to reward Li Yongfang with promotion and special treatment if he surrendered Fushun reminding him of the grim fate that would await him and Fushun's residents if they continued to resist. [71] Freeholder status was given to Li Yongfang's 1,000 troops after his surrender, and the later Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) Bao Chengxian and Shi Tingzhu also experience good fortune in Qing service after their surrenders in 1622 at Guangning. [65]

Nurhaci used semi-literate interlocutors of Han (Nikan) origin to translate between different languages and trusted them a lot, developing close and friendly personal relations with some of them like Kanggūri and Fanggina. The Han Chinese Gong Zhenglu (Gong Zhengliu) who was abducted in the 1580s by the Jurchens from Liaodong with tens of thousands of others, originally came from Shaoxing in Zhejiang became a close confidant of Nurhaci and tutoring his sons, adopting the Manchu name Onoi, and being showered with wives, slaves, and a house by Nurhaci. [60]

The Manchu leader Nurhaci embarked on the conquest of Liaodong from the Ming dynasty, luring Han Chinese to his side to defect by threatening them with destruction and at the same time also promising them rewards, with important positions. [72] A massive revolt against the Jurchens by the Liaodong Chinese broke out in 1623, due to the Jurchens squeezing the Chinese for labor and stationing Jurchen in Chinese households. Acts of sabotage and slaughter of the Jurchen were carried out by the Chinese rebels in retaliation. [72] Hong Taiji, who succeeded Nurhaci, began to include many Chinese in his government and copy the Chinese style of governing. [72] After defeats inflicted by the Chinese General Yuan Chonghuan upon the Manchus with artillery such as at the Battle of Ningyuan, [73] the Manchu then decided to absorb Han Chinese prisoners who knew how to use guns into their army to supplement their forces. [73]

The Manchus also lured Han Chinese Generals into defecting and joining the Banners by marrying them to women from the Imperial Aisin Gioro family. [74] One Han Chinese General, Li Yongfang (Li Yung-fang) was bribed by the Manchus into defecting by being married to an Aisin Gioro wife, and being given a position in the banners. Many more Han Chinese abandoned their posts and joined the Manchus. [75] A mass marriage of Han Chinese to Manchu women numbering 1,000 took place in 1632 after Prince Yoto came up with the idea. They were either generals or officials. [74] It was said by the Manchu leader that "since the Chinese generals and Manchu women lived together and ate together, it would help these surrendered generals to forget their motherland." [74] Women from the Imperial family were also married to other Han Chinese officials like the Three Feudatories' sons, who defected to the Qing after their conquest of China. [74] The Manchus also created an artillery unit out of Han Chinese, which they used against the Ming army. [75] Han Chinese were also lured by the Manchus into defecting and entering their employ in civil service by granting them privileges such as calling themselves "ministers", while Manchus in the same position were regarded as "slaves". [76]

The Han who classified in different ways had come under Manchu rule in three different eras, before 1618 the Han "transfrontiersmen" who threw in their lot with Nurhaci were effectively only Han Chinese by ancestry and blood since they practiced Jurchen culture and became part of Manchu companies (Niru) within Manchu Banners, while from 1618 to 1622 the Han captured in Liaodong and Liaoxi became either bondservants to Manchu Banners or Han Bannermen, and then finally the Han who deserted the Ming during Hong Taiji's rule to join the Manchu, and these were first placed into separate all Han companies (Niru) attached to Manchu Banners, and then when in 1642 the Manchu Banners ejected all their Han companies they were placed into separate Chinese Banners (Hanjun, or Han Banners) since they were the mostly not assimilated to Jurchen culture. [77]

At Guangning, Shi Tingzhu, a Ming soldier of Jurchen descent but who practiced Chinese culture, had surrendered to Nurhaci's Later Jin in 1622 along with Bao Chengxian and they were eventually placed into Chinese Banners (Hanjun, or Han Banners), after Bao suggested creating separate Chinese Banners (Hanjun, or Han Banners). Neither were all Han Chinese in the Eight Banners part of the Chinese Banners (Hanjun, or Han Banners), nor was the Chinese Banners (Hanjun, or Han Banners) made out of only Han Chinese, Han Banner membership did not automatically mean they were actual Han Chinese. [77]

The Jurchens under Nurhaci had classified people as Han Chinese (Nikan) according to whether they were former Ming subjects, behaved like Han Chinese, had a Chinese lifestyle, spoke Chinese language, dressed like Han Chinese, and had Han Chinese names, and all Jurchens who had moved to Ming China adopted Chinese surnames. [77] Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) rose to many powerful positions and prominence under Shunzhi, these Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) were descendants of Han defectors in Liaodong who joined Nurhaci and Hong Taiji, in the third or second generation. [70] They "were barely distinguishable from Manchu nobility." Geng Zhongming, a Han bannerman, was awarded the title of Prince Jingnan, and his son Geng Jingmao managed to have both his sons Geng Jingzhong and Geng Zhaozhong become court attendants under Shunzhi and married Aisin Gioro women, with Haoge's (a son of Hong Taiji) daughter marrying Geng Jingzhong and Prince Abatai's granddaughter marrying Geng Zhaozhong. [70]

The mistaken views applied to Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) about race and ethnicity missed the fact that they were actually a "cultural group" since a person could be a Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) without having to be an actual Han Chinese. [78] It was Qianlong who redefined the identity of Han Bannermen by saying that they were to be regarded as of having the same culture and being of the same ancestral extraction as Han civilians, this replaced the earlier opposing ideology and stance used by Nurhaci and Hong Taiji who classified identity according to culture and politics only and not ancestry, but it was Qianlong's view on Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) identity which influenced the later historians and expunged the earlier Qing stance. [61]

Qianlong also promulgated an entirely new view of the Han Bannermen different from his grandfather Kangxi, coming up with the abstract theory that loyalty in itself was what was regarded as the most important, so Qianlong viewed those Han Bannermen who had defected from the Ming to the Qing as traitors and compiled an unfavorable biography of the prominent Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) who had defected to the Qing, while at the same time Qianlong had compiled a biography to glorify Ming loyalists who were martyred in battle against the Qing called "Record of Those Martyred for Their Dynasty and Sacrificed for Purity". [60] Some of Qianlong's inclusions and omissions on the list were political in nature, like including Li Yongfang out of Qianlong's dislike for his descendant Li Shiyao and excluding Ma Mingpei out of concern for his son Ma Xiongzhen's image. [60]

From 1618 to 1629, the Han Chinese from eastern Liaodong who joined the Eight Banners were known as "tai nikan", the Han who defected to the Qing at Fushun were known as Fushan Nikan and were considered part of the Tai Nikan. The Tai Nikan were distinguished from the later Han Chinese who joined the banners between 1629-1643 and originated from western Liaodong, Shanxi, Shandong, and Zhili, and were known as "fu xi baitangga". [60] Both groups were part of the Chinese Banners before the Qing crossed over Shanhai pass in 1644, and as such were both distinguished from Han who were incorporated into the Chinese Banners after 1644 when the Qing ruled China. The pre-1644 Chinese Bannermen were known as "old men" 旧人 . [60] A mass transfer into the Manchu banners of every single Fushun Nikan, and specifically chosen tai nikan, Koreans, and Mongols was enacted by the Qianlong Emperor in 1740. [60]

Manchu Bannermen in Beijing were driven into poverty just decades after the conquest, living in slums and falling into debt, with signs of their plight appearing as soon as 1655. They were driven to the point where they had to sell their property to Han Chinese, in violation of the law. [79]

Originally in the early Qing the Qing emperors both took some Han Chinese as concubines and a 1648 decree from Shunzhi allowed Han Chinese men to marry Manchu women from the Banners with the permission of the Board of Revenue if they were registered daughters of officials or commoners or the permission of their banner company captain if they were unregistered commoners, it was only later in the dynasty that these policies were done away with and the Qing enacted new policies in their xiunu system of drafting Banner girls for the Imperial Harem by excluding daughters of Han commoners. [80]

Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) frequently married Han civilian women and this was permitted by the Qing emperors, however the Qing emperors were distressed to find girls in the Banners as a result of these intermarriages following Han civilian customs in clothing and jewelry when they ended up being drafted for palace service. [80] The Qing formulated policies to remove and shut out daughters of common Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) from serving in the Imperial palace as maids and consorts, exempting them from the draft, asserting that it was doing it out of concern due to the economic plight of Chinese Bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen), however, it may have been doing this after the Qing court was alarmed to find girls from Chinese Banners (Hanjun, or Han Banners) following Han Chinese civilian customs like wearing robes with wide sleeves, feet binding, and wearing a single earring, all of which were contrary to Manchu custom, daughters of Manchu and Mongol bannerman still had to submit to the draft where they would be selected to serve in the Imperial palace as maids or potential consorts. [80] Daughters of Han Bannermen were exempt from having to submit themselves to palace service. [78] It was not permitted for daughters of Chinese Banner (Hanjun, or Han Banner) to enter the selection as concubines to the emperor. [78]

The Manchu bannermen typically used their first/personal name to address themselves and not their last name, while Han bannermen used their last name and first in normal Chinese style. [81] [82]

A lot of Han Chinese bannermen adopted Manchu names, which may have been motivated by associating with the elite. One Han Chinese bannerman named Cui Zhilu who knew Manchu had changed his name to the Manchu Arsai, and the emperor asked him how he came about his name. [65] Chinese bannermen also adopted Manchu personal naming practices like giving numbers as personal names. [65]

Chinese bannermen (Hanjun, or Han Bannermen) manchufied their last names by adding "giya" at the end. [83] However, some Han Chinese bannermen like Zhao Erfeng, Zhao Erxun and Cao Xueqin did not use Manchu names. [83] A lot of other Han Chinese bannermen used Manchufied names, one Han bannermen with a Manchu name of Deming also had a separate Chinese name, Zhang Deyi. [83]

Within the Manchu banner companies, there were various Han Chinese and Mongol persons dispersed among them, and there were Mongol, Korean, Russian, and Tibetan companies in the Manchu Banners. The Manchu Banners had two main divisions between the higher ranking "Old Manchus" (Fo Manzhou, Fe Manju) made out of the main Jurchen tribes like the Jianzhou whom Nurhaci and Hong Taiji created the Manchu Banners from, and the lower ranking "New Manchus" (Chinese transliteration: 伊車滿洲. 衣車滿洲 Yiche Manzhou; Chinese translation: 新滿洲; Manchu: Ice Manju) made out of other Tungusic and Mongolic tribes like the Daur, (Dawoer), Oroqen (Elunchun), Solun (Suolun), Hezhe, Kiakar (Kuyula), and Xibe (Xibo) from the northeast who were incorporated into the Manchu Banners by Shunzhi and Kangxi after the 1644 Qing invasion of Ming China, in order for them to fight for the Qing against the Russian Empire in the Amur River Basin. [84]

De-Sinicization elsewhere

Hong Kong

Since the British handover of Hong Kong to China in 1997, and increasingly since the mid-2000s when travel restrictions on Mainland Chinese citizens to Hong Kong eased, there has been increasing tension between the local Hong Kong population with the Chinese central government and the Mainland-origin population. While a Hong Kong identity has been present since the colonial period, it became stronger and more pronounced over the last decade, with 53% of Hong Kong residents identifying themselves as solely Hong Kong residents but not Chinese residents (while the figure is over 75% among residents aged 18–29), and 78% of Hong Kong residents identifying themselves as both "Hong Kong citizens" and "Chinese citizens". Furthermore, some youth population of Hong Kong do not even identify themselves as broadly, and ethnically, "Chinese". Less than a fifth of Hong Kongers now identify themselves as exclusively "Chinese". [85] [86]

As a British colony for over 150 years, the culture of Hong Kong is unique in its blending of Western and Chinese elements. This cultural difference has been emphasized and embraced by some to distinguish Hong Kong from mainland China. [87] Hong Kong Cantonese differs from other Cantonese varieties as used in the Mainland province of Guangdong, in large part due to the influence of Hong Kong English and code-switching in Hong Kong.

Language differences also play a major role in separating Hong Kong identity from mainland Chinese identity. While Mandarin is the official variety of Chinese in mainland China, the regionally traditional Cantonese variant has long been used in Hong Kong. The increasing presence of Mandarin-speakers in the territory since 1997, and expectations of mainland Chinese for Hong Kong residents to speak Mandarin, has caused conflicts and defensive measures by citizens to protect Cantonese against the encroachment of Mandarin. [88] Such actions include stigmatizing Mandarin as a language of communism, while Cantonese and English language are perceived as languages of democracy; reflecting the political differences between Hong Kong and China. This political linguistic view has also spread among Overseas Chinese communities, the majority of which are historically Cantonese-speaking. [89]

The lack of democratic development in Hong Kong has further eroded a sense of a Chinese identity. [90] Under the one country, two systems policy agreed between the United Kingdom and China as a condition of Hong Kong's return, the territory is guaranteed the right to retain its free way of life for at least 50 years after 1997. However, increasing attempts from the Beijing government to curb democratic institutions and free speech, including the delay of eventual universal suffrage, have drawn continual protests and unrest among locals. This cumulated in the 2014 Hong Kong protests, when the Chinese Communist Party allowed Hong Kongers to vote for the territory's chief executive under the condition that Beijing first approves of the running candidates. The political crises have led to a strengthening of a local Hong Kong identity, with an independence movement beginning to take form as a result.[ citation needed ]

Taiwan

Following the retrocession of Taiwan from Japan [91] to the Republic of China in 1945, the Kuomintang-led government promoted a "resinicization" of the island's population, [92] [93] sponsoring Chinese calligraphy, traditional Chinese painting, folk art, and Chinese opera.

De-Sinicization occurred most rapidly between 1992 and 2005, according to a survey by the National Chengchi University about national identity in Taiwan. Identification as "Chinese" during this time dropped from 26.2% to 7.3%, "Taiwanese" identity increased from 17.3% to 46.5%, and identification as both Taiwanese and Chinese dropped from 45.4% to 42.0%. [94] The autocratic administrations of Chiang Kai-shek and Chiang Ching Kuo claimed legitimacy as pan-Chinese leaders because the Republic of China's National Assembly was elected from all over China (in 1947), rather than just from Taiwan. However, the Lee Tenghui administration (1988–2000) began to desinicize the polity by abolishing this Assembly in 1991, to form a parliamentary body with a Taiwan-only electorate. [94] In academia, de-Sinicization in the late 1980s and 1990s resulted in the replacement of the word "China" in the names of institutions to "Taiwan", creating the "Taiwan Legal Association", "Taiwan Political Science Association", "Taiwan Sociological Association", and "Taiwan History Association". As part of this movement, some Taiwanese historians downplayed the abuses of Japan's colonial administration, referring to it as "rule" rather than "occupation"; and the Taiwan History Association claimed that Taiwan's history was a part of Japanese, rather than Chinese, history. [94]

In 2001, proponents of Taiwanization began characterizing de-Sinicization 2001 as a part of the movement to emphasize a local Taiwan-based identity in opposition to the political leadership that had historically identified with China and Chinese culture. [95]

De-Sinicization accelerated under the Chen Shui-bian administration (2000–2008), with the pro-Taiwan independence Democratic Progressive Party in control of the Executive Yuan. Chen's Minister of Education, Tu Cheng-sheng, directed the rewriting of high school history textbooks to abolish the "remnants of greater Chinese consciousness" (大中國意識的沈痾). This textbook's de-Sinicization included the separation of Taiwanese history and Chinese history into separate volumes, a ban on the term mainland China , and the portrayal of Chinese immigration to Taiwan during the Qing dynasty as "colonization".[ citation needed ]

Concurrently, Chen introduced the One Country on Each Side concept in 2002, which posited that China and Taiwan are separate countries, while ordering the addition of the words "Issued in Taiwan" on Republic of China passports. [94] That same year, Tu's department chose to invent its own romanization system for Mandarin Chinese, Tongyong Pinyin, designed by a Taiwanese scholar rather than adopting the internationally well-known Hanyu Pinyin system developed by the People's Republic of China and used in other countries such as Singapore and Malaysia. In 2003, the government abolished the longstanding policy of using Mandarin as the sole language of government, which in practice promoted the second-largest language on the island, Taiwanese Hokkien, to fulfill many of the functions of a national language. [94] From 2004, the map of the "Republic of China" no longer includes mainland China.[ citation needed ]

From 2005, Chen's Executive Yuan also initiated the Taiwan Name Rectification Campaign, which sought to remove the words "China" or "Chinese" from public and private organizations. This included the renaming of state bodies such as the "Overseas Chinese Affairs Council" (which became the "Overseas Community Affairs Council"), persuading private organizations like China Airlines to change their name, and also the purging of references to mainland China in nearly 100 administrative laws. In 2006, Chen abolished the National Unification Council and its Guidelines for National Unification. [94] In February 2007, Chen's government changed the name of Chunghwa Post (China Post) to Taiwan Post, Chinese Petroleum Company to "CPC Corporation, Taiwan, and China Shipbuilding Corporation to "CSBC Corporation, Taiwan". [96]

The name changing issue was a topic in the Republic of China presidential elections in Taiwan in March 2008. Former Taipei mayor Ma Ying-Jeou was elected as the President, whereupon he sought to reverse some of the de-Sinicization policies of Chen. [97] On 1 August 2008, the postal service resolved to reverse the name change and restore the name "Chunghwa Post". [98] As of 1 January 2009, Tongyong Pinyin was abolished by the government in favor of Hanyu Pinyin. On 28 September 2009, Ma celebrated the 2559th birthday of Confucius at the Taiwan Confucian Temple, which was built in 1665. And on 1 January 2011, President Ma entitled his New Year's address "Building up Taiwan, Invigorating Chinese Heritage", which stressed "Chinese culture and virtues, such as benevolence, righteousness, filial devotion, respect for teachers, kindness, and simplicity". [97]

In the run-up to the 2024 Taiwanese general election, Chinese state media accused the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) of undertaking a de-sinicization campaign in the education sector. [99]

Thailand

Vietnam

Hoa people, or ethnic Chinese in Vietnam, form a significant minority in the country with a presence traced from the Nanyue era and became organized since the foundation of Later Lê dynasty. [100] Chinese immigration to Vietnam peaked during the late 19th to mid-20th century, when China experienced political turmoil and life quality stagnation, as well the communist takeover in 1949 and business incentives provided by the French colonial government. The Hoa largely integrated well, forming a large portion of the Vietnam's middle and upper class and playing an important role in its economy. [101] In addition to their native dialects and/or Cantonese (the lingua franca of Chinese in Southeast Asia), Vietnamese proficiency rates among the Hoa were extremely high and were the largest among Vietnam's ethnic minority groups. [102] Most Hoa eventually considered themselves as Vietnamese first and then Chinese, with those with origins not from mainland China identifying themselves to their specific place, such as "Hong Kong Chinese" or "Macau Chinese", especially in South Vietnam. [103]

Following the Fall of Saigon and communist reunification of the Vietnam, most Hoa in the former South Vietnam opted to immigrate to other countries, especially the United States, France and Australia, rather than communist-controlled China. Only ethnic Chinese persecuted by government in northern Vietnam chose to immigrate back to China, especially to Guangxi Province. [104] Overseas Chinese with origins from Vietnam usually interact with both local Chinese and Vietnamese communities. However, the presence of non-Cantonese speaking and/or mainland Chinese-descended communities results in the community identifying itself with the Vietnamese community instead, as in the case with the Chinese community in France.[ citation needed ]

North Korea

Using Hanja (한자,漢字), or Chinese characters in Korean language, was banned in 1949 in North Korea by Kim Il Sung. Kim banned the use of hanja because he viewed the abolishment of hanja as a symbol of decolonization and Korean nationalism.[ citation needed ]

South Korea

Hangul was made the official script of the Korean language since 1948, replacing Hanja, and Hanja is not required to be learned until high school as an elective course in South Korea. Former Mayor of Seoul Lee Myung-bak's move to change Seoul's official Chinese name from Hancheng (한성,漢城) to Seoul (서울) in 2005 as a model of de-Sinicization. [105] The previous name, pronounced Hànchéng in Chinese and Hanseong in Korean, is an old name for Seoul. Hanseong was derived from the Han River , and literally means "Walled City on the Han (Wide) River" but the name can be misinterpreted as Han Chinese City. The new name Shou'er (首爾) carried no such connotation, and was close in both sound and meaning to Seoul , which, uniquely among Korean place names, does not have a Sino-Korean name. See also Names of Seoul.[ citation needed ]

Kyrgyzstan

The Dungans of Kyrgyzstan represent a less conscious process of de-Sinicization, during which, over the course of a little more than a century (since the Hui Minorities' War), a Hui Chinese population became alienated from the literary tradition and local culture of Shaanxi and Gansu.[ citation needed ]

Indonesia

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Qing dynasty</span> Manchu-led dynasty of China (1644–1912)

The Qing dynasty, officially the Great Qing, was a Manchu-led imperial dynasty of China and the last imperial dynasty in Chinese history. The dynasty, proclaimed in Shenyang in 1636, seized control of Beijing in 1644, which is considered the start of the dynasty's rule. The dynasty lasted until 1912, when it was overthrown in the Xinhai Revolution. In Chinese historiography, the Qing dynasty was preceded by the Ming dynasty and succeeded by the Republic of China. The multi-ethnic Qing dynasty assembled the territorial base for modern China. It was the largest imperial dynasty in the history of China and in 1790 the fourth-largest empire in world history in terms of territorial size. With over 426 million citizens in 1907, it was the most populous country in the world at the time.

The Manchus are a Tungusic East Asian ethnic group native to Manchuria in Northeast Asia. They are an officially recognized ethnic minority in China and the people from whom Manchuria derives its name. The Later Jin (1616–1636) and Qing (1636–1912) dynasties of China were established and ruled by the Manchus, who are descended from the Jurchen people who earlier established the Jin dynasty (1115–1234) in northern China. Manchus form the largest branch of the Tungusic peoples and are distributed throughout China, forming the fourth largest ethnic group in the country. They are found in 31 Chinese provincial regions. Among them, Liaoning has the largest population and Hebei, Heilongjiang, Jilin, Inner Mongolia and Beijing have over 100,000 Manchu residents. About half of the population live in Liaoning and one-fifth in Hebei. There are a number of Manchu autonomous counties in China, such as Xinbin, Xiuyan, Qinglong, Fengning, Yitong, Qingyuan, Weichang, Kuancheng, Benxi, Kuandian, Huanren, Fengcheng, Beizhen and over 300 Manchu towns and townships. Manchus are the largest minority group in China without an autonomous region.

The Eight Banners were administrative and military divisions under the Later Jin and Qing dynasties of China into which all Manchu households were placed. In war, the Eight Banners functioned as armies, but the banner system was also the basic organizational framework of all of Manchu society. Created in the early 17th century by Nurhaci, the banner armies played an instrumental role in his unification of the fragmented Jurchen people and in the Qing dynasty's conquest of the Ming dynasty.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Hong Taiji</span> Founding emperor of the Qing dynasty

Hong Taiji, also rendered as Huang Taiji and sometimes referred to as Abahai in Western literature, also known by his temple name as the Emperor Taizong of Qing, was the second khan of the Later Jin dynasty and the founding emperor of the Qing dynasty. He was responsible for consolidating the empire that his father Nurhaci had founded and laid the groundwork for the conquest of the Ming dynasty, although he died before this was accomplished. He was also responsible for changing the name of the Jurchens to "Manchu" in 1635, and changing the name of his dynasty from "Great Jin" to "Great Qing" in 1636.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">House of Aisin-Gioro</span> Manchu clan and imperial house of China

The House of Aisin-Gioro is a Manchu clan that ruled the Later Jin dynasty (1616–1636), the Qing dynasty (1636–1912), and Manchukuo (1932–1945) in the history of China. Under the Ming dynasty, members of the Aisin Gioro clan served as chiefs of the Jianzhou Jurchens, one of the three major Jurchen tribes at this time. Qing bannermen passed through the gates of the Great Wall in 1644, and eventually conquered the short-lived Shun dynasty, Xi dynasty and Southern Ming dynasty. After gaining total control of China proper, the Qing dynasty later expanded into other adjacent regions, including Xinjiang, Tibet, Outer Mongolia, and Taiwan. The dynasty reached its zenith during the High Qing era and under the Qianlong Emperor, who reigned from 1735 to 1796. This reign was followed by a century of gradual decline.

The Jianzhou Jurchens were one of the three major groups of Jurchens as identified by the Ming dynasty. Although the geographic location of the Jianzhou Jurchens changed throughout history, during the 14th century they were located south of the Wild Jurchens and the Haixi Jurchens, and inhabited modern-day Liaoning and Jilin provinces in China. The Jianzhou Jurchens were known to possess an abundant supply of natural resources. They also possessed industrial secrets, particularly in processing ginseng and the dyeing of cloth. They were powerful due to their proximity to Ming trading towns such as Fushun, Kaiyuan, and Tieling in Liaodong, and to Manpojin camp near Korea.

Hūlun was a powerful alliance of Jurchen tribes in the late 16th century, based primarily in modern Jilin province of China.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mongolia under Qing rule</span> 1635–1911 Chinese rule over Mongolia

Mongolia under Qing rule was the rule of the Manchu-led Qing dynasty of China over the Mongolian Plateau, including the four Outer Mongolian aimags and the six Inner Mongolian aimags from the 17th century to the end of the dynasty. The term "Mongolia" is used here in the broader historical sense, and includes an area much larger than the modern-day state of Mongolia. By the early 1630s Ligdan Khan saw much of his power weakened due to the disunity of the Mongol tribes. He was subsequently defeated by the Later Jin dynasty and died soon afterwards. His son Ejei handed the Yuan imperial seal over to Hong Taiji in 1635, thus ending the rule of the Northern Yuan dynasty in Inner Mongolia. However, the Khalkha Mongols in Outer Mongolia continued to rule until they were overrun by the Dzungar Khanate in 1690, and they submitted to the Qing dynasty in 1691.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Nurhaci</span> Founding khan of Later Jin

Nurhaci, also known by his temple name as the Emperor Taizu of Qing, was the founding khan of the Jurchen-led Later Jin dynasty.

The history of the Qing dynasty began in the first half of the 17th century, when the Qing dynasty was established and became the last imperial dynasty of China, succeeding the Ming dynasty (1368–1644). The Manchu leader Hong Taiji renamed the Later Jin established by his father Nurhaci to "Great Qing" in 1636, sometimes referred to as the Predynastic Qing in historiography. By 1644 the Shunzhi Emperor and his prince regent seized control of the Ming capital Beijing, and the year 1644 is generally considered the start of the dynasty's rule. The Qing dynasty lasted until 1912, when Puyi abdicated the throne in response to the 1911 Revolution. As the final imperial dynasty in Chinese history, the Qing dynasty reached heights of power unlike any of the Chinese dynasties which preceded it, engaging in large-scale territorial expansion which ended with embarrassing defeat and humiliation to the foreign powers whom they believe to be inferior to them. The Qing dynasty's inability to successfully counter Western and Japanese imperialism ultimately led to its downfall, and the instability which emerged in China during the final years of the dynasty ultimately paved the way for the Warlord Era.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Transition from Ming to Qing</span> Period of Chinese history (1618–1683)

The transition from Ming to Qing or the Manchu conquest of China from 1618 to 1683 saw the transition between two major dynasties in Chinese history. It was a decades-long conflict between the emerging Qing dynasty, the incumbent Ming dynasty, and several smaller factions. It ended with the consolidation of Qing rule, and the fall of the Ming and several other factions.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Military of the Qing dynasty</span>

The Qing dynasty (1644–1912) was established by conquest and maintained by armed force. The founding emperors personally organized and led the armies, and the continued cultural and political legitimacy of the dynasty depended on their ability to defend the country from invasion and expand its territory. Military institutions, leadership, and finance were fundamental to the dynasty's initial success and ultimate decay. The early military system centered on the Eight Banners, a hybrid institution that also played social, economic, and political roles.

Identity in China was strongly dependent on the Eight Banner system during the Manchu-led Qing dynasty (1644–1912). China consisted of multiple ethnic groups, of which the Han, Mongols and Manchus participated in the banner system. Identity, however, was defined much more by culture, language and participation in the military until the Qianlong Emperor resurrected the ethnic classifications.

The Battle of Dalinghe was a battle between the Later Jin dynasty and the Ming dynasty that took place between September and November 1631. Later Jin forces besieged and captured the fortified northern Ming city of Dalinghe in Liaoning. Using a combined force of Jurchen and Mongol cavalry, along with recently captured Ming artillery units, the Later Jin khan Hong Taiji surrounded Dalinghe and defeated a series of Ming reinforcement forces in the field. The Ming defenders under general Zu Dashou surrendered the city after taking heavy losses and running out of food. Several of the Ming officers captured in the battle would go on to play important roles in the ongoing transition from Ming to Qing. The battle was the first major test for the Chinese firearms specialists incorporated into the Later Jin military. Whereas the Later Jin had previously relied primarily on their own Eight Banners cavalry in military campaigns, after the siege of Dalinghe the Chinese infantry would play a larger role in the fighting. Unlike Nurhaci's failed siege at the Battle of Ningyuan several years prior, the siege of Dalinghe was a success that would soon be replicated in Songshan and Jinzhou, paving the way for the establishment of the Qing dynasty and the ultimate defeat of the Ming.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Qing dynasty in Inner Asia</span> Historical territories of the Manchu-led Qing empire

The Qing dynasty in Inner Asia was the expansion of the Qing dynasty's realm in Inner Asia in the 17th and the 18th century AD, including both Inner Mongolia and Outer Mongolia, both Manchuria and Outer Manchuria, Tibet, Qinghai and Xinjiang.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Manchuria under Ming rule</span>

Manchuria under Ming rule refers to the domination of the Ming dynasty of China over the greater region of Manchuria, including today's Northeast China and Outer Manchuria. The Ming rule of Manchuria began with its conquest of Manchuria in the late 1380s after the fall of the Mongol-led Yuan dynasty, and reached its peak in the early 15th century with the establishment of the Nurgan Regional Military Commission. With the dissolution of the Nurgan Regional Military Commission the Ming power waned considerably in Manchuria. Starting in the 1580s, Nurhaci, the Jianzhou Jurchen chieftain who had been a Ming vassal, began to take control of most of Manchuria over the next several decades, and in 1616 he established the Later Jin and openly renounced Ming overlordship with the Seven Grievances. The Qing dynasty established by his son Hong Taiji would eventually conquer the Ming and take control of China proper.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Later Jin (1616–1636)</span> Jurchen-led dynasty in Manchuria

The Later Jin, officially known as Jin or the Great Jin, was a Jurchen-led royal dynasty of China in Manchuria and the precursor to the Qing dynasty. Established in 1616 by the Jianzhou Jurchen chieftain Nurhaci upon his reunification of the Jurchen tribes, its name was derived from the earlier Jin dynasty founded by the Wanyan clan which had ruled northern China in the 12th and 13th centuries.

Han Chinese Eight Banners, sometimes translated as Han-martial Eight Banners, were one of the three divisions in the Eight Banners of the Qing dynasty. Members of the Han Chinese Eight Banners were originally Han Chinese living in the Liaodong of Ming dynasty. During the transition from Ming to Qing, these people were conquered by the Jurchen-led Later Jin dynasty. In 1631, Hong Taiji created the Han Chinese Eight Banners. Over time, other Han Chinese people who had surrendered to Qing dynasty joined the Han Chinese Eight Banners.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Sinicization of the Manchus</span> Historical incorporation of the Manchu people into the Han-dominant society

The Sinicization of the Manchus was the process in which the Manchu people became assimilated into the Han-dominated Chinese society. It occurred most prominently during the Qing dynasty when the new Manchu rulers actively attempted to assimilate themselves and their people with the Han to increase the legitimacy of the new dynasty. As a result, when the Qing dynasty fell, many Manchu had already adopted Han Chinese customs, languages and surnames. For example, some descendants of the ruling imperial House of Aisin-Gioro adopted the Han Chinese surname Jin as both Jin and Aisin mean gold.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Jurchen unification</span> 1583–1619 unification of the Jurchen tribes under Nurhaci, founder of the Later Jin dynasty

The Jurchen unification were a series of events in the late 16th and early 17th centuries that led to the unification of the Jurchen tribes under the Jianzhou Jurchen leader Nurhaci. While Nurhaci was originally a vassal of the Ming dynasty who considered himself a local representative of imperial Ming power, he also had a somewhat antagonistic relationship with the Ming due to Ming's involvement in events early on in his life that led to the death of his father and grandfather combined with his own increasing ambition.

References

Citations

  1. ↑ Jacques Gernet (1996). A history of Chinese civilization . Cambridge University Press. p.  248. ISBN   978-0-521-49781-7 . Retrieved 3 June 2014. 0521497817.
  2. ↑ Mullaney, Thomas; Leibold, James; Gros, Stephane; Bussche, Eric Vanden, eds. (2012). Critical Han Studies: The History, Representation, and Identity of China's Majority (PDF). University of California Press. ISBN   9780984590988.|page= 181
  3. ↑ Jonathan Karam Skaff (6 July 2012). Sui-Tang China and Its Turko-Mongol Neighbors: Culture, Power, and Connections, 580-800. Oxford University Press. pp. 127–. ISBN   978-0-19-987590-0.
  4. ↑ Yihong Pan (1997). Son of Heaven and Heavenly Qaghan: Sui-Tang China and Its Neighbors. Center for East Asian Studies, Western Washington University. p. 35. ISBN   978-0-914584-20-9.
  5. ↑ Patricia Buckley Ebrey (25 January 2010). The Cambridge Illustrated History of China. Cambridge University Press. pp. 93–. ISBN   978-0-521-12433-1.
  6. ↑ Andrew Eisenberg (23 January 2008). Kingship in Early Medieval China. BRILL. pp. 94–. ISBN   978-90-474-3230-2.
  7. ↑ Andrew Eisenberg (23 January 2008). Kingship in Early Medieval China. BRILL. pp. 95–. ISBN   978-90-474-3230-2.
  8. ↑ Journal of Asian History. O. Harrassowitz. 1996. p. 53.
  9. ↑ Journal of Asian History. O. Harrassowitz. 1982. p. 11.
  10. ↑ George Kuwayama (1 January 1991). Ancient Mortuary Traditions of China: Papers on Chinese Ceramic Funerary Sculptures. Far Eastern Art Council, Los Angeles County Museum of Art. p. 55. ISBN   978-0-87587-157-8.
  11. ↑ Albert E. Dien (2007). Six Dynasties Civilization. Yale University Press. pp. 286–. ISBN   978-0-300-07404-8.
  12. ↑ Wontack Hong (1 January 2006). Korea and Japan in East Asian history: a tripolar approach to East Asian history. Kudara International. p. 255. ISBN   978-89-85567-03-9.
  13. ↑
  14. ↑
  15. ↑
  16. ↑ John A.G. Roberts (13 July 2011). A History of China. Palgrave Macmillan. pp. 56–. ISBN   978-0-230-34411-2.
  17. ↑ Kang-i Sun Chang; Stephen Owen (2010). The Cambridge History of Chinese Literature. Cambridge University Press. pp. 273–. ISBN   978-0-521-85558-7.
  18. ↑ Sam van Schaik (28 June 2011). Tibet: A History. Yale University Press. pp. 8–. ISBN   978-0-300-15404-7.
  19. ↑ Victor Cunrui Xiong (2009). Historical Dictionary of Medieval China. Rowman & Littlefield. pp. 293–. ISBN   978-0-8108-6053-7.
  20. ↑ Amy Chua (6 January 2009). Day of Empire: How Hyperpowers Rise to Global Dominance--and Why They Fall. Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. pp. 72–. ISBN   978-0-307-47245-8.
  21. ↑ Biran, Michal. "Michal Biran. "Khitan Migrations in Inner Asia," Central Eurasian Studies, 3 (2012), 85-108". academia.edu.
  22. ↑ . 14 April 2014 https://web.archive.org/web/20140414060414/http://cces.snu.ac.kr/article/jces3_4biran.pdf. Archived from the original (PDF) on 14 April 2014.{{cite web}}: Missing or empty |title= (help)
  23. ↑ Cha 2005, p. 51.
  24. ↑ Yang, Shao-yun (2014). "Fan and Han: The Origins and Uses of a Conceptual Dichotomy in Mid-Imperial China, ca. 500-1200". In Fiaschetti, Francesca; Schneider, Julia (eds.). Political Strategies of Identity Building in Non-Han Empires in China. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. p. 22.
  25. ↑ Orient. Maruzen Company. 2004. p. 41.
  26. ↑ Orient. Maruzen Company. 2004. p. 41.
  27. ↑ Hsueh-man Shen; Asia Society; Asia Society. Museum (1 September 2006). Gilded splendor: treasures of China's Liao Empire (907-1125). Museum für Ostasiatische Kunst (Berlin, Germany), Museum Rietberg. 5 continents. p. 106. ISBN   978-88-7439-332-9.
  28. ↑ Jiayao An (1987). Early Chinese Glassware. Millennia. p. 12.
  29. ↑ http://kt82.zhaoxinpeng.com/view/138019.htm%5B%5D MARSONE, Pierre (2011). La Steppe et l'Empire : la formation de la dynastie Khitan (Liao). Les Belle Lettres. Retrieved 8 November 2018.
  30. ↑ Johnson, Linda Cooke (2011). Women of the Conquest Dynasties: Gender and Identity in Liao and Jin China. University of Hawaiʻi Press. p. 156. ISBN   9780824870300.
  31. ↑ Jay, Jennifer W. (2 June 2018). "Women of the Conquest Dynasties: Gender and Identity in Liao and Jin China by Linda Cooke Johnson (review)". China Review International. 19 (1): 100–103. doi:10.1353/cri.2012.0018. S2CID   145295293.
  32. ↑ Johnson, Linda Cooke (2011). Women of the Conquest Dynasties: Gender and Identity in Liao and Jin China. University of Hawaiʻi Press. ISBN   9780824870300.
  33. ↑ Robinson, David M. (2008). Culture, Courtiers, and Competition: The Ming Court (1368-1644). Harvard University Asia Center. ISBN   9780674028234. Chapter 8
  34. ↑ Slobodnik, Martin (2004). "Martin Slobodník: "The Relations between the Chinese Ming Dynasty and the Tibetan Ruling House of Phag-mo-gru in the Years 1368-1434: Political and Religious Aspects", Asian and African Studies, Vol. 13 (2004), No. 2, pp. 155-171". Asian and African Studies. 13 (2). p. 166
  35. ↑ Michael E. Haskew; Christer Joregensen (9 December 2008). Fighting Techniques of the Oriental World: Equipment, Combat Skills, and Tactics. St. Martin's Press. pp. 101–. ISBN   978-0-312-38696-2.
  36. ↑ Dorothy Perkins (19 November 2013). Encyclopedia of China: History and Culture. Routledge. pp. 216–. ISBN   978-1-135-93562-7.
  37. ↑ 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.
  38. ↑ 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.
  39. ↑
  40. ↑
  41. ↑ Naquin (2000) pp. 213–
  42. ↑ 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.
  43. ↑ B. J. ter Haar (2006). Telling Stories: Witchcraft And Scapegoating in Chinese History. BRILL. pp. 4–. ISBN   978-90-04-14844-4.
  44. ↑ Frank Trentmann (22 March 2012). The Oxford Handbook of the History of Consumption. OUP Oxford. pp. 47–. ISBN   978-0-19-162435-3.
  45. ↑ Frank Trentmann (22 March 2012). The Oxford Handbook of the History of Consumption. OUP Oxford. ISBN   978-0-19-162435-3.
  46. ↑ 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.
  47. ↑ 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.
  48. ↑ Frederick W. Mote (2003). Imperial China 900-1800. Harvard University Press. pp. 657–. ISBN   978-0-674-01212-7.
  49. ↑ Robinson, David M. (2008). Culture, Courtiers, and Competition: The Ming Court (1368-1644). Harvard University Asia Center. pp. 402–403. ISBN   9780674028234.
  50. ↑ Teik, Toh Hoong (October 2000). "Shaykh 'Âlam: the Emperor of Early Sixteenth-Century China" (PDF). Sino-Platonic Papers (110).
  51. ↑ Stephen Selby (1 January 2000). Chinese Archery. Hong Kong University Press. pp. 271–. ISBN   978-962-209-501-4.
  52. ↑ Si-yen Fei (2009). Negotiating Urban Space: Urbanization and Late Ming Nanjing. Harvard University Press. pp. x–. ISBN   978-0-674-03561-4.
  53. ↑ Foon Ming Liew (1 January 1998). The Treatises on Military Affairs of the Ming Dynastic History (1368-1644): An Annotated Translation of the Treatises on Military Affairs, Chapter 89 and Chapter 90: Supplemented by the Treatises on Military Affairs of the Draft of the Ming Dynastic History: A Documentation of Ming-Qing Historiography and the Decline and Fall of. Ges.f. Natur-e.V. p. 243. ISBN   978-3-928463-64-5.
  54. ↑ Shih-shan Henry Tsai (1 July 2011). Perpetual happiness: the Ming emperor Yongle. University of Washington Press. pp. 23–. ISBN   978-0-295-80022-6.
  55. ↑ Frederick W. Mote; Denis Twitchett (26 February 1988). The Cambridge History of China: Volume 7, The Ming Dynasty, 1368-1644. Cambridge University Press. pp. 403–. ISBN   978-0-521-24332-2.
  56. ↑ Frederick W. Mote; Denis Twitchett (26 February 1988). The Cambridge History of China: Volume 7, The Ming Dynasty, 1368-1644. Cambridge University Press. pp. 404–. ISBN   978-0-521-24332-2.
  57. ↑ Frederick W. Mote; Denis Twitchett (26 February 1988). The Cambridge History of China: Volume 7, The Ming Dynasty, 1368-1644. Cambridge University Press. pp. 414–. ISBN   978-0-521-24332-2.
  58. 1 2 3 Kagan (2010) p. 95
  59. 1 2 Kagan (2010)
  60. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Crossley (1999)
  61. 1 2 Crossley (1999) pp. 55-56
  62. 1 2 3 Rawski (1998)
  63. ↑ Rowe (2010)
  64. 1 2 3 4 Watson & Ebrey (1991)
  65. 1 2 3 4 5 Elliott (2001)
  66. ↑ Hammond & Stapleton (2008)
  67. 1 2 Naquin (2000) p. 371
  68. ↑ Hansen, Mette Halskov (1 October 2011). Lessons in Being Chinese: Minority Education and Ethnic Identity in Southwest China. University of Washington Press. ISBN   9780295804125 – via Google Books.
  69. 1 2 Taveirne (2004)
  70. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Wakeman (1985)
  71. ↑ Lovell (2007)
  72. 1 2 3 Spence (1990)
  73. 1 2 Wakeman (1977) p. 78
  74. 1 2 3 4 Walthall (2008) p. 148
  75. 1 2 Wakeman (1977) p. 79
  76. ↑ Wakeman (1977)
  77. 1 2 3 Crossley, Siu & Sutton (2006)
  78. 1 2 3 Hayter-Menzies (2008)
  79. ↑ "Muramatsu 1972, p. 2" (PDF). hit-u.ac.jp.
  80. 1 2 3 Walthall (2008)
  81. ↑ Hansen, Mette Halskov (1 October 2011). Lessons in Being Chinese: Minority Education and Ethnic Identity in Southwest China. University of Washington Press. ISBN   9780295804125 – via Google Books.
  82. ↑ Hansen, Mette Halskov (1 October 2011). Lessons in Being Chinese: Minority Education and Ethnic Identity in Southwest China. University of Washington Press. ISBN   9780295804125 – via Google Books.
  83. 1 2 3 Hansen, Mette Halskov (1 October 2011). Lessons in Being Chinese: Minority Education and Ethnic Identity in Southwest China. University of Washington Press. ISBN   9780295804125 – via Google Books.
  84. ↑ Hansen, Mette Halskov (1 October 2011). Lessons in Being Chinese: Minority Education and Ethnic Identity in Southwest China. University of Washington Press. ISBN   9780295804125 – via Google Books.
  85. ↑ Why living in Hong Kong as mainland Chinese is no piece of cake Yang, Joy. South China Morning Post, 21 May 2013
  86. ↑ "HKU POP releases latest survey on Hong Kong people's ethnic identity". hkupop.hku.hk. Archived from the original on 22 December 2014. Retrieved 31 October 2014.
  87. ↑ Hong Kong's Enduring Identity Crisis Veg, Sebastian, The Atlantic, 16 October 2013.
  88. ↑ City University students deny teacher took class in Mandarin Luo, Chris, South China Morning Post , 14 October 2013.
  89. ↑ China, Hong Kong and Cantonese: Dialect dialectric China Daily Mail, 10 July 2014
  90. ↑ Think 228, Not Tiananmen: How Identity Drives the Hong Kong Vien, Thomas, The Diplomat, 22 October 2014.
  91. ↑ Department of Information Services, Executive Yuan, Republic of China (December 2011). "ROC to celebrate 70th anniversary of retrocession" . Retrieved 4 June 2024.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  92. ↑ Diamond, Larry; Plattner, Marc; Chu, Yun-han; Tien, Hung-mao (1997). Consolidating the Third Wave Democracies: Regional Challenges. JHU Press. p. 293. [During] extended Japanese colonial rule (1895-1945)... the native elite was subordinated first to a state-orchestrated desinicization campaign and later a Japanization movement that proceeded in earnest during the Pacific war.... the state's [subsequent] effort to establish the supremacy of Chinese identity... through resinicization and Mandarinization programs [occurred] despite many shared ethnic heritages between the native and the newly arrived emigre group.
  93. ↑ Sharma, Anita; Chakrabarti, Sreemati (2010). Taiwan Today. Anthem Press. pp. 21–22. [T]he people of Taiwan have been enmeshed in a century long struggle with state-sponsored cultural programmes, from 'desinicization' at the early stage of colonial rule, to 'Japanization' at the subsequent stage, and to 'resinicization' under the KMT rule.
  94. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Hao, Zhidong (2010). "De-Sinicization under Lee and Chen and the Role of Intellectuals". Whither Taiwan and Mainland China? National Identity, the State, and Intellectuals. Hong Kong University Press. pp. 49–58.
  95. ↑ Makeham, John (2008). Lost Soul: "Confucianism" in contemporary Chinese academic discourse. Harvard University Asia Center. p. 85. Many proponents of indigenization in Taiwan regard it quite specifically as a project of De-Sinicization: an attempt to remove the yoke of "Chinese" colonial hegemony so that Taiwan's putative native (bentu) identity can be recognized and further nurtured.
  96. ↑ "：：：：：Welcome to Taiwan POST：：：：：". Archived from the original on 10 May 2007. Retrieved 5 January 2011.
  97. 1 2 Hebert, David; Kertz-Welzel, Alexandra (2012). Patriotism and Nationalism in Music Education. Ashgate Publishing.
  98. ↑ "：：：：：Welcome to Chunghwa POST：：：：：". 25 December 2007. Archived from the original on 21 August 2008. Retrieved 5 January 2011.
  99. ↑ "China is stoking a controversy in order to influence Taiwan's election" . The Economist . 27 December 2023. ISSN   0013-0613 . Retrieved 28 December 2023.
  100. ↑ Taylor (2007), p. 255
  101. ↑ Marr, White (1988), p. 77-89
  102. ↑ Khanh (1993), p. 31
  103. ↑ Khanh (1993), p. 30
  104. ↑ Tom Lam (2000). "The Exodus of Hoa Refugees from Vietnam and their Settlement in Guangxi: China's Refugee Settlement Strategies". Journal of Refugee Studies. 13 (4): 374–390. doi:10.1093/jrs/13.4.374.
  105. ↑ 杨谷 (16 August 2005). 将汉城改为"首尔"是另一种形式的"去中国化" (in Chinese). Archived from the original on 23 November 2006. Retrieved 15 June 2008.{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)

Sources

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.