Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-l7hp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-02T21:30:23.788Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Chinese Communist Assessments of a Foreign Conquest Dynasty

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 February 2009

David M. Farquhar
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Chinese Communist evaluations of China's foreign conquest dynasties, like those of earlier Chinese historians, have been hostile, at least on the most vulgar level of historical writing. This comes as no surprise, for the conquest dynasties occupied all or part of China by military force and often governed badly. For the Chinese Communist historians these conquerors carry the additional onus of being feudalists, or worse, feudalists who allowed the feudal economy to stagnate. This attitude is particularly marked in the treatment of the more recent foreign dynasties, the Khitan Liao dynasty (916–1124), the Jurchen Chin dynasty (1115–1234), the Tangut Hsi Hsia dynasty (1032–1227), the Manchu Ch'ing dynasty (1644–1911) and the one discussed here, the Mongol Yüan dynasty (1220–1367).

Type
Chinese Communist History and Historiography
Information
The China Quarterly , Volume 30 , April 1967 , pp. 79 - 92
Copyright
Copyright © The China Quarterly 1967

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 For exampleChi-ming, Tung, An Outline History of China (Peking: Foreign Languages Press, 1959)Google Scholar.

2 Meng, , Yüan-tai she-hui chieh-chi chih-tu (Social Classes in China under the Yüan Dynasty) (Yenching University, 1938)Google Scholar, seems to be one of the few full-length modem monographs on Yiian history published in Republican times .

3 Ch'en wrote the important studyYüan hsi-yü-jen hua-hua k'ao (The Sinicisation of Central Asians during the Yüan), 8 Chüan, (Li-yün shu-wu ts'ung-k'o pa chung 1–2, Peiping: 1934) which has recently been translated byGoogle ScholarGoodrich, L. C. as Western and Central Asians in China under the Mongols (Monumenta Serica Monograph XV, Los Angeles: Monumenta Serica, University of California, 1966)Google Scholar.

4 Feng Ch'eng-chun (now dead), T'ao Hsi-sheng and Yao Ts'ung-wu (both now in Taiwan), Han Ju-lin and Wu Han have all made contributions. Some, like Wu, have subsequently taken up other lines of activity.

5 Weng is in the Institute ot Nationalities, Chinese Academy of Sciences. The Congress at Ulan Bator was limited to language, literature and folklore studies, and Weng's paper read there contains little of scholarly interest. See “Shih-chi-nien-lai Chung-kuo Meng-ku min-tsu yü-yen wen-hsueh ti fa-chan ho yen-chiu kung-tso ti kai-k'uang” (“A sketch of the development of, and research projects in, the linguistics and literature of the Mongolian nationality in China during the past ten years”),Studia Mongolica III, 2.24–30 (Ulan Bator, The First International Congress of Mongolists, 1962), pp. 25–37Google Scholar.

6 Yüan-an, Yü, Ch'eng-chi-ssu hart chuan (A Biography of Chinggis Qan) (Shanghai: People's Publishing House, 1955)Google Scholar; Yüan-an, Yii, Nei Meng-ku li-shih kai-yao (Outline History of Inner Mongolia) (Shanghai: People's Publishing House, 1958)Google Scholar; Ju-lin, Han, “Lun Ch'eng-chi-ssu han” (“ On Chinggis Qan”), Li-shih Yen-chiu (Historical Studies), No. 3, 1962, pp. 1–10Google Scholar.

7 This is evidenced by the maintenance of the mausoleum (“shrine” would be a better word) of Chinggis Qan at Ejen qoriya in the Ordos region. See, for example,Rintschen, , “Zum Kult Tschinggis-khans bei den Mongolen,” Opuscula Ethnologica Memoriae Ludovici Bird Sacra (Budapest: Magyar Tudomanyos Academia, 1959), pp. 9–22Google Scholar.

8 At least the two chief bibliographies of modern Mongolian books list none:Mongol ulsad 1913–1944 ond khevlesen Mongol nomyn bürtgel (Bibliography of Mongolian Books Printed in the Years 1913–1944 in Mongolia) (Ulan Bator: Shinzhlekh Ukhaany Akademiin Khevlel, 1963) andGoogle ScholarBNMA uslad 1945–1955 onuudad Mongol khel deer khevlegdesen nomyn tovch biirtgel (A Brief Bibliography of Books Published in the Mongolian Language in the Years 1945–1955 in the MPR) (Ulan Bator: Ulsyn Khevleliin gazar, 1957)Google Scholar. It should be noted, however, that considerable materials about Chinggis have been published in Mongolia, including a modern Mongolian translation of the most important source on him, the Monggol-un nigucha tobchiyan (Yüan-ch'ao pi-shih, the “ Secret History of the Mongols “), by Damdinsuren, Ts.: Mongolyn nuuts tovchoo (2nd ed., Ulan Bator: Ulsyn Khevleliin gazar, 1957)Google Scholar. In 1962 the MPR did deign to celebrate the 800th birthday of Chinggis by issuing a commemorative postage stamp. SeeStanley Gibbons Priced Postage Stamp Catalogue, Part III (London: Gibbons, 1966), p. 439Google Scholar.

9 Yü, , Biography of Chinggis Qan, pp. 3, 6Google Scholar. Ultimogeniture: inheritance by the youngest child.

10 Ibid., pp. 7–8.

11 Ibid., pp. 6–7, 85.

12 Vladimirtsov, B. la., The Social Regime of the Mongols: Nomadic Feudalism (Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, 1934), French translation byGoogle ScholarCarsow, Michael, Le Regime social des Mongols, Le Feodalisme nomade (Paris: AdrienMaisonneuve, 1948)Google Scholar. See especially pp. 39–99.

13 See, for example, the most recent assessment ofChinggis, , Lattimore, Owen, “Chingis Khan and the Mongol Conquests,” Scientific American, Vol. 209, no. 2 (08, 1963), pp. 55–68Google Scholar. Some points in Vladimirtsov's (and hence Yü's) analysis—the “unagan-bogol” concept, the character of the noyan class, etc.—must be rejected or seriously modified.

14 Vladimirtsov developed his concept of Mongolian nomadic feudalism around 1911–1912 after his return from Mongolia, well before any Marxist pressures could be put on him.

15 Yü, , Biography of Chinggis Qan, pp. 12, 16, 45, 85Google Scholar.

16 Ibid., pp. 19–20.

17 Ibid., pp. 32–33.

18 Ibid., pp. 35, 69.

19 Ibid., pp. 44, 68–69.

20 ibid., pp. 68–69, 77.

21 Ibid., pp. 85–37.

22 Ibid., p. 68.

23 Ibid., p. 90.

24 Ibid., pp. 89–90.

25 Ibid., pp. 90–95.

26 Grekov, B. D. and Iakubovskii, A. Iu., Zolotala orda i ee padenie (The Golden Horde and its Downfall), 2nd ed. (Moscow-Leningrad: Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk SSSR, 1950)Google Scholar.

27 Soviet Academy of Sciences, Istorüa mongol'skoi narodnoi respubliki (Moscow: Izdatel'stvo Akademii Nauk, SSSR, 1954)Google Scholar; Mongolian Scientific Committee, Bugd nairamdakh mongol ard ulsyn tüükh (Ulan Bator: Ulsyn Khevleliin gazar, 1955)Google Scholar. This book was subsequently translated into Chinese from the Russian edition:Meng-ku jen-min kung-ho-kuo fung-shih (History of the Mongolian Peoples Republic) (Peking: Science Publishing House, 1958)Google Scholar. The Chinese translation, which is cited in this paper, is superior to the other versions because the translators have given precise citations for quotations from Chinese books and added other useful material.

28 A point already noted by Okada Hidehiro in a brief review of the two books: “Shinkan Mongoru-shi nishu” (“Two New Mongolian Histories”), Shoho (Book News), July, 1958, pp. 13–14.

29 Yü, , An Outline History of Inner Mongolia, pp. 1–14, 16–18Google Scholar. See History of the Mongolian Peoples Republic, op. cit., p. 74.

30 Yü, , An Outline History of Inner Mongolia, p. 16Google Scholar

31 Ibid., pp. 38, 43.

32 Ibid., pp. 43–44, 49–50.

33 History of the Mongolian People's Republic, op. cit., pp. 98, 108.

34 Yü, , An Outline History of Inner Mongolia, p. 41Google Scholar.

35 Ibid., p. 46.

36 Ibid., p. 48.

37 Ibid., p. 51.

38 Ibid., pp. 51–52.

39 See, for example, the book ofDugersüren, L., Ulaanbaalar khotyn tuükhees: Nüslel khüree (On the History of Ulan-Bator: the Capital) (Ulan-Bator: Ukyn Khevlelün gazar, 1956)Google Scholar.

40 Yü, , An Outline History of Inner Mongolia, pp. 52–53Google Scholar

41 Han, , “On Chinggis Qan,” Historical Studies, pp. 1–10Google Scholar.

42 Ibid., pp. 1–3.

43 Ibid., p. 3.

44 Ibid., pp. 3–4.

45 Ibid., pp. 4–6. On the re-evaluation of the cruelty of the Mongolian conquest of China, see Huai-ling, Wang, “Tui ‘Chung-kuo fi-shih kang-yao’ Yuan-tai pu-fen ti i-chien” (“A critique of the Yüan dynasty section in ‘Outline of Chinese History’ by Shang Yüeh”), Historical Studies, No. 7, 1958, p. 42 ffGoogle Scholar.

46 Han, , “On Chinggis Qan,” p. 7Google Scholar.

47 See Yü, , Outline History of Inner Mongolia, p. 39Google Scholar

48 Han, , “On Chinggis Qan,” pp. 9–10Google Scholar.

49 Viatkin, R. V. and Tikhvinskü, S. L., “Some questions of historical science on the Chinese People's Republic,” Voprosy Istorü {Historical Questions'), No. 10 (10, 1963), pp. 3–20Google Scholar. Full translation in Current Digest of the Soviet Press, XVI, no. 4 (02 19, 1964), pp. 3–10, to which reference is made in this paperGoogle Scholar.

50 See, for example, the article by Ku-ch'eng, Chou, “On the conditions under which world history developed,” Historical Studies, No. 2, 1961Google Scholar.

51 I cannot precisely confirm this. Marx wrote a note on the early Mongols which has been published as “Mongoly v kontse XIV veka” (“The Mongols at the end of the 14th century”), in Arkhiv K. Marksa i F. Engel'sa, VI, pp. 169–171Google Scholar. This volume is not available to me and I have been unable to find such a paper in other editions of Marx's works.

52 Viatkin, and Tikhvinskü, , “Some questions of historical science,” op. cit., p. 7Google Scholar.

53 Mongolian studies were created as a discipline in Russia about 140 years ago. But the Chinese language has never been considered a normal part of th e Mongolist's curriculum, and this has successfully excluded them from Yüan studies.

54 Communist Chinese studies o n the ancient Turks are of considerable importance. Note for instance, Wen-pi, Huang[T'a-li-mu p'en-ti k'ao-ku-chi (Archaeological Report on the Tarim Basin) (Peking: Science Publishing House, 1958)]Google Scholar; Chung-mien, Ts-en[T'u-chueh chi-shih (Collected History of the Turks), 2 vols. (Peking: Chung-hua shu-chu, 1958)]Google Scholar; Hsiang T, a[T'ang-tai Ch'ang-an yu hsi-yu wen-ming (Ch'ang-an and the Civilisation of the Western Regions in Tang Times) (Peking: San-lien shu-tien, 1957)]Google Scholar; and a number of articles by Feng Chia-sheng—all men of the older generation.

55 Such a view has been expressed by Liu Ta-nien with respect to the Ch'ing dynasty. See Tikhvinski, Viatkin and, op. at., p. 8Google Scholar.

56 Notable examples are the books of Teng Chih-ch'eng on the Manchus and general history, the books of Feng Chia-sheng and Lo Chi-tsu on the Liao dynastic history, and the book of Ch'en Shu on supplements to the Jurchen Chin history.