What do you think?
Rate this book
China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia
From about 1600 to 1800, the Qing empire of China expanded to unprecedented size. Through astute diplomacy, economic investment, and a series of ambitious military campaigns into the heart of Central Eurasia, the Manchu rulers defeated the Zunghar Mongols, and brought all of modern Xinjiang and Mongolia under their control, while gaining dominant influence in Tibet. The China we know is a product of these vast conquests.
Peter C. Perdue chronicles this little-known story of China's expansion into the northwestern frontier. Unlike previous Chinese dynasties, the Qing achieved lasting domination over the eastern half of the Eurasian continent. Rulers used forcible repression when faced with resistance, but also aimed to win over subject peoples by peaceful means. They invested heavily in the economic and administrative development of the frontier, promoted trade networks, and adapted ceremonies to the distinct regional cultures.
Perdue thus illuminates how China came to rule Central Eurasia and how it justifies that control, what holds the Chinese nation together, and how its relations with the Islamic world and Mongolia developed. He offers valuable comparisons to other colonial empires and discusses the legacy left by China's frontier expansion. The Beijing government today faces unrest on its frontiers from peoples who reject its autocratic rule. At the same time, China has launched an ambitious development program in its interior that in many ways echoes the old Qing policies.
China Marches West is a tour de force that will fundamentally alter the way we understand Central Eurasia.
Peter C. Perdue chronicles this little-known story of China's expansion into the northwestern frontier. Unlike previous Chinese dynasties, the Qing achieved lasting domination over the eastern half of the Eurasian continent. Rulers used forcible repression when faced with resistance, but also aimed to win over subject peoples by peaceful means. They invested heavily in the economic and administrative development of the frontier, promoted trade networks, and adapted ceremonies to the distinct regional cultures.
Perdue thus illuminates how China came to rule Central Eurasia and how it justifies that control, what holds the Chinese nation together, and how its relations with the Islamic world and Mongolia developed. He offers valuable comparisons to other colonial empires and discusses the legacy left by China's frontier expansion. The Beijing government today faces unrest on its frontiers from peoples who reject its autocratic rule. At the same time, China has launched an ambitious development program in its interior that in many ways echoes the old Qing policies.
China Marches West is a tour de force that will fundamentally alter the way we understand Central Eurasia.
752 pages, Hardcover
First published April 30, 2005
35 people are currently reading
1404 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews
December 15, 2021
Peter Purdue begins "China Marches West" with a review of the modern historiography of Central Asia. 19th century historians saw Russian and Chinese imperial expansions as civilizing missions akin to the European settlement of the North American frontier. In Toynbee's later "Study of History" climatic conditions bound nomads to oblivion, while civilization was borne by agrarian mastery of nature. Cycles of pastoral desiccation were associated with irruptions of nomadic hordes.
Other 20th century histories such as Wittfogel's "Oriental Despotism" linked Chinese and Soviet state control of hydraulic projects to eastern autocracy, irreconcilable in spirit to western liberalism. In more recent years, histories of the region have been seen as myths consciously created for the purpose of nation building. As territory was appropriated, rationales for conquest were carefully crafted. Narratives that began in the Qing dynasty form the basis of histories that persist until today.
The work at hand situates the denizens of the Zunghar basin between Siberian fur hunting forest dwellers to the north and Tibetan high plains drifters and monks to the south. Eastern Turkestan, now known as Xinjiang or the 'new frontier' in Mandarin, had been the ancestral home to horse mounted herdsmen and steppe warriors. They were finally forced into submission when the Qing armies of conquest reached the Taklamakan desert and Tianshan mountains in the mid 18th century.
Earlier Ming methods of barbarian management, ranging from reprisal raids to Great Wall fortifications, tribute and trade, had met with limited success. Playing off marriage alliances and tribal factions had long been practiced but offered no permanent peace. The Qing solution was an aggressive campaign to exterminate the Zunghar state at its source on the steppe. To accomplish their goal extended supply chains and logistical problems would need to be overcome.
Perdue shows how the Qing conquests were a multicultural venture. Led by Manchurian warriors familiar with both steppe and settled lands, joint forces of Mongolian cavalry, Chinese infantry and Turkic artillery greatly expanded the empire. Although Manchus were the leading elite, they quickly adopted Confucian bureaucratic administration, civil service examinations and tributary systems. The dynasty was tremendously successful, becoming the fourth largest empire by land area.
'China Marches West' is a serious work of history. The author, a Yale professor, is versed in various academic disciplines and several relevant languages. Geographical, political, economical, social and cultural factors come into play in his analysis of the westward military advances. Clearly a scholarly effort, this may still be enjoyable for general readers interested in the modern history of Xinjiang, Mongolia, Tibet and Siberia. It is well guided with maps, but difficult to traverse.
Other 20th century histories such as Wittfogel's "Oriental Despotism" linked Chinese and Soviet state control of hydraulic projects to eastern autocracy, irreconcilable in spirit to western liberalism. In more recent years, histories of the region have been seen as myths consciously created for the purpose of nation building. As territory was appropriated, rationales for conquest were carefully crafted. Narratives that began in the Qing dynasty form the basis of histories that persist until today.
The work at hand situates the denizens of the Zunghar basin between Siberian fur hunting forest dwellers to the north and Tibetan high plains drifters and monks to the south. Eastern Turkestan, now known as Xinjiang or the 'new frontier' in Mandarin, had been the ancestral home to horse mounted herdsmen and steppe warriors. They were finally forced into submission when the Qing armies of conquest reached the Taklamakan desert and Tianshan mountains in the mid 18th century.
Earlier Ming methods of barbarian management, ranging from reprisal raids to Great Wall fortifications, tribute and trade, had met with limited success. Playing off marriage alliances and tribal factions had long been practiced but offered no permanent peace. The Qing solution was an aggressive campaign to exterminate the Zunghar state at its source on the steppe. To accomplish their goal extended supply chains and logistical problems would need to be overcome.
Perdue shows how the Qing conquests were a multicultural venture. Led by Manchurian warriors familiar with both steppe and settled lands, joint forces of Mongolian cavalry, Chinese infantry and Turkic artillery greatly expanded the empire. Although Manchus were the leading elite, they quickly adopted Confucian bureaucratic administration, civil service examinations and tributary systems. The dynasty was tremendously successful, becoming the fourth largest empire by land area.
'China Marches West' is a serious work of history. The author, a Yale professor, is versed in various academic disciplines and several relevant languages. Geographical, political, economical, social and cultural factors come into play in his analysis of the westward military advances. Clearly a scholarly effort, this may still be enjoyable for general readers interested in the modern history of Xinjiang, Mongolia, Tibet and Siberia. It is well guided with maps, but difficult to traverse.
January 21, 2013
Additional. I knew I didn't do justice to this book. I'm on page 18 of a second read and have no notion why I didn't five-star this. Fixed.
-----
I'm giving this a second read.
He argues for 'human agency' in history, and feels that previous history, of the steppe and China -- specific to this time but not only -- has refused to grant human agency to the actors in history, through too much determinative theory (eg. the typical one of the steppe, its politics and wars determined by climate fluctuations). Historians deal far too much in 'biological imagery and mechanical causation' particularly when they talk about steppe events -- as if nomads never changed, or indeed have no minds of their own. Old China, too, has a frozen feel in our written history, that he believes is quite false.
He studies change. When he writes about events he stresses 'the indeterminacy of the outcome'. The choices people had. The accidents or the off-the-cuff decisions that sent history the way it went. It might have been different. At every junction [I meant to write 'juncture', but that'll do] he wants to tell you, it might have been different.
That's an exciting sort of history to read. I met Peter Perdue in an essay in Warfare in Inner Asian History 500-1800: 500-1800 (Handbook of Oriental Studies/Handbuch Der Orientalistik), where he goes on, thrillingly, about contingency: he looks at a few campaigns (of the Qing against the Zunghars) and by dint of NOT using hindsight -- which makes results look inevitable -- he conveys a real sense of seat-of-the-pants history, that so easily might turned out another way. It struck me then that this is how a novelist operates; he tells me a historian should, too, and his history can have a novel-like 'what happens next? -- the unexpected'. A quote from that article: After the battles have been lost and won, it is tempting to search for definitive causes of one side's victory, but it is equally important to recapture the sense of uncertainty that the protagonists experienced during the fog of war.
It's true I was bored stiff by grain transportation when I read this, but of such stuff is history on-the-ground made. We'll see the 2nd time around. To offset the exhaustive detail it has great pictures: old cannon and portraits or battle scenes by a certain Guiseppe Castiglione, Jesuit missionary who became a court painter to the Qing.
-----
I'm giving this a second read.
He argues for 'human agency' in history, and feels that previous history, of the steppe and China -- specific to this time but not only -- has refused to grant human agency to the actors in history, through too much determinative theory (eg. the typical one of the steppe, its politics and wars determined by climate fluctuations). Historians deal far too much in 'biological imagery and mechanical causation' particularly when they talk about steppe events -- as if nomads never changed, or indeed have no minds of their own. Old China, too, has a frozen feel in our written history, that he believes is quite false.
He studies change. When he writes about events he stresses 'the indeterminacy of the outcome'. The choices people had. The accidents or the off-the-cuff decisions that sent history the way it went. It might have been different. At every junction [I meant to write 'juncture', but that'll do] he wants to tell you, it might have been different.
That's an exciting sort of history to read. I met Peter Perdue in an essay in Warfare in Inner Asian History 500-1800: 500-1800 (Handbook of Oriental Studies/Handbuch Der Orientalistik), where he goes on, thrillingly, about contingency: he looks at a few campaigns (of the Qing against the Zunghars) and by dint of NOT using hindsight -- which makes results look inevitable -- he conveys a real sense of seat-of-the-pants history, that so easily might turned out another way. It struck me then that this is how a novelist operates; he tells me a historian should, too, and his history can have a novel-like 'what happens next? -- the unexpected'. A quote from that article: After the battles have been lost and won, it is tempting to search for definitive causes of one side's victory, but it is equally important to recapture the sense of uncertainty that the protagonists experienced during the fog of war.
It's true I was bored stiff by grain transportation when I read this, but of such stuff is history on-the-ground made. We'll see the 2nd time around. To offset the exhaustive detail it has great pictures: old cannon and portraits or battle scenes by a certain Guiseppe Castiglione, Jesuit missionary who became a court painter to the Qing.
Read
July 31, 2022Errata prepared by translator (Update: Aug 1, 2022)
頁324：第二行下，「邊疆的遙遠、荒涼與貧脊」應作「邊疆的遙遠、荒涼與貧瘠」。
頁421：倒數第三行下，「海上的收入對清朝而言直到並不重要」，「直到」二字應刪去。
頁425：第七行中，「而且準噶爾人通常都都帶去......」，「都都」第二字衍，應刪去。
頁672：註42，「近來的奧斯曼帝國......」由於其他譯者用了「鄂圖曼帝國」，需統一。
頁674：註20，《宮中檔雍正朝奏折》應作《宮中檔雍正朝奏摺》。
----以上錯誤已於2021年3月3刷版中更正----
書封摺頁：作者簡介中提及「2006年以《中國西征》一書獲得美國亞洲協會最高學術榮譽的列文森獎」，2006年有誤，應作2007年。
頁12：倒數第四行上，「澈底」應作「徹底」。
頁22：倒數第三行上，「Schlesinger, J. (2017). A World Trimmed with Fur」中的A沒有對齊後文。
頁78：第四行中，「拉希德丁」應作「拉施特」或「拉施德丁」。
頁80：倒數第六行中，「喀爾干」應作「喀拉干」。
頁89：倒數第五行上，「回鶻」應該是維吾爾人，但考慮到清代沒有這個稱呼，也許改作「回部」更適當些；倒數第三行末，「恣意忘為」應作「恣意妄為」。
頁93：第一行下， 「俺答汗不未統一」應作「俺答汗不但未統一」。
頁143：第三行上，「中國人抵抗不公平對待的叛亂」改「中國人反抗不公平的對待，起而叛亂」。
頁153：第一行中，「科爾沁蒙古則是二十二萬三百零八個家庭」，「二十二萬三百零八」應改為「兩萬兩千三百零八」。
頁154：第一行，漢文小注「阿媽父也」與「厄脈母也」混入正文，應加括號區分。
頁159：倒數第三行上，「一六三七」應改「一六七三」。另原文將三藩之亂結束時間訂為一六七八年，應照原文頁463記載，改為一六八一年。
頁167：倒數第七行下，厄魯特憨都台吉等遣使進貢謝罪时间誤植為1864年，應為1684年。
頁171：倒數第七行下，「喀爾丹」應作「噶爾丹」。
頁175：第三行中，「烏爾加河」之名 ，據《清聖祖實錄》康熙二十九年五月癸丑，問澤卜尊丹巴屬下人，得知「噶爾丹於五月初三日。率兵渡烏爾扎河」，應作「烏爾扎河」；倒數第七行上，西峰口應作喜峰口。
頁201：第九行中，「長子」改「皇太子」；倒數第七行中，「盛京」應作「北京」。
頁204：倒數第九行下，「長子」改「皇太子」。
頁206：引《平定朔漠方略》卷二十三，康熙三十五年五月己未條，此「朕與汝等覿而定議指示地界」，應作「朕與汝等覿面定議指示地界」。
頁218：第四行上， 「鄂爾多斯在富裕」應作「鄂爾多斯再富裕」。
頁228，第五行上，「後金的女真」應作「金代女真人」。
頁231：第二行，「轉而對對中央歐亞民族施加經濟壓力」，此處「對對」第二字衍，應刪去。
頁254：倒數第一行下，「解僱」改「革職」。
頁255：倒數第八行上，「他聲稱從贛州到巴里坤的路線積雪三到四英尺深」，此處「贛州」應作「甘州」。
頁267：第一行，「同樣帝拒絕了年羹堯要求......」，「同樣帝」應作「同樣地」；倒數第三行，原文Sonam Stöbgyal有誤，應作Sonam Stobgyal。
頁272：倒數第三行，顎齊應作鄂齊。
頁279：第四行下，「祖父」改「父親」；第九行，「爾等系成吉思汗之後裔」應作「爾等係成吉思汗之後裔」，另後一句「何不將遊牧、仍移於阿爾泰」，應作「何不將遊牧仍移於阿爾泰」；第十行，「如有兵戎，協力相距」應作「如有兵戎，協力相拒」。
頁291：第四行下，「噶爾單策零」應作「噶爾丹策零」。
頁292：倒數第七行上，作者將日本視為清朝的忠誠藩屬國，實際上不太準確。也許用朝鮮為例更佳。
頁293：倒數第三行中，原文記達什達瓦部眾被安置在察哈爾有誤，實際上是被安置在熱河。
頁295：倒數第八至九行，「喇嘛達爾扎」應作「達瓦齊」。
頁297：倒數第一行上，「徹辰汗」應作「車臣汗」。
頁308：第八行上，「同情」改「支持」。
頁313頁：倒數第三行上，「一七六五年，位於回部（六城，Altishar）南部、擁有近百萬人口的城市的烏什爆發叛亂。」這句話裡存在兩個問題：第一，「回部南部」。原文是south march of Altishar，濮德培的這種說法本身就有問題，因為無論是歷史上還是現當代，從來沒有人對回部（更多的時候用「回疆」）使用過這樣的說法，最多的是「回疆」，然後有「回部」（回部大部分時候表示的是回疆的回人部落），還有「天山南路」或「南路」。中亞地方文獻稱「六城」（Altishar）。所以，south march of Altishar這種說法非常尷尬，而譯者譯為「回部南部」也就顯得非常彆扭，也是錯誤的。因為即使按照這種說法來翻譯，烏什也應該是位於回疆北部而非南部。所以，這裡的south march of Altishar譯為「回疆」較佳。第二，「擁有近百萬人口的城市」。這個說法不知道濮德培所依何據？根據現有文獻以及學者的研究，直到嘉慶時期，整個回疆的人口可能只有不到三四十萬，烏什一個小的駐防城市哪裡能有「近百萬人口」？當然，譯者未能指出這一處問題也有失誤。
頁314：第七行下，「烏什叛亂分子……也討厭濫權的漢族官員……」。清朝統治回疆初期，駐紮回疆各城的官員基本上都是滿蒙軍事官員，很少有漢人官員。所以此處的「漢族官員」顯然不太合適，也許可以逕譯為清朝官員。
頁324：第一行下，原文烏蘭布通有誤，應改為昭莫多。
頁355：第八行上，「同情」改「支持」。
頁362：倒數第一行，一五八七年應作一七五八年。
頁370：第一行下，一千一百三六應作一千一百三十六。
頁381：第二行， 「其間相距或貳 拾里或肆伍拾里不等。不等民間耕種全資南山雪水」應作「 其間相距或貳叄拾里或肆伍拾里不等。民間耕種全資南山雪水」。
頁382：第三行下，「雹爆」應作「雹暴」；倒數第六行，「一班」應作「一般」。
頁409：第七行上， 「不同於明代懷有矛盾情緒的作家們」，「作家」應改「官員」。
頁411：倒數第四行上，作者引王業鍵論文將1908年的白銀徵收賦稅額估計為「五億三千兩百萬兩」，不過經查原文與重新計算後，該數額應為544,925,059兩銀。但是這個數字實際上也高得不合理。所以很有可能王業鍵的表本身就有問題。但是這個就得核對他所用的材料了。
頁418：第七行中，「只取得有限成度的成功」，句中「成度」應作「程度」。
頁423：「哈薩克人將自身重新定位，從原先其他中央歐亞的供應者手中，轉向為越發仰賴中國商品了。」，這句改譯為「隨著哈薩克人越來越仰賴中國商品，他們也重新定位自己，而疏遠了其他中央歐亞的供應者。」
頁424：第三行下，「在溪邊畫定界線」，句中「溪邊」應作「西邊」。
頁427：第二行上，「給予商人預付款亦後」，句中「亦」應作「以」。
頁431：倒數第五行下，「從内地擴展到新征服地區也的文官行政也展現了同樣的驅力」，第一個「也」字衍，應刪去。
頁435：倒數第二行下，「所有這些都證實自然與人群歡迎的他的到來」，句中「歡迎」二字後「的」字衍，應刪去。
頁438：第七行下，「回復他儲君的地位」，句中「回」應作「恢」。 倒數第五行上，「做為」改為「作為」。
頁464：第十行上，「造就了的沉默」，句中「的」字衍，應刪去。
頁469：倒數第一行中，「正確的」應作「正確地」。
頁474：倒數第一行上，「奇觀」改「盛大場面」。
頁481：倒數第六行下，「洩漏」改「展現」。
頁489：倒數第二行上，「諸夏之亡，君」應作「諸夏之亡君，」。
頁495：倒數第五行下，「邊纂」應作「編纂」。
頁496：倒數第五行中，「喀什米爾」應作「克什米爾」。
頁497：第四行下，「其十一」應作「七十一」。
頁498：第十行下，「對與關內」應作「對於關內」。
頁499：第九行上，「竄逆相循」應作「篡逆相循」；倒數第六行上，「洩漏」改「展現」。
頁500：開頭前五行引文，應作「土爾扈特之在當日，竄身無所，鄂羅斯與之額濟爾肥沃之地，得以休養生息，譬如鳥焉，卵而翼之矣，安享幾二百年。傳至烏巴錫，擁眾百萬，牲畜滿野，鄂羅斯遇有危難，即匍匐救之，亦義不容辭，顧聽舍楞之邪說，而包藏禍心，欲占中國之疆界，棄久安之業，逞不測之謀，涉沙磧不毛之地，履虎狼殘暴之鄉，以致種類幾無孓遺。豈獨其謀之不臧？抑亦天厭之矣。」
頁503：第五行下，「回復我們祖先」，句中「回復」應作「恢復」。
頁504：倒數第七行中，「《欽定外藩蒙古回部王公表傳》，在一七七九至一九五年間編纂。」句中一九五應作一七九五。
頁505：倒數第十行上，「即阿玉氣汗姪子的歸還給他」此句不通，應改為「即阿玉氣汗的姪子歸還給他」。
頁506：第十行下，「合理的」應作「合理地」。
頁514：倒數第六行上，「柏克」應作「伯克」。
頁520：倒數第五行下，「Brzezi ski」應作「Brzezinski」。
頁527：倒數第九行下，「博領克圖」應作「博碩克圖」。
頁542：倒數第八行中，「洩漏」改「顯露」。
頁544：倒數第四行上，「清潮」應作「清朝」。
頁549：第十三行下，「也讓我們對糧食政策和如何運作更豐富的看法」，「如何運作」後面漏一「有」字，應補上。
頁556：倒數第二行上，「不必須」改「未必」。
頁580：倒數第三行下，「明代中國透過十五世紀開始的一條鞭法」句中「十五」應作「十六」。
頁588：第八行，「Journal of Early Modern History 5, no. 4」，4沒有對齊後文。 倒數第四行下 ，“Disanzhou”應為“Disanjie”。
頁589：倒數第一行，Beyond the Pass為書名，應改為斜體。
頁596：下起倒數第四行，GZDOL，應作GZDQL。
頁652：注17，第一行， geographique改géographique。
頁657：注107，第一行， geographique改géographique。注3，第四至五行，Zur Uberlieferungsgeschichte des Berichts uber den personlichen Feldzug des Kangxi-Kaisers gegen Galdan (1696-1697) 應作Zur Überlieferungsgeschichte des Berichts über den persönlichen Feldzug des Kangxi-Kaisers gegen Galdan (1696-1697) 。第五行，ArthurW.應作Arthur W.。注4與注6，Uberlieferungsgeschichte應作Überlieferungsgeschichte。
頁660：注75，第一行，representant應作représentant，conquetes應作conquêtes。
頁686：注78，第四行，「奏折」應作「奏摺」。
頁700：注65、66，《天驄朝臣工奏議》應作《天聰朝臣工奏議》。
頁709：注89，第二行，「後勤曲線」應作「生長曲線」。
若讀者有見到其他的問題，還請傳訊告知。以作為日後修訂依據。謝謝。
頁324：第二行下，「邊疆的遙遠、荒涼與貧脊」應作「邊疆的遙遠、荒涼與貧瘠」。
頁421：倒數第三行下，「海上的收入對清朝而言直到並不重要」，「直到」二字應刪去。
頁425：第七行中，「而且準噶爾人通常都都帶去......」，「都都」第二字衍，應刪去。
頁672：註42，「近來的奧斯曼帝國......」由於其他譯者用了「鄂圖曼帝國」，需統一。
頁674：註20，《宮中檔雍正朝奏折》應作《宮中檔雍正朝奏摺》。
----以上錯誤已於2021年3月3刷版中更正----
書封摺頁：作者簡介中提及「2006年以《中國西征》一書獲得美國亞洲協會最高學術榮譽的列文森獎」，2006年有誤，應作2007年。
頁12：倒數第四行上，「澈底」應作「徹底」。
頁22：倒數第三行上，「Schlesinger, J. (2017). A World Trimmed with Fur」中的A沒有對齊後文。
頁78：第四行中，「拉希德丁」應作「拉施特」或「拉施德丁」。
頁80：倒數第六行中，「喀爾干」應作「喀拉干」。
頁89：倒數第五行上，「回鶻」應該是維吾爾人，但考慮到清代沒有這個稱呼，也許改作「回部」更適當些；倒數第三行末，「恣意忘為」應作「恣意妄為」。
頁93：第一行下， 「俺答汗不未統一」應作「俺答汗不但未統一」。
頁143：第三行上，「中國人抵抗不公平對待的叛亂」改「中國人反抗不公平的對待，起而叛亂」。
頁153：第一行中，「科爾沁蒙古則是二十二萬三百零八個家庭」，「二十二萬三百零八」應改為「兩萬兩千三百零八」。
頁154：第一行，漢文小注「阿媽父也」與「厄脈母也」混入正文，應加括號區分。
頁159：倒數第三行上，「一六三七」應改「一六七三」。另原文將三藩之亂結束時間訂為一六七八年，應照原文頁463記載，改為一六八一年。
頁167：倒數第七行下，厄魯特憨都台吉等遣使進貢謝罪时间誤植為1864年，應為1684年。
頁171：倒數第七行下，「喀爾丹」應作「噶爾丹」。
頁175：第三行中，「烏爾加河」之名 ，據《清聖祖實錄》康熙二十九年五月癸丑，問澤卜尊丹巴屬下人，得知「噶爾丹於五月初三日。率兵渡烏爾扎河」，應作「烏爾扎河」；倒數第七行上，西峰口應作喜峰口。
頁201：第九行中，「長子」改「皇太子」；倒數第七行中，「盛京」應作「北京」。
頁204：倒數第九行下，「長子」改「皇太子」。
頁206：引《平定朔漠方略》卷二十三，康熙三十五年五月己未條，此「朕與汝等覿而定議指示地界」，應作「朕與汝等覿面定議指示地界」。
頁218：第四行上， 「鄂爾多斯在富裕」應作「鄂爾多斯再富裕」。
頁228，第五行上，「後金的女真」應作「金代女真人」。
頁231：第二行，「轉而對對中央歐亞民族施加經濟壓力」，此處「對對」第二字衍，應刪去。
頁254：倒數第一行下，「解僱」改「革職」。
頁255：倒數第八行上，「他聲稱從贛州到巴里坤的路線積雪三到四英尺深」，此處「贛州」應作「甘州」。
頁267：第一行，「同樣帝拒絕了年羹堯要求......」，「同樣帝」應作「同樣地」；倒數第三行，原文Sonam Stöbgyal有誤，應作Sonam Stobgyal。
頁272：倒數第三行，顎齊應作鄂齊。
頁279：第四行下，「祖父」改「父親」；第九行，「爾等系成吉思汗之後裔」應作「爾等係成吉思汗之後裔」，另後一句「何不將遊牧、仍移於阿爾泰」，應作「何不將遊牧仍移於阿爾泰」；第十行，「如有兵戎，協力相距」應作「如有兵戎，協力相拒」。
頁291：第四行下，「噶爾單策零」應作「噶爾丹策零」。
頁292：倒數第七行上，作者將日本視為清朝的忠誠藩屬國，實際上不太準確。也許用朝鮮為例更佳。
頁293：倒數第三行中，原文記達什達瓦部眾被安置在察哈爾有誤，實際上是被安置在熱河。
頁295：倒數第八至九行，「喇嘛達爾扎」應作「達瓦齊」。
頁297：倒數第一行上，「徹辰汗」應作「車臣汗」。
頁308：第八行上，「同情」改「支持」。
頁313頁：倒數第三行上，「一七六五年，位於回部（六城，Altishar）南部、擁有近百萬人口的城市的烏什爆發叛亂。」這句話裡存在兩個問題：第一，「回部南部」。原文是south march of Altishar，濮德培的這種說法本身就有問題，因為無論是歷史上還是現當代，從來沒有人對回部（更多的時候用「回疆」）使用過這樣的說法，最多的是「回疆」，然後有「回部」（回部大部分時候表示的是回疆的回人部落），還有「天山南路」或「南路」。中亞地方文獻稱「六城」（Altishar）。所以，south march of Altishar這種說法非常尷尬，而譯者譯為「回部南部」也就顯得非常彆扭，也是錯誤的。因為即使按照這種說法來翻譯，烏什也應該是位於回疆北部而非南部。所以，這裡的south march of Altishar譯為「回疆」較佳。第二，「擁有近百萬人口的城市」。這個說法不知道濮德培所依何據？根據現有文獻以及學者的研究，直到嘉慶時期，整個回疆的人口可能只有不到三四十萬，烏什一個小的駐防城市哪裡能有「近百萬人口」？當然，譯者未能指出這一處問題也有失誤。
頁314：第七行下，「烏什叛亂分子……也討厭濫權的漢族官員……」。清朝統治回疆初期，駐紮回疆各城的官員基本上都是滿蒙軍事官員，很少有漢人官員。所以此處的「漢族官員」顯然不太合適，也許可以逕譯為清朝官員。
頁324：第一行下，原文烏蘭布通有誤，應改為昭莫多。
頁355：第八行上，「同情」改「支持」。
頁362：倒數第一行，一五八七年應作一七五八年。
頁370：第一行下，一千一百三六應作一千一百三十六。
頁381：第二行， 「其間相距或貳 拾里或肆伍拾里不等。不等民間耕種全資南山雪水」應作「 其間相距或貳叄拾里或肆伍拾里不等。民間耕種全資南山雪水」。
頁382：第三行下，「雹爆」應作「雹暴」；倒數第六行，「一班」應作「一般」。
頁409：第七行上， 「不同於明代懷有矛盾情緒的作家們」，「作家」應改「官員」。
頁411：倒數第四行上，作者引王業鍵論文將1908年的白銀徵收賦稅額估計為「五億三千兩百萬兩」，不過經查原文與重新計算後，該數額應為544,925,059兩銀。但是這個數字實際上也高得不合理。所以很有可能王業鍵的表本身就有問題。但是這個就得核對他所用的材料了。
頁418：第七行中，「只取得有限成度的成功」，句中「成度」應作「程度」。
頁423：「哈薩克人將自身重新定位，從原先其他中央歐亞的供應者手中，轉向為越發仰賴中國商品了。」，這句改譯為「隨著哈薩克人越來越仰賴中國商品，他們也重新定位自己，而疏遠了其他中央歐亞的供應者。」
頁424：第三行下，「在溪邊畫定界線」，句中「溪邊」應作「西邊」。
頁427：第二行上，「給予商人預付款亦後」，句中「亦」應作「以」。
頁431：倒數第五行下，「從内地擴展到新征服地區也的文官行政也展現了同樣的驅力」，第一個「也」字衍，應刪去。
頁435：倒數第二行下，「所有這些都證實自然與人群歡迎的他的到來」，句中「歡迎」二字後「的」字衍，應刪去。
頁438：第七行下，「回復他儲君的地位」，句中「回」應作「恢」。 倒數第五行上，「做為」改為「作為」。
頁464：第十行上，「造就了的沉默」，句中「的」字衍，應刪去。
頁469：倒數第一行中，「正確的」應作「正確地」。
頁474：倒數第一行上，「奇觀」改「盛大場面」。
頁481：倒數第六行下，「洩漏」改「展現」。
頁489：倒數第二行上，「諸夏之亡，君」應作「諸夏之亡君，」。
頁495：倒數第五行下，「邊纂」應作「編纂」。
頁496：倒數第五行中，「喀什米爾」應作「克什米爾」。
頁497：第四行下，「其十一」應作「七十一」。
頁498：第十行下，「對與關內」應作「對於關內」。
頁499：第九行上，「竄逆相循」應作「篡逆相循」；倒數第六行上，「洩漏」改「展現」。
頁500：開頭前五行引文，應作「土爾扈特之在當日，竄身無所，鄂羅斯與之額濟爾肥沃之地，得以休養生息，譬如鳥焉，卵而翼之矣，安享幾二百年。傳至烏巴錫，擁眾百萬，牲畜滿野，鄂羅斯遇有危難，即匍匐救之，亦義不容辭，顧聽舍楞之邪說，而包藏禍心，欲占中國之疆界，棄久安之業，逞不測之謀，涉沙磧不毛之地，履虎狼殘暴之鄉，以致種類幾無孓遺。豈獨其謀之不臧？抑亦天厭之矣。」
頁503：第五行下，「回復我們祖先」，句中「回復」應作「恢復」。
頁504：倒數第七行中，「《欽定外藩蒙古回部王公表傳》，在一七七九至一九五年間編纂。」句中一九五應作一七九五。
頁505：倒數第十行上，「即阿玉氣汗姪子的歸還給他」此句不通，應改為「即阿玉氣汗的姪子歸還給他」。
頁506：第十行下，「合理的」應作「合理地」。
頁514：倒數第六行上，「柏克」應作「伯克」。
頁520：倒數第五行下，「Brzezi ski」應作「Brzezinski」。
頁527：倒數第九行下，「博領克圖」應作「博碩克圖」。
頁542：倒數第八行中，「洩漏」改「顯露」。
頁544：倒數第四行上，「清潮」應作「清朝」。
頁549：第十三行下，「也讓我們對糧食政策和如何運作更豐富的看法」，「如何運作」後面漏一「有」字，應補上。
頁556：倒數第二行上，「不必須」改「未必」。
頁580：倒數第三行下，「明代中國透過十五世紀開始的一條鞭法」句中「十五」應作「十六」。
頁588：第八行，「Journal of Early Modern History 5, no. 4」，4沒有對齊後文。 倒數第四行下 ，“Disanzhou”應為“Disanjie”。
頁589：倒數第一行，Beyond the Pass為書名，應改為斜體。
頁596：下起倒數第四行，GZDOL，應作GZDQL。
頁652：注17，第一行， geographique改géographique。
頁657：注107，第一行， geographique改géographique。注3，第四至五行，Zur Uberlieferungsgeschichte des Berichts uber den personlichen Feldzug des Kangxi-Kaisers gegen Galdan (1696-1697) 應作Zur Überlieferungsgeschichte des Berichts über den persönlichen Feldzug des Kangxi-Kaisers gegen Galdan (1696-1697) 。第五行，ArthurW.應作Arthur W.。注4與注6，Uberlieferungsgeschichte應作Überlieferungsgeschichte。
頁660：注75，第一行，representant應作représentant，conquetes應作conquêtes。
頁686：注78，第四行，「奏折」應作「奏摺」。
頁700：注65、66，《天驄朝臣工奏議》應作《天聰朝臣工奏議》。
頁709：注89，第二行，「後勤曲線」應作「生長曲線」。
若讀者有見到其他的問題，還請傳訊告知。以作為日後修訂依據。謝謝。
September 17, 2022
单从叙事的角度来说，作者在全书各章节之间的连贯性上，做得并不是太好。在最后一章试图解释清朝为何会在版图最终定型后却失去了国家建设的活力与回应环境变化的能力时，也显得仓促且不够有说服力。
然而，这些只是美中不足。因为作者真正的初衷，在于不厌其烦地检索各类历史素材，以穿透当时的历史书写者以及后世的民族国家（无论是中、蒙、俄中的哪一方）所积极构建出的历史迷雾，努力还原历史的本来面目：所谓自古以来的边界，其实是一种流变的偶然；所谓不言自明的民族身份，其实充满了悖论、涂改与计算。
"Today, peoples, nations, and civiliazations define themselves consistently only in terms of what they are not."
历史是复杂的，但历史叙事即使在理想状态下也是高度简化的。在其他时候，甚至可能是虚假而扭曲的。而我们的身份认同、我们对于世界的看法，多多少少都是这些历史叙事的产物。所以，于我们而言，尽可能厘清并驱散历史的迷雾，不但是一种智识上的必要，也是一项难以回避的道德义务。因为只有在挣脱历史的陷阱之后，我们才更有机会去创造一个坦诚而光明的未来。
然而，这些只是美中不足。因为作者真正的初衷，在于不厌其烦地检索各类历史素材，以穿透当时的历史书写者以及后世的民族国家（无论是中、蒙、俄中的哪一方）所积极构建出的历史迷雾，努力还原历史的本来面目：所谓自古以来的边界，其实是一种流变的偶然；所谓不言自明的民族身份，其实充满了悖论、涂改与计算。
"Today, peoples, nations, and civiliazations define themselves consistently only in terms of what they are not."
历史是复杂的，但历史叙事即使在理想状态下也是高度简化的。在其他时候，甚至可能是虚假而扭曲的。而我们的身份认同、我们对于世界的看法，多多少少都是这些历史叙事的产物。所以，于我们而言，尽可能厘清并驱散历史的迷雾，不但是一种智识上的必要，也是一项难以回避的道德义务。因为只有在挣脱历史的陷阱之后，我们才更有机会去创造一个坦诚而光明的未来。
July 6, 2022
近幾年，隨著中共在新疆(東突厥斯坦)的「再教育營」逐漸被揭露，世人開始關注維吾爾人及這個區域的狀況，衛城出版社在此時翻譯引進了美國新清史學者濮德培(Peter C. Perdue)著名的作品《中國西征》，也算躬逢其時。因為這部作品的主題是大清帝國對於新疆(東突厥斯坦)、蒙古與西藏等「邊疆地區」的最終征服，探討其運用了何種手段去達成，以及產生的影響與作用。而這個歷史事件，正是現代的兩個中國政權：中華民國與中華人民共和國對於這些地區領土宣稱的濫觴，因為它們幾乎繼承了大清帝國的所有疆域。如果這場征服不曾發生，就不會有這些結果，而作者在本書的結論中認為，這在漫長的中國史上是一個偶然，是滿州朝廷的特殊性才導致的成就，而非「傳統的大一統」，換言之，濮德培並不認為那些被清朝納入版圖的新征服地區是所謂的「自古以來神聖不可分割的疆域」。他的這種立場，對民族國家建構的政治神話發起了挑戰，因此一般不會被當局所喜歡，是以，本書其實早在數年前即有中國出版社產生興趣，卻卡在審查而最終無法出版。今天，在不受政治外力限制的台灣，終於讓華文使用者有幸拜讀這本大作，是值得慶幸的事情。
先說一下就是，個人對於新清史的了解不深，對於他們引起的學術糾紛也只是略有耳聞，不過，我對於那些針對濮德培等學者是「居心叵測」、「企圖分裂中國」的指控斷不能認同。 誠如前所述，在本書中，作者始終強調的一點是「歷史的偶然性」，這是針對於清朝在完成其征服之後，建構出的政治神話---將自己的軍事行動正當化而將敵方打成「叛亂勢力」，建構自己「受命於天，討伐不臣」的合法性征服--而起的一種辨明。這一場自康熙朝就開始的政治神話建構運動，隨著帝國擴張而逐漸完備，蒙古、新疆 (東突厥斯坦)與西藏、台灣就這樣地逐漸「自古屬於中國」。這並非特例，放諸任何世界上曾存在的帝國都會有此類似行為。不過這被後來的民族國家所繼承，成為它們統治該地區的一種合法性依據時，就變得微妙了。但必須聲明的是，濮德培並非是要對此加以批判攻擊，他只是坦率地指出這種「自古XX屬於XX」是一種人為的政治神話建構(但沒有評價)，以及嘗試說明，清朝的征服純屬「歷史的偶然」。
那麼，何謂「歷史的偶然」？
簡單來說，儘管我們今天回顧的「歷史」都是「已經完成的經過」，但在這些事實發生的過程中，其實有很多變數是非常的偶然性，它完全有可能造成不一樣的結果，這是透過生活經驗就可以理解的。不過，其缺點在於它無法像科學理論那樣透過實驗反覆檢證，因此在遭到質疑時反駁會顯得有些無力。而這種說法在某些人的歷史觀內就會變得非常刺耳，特別是對於堅持政治神話需要的統治者來說更是如此。
在本書內容中，濮德培試圖給讀者的一個概念是，大清是唯一一個完成徹底解決華夏農業民族跟北方遊牧民族千年來對抗的中原王朝，而它的成功不是必然而是帶著歷史的偶然性。十七世紀，滿州/清朝、莫斯科公國/俄羅斯帝國跟蒙古諸部是中央歐亞的三大角逐勢力，它們在發展的起跑線幾乎是一致的，而前兩者則深深受到後者的影響。俄羅斯從過去蒙古帝國的統治中學得了大草原的外交遊戲規則，這有助於他們東擴，並取得廣大西伯利亞資源換取資金；同時，利用東正教控制斯拉夫農民獲取糧食，解決農業跟游獵兩種社會的衝突之後方能成就帝國。清朝的歷程大致上相同，滿州八旗吸收了蒙古千戶制的特點，完成收編並致力於中央集權；對外吸收大量漢人來耕作，發展經濟以養活日漸擴大的國家。不過這兩個發展的勢力都曾面臨過發展瓶頸，莫斯科公國遭遇內亂，直到羅曼諾夫王朝興起，接連幾代英主方才穩定。而清朝則是幸運的碰上明朝內亂滅亡，入關接收十八省漢地資源成就霸業。至於蒙古諸部，他們相對不幸的，再也無法出現像成吉思汗家族那樣長期統治來穩固諸部，當清朝跟俄羅斯逐漸發展出中央集權的帝國時，依然處於紛擾的內部鬥爭之中，於是逐漸被這兩大強權所侵蝕。以往，草原勢力如果被中原王朝壓迫，他們可以利用北方西伯利亞或者中亞的縱深來避難，然後換一批新血過來繼續糾纏。但這個循環隨著俄羅斯人的東擴而被打破，空間已被壓縮，游牧民無路可逃。
而且，蒙古諸部原本還可以利用清朝跟俄羅斯的矛盾中求個漁翁得利，孰料兩邊卻和談了。著名的尼布楚條約雖然在後來的政治現實中被按照各種「需求」加以詮釋了不同的解釋，但作者指出，事實上這是一個非常公平的對等條約，因為它確實的讓參予方各取所需。對俄羅斯來說，比起領土野心，更在意的是中國龐大的貿易市場；對清朝來說，邊境的安全以及不支持蒙古人是頭號大事。而雙方雖然尚沒有主權國家的對等概念，但透過耶穌會士的中介之下，仍然達成了協議，至此之後，俄國不再干涉清朝對蒙古的動武，於是他們就成為了這次條約中唯一的犧牲者。
當然，清朝與蒙古之間的戰爭也不是一帆風順，康熙多次遠征塞外的最終凱旋，其中不乏運氣成分，這在官方文書自然不會提及。反之，他們不遺餘力地把這說成是「昭昭天命」，是上天的眷顧與對不服王化的「教訓」。滿洲朝廷之所以有如此自信，源自於在皇太極時代接收了元朝皇帝玉璽之後，便以繼承這個前世界帝國為職志，企圖完成明朝永樂帝未竟的野心。
因此，從清朝堅持一定要收回噶爾丹屍體並公開再處刑的態度上，我們不難理解，這是攸關其統治合法性的頭等大事。滿洲人此時已吸收了儒家的統治學說，認為行禮如儀是一個統治者的義務，他們透過這種「遊戲規則」確認自己受命於天的合法性，而處分一位「叛亂者」當然是重中之重。作者指出，儘管事實上噶爾丹做為一位對等的蒙古部落的領袖，其行為完全符合身分，為了自己與其部族利益行事，根本不該用「叛亂罪」來定義。而清朝這種作為明顯的就是隨著自己的勝利，將之「內化」。這種行為無疑的就是一種政治神話的建構，把過去的事實抹煞，強行倒果為因，換言之，清朝把征服蒙古視為一種「自古以來」的天然權利，而噶爾丹則是違反這種「天命」的反亂者，作為其征服行動合法性的理由，這是帝國統治手段屢見不鮮的一種，也是清朝對於之後所有新納入的邊疆，合法統治的基礎。
這種帝國統治的政治神話，在二十世紀初建構近代中國民族主義時，被選擇性的接納與吸收。民族主義份子雖然明確的區分了滿/漢的差別，但他們卻把清朝的擴張視為一種「中國文化力量的自然現象」，滿州人只是完成了理所當然會發生的任務，「統一」(請注意這個詞彙的意義)了「固有領土」。而當新的中華民族國家建立之後，繼承與統治這些疆域也就是理所當然之事。濮德培「不受歡迎」的原因，正好來自於，他在本書中明確的戳破了這種建構。他認為清朝的擴張並不是過往王朝的延續，只是一種歷史上的偶然。滿洲人有著與明朝截然不同的統治菁英性格，動員資源的力量以及歐亞的外交政策，他們又恰好碰上歐亞大陸上的其他帝國擴張造成的世界局勢，方才成就這波征服。清朝官方把這些成就重新書寫並與過去的歷史連結以構成政治神話來彰顯自己的正當性，而這又被後來企圖繼承這些遺產的中國民族國家所理所當然的利用。作者說出這個「事實」被當權者視為一種「居心不良」其實也不難想見，因為這很明顯的威脅到了它們統治的正當性來源，特別是該政權如果合法性不是來自於人民的授權。
作者「不受當局歡迎」的地方還有很多，例如他指出清朝對待維吾爾人的蘿蔔與鞭子政策：服從就吸收納編，反抗就加以殺戮，還引用了塔西陀針對羅馬帝國主義的強烈批評：「他們製造了荒漠，卻稱之為和平。」這對當代統治政權的一些作為，無疑是非常敏感。儘管濮德培這本書已經寫就十餘年了。
其實，如果把焦點放在上述的那些爭論上無疑是嚴重跑題，濮德培的這本「中國西征」更主要的是想討論清朝的對外征服與邊疆政策，反過來對於其帝國統治的成敗的影響。作者認為滿州朝廷加強了行政官僚與更大限度利用「市場」去動員境內外資源來支持其征服，同時也造成了一種離心力量埋下帝國未來衰敗的根源；以及其把對中央歐亞的外交經驗挪來應付從海上來的英、法等西方列強的錯置等，都是有趣的觀點。不過個人對此研究不深，就不敢妄加論斷了。只是濮德培說，清朝在乾隆時完成征服後「失去了強大外敵而逐漸鬆懈」，並引用了王國斌的假設：「台灣鄭氏政權如果長期存在能否給予清朝外部壓力並保持長期活力」是個頗值討論的觀點；不過從康熙的海禁政策來看，說不定只會更讓滿州帝國更加對海上封閉。
濮德培的這本《中國西征》提供了很多有意思的歷史觀，特別是對於台灣人來說是有其特別的意義，儘管這可能不是作者本意。本書動用了三位譯者的參與，儘管雖然還是有些英式中文的「翻譯腔」痕跡，但基本上還是能說得上是稱職的完成了任務。對於新清史，如果還不了解的讀者，推薦可以看看羅威廉的《中國最後的帝國：大清王朝》；至於對本書的一些回應，汪榮祖在遠流主編了一本專書，不妨試試。
PS：周錫瑞（Joseph Esherick）有一篇：《大清如何變成中國》，推薦。
先說一下就是，個人對於新清史的了解不深，對於他們引起的學術糾紛也只是略有耳聞，不過，我對於那些針對濮德培等學者是「居心叵測」、「企圖分裂中國」的指控斷不能認同。 誠如前所述，在本書中，作者始終強調的一點是「歷史的偶然性」，這是針對於清朝在完成其征服之後，建構出的政治神話---將自己的軍事行動正當化而將敵方打成「叛亂勢力」，建構自己「受命於天，討伐不臣」的合法性征服--而起的一種辨明。這一場自康熙朝就開始的政治神話建構運動，隨著帝國擴張而逐漸完備，蒙古、新疆 (東突厥斯坦)與西藏、台灣就這樣地逐漸「自古屬於中國」。這並非特例，放諸任何世界上曾存在的帝國都會有此類似行為。不過這被後來的民族國家所繼承，成為它們統治該地區的一種合法性依據時，就變得微妙了。但必須聲明的是，濮德培並非是要對此加以批判攻擊，他只是坦率地指出這種「自古XX屬於XX」是一種人為的政治神話建構(但沒有評價)，以及嘗試說明，清朝的征服純屬「歷史的偶然」。
那麼，何謂「歷史的偶然」？
簡單來說，儘管我們今天回顧的「歷史」都是「已經完成的經過」，但在這些事實發生的過程中，其實有很多變數是非常的偶然性，它完全有可能造成不一樣的結果，這是透過生活經驗就可以理解的。不過，其缺點在於它無法像科學理論那樣透過實驗反覆檢證，因此在遭到質疑時反駁會顯得有些無力。而這種說法在某些人的歷史觀內就會變得非常刺耳，特別是對於堅持政治神話需要的統治者來說更是如此。
在本書內容中，濮德培試圖給讀者的一個概念是，大清是唯一一個完成徹底解決華夏農業民族跟北方遊牧民族千年來對抗的中原王朝，而它的成功不是必然而是帶著歷史的偶然性。十七世紀，滿州/清朝、莫斯科公國/俄羅斯帝國跟蒙古諸部是中央歐亞的三大角逐勢力，它們在發展的起跑線幾乎是一致的，而前兩者則深深受到後者的影響。俄羅斯從過去蒙古帝國的統治中學得了大草原的外交遊戲規則，這有助於他們東擴，並取得廣大西伯利亞資源換取資金；同時，利用東正教控制斯拉夫農民獲取糧食，解決農業跟游獵兩種社會的衝突之後方能成就帝國。清朝的歷程大致上相同，滿州八旗吸收了蒙古千戶制的特點，完成收編並致力於中央集權；對外吸收大量漢人來耕作，發展經濟以養活日漸擴大的國家。不過這兩個發展的勢力都曾面臨過發展瓶頸，莫斯科公國遭遇內亂，直到羅曼諾夫王朝興起，接連幾代英主方才穩定。而清朝則是幸運的碰上明朝內亂滅亡，入關接收十八省漢地資源成就霸業。至於蒙古諸部，他們相對不幸的，再也無法出現像成吉思汗家族那樣長期統治來穩固諸部，當清朝跟俄羅斯逐漸發展出中央集權的帝國時，依然處於紛擾的內部鬥爭之中，於是逐漸被這兩大強權所侵蝕。以往，草原勢力如果被中原王朝壓迫，他們可以利用北方西伯利亞或者中亞的縱深來避難，然後換一批新血過來繼續糾纏。但這個循環隨著俄羅斯人的東擴而被打破，空間已被壓縮，游牧民無路可逃。
而且，蒙古諸部原本還可以利用清朝跟俄羅斯的矛盾中求個漁翁得利，孰料兩邊卻和談了。著名的尼布楚條約雖然在後來的政治現實中被按照各種「需求」加以詮釋了不同的解釋，但作者指出，事實上這是一個非常公平的對等條約，因為它確實的讓參予方各取所需。對俄羅斯來說，比起領土野心，更在意的是中國龐大的貿易市場；對清朝來說，邊境的安全以及不支持蒙古人是頭號大事。而雙方雖然尚沒有主權國家的對等概念，但透過耶穌會士的中介之下，仍然達成了協議，至此之後，俄國不再干涉清朝對蒙古的動武，於是他們就成為了這次條約中唯一的犧牲者。
當然，清朝與蒙古之間的戰爭也不是一帆風順，康熙多次遠征塞外的最終凱旋，其中不乏運氣成分，這在官方文書自然不會提及。反之，他們不遺餘力地把這說成是「昭昭天命」，是上天的眷顧與對不服王化的「教訓」。滿洲朝廷之所以有如此自信，源自於在皇太極時代接收了元朝皇帝玉璽之後，便以繼承這個前世界帝國為職志，企圖完成明朝永樂帝未竟的野心。
因此，從清朝堅持一定要收回噶爾丹屍體並公開再處刑的態度上，我們不難理解，這是攸關其統治合法性的頭等大事。滿洲人此時已吸收了儒家的統治學說，認為行禮如儀是一個統治者的義務，他們透過這種「遊戲規則」確認自己受命於天的合法性，而處分一位「叛亂者」當然是重中之重。作者指出，儘管事實上噶爾丹做為一位對等的蒙古部落的領袖，其行為完全符合身分，為了自己與其部族利益行事，根本不該用「叛亂罪」來定義。而清朝這種作為明顯的就是隨著自己的勝利，將之「內化」。這種行為無疑的就是一種政治神話的建構，把過去的事實抹煞，強行倒果為因，換言之，清朝把征服蒙古視為一種「自古以來」的天然權利，而噶爾丹則是違反這種「天命」的反亂者，作為其征服行動合法性的理由，這是帝國統治手段屢見不鮮的一種，也是清朝對於之後所有新納入的邊疆，合法統治的基礎。
這種帝國統治的政治神話，在二十世紀初建構近代中國民族主義時，被選擇性的接納與吸收。民族主義份子雖然明確的區分了滿/漢的差別，但他們卻把清朝的擴張視為一種「中國文化力量的自然現象」，滿州人只是完成了理所當然會發生的任務，「統一」(請注意這個詞彙的意義)了「固有領土」。而當新的中華民族國家建立之後，繼承與統治這些疆域也就是理所當然之事。濮德培「不受歡迎」的原因，正好來自於，他在本書中明確的戳破了這種建構。他認為清朝的擴張並不是過往王朝的延續，只是一種歷史上的偶然。滿洲人有著與明朝截然不同的統治菁英性格，動員資源的力量以及歐亞的外交政策，他們又恰好碰上歐亞大陸上的其他帝國擴張造成的世界局勢，方才成就這波征服。清朝官方把這些成就重新書寫並與過去的歷史連結以構成政治神話來彰顯自己的正當性，而這又被後來企圖繼承這些遺產的中國民族國家所理所當然的利用。作者說出這個「事實」被當權者視為一種「居心不良」其實也不難想見，因為這很明顯的威脅到了它們統治的正當性來源，特別是該政權如果合法性不是來自於人民的授權。
作者「不受當局歡迎」的地方還有很多，例如他指出清朝對待維吾爾人的蘿蔔與鞭子政策：服從就吸收納編，反抗就加以殺戮，還引用了塔西陀針對羅馬帝國主義的強烈批評：「他們製造了荒漠，卻稱之為和平。」這對當代統治政權的一些作為，無疑是非常敏感。儘管濮德培這本書已經寫就十餘年了。
其實，如果把焦點放在上述的那些爭論上無疑是嚴重跑題，濮德培的這本「中國西征」更主要的是想討論清朝的對外征服與邊疆政策，反過來對於其帝國統治的成敗的影響。作者認為滿州朝廷加強了行政官僚與更大限度利用「市場」去動員境內外資源來支持其征服，同時也造成了一種離心力量埋下帝國未來衰敗的根源；以及其把對中央歐亞的外交經驗挪來應付從海上來的英、法等西方列強的錯置等，都是有趣的觀點。不過個人對此研究不深，就不敢妄加論斷了。只是濮德培說，清朝在乾隆時完成征服後「失去了強大外敵而逐漸鬆懈」，並引用了王國斌的假設：「台灣鄭氏政權如果長期存在能否給予清朝外部壓力並保持長期活力」是個頗值討論的觀點；不過從康熙的海禁政策來看，說不定只會更讓滿州帝國更加對海上封閉。
濮德培的這本《中國西征》提供了很多有意思的歷史觀，特別是對於台灣人來說是有其特別的意義，儘管這可能不是作者本意。本書動用了三位譯者的參與，儘管雖然還是有些英式中文的「翻譯腔」痕跡，但基本上還是能說得上是稱職的完成了任務。對於新清史，如果還不了解的讀者，推薦可以看看羅威廉的《中國最後的帝國：大清王朝》；至於對本書的一些回應，汪榮祖在遠流主編了一本專書，不妨試試。
PS：周錫瑞（Joseph Esherick）有一篇：《大清如何變成中國》，推薦。
August 10, 2024
好厚的書
前面講俄羅斯和滿人的共通蒙古性
讓這兩個國家超越其他時代的統治者
有辦法搞定蒙古問題
另一面則是解釋定居民族宥於後勤因素
難以取勝中央歐亞的游牧民族
而大清終於找到方法解決後勤問題
開創前所未有的局面
書裡比較明清蒙古政策後
接著講康雍乾三代消滅準葛爾的各種努力
作者���偏愛康熙，討厭雍正
對乾隆也沒幾句好話
雍正打了敗仗加上限縮遠征駐軍的規模
就被作者反覆的抓出來鞭
作者卻假裝忘記康熙也是撐到極限
只是運氣好賭贏了XD
而且最終乾隆能夠徹底解決準部
不也是靠老爸收爺爺後期吏治敗壞的爛攤子嗎~
真的覺得這本書裡的雍正很冤啊
到書的後三分之一講內政後勤如何配合前線
以及解構中俄蒙民族建構的神話
雖然這才是本書精華所在
但我就沒那麼有興趣了
拿書中一句話作心得結尾：
[民族主義者必須聲稱清代的邊界是永久固定的
是由上天或者具有自然正當性的歷史過程所賦予
乾隆皇帝若地下有知
知道自己的神話多麼成功地注入到現代中國人心中
他想必會含笑九泉]
--
20211211 賣掉紙本@玫瑰色二手書
--
20210924 購入KOBO版
雖然��版社洽談電子版權其心可嘉
但剛出版時我問電子書，得到的答案是未授權啊Orz
前面講俄羅斯和滿人的共通蒙古性
讓這兩個國家超越其他時代的統治者
有辦法搞定蒙古問題
另一面則是解釋定居民族宥於後勤因素
難以取勝中央歐亞的游牧民族
而大清終於找到方法解決後勤問題
開創前所未有的局面
書裡比較明清蒙古政策後
接著講康雍乾三代消滅準葛爾的各種努力
作者���偏愛康熙，討厭雍正
對乾隆也沒幾句好話
雍正打了敗仗加上限縮遠征駐軍的規模
就被作者反覆的抓出來鞭
作者卻假裝忘記康熙也是撐到極限
只是運氣好賭贏了XD
而且最終乾隆能夠徹底解決準部
不也是靠老爸收爺爺後期吏治敗壞的爛攤子嗎~
真的覺得這本書裡的雍正很冤啊
到書的後三分之一講內政後勤如何配合前線
以及解構中俄蒙民族建構的神話
雖然這才是本書精華所在
但我就沒那麼有興趣了
拿書中一句話作心得結尾：
[民族主義者必須聲稱清代的邊界是永久固定的
是由上天或者具有自然正當性的歷史過程所賦予
乾隆皇帝若地下有知
知道自己的神話多麼成功地注入到現代中國人心中
他想必會含笑九泉]
--
20211211 賣掉紙本@玫瑰色二手書
--
20210924 購入KOBO版
雖然��版社洽談電子版權其心可嘉
但剛出版時我問電子書，得到的答案是未授權啊Orz
May 24, 2016
China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia, by Peter C. Perdue is about a century or so of Qing Chinese history, spanning the Qing conquests of Mongolia, Xinjiang and Tibet during the 17th and 18th centuries. Perdue examines these conflicts from every aspect, including the growth of the Qing state, the Zunghar mongols and the Russians, and the conflicting pressures on the steppe nomads of Central Asia as these three empires competed for land, tribal loyalties, and resources in the steppes of Asia, Siberia and the Gobi Desert.
Perdue's account is comprehensive, in-depth and entertaining. He looks at the political expansion and timeline of events in the books first half. The Kangxi, Yongzheng and Qianlong Emperor's are examined in depth, examining how they proceeded in the Qing conquest of Zungharia, negotiations with a rapidly expanding Russia and Russian demands for trading markets, furs and minerals, with the Tibetan Lama's, and with other steppe peoples, including the Muslim rulers of Turkestan and the Kazakhs. Perdue also looks at the complex economic needs of the expanding Manchu state, with grain supply being a critical commodity that lead to the Manchu conquest of Ming China, and the horse-tea trade that characterized Mongol-Manchu relations. Tibet's dominance over Yellow Path Buddhist's, most being Mongol tribes, was also an attractive area of expansion for Qing China, mirroring Chinese control over Tibet today. The need to submit Kazakh and Turkic tribes to Qing rule and secure grain supply routes to Chinese frontier posts, as well as dominate the horse trade to ensure adequate supplies of horses, a critical need in Qing conquests, and a resource that the Qing state had difficulty producing itself. The Qing desire to match economic growth in newly conquered territories with security needs was essential. Troops without adequate grain supplies would leave en masse, and frontier outposts would crumble without external support from interior regions of China.
Perdue's analysis of the economic needs of the Qing state and their conquests of central Asia is wonderfully in-depth. He examines grain yields in China's north-western provinces of Gansu, Shanxi and so on. He analyzes the needs of frontier troops, and innovative ways the Qing extended their control over newly conquered territories. The difficulty of trade with nomadic groups is also interesting. Perdue notes that the Zunghar mongols, and other nomadic peoples, would often send thousands to make trade, and the subsequent need to pasture nomadic horses and herds, and the risk of raids into Qing territory, increased. The Qing needed to secure a source of high quality horses for military purposes, and to reduce to pressure on frontier regions from nomadic tribes. Therefore, a series of conquests by four emperor's secured the frontier decisively, and assured a steady source of horses for the Qing state.
I could go on and on. China Marches west is an excellent book on the Qing conquest of central Eurasia. Perdue offers an unbiased account of these events, going in depth on Qing, Zunghar and Russian expansion alike, and the interesting events that lead to each states drive into Eurasia. I highly recommend this book to those interested in Chinese history, or steppe histories. This book offers much in depth information on the political, economic and social needs of Qing China, and the subsequent historical events that followed. A wonderfully crafted book for any fans of Asian history.
Perdue's account is comprehensive, in-depth and entertaining. He looks at the political expansion and timeline of events in the books first half. The Kangxi, Yongzheng and Qianlong Emperor's are examined in depth, examining how they proceeded in the Qing conquest of Zungharia, negotiations with a rapidly expanding Russia and Russian demands for trading markets, furs and minerals, with the Tibetan Lama's, and with other steppe peoples, including the Muslim rulers of Turkestan and the Kazakhs. Perdue also looks at the complex economic needs of the expanding Manchu state, with grain supply being a critical commodity that lead to the Manchu conquest of Ming China, and the horse-tea trade that characterized Mongol-Manchu relations. Tibet's dominance over Yellow Path Buddhist's, most being Mongol tribes, was also an attractive area of expansion for Qing China, mirroring Chinese control over Tibet today. The need to submit Kazakh and Turkic tribes to Qing rule and secure grain supply routes to Chinese frontier posts, as well as dominate the horse trade to ensure adequate supplies of horses, a critical need in Qing conquests, and a resource that the Qing state had difficulty producing itself. The Qing desire to match economic growth in newly conquered territories with security needs was essential. Troops without adequate grain supplies would leave en masse, and frontier outposts would crumble without external support from interior regions of China.
Perdue's analysis of the economic needs of the Qing state and their conquests of central Asia is wonderfully in-depth. He examines grain yields in China's north-western provinces of Gansu, Shanxi and so on. He analyzes the needs of frontier troops, and innovative ways the Qing extended their control over newly conquered territories. The difficulty of trade with nomadic groups is also interesting. Perdue notes that the Zunghar mongols, and other nomadic peoples, would often send thousands to make trade, and the subsequent need to pasture nomadic horses and herds, and the risk of raids into Qing territory, increased. The Qing needed to secure a source of high quality horses for military purposes, and to reduce to pressure on frontier regions from nomadic tribes. Therefore, a series of conquests by four emperor's secured the frontier decisively, and assured a steady source of horses for the Qing state.
I could go on and on. China Marches west is an excellent book on the Qing conquest of central Eurasia. Perdue offers an unbiased account of these events, going in depth on Qing, Zunghar and Russian expansion alike, and the interesting events that lead to each states drive into Eurasia. I highly recommend this book to those interested in Chinese history, or steppe histories. This book offers much in depth information on the political, economic and social needs of Qing China, and the subsequent historical events that followed. A wonderfully crafted book for any fans of Asian history.
March 23, 2018
This book is one of those to much of a good thing situations. The subject is refreshing, the methods innovative, the sources are little used or old ones analysed in a new light, a wide array of perspectives presented, well placed in wider regional and global history and yet I only give it two stars? the problem is that for all the positive aspects to the research, the book is lacking in reading fun; the middle chapters in particular just go on and on with every little detail discussed and there is nothing I hate as a reader more then books that drag on and finishing them becoming a chore. At some point you stop reading and start skimming because you can get the core of every page so quickly so what's the point reading every word? I thought about giving a three star score but I just couldn't anymore; amazing research but Peter Perdue should have killed some of his darlings; as he says himself in the introduction the book got out of hand and it really shows; for shame.
However how about the content? Ah well that is a different story altogether. Peter Perdue should be placed alongside the proud tradition of stubborn academics that flaunt all convention and study a subject that has been deemed irrelevant and reduced to a collection of assumptions based on half read sources. His opposition is legion; nationalist Chinese, Russians and Mongolian historians/narratives, orthodox marxist dialectic studies, classical Chinese historians, western traveler perceptions and western the west rises and China was a stagnated bloated corpse theories. They are all surprisingly alike when it comes to the Chinese expansion into central Eurasia; most use teleological views and combine it often with a irrelevance connotation for surely this region could not be important! Peter Perdue attempts to show them and the audience that they are wrong; studying the 16-18th century frontier of China is relevant to understand China and is relevant to fully grasp what kind of state China was. He places his book in a larger field of study on frontier societies and dynamics, this kind of study turns the classic centralized state ideal on its head; and views historical events from the frontier with an eye on each side of the border. The frontier is where the states and societies adaptive powers come to show, in the center it is all about downplaying the diversity for both contemporary and future audiences. A center perspective tends to make the end result inevitable while a frontier approach focuses on the dynamics and possibilities of the time. For example the Manchu records of the time of their rise and the military documents of their wars in the steppe against the Mongols were overruled later on by authorized historical books that properly recorded events, that show heaven's teleological path was evident all along; when comparing these the difference between a center or frontier approach becomes clear.
On a personal note; until this book, Chinese emperors to me fell in two categories, either incompetent and overruled in the shadows by councils of various origin or they were overly ambitious cruel leaders that achieved at great human costs. In short I was well molded by centuries of western historiography propaganda. Peter Perdue showed me that every dynasty and every emperor had its distinctness and had agenda's based on the same kind of concerns that would be familiar to any ruler at the time; how to conserve the state, how the achieve internal and external stability; how to amass more resources, how to manage said resources and how to commemorate the results of all that. It is obvious and yet it seems that for all my scolding of all those that fail to see the rationality of native american and African rulers and societies, I failed to notice my own ignorance and misconceptions when it comes to China. I do have to kinda blame my long Mongolian fascination and perhaps it was not merely western but also historical Mongolian 13th century views and modern nationalist Mongolian historiography of China that twisted my views of this part of the world. For that change of hearth I will have to commemorate this book.
Having said that, I do have to repeat an earlier criticism, the book is too much of a good thing. There are just to many details in there, every little twist and turn by any of the bigger players get's analysed to the minute for even if the book is theory about big structures (his main point is built on it) on ecological conditions, the role of disease and resources, societies and government; map-making and logistics; trade and tribute, power relations and rituals that accompany them. In practice he spent's an enormous amount of time on discussing the lives of a handful of political leaders. Two Qing emperors and their Three Mongolian adversaries the entire middle of the book, roughly 200 of the 560 pages deals with 5 persons and persons discussing these persons or persons reacting to the actions of these persons as part of the interaction they had with those persons and so on. On the one hand, I get why; these 5 persons (and adding in a load of Tibetan lama's, Manchu and Han generals, mongol chieftains, Confucian scholars and Jesuit missionaries) form the core period of expansion on which the book reflects but on the other hand I can't help but wonder if we really needed to spent so many time on poems written by those emperors?
Frustrating even more is that the rest of the book is way better, less cluttered with overly detailed descriptions. The book reasonable does not start with the Manchu Qing dynasty but in stead starts with the previous Ming Dynasty and how they interacted with the world of the steppe that surrounded them (and how the Manchu took over). How their policies of viewing the Mongols as a dehumanized scourge made for a totally different policy and ironically less aggressive policy then the Qing who, due to their own semi nomad origin, viewed the Mongols as subjects to be; as rebellious serfs who needed be thought their place in the order of things. At the same time the book spends quite some time discussing the Russian expansion in Siberia and even more the Mongol peoples political dynamics (including the attempt of statebuiling the Zunghar state) and relationship with Tibetan Buddhism (I did not know but apparently it were mongol princes that started the dalai Lama succession). All of this felt relevant as it shaped the Eurasian world and drew me in; so it felt even more frustrating when the middle clogged down and turned the book into a chore. It shamed me to realize that the chapters after that part could not entrance me as they would have otherwise if I had started to view the book as a chore. I never knew how extensive the commercial society was in rural China, nor the amount of effort they put into a nationwide famine relief system or how they used this relief to lure in and keep under control Mongolian nomadic clans.
As conclusion, it is a good book but unlike me I would recommend everyone, unless you are really into that kind of suff, to skimp read most of the middle parts. A shame for I can feel the raw amount of energy and dedication that went into this book.
However how about the content? Ah well that is a different story altogether. Peter Perdue should be placed alongside the proud tradition of stubborn academics that flaunt all convention and study a subject that has been deemed irrelevant and reduced to a collection of assumptions based on half read sources. His opposition is legion; nationalist Chinese, Russians and Mongolian historians/narratives, orthodox marxist dialectic studies, classical Chinese historians, western traveler perceptions and western the west rises and China was a stagnated bloated corpse theories. They are all surprisingly alike when it comes to the Chinese expansion into central Eurasia; most use teleological views and combine it often with a irrelevance connotation for surely this region could not be important! Peter Perdue attempts to show them and the audience that they are wrong; studying the 16-18th century frontier of China is relevant to understand China and is relevant to fully grasp what kind of state China was. He places his book in a larger field of study on frontier societies and dynamics, this kind of study turns the classic centralized state ideal on its head; and views historical events from the frontier with an eye on each side of the border. The frontier is where the states and societies adaptive powers come to show, in the center it is all about downplaying the diversity for both contemporary and future audiences. A center perspective tends to make the end result inevitable while a frontier approach focuses on the dynamics and possibilities of the time. For example the Manchu records of the time of their rise and the military documents of their wars in the steppe against the Mongols were overruled later on by authorized historical books that properly recorded events, that show heaven's teleological path was evident all along; when comparing these the difference between a center or frontier approach becomes clear.
On a personal note; until this book, Chinese emperors to me fell in two categories, either incompetent and overruled in the shadows by councils of various origin or they were overly ambitious cruel leaders that achieved at great human costs. In short I was well molded by centuries of western historiography propaganda. Peter Perdue showed me that every dynasty and every emperor had its distinctness and had agenda's based on the same kind of concerns that would be familiar to any ruler at the time; how to conserve the state, how the achieve internal and external stability; how to amass more resources, how to manage said resources and how to commemorate the results of all that. It is obvious and yet it seems that for all my scolding of all those that fail to see the rationality of native american and African rulers and societies, I failed to notice my own ignorance and misconceptions when it comes to China. I do have to kinda blame my long Mongolian fascination and perhaps it was not merely western but also historical Mongolian 13th century views and modern nationalist Mongolian historiography of China that twisted my views of this part of the world. For that change of hearth I will have to commemorate this book.
Having said that, I do have to repeat an earlier criticism, the book is too much of a good thing. There are just to many details in there, every little twist and turn by any of the bigger players get's analysed to the minute for even if the book is theory about big structures (his main point is built on it) on ecological conditions, the role of disease and resources, societies and government; map-making and logistics; trade and tribute, power relations and rituals that accompany them. In practice he spent's an enormous amount of time on discussing the lives of a handful of political leaders. Two Qing emperors and their Three Mongolian adversaries the entire middle of the book, roughly 200 of the 560 pages deals with 5 persons and persons discussing these persons or persons reacting to the actions of these persons as part of the interaction they had with those persons and so on. On the one hand, I get why; these 5 persons (and adding in a load of Tibetan lama's, Manchu and Han generals, mongol chieftains, Confucian scholars and Jesuit missionaries) form the core period of expansion on which the book reflects but on the other hand I can't help but wonder if we really needed to spent so many time on poems written by those emperors?
Frustrating even more is that the rest of the book is way better, less cluttered with overly detailed descriptions. The book reasonable does not start with the Manchu Qing dynasty but in stead starts with the previous Ming Dynasty and how they interacted with the world of the steppe that surrounded them (and how the Manchu took over). How their policies of viewing the Mongols as a dehumanized scourge made for a totally different policy and ironically less aggressive policy then the Qing who, due to their own semi nomad origin, viewed the Mongols as subjects to be; as rebellious serfs who needed be thought their place in the order of things. At the same time the book spends quite some time discussing the Russian expansion in Siberia and even more the Mongol peoples political dynamics (including the attempt of statebuiling the Zunghar state) and relationship with Tibetan Buddhism (I did not know but apparently it were mongol princes that started the dalai Lama succession). All of this felt relevant as it shaped the Eurasian world and drew me in; so it felt even more frustrating when the middle clogged down and turned the book into a chore. It shamed me to realize that the chapters after that part could not entrance me as they would have otherwise if I had started to view the book as a chore. I never knew how extensive the commercial society was in rural China, nor the amount of effort they put into a nationwide famine relief system or how they used this relief to lure in and keep under control Mongolian nomadic clans.
As conclusion, it is a good book but unlike me I would recommend everyone, unless you are really into that kind of suff, to skimp read most of the middle parts. A shame for I can feel the raw amount of energy and dedication that went into this book.
May 30, 2013
I think this book should have been split in two. The first part, dealing with the Qing conquest of Zhungaria was pretty engaging for a military historian. The second part, which goes into considerable depth about how the Qing administrative structure absorbed the newly conquered northwestern territories, could be quite informative for a those trying to understand the "what do we do now that we conquered this?" angle of early modern nation building. But when combined as a single work, I felt the whole project lacked direction and seemed to get bogged down in a lot of details in places whose place in the broader story was harder to gauge. Moreover, I found some of the sentences, particularly in the second half, too equivocating and vague. I think the historiographical essays at the end of the book also seemed uncomfortably placed, and maybe even should have been split into a third book or published as a review somewhere with their core ideas condensed into the introduction (which happened to some degree, so perhaps the author tried this). On the whole it was informative, but somewhat pedantic for nonspecialists.
September 29, 2007
One of these books that is really dense and irrelevant to my primary interests, so I'm only going to read the pages assigned to me as coursework, but... wow. A well-researched history on a somewhat unusual topic. Perdue is clearly a rare historian with a deep understanding of historical sociology, allowing him to show not just what happened, but what it all means.
As the title might suggest, this story is basically a political and military one, but the economic dimensions are just as important, and Perdue treats them with incredible depth. Beautiful maps and artwork. Pretty dense, but if you are at interested in modern world history before the 19th century, I'd say this is not to be missed.
Something I found particularly interesting was the importance of public grain silos. While other historians treat the Chinese state's investment in this infrastructure as a "benevolent" welfare program to benefit the peasantry, Perdue shows how they were essential to Qing imperialism.
As the title might suggest, this story is basically a political and military one, but the economic dimensions are just as important, and Perdue treats them with incredible depth. Beautiful maps and artwork. Pretty dense, but if you are at interested in modern world history before the 19th century, I'd say this is not to be missed.
Something I found particularly interesting was the importance of public grain silos. While other historians treat the Chinese state's investment in this infrastructure as a "benevolent" welfare program to benefit the peasantry, Perdue shows how they were essential to Qing imperialism.
June 14, 2020
The first section is an interesting account of the development and expansion of power of Qing China, Tsarist Russia, and the Zhungarian Mongols, and the struggle for dominance/survival between the first and last, along with how the Russian presence fatefully altered the balance of power. After that, it became something of a slog. I am sure the exhaustive economic and historiographical analysis will be compelling stuff for some people - and perhaps if it were presented differently I would be one of them - but it proved very dry and hard-going for me here.
January 11, 2016
Excellent monograph on the most complicated and complex period in Inner Asian history of Manchus Mongols and Chinese
July 21, 2024
This is my best book of 2024. 20 pages a day, during my summer vacation in BJ.
I am so fascinated with it that I started to add a lot of comments on page margins and also looked up almost all the historical names and document source in their original Chinese docs. So it also forced me, or more properly saying, induced me to read those history docs like kangxi shilu, yongzheng shilu, qianlong shilu, and various others. All my searching are done on Bing.com.
So this book really gave me a lot of unexpected experience of reading these shilu-type of books. I feel like I can be an ameture history research worker at some future time, maybe after I retire.
Now back to this terrific book. I am very impressed with the author, a foreigner and a westerner, maybe don't even read Chinese wenyan, but can write such a huge book covering almost all the details of Wing conquering Zungar.
I don't even know much about these events. I guess most Chinese students and adults don't either. All we know is mainly from middle school history textbook, a few lines about how Qing maintained the unification of the country by defeating Zunjar splitist.
Well, the real history is much more interesting. With this book I learned how Ming failed in the response to Mongol threats and most importantly this book tried to explain these questions.
1, Why did Qing conquer Xinjiang? Is it defensive actions or expansive actions?
2, Why could Qing won the wars again st Jungar? Well, a series of factors working together. Politically, logistically, financially, and geopolitically. So it's kind of accidental in some sense. And history may have taken a different route, such as a strong Jungar Empire survived and pushed Qing to build a military partnership with UK. No more opium wars!
3, what did the conquer mean to the decline of Qing?
By the way I do find of a few typos and the author's questionable understanding of the original chinese docs.
Thinking of writing the author an email to tell him about my findings. On this I have some different opinions. But don't want t to type on my cellphone now.
I guess I am one of the few readers who read every sentence carefully and think twice of what the author meant to express, and really spent a lot of time to check almost every citings in this 600 page book!
I am so fascinated with it that I started to add a lot of comments on page margins and also looked up almost all the historical names and document source in their original Chinese docs. So it also forced me, or more properly saying, induced me to read those history docs like kangxi shilu, yongzheng shilu, qianlong shilu, and various others. All my searching are done on Bing.com.
So this book really gave me a lot of unexpected experience of reading these shilu-type of books. I feel like I can be an ameture history research worker at some future time, maybe after I retire.
Now back to this terrific book. I am very impressed with the author, a foreigner and a westerner, maybe don't even read Chinese wenyan, but can write such a huge book covering almost all the details of Wing conquering Zungar.
I don't even know much about these events. I guess most Chinese students and adults don't either. All we know is mainly from middle school history textbook, a few lines about how Qing maintained the unification of the country by defeating Zunjar splitist.
Well, the real history is much more interesting. With this book I learned how Ming failed in the response to Mongol threats and most importantly this book tried to explain these questions.
1, Why did Qing conquer Xinjiang? Is it defensive actions or expansive actions?
2, Why could Qing won the wars again st Jungar? Well, a series of factors working together. Politically, logistically, financially, and geopolitically. So it's kind of accidental in some sense. And history may have taken a different route, such as a strong Jungar Empire survived and pushed Qing to build a military partnership with UK. No more opium wars!
3, what did the conquer mean to the decline of Qing?
By the way I do find of a few typos and the author's questionable understanding of the original chinese docs.
Thinking of writing the author an email to tell him about my findings. On this I have some different opinions. But don't want t to type on my cellphone now.
I guess I am one of the few readers who read every sentence carefully and think twice of what the author meant to express, and really spent a lot of time to check almost every citings in this 600 page book!
Read
October 19, 2024I'm doing this for the first time and hope for the last. I'm marking this book as read while only half of it is read, I never drop off a read unless it's something appalling from the beginning. But I feel like sharing why.
I chose this book because I was going on a trip to Xinjiang (July 2024) and I wanted to read something about the History of Xinjiang (ancient history, not bigoted contemporary crap about the place) and not about politics. So this book showed up as the possible best option.
Even though it feels like a post-Ph.D. from someone living in a bubble obsessed with all the details from an era in which we can hardly know every detail.
While traveling in Xinjiang the read was pleasant inside the realm of possibilities granted by the dryness of the author's style, but also had many enjoyable instances e.g. the first part of the book also covers Mongolia, and since I traveled to Mongolia for the second time in February 2024, it was quite a nice surprise.
This being said parts 1 and 2 were enjoyable reads - the inception of the states in central Eurasia, how the Qing came to be, the quarrels between the states, the demise of the many Mongol empires that arose after the fall of the Yuan Dynasty, ultimately I was learning about what I wanted and more (even though too much unnecessary detail as I've said before).
But when the third part about the economy of the frontier regions of the Qing Empire kicks in and I'm reading page after page about the distribution of grain among the different ranks of the army I guess I must throw in the towel.
If I had 100/200 more pages to go, I could try to finish it, but it's an almost 800-page book, my trip is way behind and I have other reading priorities now. So if you ever come across this chunk of paper, consider seriously what you're getting yourself into.
I've been lingering around this for the last few months while reading other things, at this pace I would finish it in late 2025 without remembering anything, so I'll quit and maybe (emphasis on this) come back one day.
I chose this book because I was going on a trip to Xinjiang (July 2024) and I wanted to read something about the History of Xinjiang (ancient history, not bigoted contemporary crap about the place) and not about politics. So this book showed up as the possible best option.
Even though it feels like a post-Ph.D. from someone living in a bubble obsessed with all the details from an era in which we can hardly know every detail.
While traveling in Xinjiang the read was pleasant inside the realm of possibilities granted by the dryness of the author's style, but also had many enjoyable instances e.g. the first part of the book also covers Mongolia, and since I traveled to Mongolia for the second time in February 2024, it was quite a nice surprise.
This being said parts 1 and 2 were enjoyable reads - the inception of the states in central Eurasia, how the Qing came to be, the quarrels between the states, the demise of the many Mongol empires that arose after the fall of the Yuan Dynasty, ultimately I was learning about what I wanted and more (even though too much unnecessary detail as I've said before).
But when the third part about the economy of the frontier regions of the Qing Empire kicks in and I'm reading page after page about the distribution of grain among the different ranks of the army I guess I must throw in the towel.
If I had 100/200 more pages to go, I could try to finish it, but it's an almost 800-page book, my trip is way behind and I have other reading priorities now. So if you ever come across this chunk of paper, consider seriously what you're getting yourself into.
I've been lingering around this for the last few months while reading other things, at this pace I would finish it in late 2025 without remembering anything, so I'll quit and maybe (emphasis on this) come back one day.
December 16, 2023
Very interesting book about the Qing's empire's destruction of the Dzungars (which led to the elimination of up to 1 million people), one of the three main empires in Eurasia (Russia being the third). But it is much more than that and discusses the relation to its frontier conquests with the Qing's rise and fall (it seems that the end of conquest meant the end of innovation/motivation). The treaty of Nerchinsk in 1689 and the follow-up treaty of Kyakhta in 1729 meant that the nomadic Dzungars could no longer freely roam around and limited its ability for seeking support from Russia. The closure of the border meant the end of nomadic invasions, which had occurred on and off for two millenia. The book discusses various strategies used in containing them, some more successful (notably trade) than others. The defeat was the consequence not only of successful diplomacy - splitting the Mongol alliance - but also of an unprecedented logistical achievement (typically expeditions could not last longer than 90 days in the desert(-like) environment). Interestingly, the strategies used in the Northwest were not successful in dealing with the maritime powers, notably the English, arriving in the Southeast, resulting in the humiliating loss in the Opium Wars.
March 1, 2025
Overall a very good book filled with interesting information. Clearly the product of careful and thorough scholarship. While largely focusing on big ideas and the grand arcs of history, Perdue nonetheless manages to make a few individuals stand out. I love that he thoroughly discussing Russian activity in the region as well. This is a book about the Qing Empire but it remains globally minded and globally aware.
Some of the middle chapters are repetitive and unfocused. I'm somewhat disappoint that Tibet, the Tarim Basin, and what is today Qinghai get short shrift in this narrative compared to Dzungaria. That last few chapters make very bold claims but I don't think Perdue establishes enough evidence to back up these claims.
This nevertheless serves as a wonderful overview of the Qing conquest of Dzungaria and westward Qing imperial expansion in the 18th century in general.
Some of the middle chapters are repetitive and unfocused. I'm somewhat disappoint that Tibet, the Tarim Basin, and what is today Qinghai get short shrift in this narrative compared to Dzungaria. That last few chapters make very bold claims but I don't think Perdue establishes enough evidence to back up these claims.
This nevertheless serves as a wonderful overview of the Qing conquest of Dzungaria and westward Qing imperial expansion in the 18th century in general.
May 4, 2023
从研究生入学之前到临近开题答辩，断断续续读完了。在这快两年的时间里，眼睁睁看着傻逼豆瓣陆续把唯一汉译版（没错说的就是这本）和英文原版的页面给和谐掉。对我个人而言，前几章要优于后几章，因为越是到最后越有太多无意义，甚至粗略的对比和无限度的延伸与循环论证，拖拖拉拉的很败坏阅读体验，此外还有很多错别字和表述不规范，史实方面也有问题，不过我作为一个外行就不评价了。客观来讲，这本书确实给我打开了一个新的世界，首先满足了我作为一个内地人的边疆情结，书中对中央欧亚地区的历史地理环境描写对于一个中原人来讲确实是exoticism。其次，这本书无疑是“从边缘看中心”的绝佳研究范例，中心与边缘的互动、边缘与边缘的互动在这里都有涉及，或许这在冥冥中引导了我本身的学术旨趣吧。再次，璞德培的功力确实深厚，各章节涉猎的题材之广让人惊叹，从环境史的背景塑造、经济史的定量定性分析、军事史的微观深描到历史记忆与历史书写的遗产剖析都非常精彩，很多次都在我意想不到的地方cue一下看似和主题毫不相关的研究。最后，结论部分有些美国边疆学派的色彩。作者认为边缘才是中心保持活力的源泉，真正的衰败是发生在竞争和压力之后的，有竞争才有动力，这个模型同样被用来分析勒班陀海战后奥斯曼海军力量的萎缩、奥斯曼影响力从印度洋的衰退以及边疆城市的地位浮沉。另外，作者提供的“想像中国近代史的另一种可能”挺有意思，但不敢苟同，不过大佬都是有些健史爱好也无可厚非啦～
December 19, 2025
An excellent history! I was particularly interested in the campaigns against the Zunghars described in the first half of the book, less so in some of the more general chapters in the third quarter of the book, and then again in the last, wrapping up part of the book.
Specialists should be able to find a great deal to study here, and probably to argue with, since Perdue seems to be taking a different approach to some matters than others. I wouldn't know; I am a very uninformed reader on these topics.
Specialists should be able to find a great deal to study here, and probably to argue with, since Perdue seems to be taking a different approach to some matters than others. I wouldn't know; I am a very uninformed reader on these topics.
February 16, 2023
3.9星
初看时颇为惊喜，读到最后几章之时越来越“没意思”，讲述历史部分足以五星，后面的比较历史理论构建实在没有什么创新性。而且这种理论构建与其说是在“抹黑中国”不如说实际上在美化中国的历史。作者认为“到十八世纪中叶之前，清帝国与欧洲国家体系没有强烈对比”（P544），并且认为清朝在后期边疆的封闭及其带来的缺乏挑战性，导致了清朝制度的僵化，及其在后期应对西方挑战的不力。但实际上，正如一些列彭慕兰们的理论构建一样，这种试图避免“欧洲中心主义”与“在中国发明历史”的写法，试图把中国从历史这架飞机的厕所升为头等舱的理论构建，忽略了最最最根本的一点，西欧诸国是采邑封建国家，但是中国是编户齐民——帝制。在秦制中国的构建下，战争与对边疆的开拓无法带来某种“基本帝国建制”的改变，及西欧那样一个“中间自由人阶层”的出现。同时，“农民社会”中的农民是peasant，属于一种“农民”身份，而非farmer所代表的农夫职业。晚清晚明无论商业多么发达，也不意味着脱离了“农民身份制社会”，并不是什么“资本主义萌芽”。
初看时颇为惊喜，读到最后几章之时越来越“没意思”，讲述历史部分足以五星，后面的比较历史理论构建实在没有什么创新性。而且这种理论构建与其说是在“抹黑中国”不如说实际上在美化中国的历史。作者认为“到十八世纪中叶之前，清帝国与欧洲国家体系没有强烈对比”（P544），并且认为清朝在后期边疆的封闭及其带来的缺乏挑战性，导致了清朝制度的僵化，及其在后期应对西方挑战的不力。但实际上，正如一些列彭慕兰们的理论构建一样，这种试图避免“欧洲中心主义”与“在中国发明历史”的写法，试图把中国从历史这架飞机的厕所升为头等舱的理论构建，忽略了最最最根本的一点，西欧诸国是采邑封建国家，但是中国是编户齐民——帝制。在秦制中国的构建下，战争与对边疆的开拓无法带来某种“基本帝国建制”的改变，及西欧那样一个“中间自由人阶层”的出现。同时，“农民社会”中的农民是peasant，属于一种“农民”身份，而非farmer所代表的农夫职业。晚清晚明无论商业多么发达，也不意味着脱离了“农民身份制社会”，并不是什么“资本主义萌芽”。
April 15, 2025
China Marches West is an immaculately researched work of history following the Qing conquest of Central Eurasia, focusing on the subjugation of the Zunghar state, but also giving details on the conquest of Tibet and East Turkestan.
This book could easily have fallen into a dull reading of military minutia, but instead focused on analysis of the motives and positions of the relevant historical characters, in particular the Qing emperors and governors general, Tibetan and Mongol political and religious leaders, the leaders of the Zunghar state, as well as the relations with the Muscovites as czarist Russia expanded east into Siberia. Perdue emphasizes the autonomy and agency of political actors as he gives context for their decisions and the events that followed. There's also considerable time given to the Qing attempts at economic development in former Zungharia during and post-conquest with historical perspective given to prior dynasties that had previously tried to expand their state.
Cannot recommend this enough for the incredibly clear picture it paints of such an important and under-analyzed period of history that still reverberates to this day.
This book could easily have fallen into a dull reading of military minutia, but instead focused on analysis of the motives and positions of the relevant historical characters, in particular the Qing emperors and governors general, Tibetan and Mongol political and religious leaders, the leaders of the Zunghar state, as well as the relations with the Muscovites as czarist Russia expanded east into Siberia. Perdue emphasizes the autonomy and agency of political actors as he gives context for their decisions and the events that followed. There's also considerable time given to the Qing attempts at economic development in former Zungharia during and post-conquest with historical perspective given to prior dynasties that had previously tried to expand their state.
Cannot recommend this enough for the incredibly clear picture it paints of such an important and under-analyzed period of history that still reverberates to this day.
June 23, 2017
Exhaustive but easy to read survey of the end of the last Nomadic Empire.
October 3, 2018
Amazing details about Qing frontier economic policy. Turns out proportional income taxes do discourage labor supply!
January 29, 2021
A well researched and written book about China's expansion to the west and implications for today. I liked it. Well written and an easy read that keeps your attention over 500 plus pages.
October 18, 2023
Surprisingly a good read for me....a little dry in places but I learned a fair bit about this massive Chinese Dynasty from the 16th to 18th century and their interaction with Russia and Mongelians.
April 19, 2024
历史学术书，随便翻翻。乾隆爷算是现代中国版图的奠基人
October 17, 2024
So many novel arguments, I can see how this is a must-read. Can't say I fully digested it all though.
November 25, 2025
This book is vast, but it's a great read.
I will not go too deep in the review, but i highly recommend it for anyone interested in how China expanded to it's current size
I will not go too deep in the review, but i highly recommend it for anyone interested in how China expanded to it's current size
June 25, 2021
满清利用蒙古“致命的个人主义”对各部进行一一征服和拉拢，通过《尼布楚条约》和《恰克图条约》，用贸易让利将俄罗斯引入对中央欧亚最后一个草原帝国——准噶尔汗国的围堵与压制，共同合作剥夺其创立永久国家所需的关键资源。边疆的扩张对满清的兴衰发挥着异乎寻常的作用，正是与准噶尔的竞争性的国家创建过程中，满清的官僚体制才会呈现前所未有的活力与效率，拥有处理腐败的决定意志力，甚至濮德培还给到了如果准噶尔汗国或其他蒙古政权能挺过18世纪，是否在面对边疆的挑战时，如17世纪与耶稣会士合作一般，中国会有机会与英国在诸如武器等方面的合作，届时，中英之间的贸易逆差将不会通过未来的鸦片而是武器或其他技术获得平衡，全球的历史将会改写
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
July 27, 2008
A painfully poorly written book. Though chapters 13 and 14 are good, the rest are to various degrees forgettable. Chapters 10 and 11 are what happen when historians try to make statistical analyses or explain economic concepts: the reader hardly understands the author since the author hardly understands what he's talking about. Chapter 14 should have been good, but wasn't. Chapters 15 and 16 betwen them contain perhaps a single page of useful analysis. Chapters 4 through 7 could have told an interesting story about the Manchu conquest of Xinjiang, Tibet, and western Mongolia. I could go on, but I would be just as guilty of repeating myself as the author was. This book has 250, maybe 300 pages of useful information. It's thus a great pity that it's 565 pages long. It's also a great pity that it continues the horrid Western practice of including pinyin (pinyin instead actual characters for godssake!) in books on China. Look, a non-specialist hasn't the foggiest idea about pinyin and a specialist just wants to see the original characters. Pinyin makes no one happy, except perhaps the author who is able to indulge his vanity for knowing a non-English language. Bottom line: unless you're really really interested in Manchu imperial history, avoid this book.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 35 reviews