What do you think?
Rate this book
何為「中國」：疆域、民族、文化與歷史
本書中討論的是什麼是「中國」，現代中國是怎樣從古代中國逐漸形成的，這個包含了眾多民族、複雜文化和龐大疆域的「中國」，在當下面臨著什麼樣的問題？研究中國歷史繞不開這些大問題，觀察現實中國也不能迴避這些大問題。最近，迅速膨脹的中國面臨的嚴重問題之一，就是中國與亞洲和世界，究竟在文化、政治和經濟上如何相處？我們要承認，現代中國已經遇到很多麻煩，比如高句麗問題、東海與釣魚島問題、南海與西沙、南沙問題、外蒙古與內蒙古問題、新疆的東突厥運動以及伊斯蘭教問題、西藏及藏傳佛教問題、中印邊界問題、台灣問題，甚至還有可能死灰復燃的琉球問題等等。
當我們討論「中國」時，也不可避免會涉及「亞洲」的鄰居，比如日本和韓國，甚至涉及到西方世界。生活在這樣一個互相聯繫又互相依賴的世界裡，我們希望反思歷史所帶來的理性，可以讓我們抑制情感驅動的民族主義立場，在同一個世界中彼此尊重。
這本小書中討論這些關係到你、我、他的大問題。本書從「歷史」出發，不僅通過歷史知識認識自我，而且通過歷史知識與周邊鄰居形成一些共識。
當我們討論「中國」時，也不可避免會涉及「亞洲」的鄰居，比如日本和韓國，甚至涉及到西方世界。生活在這樣一個互相聯繫又互相依賴的世界裡，我們希望反思歷史所帶來的理性，可以讓我們抑制情感驅動的民族主義立場，在同一個世界中彼此尊重。
這本小書中討論這些關係到你、我、他的大問題。本書從「歷史」出發，不僅通過歷史知識認識自我，而且通過歷史知識與周邊鄰居形成一些共識。
176 pages
Published January 1, 2014
10 people are currently reading
335 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 - 11 of 11 reviews
September 16, 2020
A collection of essays and talks about the historical perceptions of China. Yes, a very broad topic. But Ge asks perceptive questions and provides some useful examples to think about.
Chapter 1 covers the intellectual shift from China as the center of all under heaven 天下 to one of myriad states 萬國. Chapter 2 is on shifting borders, Chapter 3 is on the various and contentious relationship between a Chinese state and the non-Han peoples (Tibetans, Uyghurs, Hui, Miao, Mongols, Manchus, etc.) who live within its borders. Chapter 4 defines 'values', and Chapter 5 focuses on outside non-Western perspectives of China - that is, Japan and Korea. Chapter 6 is yet another rebuke of Huntington's "clash of civilizations", but also a criticism of Han nationalists who seek to oversimply or destroy the pluralism within China itself.
While the book is short, it at least alludes to some thoughtful ideas and I'd wish he could go on in further detail. Assertions about alternate paths to state-building, or referring to the intellectual debate of 'modern' China existing as one state among many in the Song Dynasty period. He alludes to one of the tensions - or to borrow the Marxist term 'contradictions' - of 20th-century Chinese history. That is, attempts to build a modern nation-state on the territory of the old Qing Empire. He covers the early attempts to build a 'five races under one union' 五族共和 system of the Republic, but there is no discussion of the Soviet conception of 'minority peoples' 少数民族 which is used in the PRC. Any discussion of current events is oblique at best.
This is a perceptive little collection, and one learns from what the author says as much as what he alludes to or does not say directly. I must also praise the translator - working with lectures and dense historical material is not easy.
Chapter 1 covers the intellectual shift from China as the center of all under heaven 天下 to one of myriad states 萬國. Chapter 2 is on shifting borders, Chapter 3 is on the various and contentious relationship between a Chinese state and the non-Han peoples (Tibetans, Uyghurs, Hui, Miao, Mongols, Manchus, etc.) who live within its borders. Chapter 4 defines 'values', and Chapter 5 focuses on outside non-Western perspectives of China - that is, Japan and Korea. Chapter 6 is yet another rebuke of Huntington's "clash of civilizations", but also a criticism of Han nationalists who seek to oversimply or destroy the pluralism within China itself.
While the book is short, it at least alludes to some thoughtful ideas and I'd wish he could go on in further detail. Assertions about alternate paths to state-building, or referring to the intellectual debate of 'modern' China existing as one state among many in the Song Dynasty period. He alludes to one of the tensions - or to borrow the Marxist term 'contradictions' - of 20th-century Chinese history. That is, attempts to build a modern nation-state on the territory of the old Qing Empire. He covers the early attempts to build a 'five races under one union' 五族共和 system of the Republic, but there is no discussion of the Soviet conception of 'minority peoples' 少数民族 which is used in the PRC. Any discussion of current events is oblique at best.
This is a perceptive little collection, and one learns from what the author says as much as what he alludes to or does not say directly. I must also praise the translator - working with lectures and dense historical material is not easy.
May 13, 2020
This is a very good, opinionated book, discussing recent historiography debates between the western led "New Qing" school, and Chinese academia. The former de-emphasises the importance and continuity of the Unified Chinese state. Their name comes from the breakthrough that the Qing dynasty kept its Manchurian traditions while ruling China, which China does not fully acknowledge today. This school writes history through the prism of the various peoples of China, not of the state itself; an example, would be Bill Hayton's The Invention of China. Ge Zhaoguang, in an effort against this school, defends the importance of studying China through the lens of the State, arguing that all dynasties recognised "China" as some sort of entity that existed and that ruled a certain area. In this effort, he tries to answer the titular question: What is China?
The book is wide in its scope, and although it is far too short to delve into any topic with great detail, it does a good job of summarising each one quite well, with the appropriate caveats and nuance. It recounts how China transitioned from a "Mandate from Heaven", where China at the center had the right and power to govern the entire world, even if the extremities were not worth the effort; to a "one state among many" approach, starting from Matteo Ricci's travels, or perhaps even before, during the time where the Song and Liao dynasties recognised each first as another dynasty of the same Kingdom, and then as rulers of a different one. The other great question is how China is or ought to be composed of: a federation of one "Han" nation leading the others (the "54 minorities", or as the book papers over, the "4 barbarians"); or one state of many nations unified by a nation-less unique " Chinese Culture".
It has two main faults in my view. First, it is extraordinarily self-centred, at times it seems deliberately ignoring that China is not alone in most of these issues. It talks of how China uniquely had well-defined borders before Europe, when Portugal, the country from which I am from, has had virtually unchanged borders for hundreds of years. It also talks about how China alone is hardly a unified nation-state, which is even more common: Spain, Belgium, and even the US do not have a single national "people", or at least some would argue they do not. None of this is discussed: the author takes a modern unified singular "nation-state" to be a real characterisation of all or most countries today, and China alone as the outlier.
Secondly, the book is mostly betrayed by its last chapter and ultimate conclusion, which is an explicit answer to Huntington's Clash of Civilisations. Huntington today is not particularly well-liked in the literature, from what I gather, and its rhetoric is frequently assumed to be simplistic and unhelpful. Given that two major themes of this book is that "All History is Political" and that Chinese historiography has frequently bypassed scientific norms of questioning to answer to the West's and Japan's vision of China, one can't help but ask how much of this book might not fall for the same trap, in particular answering a simplistic take which does not reflect modern Western visions of China.
It is, regardless, a worthwhile read.
The book is wide in its scope, and although it is far too short to delve into any topic with great detail, it does a good job of summarising each one quite well, with the appropriate caveats and nuance. It recounts how China transitioned from a "Mandate from Heaven", where China at the center had the right and power to govern the entire world, even if the extremities were not worth the effort; to a "one state among many" approach, starting from Matteo Ricci's travels, or perhaps even before, during the time where the Song and Liao dynasties recognised each first as another dynasty of the same Kingdom, and then as rulers of a different one. The other great question is how China is or ought to be composed of: a federation of one "Han" nation leading the others (the "54 minorities", or as the book papers over, the "4 barbarians"); or one state of many nations unified by a nation-less unique " Chinese Culture".
It has two main faults in my view. First, it is extraordinarily self-centred, at times it seems deliberately ignoring that China is not alone in most of these issues. It talks of how China uniquely had well-defined borders before Europe, when Portugal, the country from which I am from, has had virtually unchanged borders for hundreds of years. It also talks about how China alone is hardly a unified nation-state, which is even more common: Spain, Belgium, and even the US do not have a single national "people", or at least some would argue they do not. None of this is discussed: the author takes a modern unified singular "nation-state" to be a real characterisation of all or most countries today, and China alone as the outlier.
Secondly, the book is mostly betrayed by its last chapter and ultimate conclusion, which is an explicit answer to Huntington's Clash of Civilisations. Huntington today is not particularly well-liked in the literature, from what I gather, and its rhetoric is frequently assumed to be simplistic and unhelpful. Given that two major themes of this book is that "All History is Political" and that Chinese historiography has frequently bypassed scientific norms of questioning to answer to the West's and Japan's vision of China, one can't help but ask how much of this book might not fall for the same trap, in particular answering a simplistic take which does not reflect modern Western visions of China.
It is, regardless, a worthwhile read.
January 21, 2019
看的是中文版。實在太精彩啦，深入淺出地說明了為什麼中國「是在無邊帝國的意識中有有限國家的概念，在有限的國家認知中保存了無邊帝國的想像」。用這本來當中學中史教科書才夠格吧。
July 10, 2024
This is by far one of the BEST books explaining how modern multi-ethnic China came to be. I loved that Professor Ge incorporated almost every major dynasty in the formation of what has come to known as "China" especially with mentions of Liao, Jin, Yuan, Qing, which some scholars tip-toe around since they consider those dynasties as "non-Han" therefore "non-Chinese", but as Professor Ge wrote extensively in the books, those dynasties are not only legitimate historical dynasties that left their mark on the formation of "China" and "Chinese identity" but each of those aforementioned also contributed immensely to what we know as China today, an ever-maturing multinational state.
July 20, 2019
Extremely interesting especially for post-Soviet people. Unfolding story about development of national identity, empire identify, ethnic identity, multinational Society and place of minorities. But some issues was remaining [typically] out of focus. I talk about different centers of Chinese origin and how these centers like South or Sichuan was incorporated in Han identity.
July 20, 2021
Ultimately how much you enjoy this will depend on what you're expecting to get from it. If you want a deep dive into the topic this probably isn't for you. If you want a state of the field survey that meets a personal opinion from a leading scholar then this is probably going to be more your cup of tea, bringing these two things together in a short but detailed analysis.
There are some elements that will be very family and some approaches that seem selectively blinkered, clashing with other scholarly opinions and coming across from a clearly Chinese perspective but that is to be expected and is a positive in a field dominated by external scholars.
At the end of the day the length means it's unlikely to take up too much time and because it offers such a wide ranging approach that goes beyond most familiar accounts, it is unlikely to be felt to be a waste of time.
There are some elements that will be very family and some approaches that seem selectively blinkered, clashing with other scholarly opinions and coming across from a clearly Chinese perspective but that is to be expected and is a positive in a field dominated by external scholars.
At the end of the day the length means it's unlikely to take up too much time and because it offers such a wide ranging approach that goes beyond most familiar accounts, it is unlikely to be felt to be a waste of time.
August 15, 2021
葛兆光老师的论述强调一个作为文化的实体中国，这种实体以“中原”的汉字文化、儒家礼教秩序、无边界的“天下”观为核心。他提出宋辽分治的现实形成了汉人的国族价值，批评班尼迪克老师的理论。
但他会遇到一些明显的难题：既然种族大融合曾是史实，他也承认女真统治北方后汉人对儒家文化的归属感变得模糊，那么他认定的汉人儒家文化到底能否被作为实体中国中不变的内核去理解；政治力量的确强势地维持儒家文化的主流影响，但这种影响的覆盖范围到底多广（除去贵族、士人），且考虑到东亚的历史地理实况（中心与周边交通不便），能否将这种事实理解为对汉人文化的本质性认同；他着重讲述日韩东南亚这些横向“周边”，但针对“国内”其他民族的纵向“周边”的论述很缺乏。他对想象的共同体理论也有一些表面的理解，显然没有深入分析班尼迪克老师的表述。
但他会遇到一些明显的难题：既然种族大融合曾是史实，他也承认女真统治北方后汉人对儒家文化的归属感变得模糊，那么他认定的汉人儒家文化到底能否被作为实体中国中不变的内核去理解；政治力量的确强势地维持儒家文化的主流影响，但这种影响的覆盖范围到底多广（除去贵族、士人），且考虑到东亚的历史地理实况（中心与周边交通不便），能否将这种事实理解为对汉人文化的本质性认同；他着重讲述日韩东南亚这些横向“周边”，但针对“国内”其他民族的纵向“周边”的论述很缺乏。他对想象的共同体理论也有一些表面的理解，显然没有深入分析班尼迪克老师的表述。
January 18, 2025
This book cannot be found on the Douban app, and I wonder why. It presents a very good historical point of view, but I cannot agree with a few of its conclusions, especially the author’s statement about myth.
February 19, 2021
(read in Bang Nam Chuet, Thailand)
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
September 20, 2023
a little redundant but overall exhaustive, it helps understanding how Chine and Chinese conceive themselves within the modern international sistem
April 15, 2019
Ge Zhaoguang says he hopes to share with his readers ‘how a Chinese scholar understands “China”, “Chinese history”, and “Chinese culture”.’ That he does, but his understanding turns out to be based on a definition that remains stuck in the 19th century and his definition of culture is remarkably modernist, positivist, and defined only by what the elite does. His desire to maintain a ‘China’ leads him to dismiss what he calls ‘postmodernist theories of history’ without showing much understanding of them. To his discredit, he actually takes Huntington’s ‘Clash of Civilisations’ seriously. This is perhaps how many Chinese intellectuals think, but it makes this book more a primary source than anything else. The most interesting contribution is his conception of China as 'empire within a nation-state'.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews