Debate On The Chineseness Of Yuan And Qing Dynasties

The debate on the "Chineseness" of the Yuan and Qing dynasties is concerned with whether the Mongol-led Yuan dynasty (1271–1368) and the Manchu-led Qing dynasty (1644–1912) can be considered "Chinese dynasties", and whether they were representative of "China" during the respective historical periods. The debate, although historiographical in nature, has political implications. Mainstream academia and successive governments of China, including the imperial governments of the Yuan and Qing dynasties, have maintained the view that they were "Chinese" and representative of "China".葉碧苓《九一八事變後中國史學界對日本「滿蒙論」之駁斥—以〈東北史綱〉第一卷為中心之探討》，〈國史館學術集刊〉第11期，2007-03-01，第105-142頁方修琦，萧凌波，魏柱灯《8～19世纪之交华北平原气候转冷的社会影响及其发生机制》，〈中国科学〉第43卷第5期，2013年 In short, the cause of the controversy stems from the dispute in interpreting the relationship between the two concepts of "Han Chinese" and "China", because although the Chinese government recognizes 56 ethnic groups in China and the Han have a more open view of the Yuan and Qing dynasties since Liang Qichao and other royalist reformers supported the Qing dynasty, the Han are China's main ethnic group. This means that there are many opinions that equate Han Chinese people with China and lead to criticism of the legitimacy of these two dynasties.

Background

Origin and development

This debate emerged following the Meiji Restoration in Japan. In their attempt to rationalize the debate, some Japanese scholars deliberately conflated the concepts of "China" and "China proper", in the process diminishing the scope of the former. The position that the Yuan and Qing dynasties were "non-Chinese" was later adopted by some late-Qing anti-Manchu Chinese revolutionaries who had lived in Japan. Zhang Binglin, for instance, in a work titled ''On the Chinese Republic'', proposed that a potential Chinese republican state to be founded in the event of a Qing collapse should only comprise regions influenced by Han culture, and that non-Han regions were outside of "China".

Furthermore, to serve Japanese political agenda, some Japanese academics and politicians like Yano Jinichi and Ishiwara Kanji made a distinction between "China" and the "Qing dynasty"; and separated Manchuria, Inner Mongolia, and Outer Mongolia from the territorial scope of "China" in their rhetoric to justify the Continental Policy and the Japanese invasion of China.

Political significance

Whereas there were many regimes in Chinese history that were ruled by non-Han ethnicities, the Yuan and Qing dynasties were the only two that ultimately achieved the unification of China proper. The Qing dynasty, in particular, is noted for having laid the foundation for the modern-day territories of China. Both the People's Republic of China and the Republic of China base their constitutional territorial claims on those of the Qing dynasty, in accordance with the succession of states theory. Denying the "Chineseness" of the Yuan and Qing dynasties thus threatens the territorial integrity of contemporary China. To protect Chinese national and traditional historiographical interests, Chinese historians and governments have rejected the opinion that the Yuan and Qing dynasties were "non-Chinese".

Opposing positions

Yuan and Qing as "non-Chinese" dynasties

Proponents of the view that the Yuan and Qing dynasties were "non-Chinese" or "foreign" generally equate "Chinese people" with Han people, and "China" with the Han-dominated region of China proper. Emphasis is often given to the fact that both regimes and those who founded them did not originate from the Central Plain, the cradle of Chinese civilization and the heartland of the ethnic Han. Furthermore, the rulers were ethnic minorities, whom the dominant Han people traditionally considered "barbarians", according to the ''Hua''–''Yi'' dichotomy. Thus, during these periods "China" should be perceived as a "colony" of the Mongols and Manchus respectively. By extension, the lands controlled by the Yuan and Qing dynasties, particularly those inhabited by significant non-Han populations, should not be regarded as historical Chinese territories.Molly Lortie
歷史不是站在中國這邊的；藏人行政中央：西藏從來就不是中國的一部分
, Tibet Post International, 2015歷史檔案：西藏五十年
, BBC
...