查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- Is the Opium War a Defining Moment in Chinese History? A View from Trade Routes, Interregional Trade, and the Lower Yangzi
- 改革開放後--大陸文學期刊評析
- 長江流域下游地區的城鎮空間演化機制探索
- 上海在近代中國工業化的地位
- [評葉文心著]Shanghai Splendor: Economic Sentiments and the Making of Modern China, 1843-1949
- 民國上海的廣東新音聲--廣東樂人與江南樂人的交流
- 民國上海教育家:我的祖父胡叔異
- 上海.江南水鄉.同濟建築
- 用圖像記錄江南大運河的「前世今生」
- 一世清官誥封傳--記金門湖下村江南提督楊華四道誥封
頁籤選單縮合
題名 | Is the Opium War a Defining Moment in Chinese History? A View from Trade Routes, Interregional Trade, and the Lower Yangzi=質疑鴉片戰爭為中國近現代史開端之說:以商業路線,區域間貿易,和長江下游歷史發展軌跡為證 |
---|---|
作者 | 張信; | 書刊名 | 當代中國研究 |
卷期 | 17:2 2010.10[民99.10] |
頁次 | 頁81-134 |
分類號 | 627.65 |
關鍵詞 | 鴉片戰爭; 商業路線; 區域貿易; 長江下游; 江南; 上海; 全國中心市場; 長江流域; 大運河; Opium War; Trade routes; Interregional trade; The lower Yangzi Region; Jiangnan; The Yangzi River; Shanghai; National market; Grand Canal; |
語文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 中國史學界歷來視鴉片戰爭為一重要歷史轉捩點:中國近代化之始,西方帝國主義對華侵略之初,以及中國半殖民地時期之開端。此觀點不僅獲得學術界廣泛認同,更被廣大民眾(甚至包括電影作者)普遍接受。與此相反,美國學者對諸如鴉戰是否是近代和傳統社會分水嶺之類問題廖無興趣。主要原因旨在費正清(John Fairbank)和哈佛大學中國學學派所宣導的“西方衝擊/中國反映”論受保羅柯文(Paul Cohen)批評後,美國學術界對任何與此有關的研究心存餘悸。尤其是對可能被懷疑和「西方中心說」(而非「中國中心論」)有關的課題避之若浼。 鑒於目前有目共睹的中國自七十年代末對外開放以來所呈現的空前發展,此問題的重提不僅非常重要更有現實意義。由於這次開放為中國近現代史上第二次(第一次在鴉戰之後),我們有必要窺探此戰對中國社會內部變化的影響並以為借鑒。 為達此目的, 此文將從一全新角度著手探討。為避免因循守舊,本研究將以商業路線的演變為主導分幾個步驟進行:先梳理出商路的分佈以縱觀其在長途販運者靈活運作下所形成的完整和穩定結構。再從一主幹道,長江,在十九世紀前發展中的作用來摸索十九世紀上葉上海崛起的內部因素。接著以商路結構在鴉戰之際頻臨瓦解的狀況來判斷鴉戰後以上海為主軸的新路線結構興起的必然趨勢。最後 再論證鴉戰後由於商路變化所引起的整個中國商業體系從原來以區域間貿易為主向帶有國際間貿易為特色的新體系轉型。本文旨在證明,儘管鴉片戰爭對中國商業系統的演變起了出乎意外的促進作用,但它並非是中國歷史的關鍵性轉捩點。 |
英文摘要 | For years, the Opium War has been considered by Chinese historians a defining moment in Chinese modern history: the beginning of China’s modernization, the commencement of fully fledged Western imperialism, and the inception of semi-colonial period in China. The very notion that the event is a watershed between tradition and modernity has been deeply embedded in the psyche of not only those who study modern Chinese history but also the general public and even the movie makers. In deep contrast, however, most scholars in the United States will shy away from a question such as whether the Opium War is a defining moment in Chinese history, given the fact that the field of China studies has largely moved away from this kind of inquiry. Since the appearance of Paul Cohen’s criticism of the “impact/response” paradigm known to be associated with John Fairbank and the “Harvard-school of sinologists,” we have consciously or unconsciously avoided topics that would might be considered “Western centered” topics (Cohen). The question becomes not only relevant but also important to all of us today as we are all witnessing unprecedented changes in China, after it has open itself to the world since the late 1970s. Because this is the second time China has “opened up”- the first took place right after the Opium War, as a result of China’s defeat in the war- it is necessary for us to reexamine how the war relates to the internal changes in the country to draw historical lessons from the past. In order to provide a fresh look at the matter, I approach the question from a unique angle: Rather than looking from the perspectives assumed by precious researchers, I will scrutinize the issue from an angle of trade routes. Step by step, I will discover the main trade routes: how they were utilized by long distance travelers to create an efficient and stable system of interregional trade; how the development of one of the main routes, the Yangzi River, provided opportunities for new cities like Shanghai; then how that system broke down when the Opium War took place; and how the war led to the rise of Shanghai and the opening of the lower Yangzi region, both of which hastened the shifting of main trade routes from the interregionally based to transnationally based. Through the following research, we will be able to see that the Opium War, though unintendedly contributed to the transition of China’s trade system, shall not be considered a defining movement in Chinese history. |
本系統之摘要資訊系依該期刊論文摘要之資訊為主。