白族과 ‘白蠻’ - 白族簡史의 백족 계보 구성 비판
Bai people (Baizu) and their ancestors in Yunnan, China: A critical study on the “Ethnic History” in PRC
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In this paper, I examined the history of Baizu that the Brief History presented. PRC created Baizu as one the 55 ethnic minority nations, as it “nationalized” all the people living within its territorial boundary. And it constructed the narrative of the “ethnic history” of Baizu, while it constructed the grand narrative of the history of the unified, multinational “zhonghua minzu.” There are two major problems in the historical narrative of Baizu, thus constructed. First, the genealogy of the ancestors of Baizu constructed by PRC lacks sufficient historical evidence to prove it. Second, the politically-driven ethnic classification project by PRC produced ethnic minority nation, which does not have their own territory and Baizu was one of them. Because of this, the history of Baizu, who historically lived mixed with other ethnic groups together in Yunnan, cannot help but becoming a part of the larger Yunnan history, rather than constituting a history of an ethnic group. Then, what would be a historically sensible way to write a history of ethnic minorities in Yunnan, who have not transformed themselves into a modern nation? What I would like to suggest is, first, to abandon the construction of the history of Baizu as an ethnic group. I also suggest to distinguish Yunnan from China (zhongguo) as a unit of historical writing, and thus to cut the relationship between the Baizu history and the larger history of the unified, multitethnic “zhonghua minzu.” The narrative of the Chinese history (history of Zhongguo), which takes the PRC’s current territorial boundary as the unit of historical narrative, lacks historical objectivity. Names for historical communities survive, because they have been used by those who have lived in the communities as well as by other historical communities. Members of a certain historical community occupy distinctive historical space and share common historical experience. And their historical experience is mainly informed by political changes that affected the space that the historical community occupies. If one constructs the history of “Yunnan” as a distinctive historical space and community, which could be distinguished from the historical “China” (zhongguo), one may be able to construct the history of the people of Yunnan in its fullest sense.
Abstract
In this paper, I examined the history of Baizu that the Brief History presented. PRC created Baizu as one the 55 ethnic minority nations, as it “nationalized” all the people living within its territorial boundary. And it constructed the narrative of the “ethnic history” of Baizu, while it constructed the grand narrative of the history of the unified, multinational “zhonghua minzu.” There are two major problems in the historical narrative of Baizu, thus constructed. First, the genealogy of the ancestors of Baizu constructed by PRC lacks sufficient historical evidence to prove it. Second, the politically-driven ethnic classification project by PRC produced ethnic minority nation, which does not have their own territory and Baizu was one of them. Because of this, the history of Baizu, who historically lived mixed with other ethnic groups together in Yunnan, cannot help but becoming a part of the larger Yunnan history, rather than constituting a history of an ethnic group. Then, what would be a historically sensible way to write a history of ethnic minorities in Yunnan, who have not transformed themselves into a modern nation? What I would like to suggest is, first, to abandon the construction of the history of Baizu as an ethnic group. I also suggest to distinguish Yunnan from China (zhongguo) as a unit of historical writing, and thus to cut the relationship between the Baizu history and the larger history of the unified, multitethnic “zhonghua minzu.” The narrative of the Chinese history (history of Zhongguo), which takes the PRC’s current territorial boundary as the unit of historical narrative, lacks historical objectivity. Names for historical communities survive, because they have been used by those who have lived in the communities as well as by other historical communities. Members of a certain historical community occupy distinctive historical space and share common historical experience. And their historical experience is mainly informed by political changes that affected the space that the historical community occupies. If one constructs the history of “Yunnan” as a distinctive historical space and community, which could be distinguished from the historical “China” (zhongguo), one may be able to construct the history of the people of Yunnan in its fullest sense.
참고문헌 (38)
- "史記", pp.2991~, 中華書局本
- "新唐書", pp.6317~6275, 中華書局本
- "元史", pp.2979~, 中華書局本
- "明史", pp.7981~8072, 中華書局本
- 雲南志補注, "樊綽 撰, 向達 原校, 木芹 補注", pp.29~119 (1995), 雲南人民出版社
- "滇略", pp.494~494-223, 文淵閣四庫全書
- "土官底簿", pp.1~179, 文淵閣四庫全書
- "皇淸職貢圖", pp.795~ (1991), 遼瀋書社
- 白族簡史 編寫組, "白族簡史", pp.1~273 (1988), 雲南人民出版社
- 雲南省編輯委員會, "白族社會歷史調査" (1981), 雲南人民出版社
- 雲南省編輯組, "白族社會歷史調査(二)" (2009), 雲南人民出版社
- 雲南省編輯組, "白族社會歷史調査(三)" (1991), 雲南人民出版社
- 雲南省編輯組, "白族社會歷史調査(四)" (1991), 雲南人民出版社
- 공봉진, "중국 ‘민족식별’과 소수민족의 정체성에 관한 연구", 국제정치연구, 7(1), pp.185~205 (2004)
- 공봉진, "동아시아 민족문제와 중국 민족식별의 관계 연구 - 한국과 중국을 중심으로", 동북아연구, 10, pp.33~63 (2005), 경남대학교 극동문제연구소
- 공봉진, "漢族의 민족정체성에 관한 연구", CHINA연구, (1), pp.1~32 (2006), 중국연구소
- 공봉진, "중화민족’ 용어의 기원과 정체성에 관한 연구", CHINA연구, (2), pp.1~31 (2007), 중국연구소
- 공봉진, "중국 ‘사족(畬族)’의 민족정체성에 관한 연구", CHINA연구, (4), pp.1~33 (2008), 중국연구소
- 김석우, "先秦시기 국가의 ‘政’의 범위와 판도,역대 중국의 판도 형성과 변강", pp.54~57 (2008), 한신대학교 출판부
- 김예경, "중국의 소수민족(少數民族) 정의와 그 정치적 함의 -民族과 族群 논쟁을 중심으로-", 국제지역연구, 11(2), pp.91~114 (2007), 국제지역연구센터
- 김한규, "요동사", pp.27~71 (2004), 문학과지성사
- 이강원, "중국의 민족식별과 민족자치구역 설정: 공간적 전략과 그 효과", 대한지리학회지, 37(1), pp.75~92 (2002), 대한지리학회
- 이연주, "언어 구분의 관점에서 본 중국 소수민족 분류에 대한 고찰", 중국어문학, (41) (2003), 영남중국어문학회
- 정면, "爨蠻’의 출현과 구성 ― ‘西爨白蠻’과 ‘東爨烏蠻’의 구분 문제 ―", 중국고중세사연구, (23), pp.247~304 (2010), 중국고중세사학회
- 立石謙次, "清初雲南大理地方における白人の歴史認識について : 白国因由の研究", 史學雜誌, 115(6), pp.1079~1104 (2006)
- 段鼎周, "僰人․西爨白蠻和白人, 各有自己的源流", 雲南學術探索, 1994(2), pp.52~56 (1994)
- 方國瑜, "雲南白族的起源和形成論文集, In 雲南白族的起源和形成論文集", pp.115~119 (1957), 雲南人民出版社
- 方國瑜, "中國西南歷史地理考釋", pp.348~358 (1987), 中華書局
- 方國瑜, "雲南史料叢刊(卷5)", pp.418~ (1998), 雲南大學出版社
- 郭凈, "雲南少數民族槪覽", pp.57~59 (1999), 雲南民族出版社
- 侯冲, ",白國心史-白古通記硏究", pp.135~164 (2002), 雲南民族出版社
- 馬曜, "試論白族源出於漢代洱海區的昆明人, In 雲南白族的起源和形成論文集", pp.62~77 (1957), 雲南人民出版社
- 王建民, "中國民族學史 上卷(1903-1949)", pp.229~242 (1997), 雲南敎育出版社
- 王建民, "中國民族學史 下卷(1950-1997)", pp.11~169 (1998), 雲南敎育出版社
- 徐琳, "白語簡志", pp.1~2 (1984), 民族出版社
- 楊愛民, "白子國散議", 西南學刊, 3, pp.187~200 (2012)
- Bin Yang, "Between Winds and Cloud", pp.259~ (2009), COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY PRESS
- Thomas S. Mullaney, "Coming to Terms with the Nation:Ehtnic Classification in Modern China", pp.40~90 (2011), Univeresity of California Press
