具體描述
This book is an attempt to clarify the history of San On County — the broader Hong Kong area — centring on the troubled years of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries. It is based on an in-depth study of the San On County Gazetteer, which allows for a detailed discussion of the role, attitudes, and personalities of the San On magistrates, who were the heads of the county administration during this period. Particular focus is given to Zhou Xiyao (magistrate 1640–1644) and Li Kecheng (magistrate 1670–1675). The study finds that they, and at least some of the other magistrates of this period, were genuinely concerned about the county and its people, and tried as best they could to provide good and effective government for them.
遺忘的疆域：明末清初鄂溫剋族遊牧史跡與生態變遷 導言 本書旨在填補史學研究中的一個重要空白：深入探究中國東北邊疆地區，特彆是大興安嶺山脈與鬆嫩平原交匯地帶，明朝晚期至清朝早期鄂溫剋（Oroonchen）族群的生存狀態、社會結構及其與周邊環境的復雜互動。不同於側重於中央王朝政治決策或傳統漢地官僚體係的論述，本書將目光投嚮瞭那些在宏大曆史敘事中被邊緣化的遊牧社群，力圖通過多源史料的交叉比對，重構一個鮮活的、動態的曆史圖景。 第一部分：邊緣的地理與曆史的交匯點 本書首先從地理環境入手，詳細描繪瞭明末清初時期，鄂溫剋族傳統活動區域——黑龍江上遊、大興安嶺西麓——的自然地理特徵。這一區域在地理上具有強烈的過渡性，既有寒冷的針葉林帶，也有適閤季節性放牧的草原邊緣。這種地理特徵深刻影響瞭鄂溫剋人的生産方式和遷徙模式。 在曆史背景上，本部分梳理瞭明朝“衛所製度”在東北的衰落與“薩滿教”信仰的內在張力。明朝對該區域的控製力在萬曆年間急劇減弱，為後來的滿洲崛起提供瞭空間。我們考察瞭這一時期鄂溫剋族群內部的部族劃分（如索倫、霍溫、奇勒斡等分支的早期形態），並分析瞭他們如何利用這種地緣政治的真空期，進行內部資源的重新整閤。大量的口述史料與地方誌零星記載被發掘齣來，用以佐證他們在這一時期的相對獨立性，以及對周邊通古斯語族群（如早期滿洲、锡伯）保持的微妙距離。 第二部分：遊牧生活的生態哲學與社會組織 核心章節聚焦於鄂溫剋人的日常生活。與定居的農業社會截然不同，鄂溫剋人的生存智慧建立在對馴鹿（部分分支為馬匹）的依賴之上。本書細緻分析瞭馴鹿在他們的經濟、宗教和運輸體係中的核心地位。我們不僅描述瞭捕獵、采集的傳統技術，更深入探討瞭他們對林地資源的可持續管理哲學——一種與西方現代生態觀截然不同的、強調“敬畏”與“循環”的生態倫理。 在社會結構方麵，本書摒棄瞭將遊牧社會簡單視為“氏族社會”的傳統框架。通過對早期清代族譜、商貿記錄（如與恰剋圖的早期貿易網絡）的分析，我們發現鄂溫剋社會已形成瞭復雜的“那仁”（首領階層）、“薩滿”（精神權威）與“額魯”（普通成員）之間的權力製衡體係。婚姻聯盟、共獵區域的劃分，以及處理外部衝突的決策機製，都顯示齣高度的適應性和內在的政治智慧。例如，對“巴魯”（森林法庭）的審判記錄，揭示瞭他們在缺乏中央司法機構的情況下，如何維持內部秩序和財産關係的。 第三部分：從“邊外”到“藩部”：清朝的適應與鄂溫剋的嬗變 清朝建立後，對東北的治理策略發生瞭根本性轉變。本書的第三部分探討瞭這一轉變對鄂溫剋社會帶來的結構性衝擊。清廷對東北的“懷柔”與“控製”策略是雙重的：一方麵，通過冊封和賜予“旗”的身份，將他們納入“理藩院”體係；另一方麵，嚴格限製他們與漢人的直接貿易和人口流動。 我們詳細分析瞭“盟旗製度”在鄂溫剋地區的移植過程。鄂溫剋各部落在被納入清朝版圖後，其傳統的首領權力如何被重新定義和固化，以及新設立的“佐領”製度如何在一定程度上削弱瞭薩滿的世俗影響力。這一時期的軍事徵調記錄（如參與雅剋薩之戰的部分鄂溫剋兵籍），揭示瞭他們作為“邊防力量”的身份轉變。 然而，這種“同化”並非單嚮。鄂溫剋人也積極利用清朝的貿易政策，將鹿産品、皮毛輸入內陸，換取金屬工具、茶葉和煙草。這種“邊緣滲透”對清朝的邊疆經濟産生瞭不可忽視的影響。本部分還探討瞭早期傳教士的簡短記載，分析瞭外界觀察者如何誤讀或簡化瞭鄂溫剋人的信仰體係。 結論：被遺忘的韌性 本書總結道，明末清初的鄂溫剋族群並非曆史的被動接受者，而是在嚴苛的自然環境中展現齣非凡的適應能力和社會韌性的獨立行為體。他們的曆史是關於環境、信仰與權力重塑的復雜案例研究。通過聚焦於這些“被遺忘的英雄”——那些在寒冷前沿維持著自己生活方式的族人——我們得以更全麵地理解中國邊疆社會在朝代更迭時期的真實麵貌。本書的意義在於，它為研究中國邊疆史提供瞭不同於傳統“王朝視角”的、以生態與族群為中心的敘事路徑。
著者信息
作者簡介
Patrick H. Hase
Patrick H. Hase is a researcher into local history. He is the author of The Six-Day War of 1899: Hong Kong in the Age of Imperialism (2008), Custom Land and Livelihood in Rural South China: The Traditional Land Law of Hong Kong’s New Territories, 1750–1950 (2013) and other books and articles on the history and ethnography of the New Territories area. He is a past president and honorary fellow of the Royal Asiatic Society, Hong Kong, and serves as an honorary advisor to museums in Hong Kong, Shenzhen, and Kaiping. He currently lectures part time at Lingnan University History Department.
Patrick H. Hase
Patrick H. Hase is a researcher into local history. He is the author of The Six-Day War of 1899: Hong Kong in the Age of Imperialism (2008), Custom Land and Livelihood in Rural South China: The Traditional Land Law of Hong Kong’s New Territories, 1750–1950 (2013) and other books and articles on the history and ethnography of the New Territories area. He is a past president and honorary fellow of the Royal Asiatic Society, Hong Kong, and serves as an honorary advisor to museums in Hong Kong, Shenzhen, and Kaiping. He currently lectures part time at Lingnan University History Department.
圖書目錄
1 Introduction: The Origins and Early Years of the County of San On
2 The San On Gazetteer: The Magistrates and the County Community
3 The Work of the County Magistrates and Their Magistracies
4 The Ming Magistrates: Zhou Xiyao and His Predecessors
5 Li Kecheng and the Early Qing Magistrates
6 Salt and Fish
7 Corruption
8 Conclusions
2 The San On Gazetteer: The Magistrates and the County Community
3 The Work of the County Magistrates and Their Magistracies
4 The Ming Magistrates: Zhou Xiyao and His Predecessors
5 Li Kecheng and the Early Qing Magistrates
6 Salt and Fish
7 Corruption
8 Conclusions
圖書序言
序
The counties (縣, yuen, xian) were the lowest level of the Chinese imperial state structure, and the county magistrates, the heads of the county administration, were in a very real sense the foundation which supported the whole of the rest of the administration. Study of the counties and their administrators is, therefore, of great importance, as well as being a study of great fascination. During 40 years of studying the local history of the New Territories of Hong Kong, the relationship between the villagers and the magistracy has frequently caught my attention, and, my interest thus excited, in due course led to the production of this book.
The central role played by the county magistrates in imperial China has inspired a number of English-language books in recent decades. Among others, T’ung-tsu Chu mostly used handbooks for magistrates, prepared by distinguished Qing scholars, to illustrate his work. John R. Watt produced a masterly work on the magistrates, as seen from the centre, relying particularly on the Qing law code and regulations, but also employing some local material to illuminate such questions as tenure, appointment, and dismissal. Philip C.C. Huang has written two books on the activities of the magistrates as judicial officers in the field of inter-personal, “civil”, legal disputes. There is also a fine study by Linxia Liang on the magistrates as judicial officers in the field of inter-personal legal disputes.
These studies provide an excellent overview of the magistrates and their work. They do not, however, look primarily at the magistrates from the local viewpoint, and so they do not study in detail the magistrates as they functioned within their counties. Several use those local archives that survive (mostly very late nineteenth-century archives from Ba county, 巴縣, that is, the city of Chongqing, 重興, in Sichuan Province; and from Baodi County, 寶抵縣, in Hebei Province, half-way between Tianjin and Peking), as well as central government archives, and some other local sources here and there. However the main aim of all these works is to illuminate the magistrates as a national administrative and judicial institution, taking China as a whole, and not primarily to look at the work of the magistrates within their counties, nor to clarify how they saw and reacted to local problems in those counties.
Clearly, however, the county magistrates were central to the administration and development of their counties, and, as such, also merit detailed study at the local level, as well as on a nationwide basis.
Bradly Reed has prepared a quite superb book (Clerks and “Runners”) which explores the work of magistracy underlings within one particular county (Ba County, the city of Chongqing), at the end of the nineteenth century, but it does not concern itself with the magistrates themselves (except insofar as they managed their underlings), and its setting (a very busy, large, city, a treaty port, at the very end of the imperial period) may well not reflect in its entirety the situation in a small, rural county 250 years earlier.
There were a significant number of handbooks for magistrates written by distinguished scholars in the late Ming and early Qing. One of these, written by Huang Liu-hung (黃六鴻) in 1694, is a particularly down-to-earth and practical work, and gives a good idea of how competent magistrates viewed their work and the problems they actually faced in this period. It has been published in translation; the introduction to this book by the editor, Djang Chu, is a valuable contribution to the study of the magistrates within their counties in the late Ming and early Qing. This manual looks in great depth (in 32 volumes, 捲), totaling 559 pages in translation) at the work of the magistrate within his county. It concentrates, however, on the practice in the north of China (Huang Liu-hung was magistrate in Shantung and Hebei), and the practices described by Huang Liu-hung do not in every respect illustrate practice in the far south. Most of the other handbooks, from this period and later, while they purport to illuminate the problems magistrates might face, and to give advice on dealing with them, are, in fact, almost all “full of moralistic injunctions, with little practical information”, and are of relatively little value in understanding how magistrates in fact operated.
Du Fengzhi (杜鳳治, To Fung-chi) was magistrate of Kwong Ning county (廣寜縣, Guangning), in Kwangtung, in the late Qing; (between 1866 and 1868), and then of Sze Wui county, Kwangtung, (四會, Sehui), and then was once again for a few months in 1870–71 magistrate of Kwong Ning, before being appointed in 1871 as magistrate of the metropolitan county of Nam Hoi (南海, Nanhai: this county covered the western half of Canton city and its western suburbs), where he stayed for some five years, until he was promoted to the prefecture of Law Ting in western Kwangtung (羅定, Luoding). He retired from this post because of ill-health in 1880, at the age of 67. Du Fengzhi left a vast and very detailed diary, (望鳬行館宦粵日記), in 41 volumes, which has recently been published (the second volume of the diary, covering some three months in early 1867, was unfortunately lost during Du Fengzhi’s lifetime). It is particularly illuminating for the period Du Fengzhi spent in Kwong Ning, especially in 1866. Cheung Yin (張研, Zhang Yan) and Yau Tsit (邱捷, Qiu Jie) have written a number of important works on the information available in this diary. This material looks at what Du Fengzhi did, in particular within Kwong Ning county. Kwong Ning was, like San On, a generally quiet and rural county, and these essays, therefore, give a fascinating insight into this late Qing magistrate’s problems, and how he reacted to them: the information thus discussed clarifies, in some respects, the situation in late Ming and early Qing San On.
This current book, like the essays of Yau Chit and the work of Cheung Yin, aims to look at the magistrates of one particular county, San On, but at an earlier period (essentially the period 1573–1713), primarily to attempt to see how the magistrates viewed themselves and their work within that county, how they viewed the problems of that county, and how they set about dealing with those problems, and secondarily to see how the community of that county viewed them and their work. It aims, therefore, to find out what the magistrates were like as individuals and as officials, and what they did, or failed to do, for that county. The book makes no pretentions to do any more than this. The book’s understanding of the general history of China in the late Ming and early Qing is taken from general studies. It likewise takes its understanding of Confucianism and the Confucian “superior man” from general studies.
Apart from the innate fascination of seeing how the San On magistrates functioned when faced with the problems of their county, a major aim of this study is to illuminate part of the pre-British history of the Hong Kong area. Local history, the study of a particular locality, is of great importance. This book is, therefore, intended, at least in part, to throw some light on a vital part of Hong Kong local history and perhaps offer a picture of the magistrates as human figures, struggling with intractable local problems, and, as such, give, it is hoped, a view of them complementary to that given by John R. Watt and Philip C.C. Huang and their colleagues.
The County Gazetteer of San On County (新安縣縣誌, Xinan), that is, the county in which the Hong Kong area stood before the coming of the British, with some assistance from the Kwangtung Provincial Gazetteer and the gazetteers of the home counties of the San On magistrates, contains a considerable amount of information which can be used to study the late Ming and early Qing San On magistrates. No archival material from San On is known to survive, and no printed material other than the gazetteers contains anything of marked significance on these officials: almost all that is known of the San On magistrates comes from these publications, without very much in the way of independent supporting evidence. This gives rise to a systemic problem: this study has to use just a tiny handful of sources, and within those sources mostly the writings of the magistrates themselves, along with eulogistic biographies of the magistrates written by scholars of the county, if any such study is to be done. The administrations of these men thus have to be viewed through the eyes of the magistrates themselves, or else through the writings of those who may well have been close to them as community leaders and advisors. Despite these serious problems, however, there seems to be enough evidence to support this study.
The information in the 1688 San On Gazetteer is, in particular, enough to allow a study to be done of the administrations of Zhou Xiyao, who was magistrate between 1640 and 1644, in the late Ming, and Li Kecheng, who was magistrate between 1670 and 1675, in the early Qing, and gives at least some information about some other magistrates in this general period.
This short study of the San On magistrates in the late Ming and early Qing, is intended as a start. Similar studies, such as those of Djang Chu on Huang Liu-hung, and Yau Tsit and Cheung Yin on Du Fengzhi in Kwong Ning, looking at the magistrates in other counties, are desirable, so that a broader-based understanding of these men and their work at the local level can slowly be developed, to put alongside the studies of the magistrates in general as an administrative and judicial national institution. This small book is thus a brick which may one day, together with any other similar studies, form part of a more elaborate and detailed structure.
The counties (縣, yuen, xian) were the lowest level of the Chinese imperial state structure, and the county magistrates, the heads of the county administration, were in a very real sense the foundation which supported the whole of the rest of the administration. Study of the counties and their administrators is, therefore, of great importance, as well as being a study of great fascination. During 40 years of studying the local history of the New Territories of Hong Kong, the relationship between the villagers and the magistracy has frequently caught my attention, and, my interest thus excited, in due course led to the production of this book.
The central role played by the county magistrates in imperial China has inspired a number of English-language books in recent decades. Among others, T’ung-tsu Chu mostly used handbooks for magistrates, prepared by distinguished Qing scholars, to illustrate his work. John R. Watt produced a masterly work on the magistrates, as seen from the centre, relying particularly on the Qing law code and regulations, but also employing some local material to illuminate such questions as tenure, appointment, and dismissal. Philip C.C. Huang has written two books on the activities of the magistrates as judicial officers in the field of inter-personal, “civil”, legal disputes. There is also a fine study by Linxia Liang on the magistrates as judicial officers in the field of inter-personal legal disputes.
These studies provide an excellent overview of the magistrates and their work. They do not, however, look primarily at the magistrates from the local viewpoint, and so they do not study in detail the magistrates as they functioned within their counties. Several use those local archives that survive (mostly very late nineteenth-century archives from Ba county, 巴縣, that is, the city of Chongqing, 重興, in Sichuan Province; and from Baodi County, 寶抵縣, in Hebei Province, half-way between Tianjin and Peking), as well as central government archives, and some other local sources here and there. However the main aim of all these works is to illuminate the magistrates as a national administrative and judicial institution, taking China as a whole, and not primarily to look at the work of the magistrates within their counties, nor to clarify how they saw and reacted to local problems in those counties.
Clearly, however, the county magistrates were central to the administration and development of their counties, and, as such, also merit detailed study at the local level, as well as on a nationwide basis.
Bradly Reed has prepared a quite superb book (Clerks and “Runners”) which explores the work of magistracy underlings within one particular county (Ba County, the city of Chongqing), at the end of the nineteenth century, but it does not concern itself with the magistrates themselves (except insofar as they managed their underlings), and its setting (a very busy, large, city, a treaty port, at the very end of the imperial period) may well not reflect in its entirety the situation in a small, rural county 250 years earlier.
There were a significant number of handbooks for magistrates written by distinguished scholars in the late Ming and early Qing. One of these, written by Huang Liu-hung (黃六鴻) in 1694, is a particularly down-to-earth and practical work, and gives a good idea of how competent magistrates viewed their work and the problems they actually faced in this period. It has been published in translation; the introduction to this book by the editor, Djang Chu, is a valuable contribution to the study of the magistrates within their counties in the late Ming and early Qing. This manual looks in great depth (in 32 volumes, 捲), totaling 559 pages in translation) at the work of the magistrate within his county. It concentrates, however, on the practice in the north of China (Huang Liu-hung was magistrate in Shantung and Hebei), and the practices described by Huang Liu-hung do not in every respect illustrate practice in the far south. Most of the other handbooks, from this period and later, while they purport to illuminate the problems magistrates might face, and to give advice on dealing with them, are, in fact, almost all “full of moralistic injunctions, with little practical information”, and are of relatively little value in understanding how magistrates in fact operated.
Du Fengzhi (杜鳳治, To Fung-chi) was magistrate of Kwong Ning county (廣寜縣, Guangning), in Kwangtung, in the late Qing; (between 1866 and 1868), and then of Sze Wui county, Kwangtung, (四會, Sehui), and then was once again for a few months in 1870–71 magistrate of Kwong Ning, before being appointed in 1871 as magistrate of the metropolitan county of Nam Hoi (南海, Nanhai: this county covered the western half of Canton city and its western suburbs), where he stayed for some five years, until he was promoted to the prefecture of Law Ting in western Kwangtung (羅定, Luoding). He retired from this post because of ill-health in 1880, at the age of 67. Du Fengzhi left a vast and very detailed diary, (望鳬行館宦粵日記), in 41 volumes, which has recently been published (the second volume of the diary, covering some three months in early 1867, was unfortunately lost during Du Fengzhi’s lifetime). It is particularly illuminating for the period Du Fengzhi spent in Kwong Ning, especially in 1866. Cheung Yin (張研, Zhang Yan) and Yau Tsit (邱捷, Qiu Jie) have written a number of important works on the information available in this diary. This material looks at what Du Fengzhi did, in particular within Kwong Ning county. Kwong Ning was, like San On, a generally quiet and rural county, and these essays, therefore, give a fascinating insight into this late Qing magistrate’s problems, and how he reacted to them: the information thus discussed clarifies, in some respects, the situation in late Ming and early Qing San On.
This current book, like the essays of Yau Chit and the work of Cheung Yin, aims to look at the magistrates of one particular county, San On, but at an earlier period (essentially the period 1573–1713), primarily to attempt to see how the magistrates viewed themselves and their work within that county, how they viewed the problems of that county, and how they set about dealing with those problems, and secondarily to see how the community of that county viewed them and their work. It aims, therefore, to find out what the magistrates were like as individuals and as officials, and what they did, or failed to do, for that county. The book makes no pretentions to do any more than this. The book’s understanding of the general history of China in the late Ming and early Qing is taken from general studies. It likewise takes its understanding of Confucianism and the Confucian “superior man” from general studies.
Apart from the innate fascination of seeing how the San On magistrates functioned when faced with the problems of their county, a major aim of this study is to illuminate part of the pre-British history of the Hong Kong area. Local history, the study of a particular locality, is of great importance. This book is, therefore, intended, at least in part, to throw some light on a vital part of Hong Kong local history and perhaps offer a picture of the magistrates as human figures, struggling with intractable local problems, and, as such, give, it is hoped, a view of them complementary to that given by John R. Watt and Philip C.C. Huang and their colleagues.
The County Gazetteer of San On County (新安縣縣誌, Xinan), that is, the county in which the Hong Kong area stood before the coming of the British, with some assistance from the Kwangtung Provincial Gazetteer and the gazetteers of the home counties of the San On magistrates, contains a considerable amount of information which can be used to study the late Ming and early Qing San On magistrates. No archival material from San On is known to survive, and no printed material other than the gazetteers contains anything of marked significance on these officials: almost all that is known of the San On magistrates comes from these publications, without very much in the way of independent supporting evidence. This gives rise to a systemic problem: this study has to use just a tiny handful of sources, and within those sources mostly the writings of the magistrates themselves, along with eulogistic biographies of the magistrates written by scholars of the county, if any such study is to be done. The administrations of these men thus have to be viewed through the eyes of the magistrates themselves, or else through the writings of those who may well have been close to them as community leaders and advisors. Despite these serious problems, however, there seems to be enough evidence to support this study.
The information in the 1688 San On Gazetteer is, in particular, enough to allow a study to be done of the administrations of Zhou Xiyao, who was magistrate between 1640 and 1644, in the late Ming, and Li Kecheng, who was magistrate between 1670 and 1675, in the early Qing, and gives at least some information about some other magistrates in this general period.
This short study of the San On magistrates in the late Ming and early Qing, is intended as a start. Similar studies, such as those of Djang Chu on Huang Liu-hung, and Yau Tsit and Cheung Yin on Du Fengzhi in Kwong Ning, looking at the magistrates in other counties, are desirable, so that a broader-based understanding of these men and their work at the local level can slowly be developed, to put alongside the studies of the magistrates in general as an administrative and judicial national institution. This small book is thus a brick which may one day, together with any other similar studies, form part of a more elaborate and detailed structure.
圖書試讀
Introduction:
The Origins and Early Years of the County of San On
Before 222 B.C. the Kwangtung (廣東, Guangdong) area was inhabited by unsinicised barbarian peoples, and the southern border of the Chinese Empire lay along the Lingnan Mountains (嶺南, Ling Nam), on the northern border of today’s province of Kwangtung. During the fourth and third century B.C., however, merchants from South-East Asia started to arrive to trade at Canton (廣州, Guangzhou), and a thriving mercantile town grew up there. Chinese merchants began to travel south from the empire to Canton to take part in this trade, and a Chinese mercantile community began to establish itself. The first emperor (秦始皇) became concerned that a community of Chinese merchants was growing up outside his control, and he sent his armies across the Lingnan Mountains to bring the Kwangtung area into his empire (234–222 B.C.).
After the Canton area had successfully been absorbed into the empire (222 B.C.), Chinese civilisation slowly spread over the surrounding region. As soon as this happened, counties, to administer this newly Chinese territory, were established. The area to the south and east of Canton, the area centred on the lower East River (東江) valley and the eastern coast of the Pearl River estuary (珠江), was thus divided off to form a new county. This county, at most dates called Tung Kwun (東莞, Dongguan, literally “eastern grasslands”), was originally very large, but was slowly reduced in area until, in 972–973, in the early Song dynasty, it was reduced to the size it was to remain until 1573.
The Origins and Early Years of the County of San On
Before 222 B.C. the Kwangtung (廣東, Guangdong) area was inhabited by unsinicised barbarian peoples, and the southern border of the Chinese Empire lay along the Lingnan Mountains (嶺南, Ling Nam), on the northern border of today’s province of Kwangtung. During the fourth and third century B.C., however, merchants from South-East Asia started to arrive to trade at Canton (廣州, Guangzhou), and a thriving mercantile town grew up there. Chinese merchants began to travel south from the empire to Canton to take part in this trade, and a Chinese mercantile community began to establish itself. The first emperor (秦始皇) became concerned that a community of Chinese merchants was growing up outside his control, and he sent his armies across the Lingnan Mountains to bring the Kwangtung area into his empire (234–222 B.C.).
After the Canton area had successfully been absorbed into the empire (222 B.C.), Chinese civilisation slowly spread over the surrounding region. As soon as this happened, counties, to administer this newly Chinese territory, were established. The area to the south and east of Canton, the area centred on the lower East River (東江) valley and the eastern coast of the Pearl River estuary (珠江), was thus divided off to form a new county. This county, at most dates called Tung Kwun (東莞, Dongguan, literally “eastern grasslands”), was originally very large, but was slowly reduced in area until, in 972–973, in the early Song dynasty, it was reduced to the size it was to remain until 1573.
用戶評價
评分
當我看到《Forgotten Heroes: San On County and its Magistrates in the Late Ming and Early Qing》這個書名時，一股對曆史細節探索的渴望油然而生。我一直認為，真正的曆史，往往隱藏在那些宏大敘事的光芒之下，存在於地方的細節之中。這本書的視角，將焦點聚集在明末清初 San On 縣的縣官們身上，這讓我非常著迷。我想象作者是如何通過搜集大量的史料，比如地方誌、奏摺、信函、甚至是一些零散的民間傳說，來拼湊齣這些官員的形象和他們的執政經曆。我期待這本書能夠深入到當時 San On 縣的社會肌理之中，展現齣這些縣官們是如何在復雜的政治環境下，處理各種地方事務的。他們是否麵臨過貪腐的誘惑，他們是否做齣過艱難的權衡，他們又是如何與當地的士紳、農民、商賈等不同階層進行互動的？我希望這本書能夠提供一種不同於傳統曆史研究的視角，讓我們看到在那個劇烈變動的時代，地方治理所麵臨的獨特挑戰，以及這些縣官們所付齣的努力和可能承受的壓力。這本書的價值，就在於它能夠讓那些曾經默默無聞的縣官，重新迴到曆史的舞颱，讓我們能夠從一個全新的角度去理解明清之際的中國。
评分《Forgotten Heroes: San On County and its Magistrates in the Late Ming and Early Qing》這個書名，就像一顆石子投入我平靜的閱讀湖麵，激起瞭層層漣漪。我對“被遺忘的英雄”這個概念尤其感興趣，這暗示著這本書將揭示一些鮮為人知的曆史人物和事件。在明末清初這個大變局的時代，我們對皇帝、權臣、起義領袖等高層人物的故事耳熟能詳，但那些在地方默默奉獻、卻可能因為缺乏史料記載或身份地位不高而被忽略的官員，他們的命運和功績往往湮沒在曆史的長河中。我希望這本書能夠像一位細心的考古學傢，發掘齣這些被塵封的寶藏，讓我們得以一窺這些縣官們在當時復雜的社會網絡中的真實角色。他們是如何在中央政權的權威逐漸衰落，地方勢力蠢蠢欲動，以及社會秩序麵臨挑戰的背景下，維護法律的尊嚴、保障民眾的利益的？我猜想書中會涉及許多具體案例，展現他們在處理錯綜復雜的案件、應對突發的危機、甚至是與形形色色的地方勢力周鏇時的策略和智慧。這本書的價值在於，它讓我們看到曆史不僅僅是帝王將相的故事，更是由無數個普通人的努力和奮鬥構成的宏大畫捲。
评分《Forgotten Heroes: San On County and its Magistrates in the Late Ming and Early Qing》這樣一個書名，無疑觸動瞭我內心深處對那些被曆史洪流所掩埋的人物的好奇。明末清初，這是一個風起雲湧的時代，無數的英雄豪傑在曆史舞颱上留下瞭濃墨重彩的一筆。然而，那些在基層默默耕耘、維係著地方秩序的官員們，他們的故事往往鮮為人知。《Forgotten Heroes》這個詞語，就仿佛在嚮我發齣邀請，去發掘那些被時代遺忘的閃光點。我預想這本書會通過對 San On 縣的縣官們進行細緻的研究，來展現他們在那個復雜多變的時期所扮演的角色。他們如何在動蕩的局勢下，承擔起維護一方安定、執行朝廷政令的重任？他們是否經曆瞭從明朝到清朝的權力更迭，又是如何在新舊政權之間找到自己的立足點？我非常渴望瞭解他們具體的執政策略，是如何應對地方的民生問題，處理司法案件，以及如何與形形色色的地方勢力進行博弈。這本書，我期待它能是一部充滿人情味的曆史作品，能夠讓我們感受到那些基層官員的責任感、智慧，以及在曆史的洪流中，他們所做齣的個體選擇所帶來的深遠影響。
评分作為一名對曆史細節有著強烈興趣的讀者，我一直渴望能夠深入瞭解那些被主流敘事所忽略的個體故事。《Forgotten Heroes: San On County and its Magistrates in the Late Ming and Early Qing》這個書名就立刻抓住瞭我的眼球。我預想這本書會像一扇窗戶，帶領我穿越時空，去窺探明末清初這樣一個變革與動蕩交織的時代，特彆是通過那些肩負地方治理重任的縣官們的視角。我想象他們如何在復雜的政治格局、劇烈的社會變遷以及人民生活的艱辛中，努力維係一方的安寜與秩序。這本書或許不僅僅是關於曆史事件的記錄，更是關於這些“被遺忘的英雄”在時代洪流中的抉擇、睏境與貢獻的生動寫照。我特彆期待書中能夠描繪齣這些縣官們各自獨特的性格、他們的執政理念、他們所麵臨的挑戰，以及他們是如何運用智慧和勇氣去應對的。或許，書中會涉及到他們如何處理地方性的訴訟、如何調解鄰裏糾紛、如何應對天災人禍、如何與士紳階層打交道，甚至是如何在中央政權的更迭中保持一種微妙的平衡。我希望這本書能展現齣曆史的溫度，讓這些曾經的官員不再是冰冷的名字，而是有血有肉、有情感、有思想的鮮活個體。
评分讀到《Forgotten Heroes: San On County and its Magistrates in the Late Ming and Early Qing》這個書名，我立刻被一股強烈的求知欲所驅使。對於明清易代的曆史，我們往往聚焦於宏大的政治鬥爭和軍事衝突，而這本書的視角則顯得格外獨特而珍貴——它將目光投嚮瞭地方，投嚮瞭那些在動蕩年代裏默默堅守的縣級官員。我迫切地想知道，在那個風雨飄搖的時代，一位身處基層、權力有限的縣官，是如何應對來自上層的壓力、地方的民情以及外來的威脅的？這本書是否會詳細剖析他們是如何在政策執行、稅收徵繳、司法審判、災害救助等方麵，做齣屬於自己的判斷和選擇？我希望它不僅僅是一份陳述事實的史料匯編，更是一次對當時社會結構、官場生態以及地方治理模式的深度解讀。或許，書中會展現齣不同縣官的差異化執政風格，有的可能嚴苛公正，有的可能溫和務實，有的可能麵臨著難以想象的道德睏境。我期待作者能夠通過豐富的史料，為我們還原齣那個時代基層治理的真實圖景，讓我們理解在那些重大的曆史轉摺點背後，也有無數普通人在各自的崗位上，書寫著屬於他們的曆史篇章。
相關圖書
本站所有內容均為互聯網搜尋引擎提供的公開搜索信息，本站不存儲任何數據與內容，任何內容與數據均與本站無關，如有需要請聯繫相關搜索引擎包括但不限於百度，google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 ttbooks.qciss.net All Rights Reserved. 小特书站 版權所有