Judicial Changes in Qing Beijing during the Shunzhi Period (1644–61)

The judicial system in Qing Beijing integrated both Ming and Manchu institutions. In the Ming judicial system, the first level of courts in Beijing included the Ministry of Justice and the Censorate, and on the second level was the Court of Judicial Review. During the Ming, however, this system became heavily disrupted by the intelligence security apparatuses, like the Eastern Depot. In the Manchu system, on the first level of courts was the banner company captains and on the second level was the Ministry of Justice. After 1644, the Ming’s institutional legacies and lessons remained so important to Manchu rulers that they eventually created an integrated legal system that primarily drew from the Ming system. This integration reflected the Qing dynasty’s endeavor to adopt Ming institutions. Prince Regent Dorgon insisted upon judicial separation on the first level of the courts—Censors of the Five Wards could not settle cases involving banner people, nor could the banner system handle cases involving civilians—while the Shunzhi emperor and his successors wanted judicial unity in Beijing and ordinary banner people and civilians to be adjudicated by the same courts.     

From Alliance to Tutelage: A Historical Analysis of Manchu-Mongol Relations before the Qing Conquest

Before 1644, the Manchu rulers pursued a deliberate policy of alliances with the southern (later “Inner”) Mongol tribes. In the 1630s the system of treaties and alliances gave way to the creation of the League-Banner system, the jasaq system, and the Lifan Yuan. The new territorial and political organization meant that the southern Mongols, while retaining a degree of autonomy, became subjects of the Qing dynasty. This essay explores the historical circumstances of the transformation of the relationship between Manchus and Mongols from partnership to subordination. It also aims to explain the political principles deployed by the Manchus in the redefinition of their relationship with the Mongol elites. More specifically, the essay proposes that the new forms of administration of Inner Mongolia stemmed from a condition of “tutelage.” Tutelage was not simply imposed by the Manchus upon their erstwhile allies, but actively sought by Mongol aristocrats in the context of the intra-Mongol wars carried out by the Čaqar leader Ligdan Khan.     

康有为的“大中国观”与革命派放弃“驱除鞑虏”口号

190 2年 ,康有为深情表白 :“以我之愚 ,窃爱大中国 ,爱一统 ,若其为印度焉 ,分为众小以待灭 ,此则我之愚 ,所不敢知不敢从也。”他以“大中国观”反对喧嚣一时的狭隘民族主义 ,导发了一场思想大论战。通过论战 ,革命派接受了“大中国观”,清算了“民族复仇”、“满汉分治”、“特法治满”等错误主张 ,放弃了有严重负作用的“驱除鞑虏”口号 ,形成了巩固中国统一、体现民族平等的“五族共和”方针     

The Qing,the Manchus,and Footbinding: Sources and Assumptions under Scrutiny

Two sets of assumptions surrounding the Manchus and footbinding have crept into the historiography of the Qing period. A first set of assumptions claims that the Manchus attempted to ban footbinding among civilian Han on repeated occasions after the conquest but failed due to women’s resistance. Moreover, Qing attempts to ban footbinding made binding into a politically charged ethnic marker that embodied for Han anti-Manchu and anti-Qing sentiments and caused the bans to backfire and footbinding to spread further. A second set of assumptions claims that the overwhelming cultural allure and popularity of footbinding proved irresistible to banner women, who, thwarted by banner regulations forbidding the practice, covertly imitated footbinding by wearing platform shoes that hid natural feet and created an illusion of smallness. This paper scrutinizes the evidence put forward by Qing historians for the first of these two sets of assumptions. The claims are found to be unsubstantiated and evidence is offered that contradicts them. I argue that the weight of evidence shows that there was no prohibition on footbinding imposed in 1645 or at any time during the Manchu conquest, and that a 1664 proposal to ban footbinding was withdrawn before it could be implemented, for reasons misunderstood by historians of footbinding. Therefore there could have been no “resistance” by Han women or men to a ban on footbinding, and claims that footbinding became a politically charged ethnic marker of anti-Qing sentiment in the seventeenth century are groundless. With regard to the second set of assumptions, I provide evidence in a separate paper to be published elsewhere that banner women had distinctive roles and fashions uninfluenced by the culture of footbinding, and that in Beijing and the Northeast Manchu styles were emulated by Han, not vice versa.     

From Personal Network to Institution Building: The Lifanyuan,Gift Exchange and the Formalization of Manchu–Mongol Relations

The Qing emperors, who ruled over China from 1644 to 1911, managed to bring large parts of Inner Asia under their control and extended the territory of China to an unprecedented degree. This paper maintains that the political technique of patronage with its formalized language, its emphasis on gift exchange and expressions of courtesy is a useful concept for explaining the integration of Inner Asian confederations into the empire. By re-interpreting the obligations of gift exchange, the Qing transformed the network of personal relationships, which had to be reinforced and consolidated permanently, into a system with clearly defined rules. In this process of formalization, the Lifanyuan, the Court for the Administration of the Outer Regions, played a key role. While in the early years of the dynasty, it was responsible for collecting and disseminating information concerning the various patronage relationships with Inner Asian leaders, over the course of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries its efforts were directed at standardizing and streamlining the contacts between ethnic minorities and the state. Through the Lifanyuan, the rules and principles of patronage were maintained in a modified form even in the later part of the dynasty, when the Qing exercised control in the outer regions more directly. The paper provides an explanation for the longevity and cohesiveness of the multi-ethnic Qing Empire. Based on recently published Manchu and Mongol language archival material and the Maussian concept of gift exchange, the study sheds new light on the changing self-conception of the Qing emperors.