[Yun]

Hanul_Na wrote on another thread:

Quote

Modern China calls its people 中華民族 which means, as far as I know, that they are people from 華夏 and they are succeeding history and tradition of 華夏.

My reply:

Zhonghua 中華 ('the Civilized Centre') is a relatively old term to refer to the area occupied by Huaxia 華夏 ('the Great Civilization'), which is now known as 'China'. It first appears in texts of the Age of Fragmentation, Sui, and Tang.

Minzu 民族 (literally 'people-lineage') is a new term invented in the 19th century in Japan, and used to translate 'nation'. The Chinese borrowed it to translate a number of different but related terms: 'nation', 'race', and 'ethnic group'.

Zhonghua Minzu 中華民族 is a composite of the two terms, first used in 1902 by Liang Qichao to refer to what were then commonly known as the 'Han' people. This usage of Zhonghua Minzu as a synonym for the Han continued until the early Republican period. Then, in the 1910s and 1920s, the need to emphasize the unity of the peoples of the Republic of China (in Chinese, Zhonghua Minguo, literally 'Country of the Zhonghua Minzu') as a single nation-state led to the increasingly popular argument that the Manchus, Mongols, Tibetans and Muslims were also part of the greater 中華民族. This position eventually became orthodox in the Republic of China, with five ethnic groups (zu 族) being recognized as making up the 中華 nation (minzu 民族).

The PRC further developed this multi-ethnic model by recognizing 56 民族 (translated as 'nationalities', but actually meaning 'ethnic groups') as making up a greater 中華 nation (again, minzu 民族). Many scholars have commented on the problems with using 民族 to translate both 'ethnic group' and 'nation', as well as the difficulty of developing a sense of multi-ethnic nationhood in the PRC, where ethnic nationalism tends to remain strong.

[LYY]

Quote

Zhonghua Minzu 中華民族 is a composite of the two terms, first used in 1902 by Liang Qichao to refer to what were then commonly known as the 'Han' people. This usage of Zhonghua Minzu as a synonym for the Han continued until the early Republican period. Then, in the 1910s and 1920s, the need to emphasize the unity of the peoples of the Republic of China (in Chinese, Zhonghua Minguo, literally 'Country of the Zhonghua Minzu') as a single nation-state led to the increasingly popular argument that the Manchus, Mongols, Tibetans and Muslims were also part of the greater 中華民族. This position eventually became orthodox in the Republic of China, with five ethnic groups (zu 族) being recognized as making up the 中華 nation (minzu 民族).

That also implies there is no 中華民族 ...

[Toluy]

LYY, on Oct 9 2006, 01:58 PM, said:

That also implies there is no 中華民族 ...

There is a term 中華民族 represents all the people of whose roots are in present China. However there is no an ethnic group or nation or race called 中華民族.

[Ashura]

Hua華also means beautful. If you are Chinese living outside of China, you will be called a Huaren 華人. So by definition, we are all beautiful people no matter how we look.

The term 中華民族 is more like "the group of people who share the same 中華 cultural background and lifestyle."
It is a very flexible concept and just about anybody can join.

Quote

That also implies there is no 中華民族

If there is no 中華民族, there was no Roman then.

[Yun]

Mark Elliott, a historian at Harvard specializing in the Qing dynasty, argues that the best way to define 中華民族 is "the former peoples of the Qing dominions", i.e. all ethnic groups that have been ruled by the Qing empire, since the ROC and PRC were essentialy built upon the results of the Qing imperial expansion.

Today's China is really a former multi-ethnic empire trying to redefine itself as a multi-ethnic nation. Benedict Anderson said as much in his 1991 classic Imagined Communities.

[Ashura]

Yun, on Oct 11 2006, 08:32 PM, said:

Mark Elliott, a historian at Harvard specializing in the Qing dynasty, argues that the best way to define 中華民族 is "the former peoples of the Qing dominions", i.e. all ethnic groups that have been ruled by the Qing empire, since the ROC and PRC were essentialy built upon the results of the Qing imperial expansion.

Today's China is really a former multi-ethnic empire trying to redefine itself as a multi-ethnic nation. Benedict Anderson said as much in his 1991 classic Imagined Communities.

I have to disagree with Mark Elliott's definition, for that makes 中華民族 exclusive, which can be very dangerous down the road and may flame up nationalism. It might be plausible after the immediate collpase of Qing but right now we should worry about how to make 中華民族 inclusive.

[Yun]

How much more inclusive does it have to be, since all the 56 ethnic groups now recognized by the PRC were once under Qing rule, and so was Taiwan? I would think it only needs to be even more inclusive if the PRC government has an interest in integrating immigrants (e.g. North Korean refugees and Russians) into the 中華民族.

[MING-LOYALIST]

Yun, on Oct 11 2006, 10:32 PM, said:

Mark Elliott, a historian at Harvard specializing in the Qing dynasty, argues that the best way to define 中華民族 is "the former peoples of the Qing dominions", i.e. all ethnic groups that have been ruled by the Qing empire, since the ROC and PRC were essentialy built upon the results of the Qing imperial expansion.

Today's China is really a former multi-ethnic empire trying to redefine itself as a multi-ethnic nation. Benedict Anderson said as much in his 1991 classic Imagined Communities.

I almost agree completely with this except that PRC/ROC no longer includes Mongolia.
Thus 中華民族 is different today.

Its essentially like ancient times when confucians stressed that all peoples born within the territories of the middle kingdom was one family. yet the 'middle kingdom''s borders change, ie Tang was obvuoisly larger then Ming thus included more peoples.

Today all people inside borders of PRC/ROC are one people.

Ethnic groups are invented and changes. Khitan was mongolic speakers yet claimed to be descendents of yan emperor, does not really matter if it was true or not, but it serves the purpose.

中華民族 serves the purpose of uniting all the peoples of PRC/ROC, but outer-mongolians obviosly aren't really part of it today.

This post has been edited by Yun: 19 October 2006 - 05:58 AM

[Ashura]

Immigrants that's what I was thinking about. As China's economy getting developed, there will be lots and lots of people going to China for whatever reasons. Why shoud the definition of 中華民族 be limited to 56 ethnic groups then, when the culture is being shared by more and more people?

To be inclusive is to adopt and incorporate. It is benefitial to which ever country that does that.

[MING-LOYALIST]

Immigrants will be Chinese if they take up citizenship.

However 中華民族 is differen in that its a ethnic definition not nationality, ie a Singaporean chinese or an american chiense is also 中華民族 even if they do not hold PRC/ROC citizenship.

[Ashura]

MING-LOYALIST, on Oct 11 2006, 10:17 PM, said:

Immigrants will be Chinese if they take up citizenship.

However 中華民族 is differen in that its a ethnic definition not nationality, ie a Singaporean chinese or an american chiense is also 中華民族 even if they do not hold PRC/ROC citizenship.

They are 中華民族 if they think they are, but they are not born to be. If they don't think they are then the Chinese ethnicity means nothing to them. That's why I said the term has to be flexible. If a Manchurain is 中華民族, why can't a Japanese, Vietnamese, Italian, German be 中華民族? You see where I'm going?

[Toluy]

I think 中華民族 is a term to describ nether ethnicity nor nationality. it is a matter of cultural concept. So anyone who share the relative culture could be a member of 中華民族 no matter their ethnicity and nationality indeed.

[MING-LOYALIST]

Ashura, on Oct 12 2006, 12:54 AM, said:

They are 中華民族 if they think they are, but they are not born to be. If they don't think they are then the Chinese ethnicity means nothing to them. That's why I said the term has to be flexible. If a Manchurain is 中華民族, why can't a Japanese, Vietnamese, Italian, German be 中華民族? You see where I'm going?

Because they have their own countries and those countries aren't inside PRC borders.

[Yun]

Quote

Khitan was mongolic speakers yet claimed to be descendents of yan emperor, does not really matter if it was true or not, but it serves the purpose.

Actually, the Khitan didn't. It was the Tuoba Xianbei who claimed to be descendants of the Yellow Emperor (Huang Di).

Quote

I almost agree completely with this except that PRC/ROC no longer includes Mongolia.

However, the PRC still has citizens of Mongol ethnicity, though not as many as the Qing did. I don't think the ROC has even given up its claim to Outer Mongolia yet.

Perhaps the only ethnic groups the Qing had that the PRC and ROC do not have would be certain peoples living north of the Amur River, which are in Russian Siberia now. But I don't know if there such groups.

[MING-LOYALIST]

Yun, on Oct 12 2006, 03:56 AM, said:

Actually, the Khitan didn't. It was the Tuoba Xianbei who claimed to be descendants of the Yellow Emperor (Huang Di).

The (Liao history) imply they did.


有关契丹族源起的历史传说，除了上面谈到的青牛白马说和三汗说之外，还应该提到黄帝说和炎帝说。《辽史·太祖纪赞》曰：“辽之先，出自炎帝，世为审吉国，其可知者盖自奇首云。”卷六三《世表序》亦曰：“考之宇文周之书，辽本炎帝之后，而耶律俨称辽为轩辕后。俨志晚出，盍从《周书》。盖炎帝之裔曰葛乌菟者，世雄朔陲，后为冒顿可汗所袭，保鲜卑山以居，号鲜卑氏。既而慕容燕破之，析其部曰宇文，曰库莫奚，曰契丹。契丹之名，昉见于此。”　　以上所引《辽史·太祖纪赞》和《世表序》，都只能代表元朝史官的观点。他们主张契丹为炎帝之后，其史料依据出自《周书·文帝纪》。据《世表序》说，耶律俨《皇朝实录》原是称契丹为黄帝之后的，但《辽史》纂修者们认为此说无据，故改倡炎帝说。