近代河套地区的天主教与移民社会

清末,罗马教廷正式指定中国长城以北蒙古地区为比利时、荷兰两国的"圣母圣心会"传教区,一直到新中国成立,内蒙古地区的天主教教务一直由圣母圣心会管理。在这段历史中圣母圣心会对于河套地区的水利建设、文化教育以及当地移民社会的形成曾有过不可忽视的作用。本文将从以上三个方面就圣母圣心会在河套地区的传播和所产生的影响进行了全面的分析。     

水以载史——从水利视角看巴塘城镇史

以水利为切入点,梳理地方社会史,是水利社会学的一项重要内容。从"治水"到"水利共同体",再到强调"水利区域社会",是水利社会学经历的大致脉络。藏区的水利研究在这方面尚属空白。甘孜藏族自治州的巴塘县境内不同的水利设施见证了不同群体的交往史,层累式的水利工程,不仅逐渐形成了巴塘城区的人文区位格局,也隐喻着巴塘地区的历史变迁。其中,文化的交流和融合也在发生,不同的民族群体,在水的流动之中,逐渐把边界模糊,形成了巴塘多民族和多元文化交汇的局面,这正是区域社会独有的历史发展路径。     

武陵山区古代少数民族社会治理与结构变迁——以老司城遗址为中心的分析

土司制度是中央王朝治理少数民族社会的一种职官体制,是从羁縻制度转化而来,这一转化不仅是政治一体化逐渐强化和内化的过程,同时也是民族区域社会结构过程。本文以土家族地区老司城遗址为中心,从身份等级、宗族以及社会组织等方面的变化来分析这一变迁脉络:一方面,"国家"采取多种治策如朝贡、册封和军事征调等不断加强对民族区域社会的控制;另一方面,民族区域社会在与中央权力的互动过程中则建构起自身"地方"自治的权利架构和统治秩序。但其政治、经济和文化基本模式和要素都受"国家"因素的影响。在这一过程中,民族区域社会"地方"对"国家"的认同不断加强,民族区域社会的内在体系建构和"国家"对民族地区的治理形成了相互促进的关系。     

木雅地区社会组织“居巴”的开放性与各民族交融的社会基础

文化交融和社会交融发生于多民族交往交流交融的过程中。善于处理人口流动，能够提供更多融入机制的社会组织具有一定的开放性，可以促进社会交融发生。文章基于对四川省甘孜藏族自治州木雅地区的调查，认为青藏高原的人口流动是一种常态，因而讨论各民族交往交流交融时，需要重视基层社会组织如何根据外来人口的来源和流动方式提供融入机制。木雅地区处于青藏高原交通要道，人口流动频繁，为了加快外来者融入当地社会，其社会组织“居巴”形成了一套有效的处理原则。首先，“居巴”在当地被表述为一个血缘亲属团体，但“居巴”的双边继嗣特点可以在一定程度上削弱其血缘排斥性，从而有效扩大亲属范围。其次，基于“居巴”形成的“亲戚”,是一个以姻亲关系联结的亲属网络，它通过对“居巴”继承关系的肯定和与新建“居巴”形成姻亲关系两重方式，将外来人口继承或者新建的“居巴”完全接纳到“亲戚”群体中，以完成外来者融入当地社会的过程。总体而言，“居巴”是既能吸纳外来人口加入，又能持续保持社会稳定性的社会组织，在这一意义上对外来人口具有开放性，利于不同来源、不同身份的外来人口融入，是促进当地各民族交往交流交融的社会基础。     

“双轨水利”:农村水利运行机制的文化人类学研究——以广西S村为例

从费孝通对乡土中国的双轨政治概念出发,通过对农村水利发展历史的梳理,探寻出农村水利机制运行规律的两条道路——双轨水利,并指出推行水利社区化是对以往民间水治道路的恢复与重构,同时也是作为消弥当下农村水利困境的有效途径。     

查玛乐舞在蒙古族地区藏传佛教寺庙的传播、继承与弘扬

自藏传佛教传入蒙古族地区之后,其宗教乐舞"羌姆"也逐步流传至蒙古族地区各寺院,并与蒙古族文化交融,形成具有地方特色的"查玛"乐舞。蒙古族地区佛教寺庙每年定期举行查玛乐舞仪式,其宗教目的在于断除我执、法执,慑服一切内外魔障以祈福禳灾、普度众生。文章从历史角度对蒙古族地区查玛乐舞源流、形式与内容进行梳理、分析,进一步阐释当今查玛乐舞在"寺庙"场域与"非遗"场域传承过程中的发展与演变,以及存在的问题。     

论水利系统的档案管理

水利系统在行政、技术和管理方面都有大量档案形成,如何实现档案管理现代化,为水利行业和社会经济发展提供技术保障是摆在水利工作者面前的一项重要课题。本文提出了与时俱进,推进档案现代化的理念,以及以人为本,加快人才培养,加强领导,推动档案现代化进程等观点和参考意见。     

蒙古地区近当代“民族”[ündüsüten]概念及其社会认同

"蒙古民族"[m■ηg■lündüsüten]概念的出现和使用与近当代中国历史和民族政治的发展过程密切相关。在近代蒙古地区,"民族"[ündüsüten]概念的流行和使用无疑受到了西方资本主义国家、中国国内政治、汉人文化思想界和日本等东方国家的直接影响。蒙古民众和精英在传统的血统、部落、种族、宗教等概念的基础上逐渐接受了"民族"概念,并为传统的部落、部族赋予了新的意涵。本文通过系统考察蒙古地区近当代蒙古文文献与汉文文献记载,从知识社会学视角出发,深入阐释了"民族"[ündüsüten]概念在近当代蒙古地区民族主义形成过程中的叙述形式及其社会认同的多线性、模糊性特征。     

12世纪前中央亚细亚草原的鞑靼人及其国家

波斯史学家拉施特丁的《史集》为研究蒙古人统治之前中央亚细亚草原上鞑靼人的历史提供了重要信息。拉施特丁认为,蒙古人统治之前中央亚细亚草原地区的居民以突厥部落为主,其组织"结构"为6个鞑靼人国家。本文以鄂尔浑和叶尼塞河流域突厥如尼文碑铭记载为依据,参照汉文史籍、敦煌和波斯手稿等的记载,探讨了9—12世纪在甘肃和新疆的广阔地域内活动的鞑靼人及其政权、9世纪上额尔齐斯河流域基马克人及其部落联盟的形成与鞑靼人之间的关系。     

村落:民间社会的文化等级——以甘肃洮岷地区青苗会权利类型为例

甘肃洮岷地区青苗会产生于清代初期,是负责洮岷地区湫神①祭祀活动的民间组织.根据会首参选条件的不同,洮岷地区青苗会内部的权利类型可以分为家族共治型、老人治理型、个人能力与经济主导型三种.在洮岷地区的青苗会组织中,神圣与世俗、精英与民间权力并存,权力类型较为多元,民间社会的文化等级性鲜明.     

师儒与官绅：传统中国治水社会的士绅研究述评

Already for quite some time, the u-nique power structure of the traditional Chinese so-ciety has been viewed and discussed in the field of humanities and social sciences. Focusing on the status and role of its gentry class, Chinese and Western scholars have deeply researched the gen-eral characteristics of the political structure in the traditional Chinese society. And the analysis of the interaction between different social groups from the perspective of the traditional Chinese ‘hydraulic ’ structure has even gradually deepened and expand-ed this research topic. This paper looks at relevant research conducted by former scholars like e. g. Weber, Wittfogel, and Fei Xiaotong while attemp-ting to come to a more historic understanding of the relationship between the imperial power and the gentry class within the power structure of tradition-al Chinese society: this essay indeed focuses on the political status and social function of the gentry class in the traditional Chinese hydraulic society. Based on the research findings of scholars like Adam Smith, John Stuart Mill, and Karl Heinrich Marx, Weber pointed out that in Eastern societies there was a certain relationship between the autoc-racy and the local irrigation-based agriculture. And Weber believed that the relationship between the autocratic imperial power and the more local Con-fucian gentry was the key to understanding the po-litical structure of the Chinese society. At that time and place, the local water management-projects, other entrenched bureaucracies, the respected Confucian gentry, as well as the central imperial power were all intertwined together; this shaped a unique form of political power in traditional China. By borrowing Marx’ s concept of ‘the Asiatic mode of production’ , Wittfogel discussed the rela-tionship between ( i ) the political autocracy and ( ii) indigenous irrigation projects in Eastern socie-ties, seen from the perspective of political econom-ics. He proposed that the political autocracy was a result of the social functioning of hydraulic pro-jects, and briefly described the Eastern society as an ‘Oriental-authoritarian ’ society under the rule of an ‘absolute monarchy’ . In the eyes of Wittfo-gel, the traditional Chinese gentry was just a bu-reaucratic group attached to the totalitarian rule:their power did not draw from their own knowledge monopoly of value ethics and ritual standards, but solely from their power-relationship with the des-potic ruler. According to Wittfogel, the‘hydraulic society’ , totalitarian rule, bureaucratic groupings, and imperial power were all intertwined and togeth-er made up the government form of the traditional Chinese society. While Weber described the gentry as reputa-ble Confucian intellectuals, Wittfogel regarded them as mere bureaucrats firmly attached to the to-talitarian rule. In contrast with the Western schol-ars’ too simple view of the ‘gentry group’, Chi-nese scholars have emphasized that this ‘gentry group’ was an organism made up of bureaucrats and literati:they not only participated in local gov-ernance and cultural activities, but they also lived and passed on the inheritance of Confucian ortho-dox ideology. Fei Xiaotong stressed constantly that the tradi-tional Chinese political system wasn ’ t completely arbitrary;instead it was closely related to the so-cial class of the scholar-officials ( a combination of the bureaucrats and gentry within Chinese socie-ty) . Fei stated that the traditional Chinese society had a‘bottom-up’ or‘secondary/parallel’ track:this ‘informal track’ made it possible for the ordi-nary people to pass on their opinions to top level people. Guided by tao-t’ung ( Confucian orthodox-y) , the scholar-intellectuals were able to influence political power by expressing their opinions and by putting forward a set of ethical principles. Al-though they had no part in real political power, they still maintained a social prestige. As a buffer between imperial power and the common people, the scholar-officials could not only extend the pow-er of the monarch to the far corners of society, but they also could properly protect the interests of farmers through some informal channels outside of the system. In the view of Yu Yingshi, the scholar-offi-cials not only were royal officers but also teachers of the emperor: that is why they could exert con-straint to autocratic imperial power. Nevertheless, autocratic imperial power also constrained them. Even so, the bureaucrats and gentry kept alive the tao-t’ung in traditional Chinese political life, which safeguarded basic social values. However, the strength of tao-t’ung was always weaker than that of the royal power, therefore, Chinese society did have a tendency of ‘oriental despotism’ described by Wittfogel. In the study of Zhang Yahui, the scholar-offi-cial group was positioned right in middle of the so-ciety: this allowed them to work upwardly and downwardly. They thus could ( i) cooperate with the public to fight against the rulers ’ invasion of local life, and they ( ii) could compromise and a-gree with the rulers as to construct a new harmoni-ous coexistence model. His study reemphasized the historical role of the scholar-official group in keep-ing social harmony. In this study, the scholar-offi-cial group on one hand counterbalanced the central power’ s interference with local affairs, and on the other hand shaped more reasonable identities of the central power, acceptable for local communities. Zhang Yahui’ s study reminds us that-in the tradi-tional Chinese society-authoritarian rulers, the scholar-official group, and the public interlaced with, constrained, and supported each other, and thus constituted the overall picture of the traditional China. The scholar-official group thus was a major force in maintaining the social cohesion of the tra-ditional Chinese society. When indeed we consider both the ‘master-scholars’ and ‘bureaucrats’-the two special components of Chinese scholar-official class-we can better understand the characteristics of the vivid and interactive relationships between the rulers, the scholar-officials, and the local com-mon people. In other words, only when we recog-nize these two aspects of the gentry class, can we see the ‘unifying mechanism ’ of the traditional Chinese society;this allows us to develop a clearer social and historical picture of the traditional Chi-nese interaction between imperial power, scholarly power, and civil rights. To get to this new under-standing of the power structure of the traditional Chinese hydraulic society, we need to critically re-view all sorts of other simplified understandings of the period gentry group.