{"title":"The Tabgatch empire and the idea of China","authors":"Charles Holcombe","doi":"10.1080/00182370.2023.2167506","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT A proposal has recently been made to relabel most of the period of Chinese history commonly known as the Northern Dynasties (386–581 CE) as “the Tabgatch empire.” The hope is that such a change might help avoid teleological assumptions that these dynasties were merely half of a temporarily divided China that was destined to eventually be reunified. This change of label also emphasizes the ethnic non-Han Chinese origins of these dynasties’ rulers by using a non-Chinese name. Problematizing the very idea of China, the same scholar has even proposed to “jettison the term ‘China’ altogether.” But, while there was indisputably much ethnic and cultural diversity in geographic China during these centuries, and fertile interaction, there remained powerful elements of mainstream continuity stretching from antiquity through the “reunified” Tang dynasty (618–907) and beyond. These continuities included historical memory, institutions, written language, and elite culture, for which China and Chinese may still be as good English designations as any.","PeriodicalId":44078,"journal":{"name":"HISTORIAN","volume":"84 1","pages":"242 - 261"},"PeriodicalIF":0.2000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"HISTORIAN","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00182370.2023.2167506","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
ABSTRACT A proposal has recently been made to relabel most of the period of Chinese history commonly known as the Northern Dynasties (386–581 CE) as “the Tabgatch empire.” The hope is that such a change might help avoid teleological assumptions that these dynasties were merely half of a temporarily divided China that was destined to eventually be reunified. This change of label also emphasizes the ethnic non-Han Chinese origins of these dynasties’ rulers by using a non-Chinese name. Problematizing the very idea of China, the same scholar has even proposed to “jettison the term ‘China’ altogether.” But, while there was indisputably much ethnic and cultural diversity in geographic China during these centuries, and fertile interaction, there remained powerful elements of mainstream continuity stretching from antiquity through the “reunified” Tang dynasty (618–907) and beyond. These continuities included historical memory, institutions, written language, and elite culture, for which China and Chinese may still be as good English designations as any.
期刊介绍:
Founded in 1938, The Historian has one of the largest circulations of any scholarly journal in the US or Britain with over 13,000 paid subscribers, both individual and institutional. The Historian seeks to publish only the finest of contemporary and relevant historical scholarship. It is the commitment of The Historian to serve as an integrator for the historical profession, bringing together the many strands of historical analysis through the publication of a diverse collection of articles.