{"title":"The frontier crisis and the construction of modern Chinese geography in Republican China (1911–1949)","authors":"Zhihong Chen","doi":"10.1080/10225706.2016.1252274","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"ABSTRACT The article probes into the connection between territorial nationalism and the disciplinary formation of modern geography in early twentieth-century China. It explores how a group of Republican Chinese geographers, such as Zhu Kezhen 竺可楨 (1890–1974), Hu Huanyong 胡煥庸 (1901–1998), and Zhang Qiyun張其昀 (1900–1985), reexamined Chinese traditional dynastic geography (yange dili) and defined the nature and methodology of what they called the “new geography” under the context of foreign imperialism, Chinese nationalism, and escalating frontier crisis. It argues that Chinese intellectuals’ efforts to overcome the frontier crisis led to a significant shift of major methodology in geography from textual research to actual fieldwork or on-site investigation. The adoption of this new methodology distinguished the “new geography” from the old dynastic geography. Geographers also grappled with multiple concepts and diverse traditions in physical geography, human geography and regional geography. Environmental determinism was adopted but quickly replaced by possibilist approaches. There were also attempts at reforming the traditional Chinese gazetteers using modern geographic ideas. Geographical research was imbued with political concerns. Cooperation between geographers and the state also led to the establishment of important geographical departments and study societies, providing institutional foundation for the maturation of modern Chinese geography as a discipline independent of either history or geology.","PeriodicalId":44260,"journal":{"name":"Asian Geographer","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2016-07-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1080/10225706.2016.1252274","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Asian Geographer","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10225706.2016.1252274","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GEOGRAPHY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5
Abstract
ABSTRACT The article probes into the connection between territorial nationalism and the disciplinary formation of modern geography in early twentieth-century China. It explores how a group of Republican Chinese geographers, such as Zhu Kezhen 竺可楨 (1890–1974), Hu Huanyong 胡煥庸 (1901–1998), and Zhang Qiyun張其昀 (1900–1985), reexamined Chinese traditional dynastic geography (yange dili) and defined the nature and methodology of what they called the “new geography” under the context of foreign imperialism, Chinese nationalism, and escalating frontier crisis. It argues that Chinese intellectuals’ efforts to overcome the frontier crisis led to a significant shift of major methodology in geography from textual research to actual fieldwork or on-site investigation. The adoption of this new methodology distinguished the “new geography” from the old dynastic geography. Geographers also grappled with multiple concepts and diverse traditions in physical geography, human geography and regional geography. Environmental determinism was adopted but quickly replaced by possibilist approaches. There were also attempts at reforming the traditional Chinese gazetteers using modern geographic ideas. Geographical research was imbued with political concerns. Cooperation between geographers and the state also led to the establishment of important geographical departments and study societies, providing institutional foundation for the maturation of modern Chinese geography as a discipline independent of either history or geology.
期刊介绍:
Asian Geographer disseminates knowledge about geographical problems and issues focusing on Asia and the Pacific Rim. Papers dealing with other regions should have a linkage to Asia and the Pacific Rim. Original and timely articles dealing with any field of physical or human geographical inquiries and methodologies will be considered for publication. We welcome, for example, submissions on people-environment interactions, urban and regional development, transport and large infrastructure, migration, natural disasters and their management, environment and energy issues. While the focus of the journal is placed on original research articles, review papers as well as viewpoints and research notes under the category of “Asian Geography in Brief” are also considered. Review papers should critically and constructively analyse the current state of understanding on geographical and planning topics in Asia. The ‘Asian Geography in Brief’ section welcomes submissions of applied geographical and planning research about Asia. The section aims to showcase (1) the diverse geography and planning of Asia; and (2) the diverse geographical and planning research about Asia. The journal will also publish special issues on particular themes or areas. Book reviews can be included from time to time.