A handful of American scholars have claimed that their research of the history of the Qing dynasty (1616–1911) of China is different from previous studies, hence the term "New Qing History." These scholars attempted to articulate Qing history in terms of the theory of conquering dynasties. Still, their approach has been widely questioned and unanimously rejected by the Chinese academic community.

The reason is simple but clear. The research of these American scholars not only did not conform to the true history of the Qing dynasty but also failed to objectively interpret the history of the formation and development of China (Zhongguo in Chinese pinyin) as a multi-ethnic country.

"Manchuria" and "China" are not opposite to each other

The opposition between "Manchuria" and "China" is the basis for a series of views in the New Qing History, yet this basis does not actually exist. The term "China" carries rich meanings and can refer to a concept of a group of people, yet the group it signifies is not a static construct. In some specific cases, "China" refers to a certain group spread out in the agricultural region of the central plains and has been constantly integrating other ethnic groups, moving in and out of this region throughout its history.

In the pre-Qin classic The Records of Rites, the people living in the Western Zhou (1046–771 BC) capital were referred to as "Zhongguo (Central State)" among the "People from all regions (central, as well as the northern, southern, eastern, western marginal areas)."

During the Qin (221–207 BC) and Han (206 BC–AD 220) dynasties, the Qin and Han people derived from Zhongguo were formed by the coalescence of people in the central plains of previous dynasties, namely, the Xia people in Xia (c. 2070–1600 BC), the Shang people in Shang (1600–1046 BC), and the Zhou people in both Western Zhou and Eastern Zhou (770–256 BC). During the Three Kingdoms period (220–280), the "Chinese people" split into the Wei people, the Shu people and the Wu people of the three kingdoms.

The short-lived unification during the Western Jin dynasty (265–317) gave rise to the Jin people. However, the migration of the Jin people to the south and the settlement of the five northern nomadic tribes in the central plains completely changed its demographic landscape. It is recorded in history books that "of the one million people in Guanzhong (a historical region of China within Shaanxi province) area, half are northern nomads."

During the Sui (581–618) and Tang (618–907) dynasties, the "Zhongguo people" and "the people of the northern, southern, eastern, western marginal areas" together constituted "Tianxia" (all under heaven). At the same time, there were different names of Zhongguo people, such as the "Tang people," "Hua people" and the "Zhonghua people."

During the period of the Five Dynasties (907–960), the period of co-existence of the Song dynasty (960–1279) and local regimes such as Liao, Xia and Jin, the word "Zhongguo" was more often used to indicate the legitimacy of ruling that these dynasties fought for. The people in the Song, Liao, and Jin were generally named after individual dynasties.

After the Qing Dynasty (1616–1911) realized the unification, a common name for the people under its ruling system was "Chinese." Of course, for different groups of people, there were also different names, such as "Manchurian," "Mongol," "Han" and so on.

In the Treaty of Nerchinsk signed between the Qing government and Tsarist Russia in 1689, "China" was already a synonym for the multi-ethnic country of the Qing Dynasty. For example: "With the Argun River, which flows into the Heilongjiang River, as the boundary, the south bank belongs to China, and the north bank belongs to Russia." At the same time, compared with "Westerners," "Chinese" gradually became a collective term for all groups in the Qing Dynasty, as reflected in historical documents. For example: "When sailing on the ocean, Chinese people mostly calculated the distance by night watches, while Westerners by longitude."

To summarize, even if "China" is used as a geographical concept, the people living in this region were not fixed. With different dynasties rolling on, the migration and aggregation of different groups of people created different demographic landscapes, which led to different names for the people in different periods.

Despite the different terms, "Chinese" is the common term. Therefore, the terms "China" and "Manchuria" used to refer to groups of people are not opposite to each other, but are, more often than not, an inclusive relationship in which Manchuria is an integral part of China. This is also why the Qing emperors regarded themselves as "Chinese" emperors.

Qing rulers as competitors and successors to legitimate rulers

The purpose of discussing the relationship between the concepts of "Manchuria" and "China" is to illustrate the ongoing struggle for "orthodoxy" or "legitimacy" throughout Chinese history.

Although the people in the region of "China" were changing, the "Chinese" identity has been one of the most important pre-conditions for the dynasties in Chinese history to compete for orthodoxy or legitimacy. Whether Manchuria was qualified to be "orthodox" has also sparked a lot of heated discussions.

The earliest known occurrence of the word "Zhongguo" is in the inscription "Zhai Zi Zhongguo"(宅兹中国, meaning "Here in China I dwell") on He Zun (何尊), the ritual wine vessel made of bronze in Western Zhou dynasty. The vessel was discovered in 1963. Throughout history, scholars have different interpretations of the meaning of "Zhongguo." However, it is unanimously recognized that "Zhongguo" had the political meaning of "capital" and "central state," an implicit reference to the political order of "great unity" in the Western Zhou dynasty with the Zhou ruler as its core.

The Northern Wei dynasty (386–534), founded by the Tuoba Xianbei, the Liao dynasty (907–1125), founded by the Khitan, and the Jurchen Jin dynasty (1115–1234), all achieved partial unification of the northern part of China. It was not until the Yuan dynasty (1206–1368), founded by the Mongols that the "great unity" of China was realized, and the history of the Yuan dynasty, compiled by the following dynasty, was called the "official history," indicating its acceptance as a legitimate dynasty.

Although the Qing rulers of "Manchurian" origin realized the "great unity," their "orthodox" status and legitimacy of ruling were denied by the contemporary Confucians. Emperor Yongzheng (reign 1723–1735) thereby wrote Da Yi Jue Mi Lu (On the Legitimacy of the Qing Dynasty) trying to identify "Manchuria" merely as their "birthplace". He argued for orthodoxy and legitimacy by borrowing phrases from famous people in Chinese history: "those who are virtuous can be the king of the world," "to follow the mandate of heaven," and so on.

More importantly, Emperor Yongzheng recognized that "great unity" requires "the unity of China in the central plains and marginal people." He stated that "the expansion of China's territory is a blessing for all people of the country, so how can we differentiate between Chinese and marginals!"

This fully demonstrates that the rulers of the Qing dynasty, represented by Emperor Yongzheng, did not position themselves outside of the political system of "great unity." In other words, they never considered their dynasty as a "conquering dynasty," but as a legitimate competitor and successor to the "orthodox" political system.

Focusing on "Tianxia" rather than "China"

There have been many dynasties and local regimes in China. Still, before the Qing dynasty and the Republic of China (1912–1949), there was no period during which "China" was used as a dynasty name or its abbreviation. An important reason for this is that, although "China" represents the political system of "great unity," "Tianxia (all under heaven)" is the concept that refers to the implementation of this political system. It is precisely for this reason that the multi-ethnic state of China is often referred to as the "state under heaven" in ancient Chinese texts.

Therefore, "Tianxia" rather than "China" provides an appropriate perspective to understand the history of the formation and development of this multi-ethnic state.

The term "Tianxia" appeared very early. Its scope of reference continued to expand outward as people's knowledge of the world increased. However, the expansion was not unlimited. Its connotations can be divided into the ideal and the real.

The phrase "Tianxia" can be found in the Book of Songs: "All land under the sky rolls as the king's domain; all people near and nigh subject to the king's reign." On the other hand, the real Tianxia can often be found in the history books: "amnesty for Tianxia." In reality, the scope of Tianxia generally refers to the territorial boundaries of the dynasty.

Although there were different criteria for dividing the population under heaven from the pre-Qin period to the later dynasties, there was a unanimous understanding that all of them shared a common Tianxia. This is why different groups of people and regimes agreed on the political system of "great unity." This is why concepts like "Huaxia and the barbarians as one family" frequently appear in ancient texts, reflecting a shared acknowledgment of the "great unity" political system. This recognition contributed to the evolution of China's multi-ethnic state from a "Tianxia state" (a state under heaven) to a sovereign state during the Qing dynasty.

The shared Tianxia and the continuing quest for "great unity" resulted in the formation of the multi-ethnic state of China—the joint creation of many peoples, including those who have lived and prospered and disappeared on the land of China. The formation and development of China included not only the series of "orthodox" dynasties but also other peripheral regimes and tribes outside of those dynasties, such as Xiongnu, Xianbei, Gaogouli (Goguryeo), Uighur, Tubo, Western Xia, Nanzhao and so on.

Because China has a unique view of the world, of people, and political ideals centered on "great unity," it is difficult to accurately understand and interpret the history of China as a multi-ethnic country by focusing on the origin of a particular dynasty from a Western "nation-state" perspective. This is the deep-rooted reason for our disagreeing with certain academic viewpoints of the New Qing History experts.

The author is Li Dalong, Director of the Department of State and Borderland Theory, Institute of Chinese Borderland Studies, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, and editor-in-chief of China's Borderland History and Geography Studies.

Liu Xian /Editor    Liu Li /Translator

Yang Xinhua /Chief Editor    Liu Xian /Coordination Editor

Liu Li /Reviewer

Zhang Weiwei /Copyeditor    Tan Yujie /Image Editor

The views don't necessarily reflect those of DeepChina.