:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:遼、宋、北漢對「雄州和議」之認知
書刊名:東吳歷史學報
作者:朱奕嵐
作者(外文):Chu, Yi-lan
出版日期:2011
卷期:26
頁次:頁1-46
主題關鍵詞:雄州和議認知緩衝體系北漢Peace Accord of XiongzhouPerceptionBuffer systemNorthern HanLiaoSong
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:348
  • 點閱點閱:297
代表宋遼初次和解合意之「雄州和議」,即便存續時間短暫,確實使得宋遼關係正式對等正常化,對於解決五代以來遼與中原政權之間的衝突而言,有其重要性。然而,「雄州和議」終究未能化解遼、宋與北漢間之矛盾而弭兵止戰。三方在「雄州和議」成立之後仍衝突不斷,以至於北漢在979年降宋,宋遼旋即進入全面戰爭狀態。以體系觀點切入,本文認為遼、宋與北漢在「和議之範圍」、「體系之現狀」以及「對他行動者之行為預期」之認知上,彼此具備矛盾性與衝突性,進而產生認知上之不協調。遼明顯偏好現狀穩定,認為「雄州和議」應包括北漢,宋不應該再攻北漢,而北漢不得挑釁;北漢雖然亦偏好現狀,但認為「雄州和議」未包含宋與北漢之關係,而宋將繼續來襲;宋雖然似乎願意與遼建立和平,但不偏好北漢存在之現狀,且以擊滅北漢為國家統一之重要目標。此等認知上之不協調,使三方行動者,特別是體系主導強權的遼與宋,未能利用雙方和議之契機,共同穩定三邊緩衝關係之現狀與體系內行動者間之和平。
The Peace Accord of Xiongzhou of AD975, which represented the first reconciliation between Song Dynasty and Liao Dynasty, did normalize the relationship between Song and Liao for a very short period of time. The Peace Accord, therefore, was significant in reconciling the persisting conflicts during the period of Five Dynasties (AD907-979) between Liao and regimes of the Central Plain of China. However, the Peace Accord of Xiongzhou eventually did not resolve the armed conflicts between Liao and the Kingdom of Northern Han, on the one hand, and Song on the other. The prolong war between Song and Northern Han did not cease and Northern Han at last surrendered to Song in AD979; Song and Liao immediately went into a full-scale war against each other for years.From the viewpoint of systemic analysis, this article argues that discrepancies and conflicts of the perceptions existed as to the geographic scope of the Peace Accord of Xiongzhou, the status quo, and the expectations about other actors' actions. Liao obviously preferred the status quo with Song, expected Northern Han as a stable buffer state. Liao further held that the Peace Accord should include Northern Han, and both Song and Han should not attack each other from then on. Northern Han also preferred the status quo in which Northern Han could exist with the support from Liao. But Northern Han did not take part in the Peace Accord governing or resolving the relationship between Song and herself. Northern Han believed that Song would keep waging war for Northern Han's annihilation. Although willing to have peace with Liao in AD974, Song did not prefer the buffer system in which Northern Han's existence could be assured. For Song, conquering Northern Han was one of the major objectives for the national unity. These inconsistencies of perceptions made the actors within the system, especially Liao and Song as the system dominants, unable or unwilling to take the opportunity brought by the Peace Accord of Xiongzhou to stabilize the status quo jointly and to make peace between them.
期刊論文
1.Leung, Wai-Kei(2000)。近五十年來「宋初統一戰略」問題的研究回顧。新亞書院歷史學系系刊,10。  延伸查詢new window
2.Chu, Yi-Lan(2005)。緩衝體系之政治作用。國防政策評論,5(2),114-132。  延伸查詢new window
3.Leung, Wai-Kei(1999)。先南征、後北伐:宋初統一全國的唯一戰略(960-976)?。中國文化研究所學報,新8,73-102。  延伸查詢new window
4.Cao, Xianzhen(2006)。遼宋首次交聘之背景分析。北方文物,1=85,76-80。  延伸查詢new window
5.Liao, Long Sheng(1982)。宋太宗的聯夷攻遼外交及其二次北伐。師範大學歷史學報,10,83-101。  延伸查詢new window
6.Jiang, Fu-Cong(1964)。澶淵之盟的研究。宋史研究集,2,157-198。  延伸查詢new window
7.Osborne, John(1950)。MacArthur and Asia—his plane: contain the Reds in the East, then be free to face Russia elsewhere。Life Magazine,125-141。  new window
8.Michael-Greenfield Partem(1983)。The Buffer System in International Relations。The Journal of Conflict Resolution,27,3-26。  new window
9.Spykman, Nicholas J.、Rollins, Abbie A.(1939)。Geographic Objectives in Foreign Policy, I。The American Political Science Review,33(3),391-410。  new window
10.Anonymous(1955)。Buffer States: their historic service to peace。The Round Table,45(180),334-345。  new window
會議論文
1.Tao, Jing-Sheng(1988)。雄州與宋遼關係。台北。1,169-184。  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.陶晉生(1983)。宋遼關係史研究。臺北:聯經出版事業公司。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.Liddell-Hart, B. H.(1972)。History of the First World War。London:Cassell and Co。  new window
3.Albercht-Carrié, Rene(1958)。A Diplomatic History of Europe Since the Congress of Vienna。New York:Haper and Row。  new window
4.薛居正(1988)。舊五代史。臺北:臺灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
5.Jervis, Robert(1978)。Perception and Misperception in International Politics。Princeton, NJ:Princeton University Press。  new window
6.曾瑞龍(2003)。經略幽燕:宋遼戰爭軍事災難的戰略分析。香港:中文大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
7.楊寬(1997)。戰國史。上海:上海出版社。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.司馬光、胡三省(1995)。資治通鑑。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
9.Schroeder, Paul W.(1994)。The Transformation of European Politics, 1763-1848。Oxford University Press。  new window
10.班固、顏師古(1987)。漢書。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
11.李攸(1967)。宋朝事實。臺北市:文海出版社。  延伸查詢new window
12.李燾、上海師範大學古籍整理研究所、華東師範大學古籍整理研究所(2004)。續資治通鑑長編。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
13.邵伯溫、李劍雄、劉德權(1997)。邵氏聞見錄。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
14.Wang, Cheng(1980)。東都事略。台北。  延伸查詢new window
15.Wu, Ren-Chen(2010)。十國春秋。北京。  延伸查詢new window
16.Tuo, Tuo(1988)。遼史。台北。  延伸查詢new window
17.Peng, Bai Chuan(1966)。太平治跡統類。台北。  延伸查詢new window
18.Yang, Yi(1993)。楊文公談苑。上海。  延伸查詢new window
19.魏泰(1997)。東軒筆錄。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
20.Jiang, Tian-Wei(1991)。兩漢與匈奴關係。西安。  延伸查詢new window
21.Ren, Bing-Xiang(1998)。Gaius Julius Caesar。台北。  new window
22.Jiang, Wu-Xiong(1998)。遼與五代政權移轉始末。台北。  延伸查詢new window
23.Mathisen, Trygave(1971)。The Functions of Small States in the Strategies of the Great Powers。Oslo。  new window
24.Spykman, Nicholas John、Nichol, Helen R.(1944)。1944The Geography of the Peace。New York。  new window
25.Fazal, Tanisha M.(2007)。State Death: the Politics and Geography of Conquest, Occupation, and Annexation。Princeton, New Jersey:Princeton University Press。  new window
26.Fox, William T. R.(1944)。The Super-Powers: The United States, Britain, and the Soviet Union-Their Responsibility for Peace。New York。  new window
27.Goetz, Walter(1920)。Briefe Wilhelms II an den Zaren, 1894-1914。Berlin。  new window
28.Ross, Tomas E.(1986)。Buffer State: A Geographer’s Perspective。Buffer States in World Politics。Colo.。  new window
29.Dunn, Frederick S.(1944)。A Introductory Statement。The Geography of the Peace。New York。  new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE