:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:三國時代的山越與六朝的族群現象
書刊名:臺灣師大歷史學報
作者:呂春盛 引用關係
作者(外文):Leu, Chuen-shang
出版日期:2005
卷期:33
頁次:頁1-26
主題關鍵詞:山越族群關係三國時代六朝孫吳政權San YueEthnic relationshipThe Three Kingdoms PeriodSan KuoThe Six DynastiesLiu ChaoThe Sun Wu Sovereignty
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(8) 博士論文(1) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:5
  • 共同引用共同引用:14
  • 點閱點閱:38
山越是三國時代孫吳立國於江南所面臨的最大內患,然而在孫吳政權幾十年的征討與統治之後,卻驟然消失。近代學者對山越族屬之爭議,依其對山越集團之界定寬鬆,可分為廣義與狹義的兩種山越論。前者認為,山越雖有部分是古越人之後裔或江南土著,但其中大部分卻是亂世之中開闢山區或逃往山區規避賦稅搖役的漢族人民。後者認為,只有古越人後裔才是山越。然而,史籍所見的山越,常被描述為蠻夷之類的化外之民,整體上是被當時的人視為是「非我族類」的異族。 三國時代的山越,幾乎遍及孫吳全境,如此廣大地域的居民,當然不可能是成員彼此認同的特定族群。商周時期已有越族,但要到春秋晚期越之名始大顯於世,戰國晚期越似已成為東南沿海各族的泛稱,並出現「百越」一詞,戰國末到西漢初,東南各地又出現許多與越有關之國名或族名,越之概念逐漸擴大為泛指江南廣大地域之異族。東漢末年出現「山越」一詞,而三國時代反抗孫吳統治的山區各族群,遂都被統稱為山越。 以往學者對山越的消失,都認為是融合於漢族之中。然而,筆者認為山越不可能全部被漢化,山越的消失只是「山越」一詞用法之消失,原山越之各種族裔在兩晉以後轉化以各種不同的族稱呈現,這種族群轉化的現象,乃是與大量漢人南下對各地加深開發,產生新的族群認識有密切的關係。
San Yue was the largest domestic trouble that Sun Wu, in the Three Kingdoms period (San Kuo), had to be confronted with as they set up their country in the southern part of the Yangtze River (Jiang Nan). Nevertheless, San Yue, after years of being conquered and ruled by the Sun Wu sovereignty, disappeared all of a sudden. Scholars in modern times, with different perspectives, disputed with each other warmly over San Yue's ethnic characteristic. In accordance with the unlimited definition of San Yue, it could be defined in the broad and the narrow sense respectively. The former regarded some parts of San Yue as the descendants of the ancient Yue people or the Jiang Nan aboriginals, while a majority of them were the Han people opening up the mountain wastelands or fled to the mountains to escape themselves from income tax paying or military service doing during the period of disorder. On the other hand, the latter thought that the descendants of the ancient Yue people were real San Yue. However, San Yue, in the historical classics, was often referred to as the uneducated barbarians like Man and Yi. To sum up, people at that time considered San Yue ”alienated”, not belonging to them. San Yue, in the Three Kingdoms, was nearly situated in the territory of Sun Wu. Hence, it was absolutely impossible for the residents located in so broad a territory to identify with each other as a specific ethnic group. Yue, existing in the era of Shang Zhou and in the late Chuen Qiu, was well-known to the public then. What’s more, in the late Warring States (Zhan Kuo), it seemed that Yue had been a general term for most ethnic groups along the southeastern coastland. Also, the term of ”Bai Yue” appeared during that time. Moreover, from the late Zhan Kuo to the early West Han, in the southeastern area, a good many names of states and ethnic groups concerning Yue came into sight. Thus, the general idea of Yue gradually was developed into an alien group residing in the broad territory of Jiang Nan. The term, San Yue, appeared first in the late East Han. During the epoch of San Kuo, all of the races amid mountains, opposing to the Sun Wu sovereignty, were generally termed San Yue. Scholars in the past thought San Yue's integration into Han's society led to its disappearance. Rather, the author finds San Yue's joining in Han's society as a whole impossible. In a way, the term of San Yue was out of use, accordingly, resulting in the disappearance of the race. That is, various kinds of San Yue ethnic groups, after the times of Liang Jin, underwent a complete transformation, with miscellaneous ethnic designations. Such ethnic transformation phenomenon, surely, had close relationship with most Han people's deepening development in Jiang Nan after their moving southward, bringing about a new ethnic recognition as well.
期刊論文
1.呂錫生(1984)。山越在東吳立國中的作用。浙江師範學院學報(社會科學版),1984(3),63-68。  延伸查詢new window
2.關尾史郎(1993)。曹魏政權與山越。文史哲,1993(3),30-33。  延伸查詢new window
3.劉芝祥(1924)。山越考。史地學報,3(4),53-54。  延伸查詢new window
4.江應梁(1980)。說濮。思想戰線,1980(1),60-67。  延伸查詢new window
5.吳永章(1982)。山越非濮后裔辨。中南民族學院學報,1982(2)。  延伸查詢new window
6.施光明(1984)。山越非山民、宗部解。民族研究,1984(1),66-69。  延伸查詢new window
7.袁剛(1987)。孫吳鄱陽郡宗民暴動及其性質。文史哲,1987(4),54-58。  延伸查詢new window
8.葉國慶(1934)。三國時代山越分布之區域。禹貢,2(8),291-296。  延伸查詢new window
9.高亞偉(19531031)。孫吳開闢蠻越考。大陸雜誌,7(8),12-18。  延伸查詢new window
10.陳國強(1985)。百越民族史的研究。民族研究動態,1985(4),1-15。  延伸查詢new window
11.龔蔭(1984)。關於百越地區與民族問題。昆明師院學報,1984(1),21-24。  延伸查詢new window
12.萬斗雲(1990)。百越的涵義。貴州民族研究,1990(1),74-80。  延伸查詢new window
13.侯哲安(1994)。從歷史上看百越的涵義及其演變。貴州民族研究,1994(1),23-29。  延伸查詢new window
14.黃增慶(1986)。如何理解百越共同文化習俗。中南民族學院學報,1986(S1),137-146。  延伸查詢new window
15.楊國宜(1960)。東吳平定皖南山越戰爭的性質及其歷史作用。安徽史學,1960(2),24-34。  延伸查詢new window
16.施光明(1986)。論皖南山越。安徽史學,1986(4),8-9。  延伸查詢new window
17.周兆望(1992)。孫吳時期江西境內的山越及其對經濟開發的貢獻。爭鳴,1992(3),58-63。  延伸查詢new window
18.何光岳(1994)。山越的分布與消融。吉安師專學報,1994(5),70-71。  延伸查詢new window
19.安般(1999)。山越盛衰淺析。中央民族大學學報,1999(4),38-40。  延伸查詢new window
20.童疑。夷蠻戎狄與東西南北。禹貢半月刊,7(10)。  延伸查詢new window
21.徐仁瑤(1987)。''蠻'' 、''越''關係淺談。吉首大學學報,1987(4),25-29。  延伸查詢new window
22.張澤洪(1988)。魏晉南朝蠻、僚、俚族的北徙。四川大學學報,1988(4),92。  延伸查詢new window
23.谷口房南(2004)。南朝の左郡左縣について--六朝時代における民族認識の在リ方を求めて。東洋大學文學部紀要,57(29),1-28。  延伸查詢new window
24.川本芳昭(1986)。六朝における蠻の理解についての一考察--山越•蠻漢融合の問題を中心として見。史學雜誌,95(8),37-38。  延伸查詢new window
25.桑秀雲(19840900)。宗與山越族屬的探討:氐人的研究之三。中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊,55(3),543-565。new window  延伸查詢new window
26.高亞偉(19531015)。孫吳開闢蠻越考。大陸雜誌,7(7),13-18。  延伸查詢new window
27.王克旺(1988)。試論百越文化的差異性。東南文化,1988(2),114-118。  延伸查詢new window
28.陳寅恪(19440900)。魏書司馬叡傳江東民族條釋證及推論。中央研究院歷史語言研究所集刊,11,1-25。new window  延伸查詢new window
圖書
1.惠棟。後漢書補注。上海:上海商務印書舘。  延伸查詢new window
2.王國維。古本竹書紀年輯校。  延伸查詢new window
3.百越民族史研究會(1985)。百越民族史論叢。南寧:廣西人民出版社。  延伸查詢new window
4.朱俊明(1987)。百越史研究。貴陽:貴州人民出版社。  延伸查詢new window
5.彭適凡(1990)。百越民族研究。南昌:江西教育出版社。  延伸查詢new window
6.何焯(1992)。義門讀書記。上海:上海古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
7.林惠祥(1993)。中國民族史。北京:商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
8.羅香林(1943)。中夏系統中之百越。重慶:獨立出版社。  延伸查詢new window
9.蔣炳釗、吳綿吉、辛士成(1988)。百越民族文化。上海:學林出版社。  延伸查詢new window
10.何光岳(1989)。百越源流史。南昌:江西教育出版社。  延伸查詢new window
11.羅香林(1955)。百越源流與文化。台北:中華叢書委員會。  延伸查詢new window
12.中國社會科學究所(1982)。百越民族史論集。中國社會科學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
13.黃學光(1995)。中國的民族識別。北京:民族出版社。  延伸查詢new window
圖書論文
1.呂春盛(2001)。陳朝內部的弱點及其滅亡。陳朝的政治結構與族群問題。台北:稻鄉出版社。  延伸查詢new window
2.川本芳昭(1998)。六朝における蠻の理解についての一考察--山越•蠻漢融合の問題を中心として見。魏晉南北朝時代の民族問題。東京:汲古書院。  延伸查詢new window
3.呂思勉(1982)。秦漢•山越。讀史札記。上海:上海古籍出版社。  延伸查詢new window
4.陳國強、蔣炳釗、吳綿吉、辛土成(1988)。山越。百越民族史。北京:中國社會科學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
5.王文光(1999)。山越的由來、分布與民族關係。中國南方民族史。北京:民族出版社。  延伸查詢new window
6.井上晃(1938)。三國時代の山越に就て。史觀。  延伸查詢new window
7.王鳴盛(1979)。山越條。十七史商榷。台北:鼎文書局。  延伸查詢new window
8.胡守為(1980)。山越與宗部。史學論文集。廣州:廣東人民出版社。  延伸查詢new window
9.宋蜀華(1991)。山越。百越。長春:吉林教育出版社。  延伸查詢new window
10.葉國慶、辛土城(1982)。關於山越若干歷史問題的探討。百越民族史論集。北京:中國社會科學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
11.吳書.陸遜傳。三國志。  延伸查詢new window
12.孝靈帝紀。後漢書。  延伸查詢new window
13.靈帝建靈二年九月。資治通鑑。  延伸查詢new window
14.吳書.孫輔傳。三國志。  延伸查詢new window
15.吳書.孫權傳。三國志。  延伸查詢new window
16.吳書.韓當傳。三國志。  延伸查詢new window
17.吳書.孫策傳。三國志。  延伸查詢new window
18.吳書.朱治傳。三國志。  延伸查詢new window
19.吳書.諸葛恪傳。三國志。  延伸查詢new window
20.諸夷傳.中天竺國。梁書。  延伸查詢new window
21.夷貊傳.中天竺國。南史。  延伸查詢new window
22.朱右曾(1968)。王會。逸周書集訓校釋。台北:台灣商務印書館。  延伸查詢new window
23.楚世家。史記。  延伸查詢new window
24.越王句踐世家。史記。  延伸查詢new window
25.蔣炳釗(2002)。「越為禹後說」質疑--兼論越族的來源。東南民族研究。廈門:廈門大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
26.王明珂(1997)。邊緣人群華夏化歷程:吳太伯故事。華夏邊緣--歷史記憶與族群認同。台北:允晨文化實業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
27.梁啟雄(1974)。儒效篇。荀子東釋。台北:河洛圖書出版社。  延伸查詢new window
28.呂不韋、陳奇猷(1985)。恃君。呂氏春秋校釋。台北:華正書局。  延伸查詢new window
29.蒙文通(1983)。越族古居''揚子江以南整個地區''辨。越史叢考。北京:人民出版社。  延伸查詢new window
30.高帝紀。漢書。  延伸查詢new window
31.地理志。漢書。  延伸查詢new window
32.秦維廉(1993)。古越族的人類學定義是否成立?。嶺南古越族文化論文集。香港:香港市政局。  延伸查詢new window
33.吳書.賀齊傳。三國志。  延伸查詢new window
34.吳書.張承傳。三國志。  延伸查詢new window
35.南蠻傳。隋書。  延伸查詢new window
36.馬戎(2004)。[民族社會學--社會學的族群關係研究]前言。民族社會學--社會學的族群關係研究。北京:北京大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
37.馬戎(2004)。關於''民族''和''族群''的定義。民族社會學--社會學的族群關係研究。北京:北京大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
38.王明珂(2001)。歷史文獻中的羌族。蠻子、漢人與羌族。台北:三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
39.馬戎(2004)。族群意識。民族社會學--社會學的族群關係研究。北京:北京大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
40.王明珂(1997)。華夏邊緣的漂移:誰是羌人。華夏邊緣:歷史記憶與族群認同。台北:允晨文化實業股份有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
41.何光岳(1988)。蠻人的來源和遷徙。南蠻源流史。南昌:江西教育出版社。  延伸查詢new window
42.唐彬傳。晉書。  延伸查詢new window
43.王導傳。晉書。  延伸查詢new window
44.王文光(1999)。三國兩晉南北朝動蕩時期的南方民族。中國南方民族史。北京:民族出版社。  延伸查詢new window
45.白鳥芳郎(1985)。華南.東南アジアにゆける權カ構造形成の基盤--種族集團の民族系譜。華南文化史研究。東京:六興出版社。  延伸查詢new window
46.唐長孺(1955)。孫吳建國及漢末江南的宗部與山越。魏晉南北朝史論叢。北京:三聯書店:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
47.陳可畏(1964)。東越、山越的來源和發展。歷史論叢。北京:中華書局。  延伸查詢new window
48.蔣炳釗(2002)。濮和越是我國古代南方兩個不同的民族。東南民族研究。廈門:廈門大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
49.僭晉司馬叡傳。魏書。  延伸查詢new window
50.陳寅恪(1979)。魏書司馬叡傳江東民族條釋證及推論。陳寅恪先生全集。臺北:里仁書局。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
QR Code
QRCODE