本文選題：中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng) + “乘勝即收”��； 參考：《南京大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：公元1883年12月至1885年4月,中法之間因?yàn)樵侥蠁栴}爆發(fā)戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng),戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)分為兩大階段,第一階段在越南北部境內(nèi),第二階段進(jìn)入到中國(guó)云南地區(qū),甚至擴(kuò)大到了中國(guó)東南沿海地區(qū)。對(duì)于中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的結(jié)局,史學(xué)界傳統(tǒng)認(rèn)為“中國(guó)不敗而敗,法國(guó)不勝而勝”,而在本文中,筆者通過五個(gè)部分的描述,闡述的觀點(diǎn)是“乘勝即收”是清政府無奈,但也是相對(duì)而言最優(yōu)的政策。 文章的第一部分為前言部分,其中分為三段內(nèi)容,第一段回顧和總結(jié)了過去120年來各位學(xué)者對(duì)于中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)“乘勝即收”這一結(jié)局的主要看法,列舉了認(rèn)為中國(guó)是不敗而敗的觀點(diǎn),以及認(rèn)為中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)“乘勝即收”是比較明智的一些學(xué)者的主要觀點(diǎn)和分析思路；第二段羅列了本文寫作過程中的參考書目,以及研究的思路,主要通過國(guó)際關(guān)系的視角來進(jìn)行研究；第三段,陳述了本文研究的創(chuàng)新之處,用了和傳統(tǒng)史學(xué)界不同的視角,以及對(duì)于進(jìn)一步詳述了對(duì)中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)結(jié)果的不同評(píng)價(jià)。文章的第二部分,簡(jiǎn)要地比較了中國(guó)和法國(guó)兩個(gè)國(guó)家,闡述了當(dāng)時(shí)中國(guó)和法國(guó)在經(jīng)濟(jì)狀況和軍事實(shí)力上的差距,兩國(guó)的戰(zhàn)場(chǎng)形勢(shì),以及當(dāng)時(shí)的政治處境。第三部分闡述了中法兩國(guó)所面臨的不同的國(guó)際局勢(shì),法國(guó)處于歐洲大陸上,面對(duì)著英、德等歐洲國(guó)家,以及新興的美國(guó)、日本等的支持,而中國(guó)則面臨著東亞封貢體系的瓦解,以及自身周邊邊境危機(jī)四伏的不安定狀態(tài),中國(guó)相對(duì)來講,處在比法國(guó)更為復(fù)雜的國(guó)際局勢(shì)之中。第四部分,考查中國(guó)內(nèi)部統(tǒng)治者政策的出發(fā)點(diǎn),當(dāng)時(shí)在清廷內(nèi)部分為主戰(zhàn)和主和兩派,而每一派中又由不同的派別構(gòu)成,每一個(gè)派別出于各自的目的,對(duì)中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)提出了不同的政策,有主張積極應(yīng)戰(zhàn),不應(yīng)該“乘勝即收”的,有主張“以戰(zhàn)求和”的,他們各自建議的提出都是由不同理由所支持的。通過比較清廷內(nèi)部官員的政策選擇,就更能清楚地看到作為統(tǒng)治階層中的掌權(quán)者,以李鴻章為首,他們不止了解國(guó)內(nèi)的情勢(shì),更了解國(guó)際局勢(shì)的變化,所以提出的政策相對(duì)更為合理和客觀。他們了解到中國(guó)并沒有長(zhǎng)期戰(zhàn)斗下去的實(shí)力,所以“乘勝即收”可以說是一個(gè)無奈,但是相對(duì)而言最好的結(jié)果。在本文的第五部分,在國(guó)際關(guān)系理論中,最能確切解釋中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)“乘勝即收”的外交策略的一點(diǎn)是“弱國(guó)無外交”,在一個(gè)國(guó)家實(shí)力不足的情況下,是不可能談平等外交的。筆者要表達(dá)的觀點(diǎn)是,“乘勝即收”是清政府在當(dāng)時(shí)相對(duì)而言最合情合理,也最符合本國(guó)利益的一個(gè)政策選擇,他雖是無奈的,但是也是最優(yōu)的。
[Abstract]:From December 1883 to April 1885, the war broke out between China and France because of the Vietnam problem. The war was divided into two stages. The first stage was in the northern part of Vietnam, the second stage entered the Yunnan region of China, and even to the southeast coastal areas of China. In this article, the author, through the description of five parts, expounds that "victory or harvest" is the policy that the Qing government is helpless, but also the relatively optimal policy.
The first part of the article is the preface, which is divided into three paragraphs. The first paragraph reviews and summarizes the main views of the scholars in the past 120 years on the "victory or receipt" of the Sino French war, and enumerates the views that China is an undefeated and defeated view, and that the war between China and France is a relatively wise scholar. The second paragraph lists the bibliographies and research ideas in the process of writing, mainly through the perspective of international relations; the third paragraph describes the innovation of this study, uses the different perspectives from the traditional historiography, and further details the results of the Sino French war. The second part of the article briefly compares the two countries of China and France, and expounds the gap between China and France on the economic and military strength, the battlefield situation of the two countries, and the political situation at that time. The third part expounds the different international situation facing China and France, France is in the continent of Europe. In the face of the support of the European countries such as Britain, Germany, and the emerging United States and Japan, China is faced with the collapse of the tribute system in East Asia, as well as the perilous state of instability around its borders. China is relatively in a more complex international situation than France. The fourth part examines the policy of the Chinese rulers. The starting point was divided into the main war and the main and the two schools within the Qing court, and each faction was made up of different factions. Each faction proposed different policies for the Sino French war for its own purpose. By comparing the policy choices of the internal officials of the Qing government, we can see more clearly as the ruler of the ruling class, with Li Hongzhang as the leader, who not only understand the situation at home, but also understand the changes in the international situation, so the policy is more reasonable and objective. They know that China has not long been a long term. In the fifth part of this article, in the theory of international relations, one of the most accurate explanations of the diplomatic strategy of "victory or receipt" in the Sino French war is "the weak country without foreign exchange", and in the case of a country's weak strength. It is possible to talk about equal diplomacy. The author's point of view is that "winning or receiving" is a policy choice that the Qing government is most reasonable at the time and is most in line with its own interests. Although he is helpless, he is also the best.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：南京大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：K256.2

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 楊全順;李鴻章和局思想與中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)中國(guó)不敗而敗[J];湖北社會(huì)科學(xué);2004年01期

2 黃琦;如何看待中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的結(jié)局？[J];廣西師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1994年01期

3 關(guān)威;中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)乘勝即收問題論析[J];暨南學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2002年06期

4 關(guān)威;;中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)中的曾紀(jì)澤是什么派[J];歷史教學(xué);1989年02期

5 關(guān)威;鎮(zhèn)南關(guān)大捷后法國(guó)對(duì)華政策試析[J];欽州師范高等專科學(xué)校學(xué)報(bào);2002年02期

6 何平立;論中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)與清廷議和[J];上海大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1988年02期

7 張梅;中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)中清政府“乘勝而收”原因新探[J];學(xué)術(shù)界;1990年04期

8 關(guān)威;;中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)后期清政府“乘勝即收”原因析[J];山西大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(哲學(xué)社會(huì)科學(xué)版);1988年01期

9 王留喜;中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)期間法國(guó)的困境與結(jié)果[J];天中學(xué)刊;2003年03期

10 邵自玲;;也談中法戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的結(jié)局[J];烏魯木齊職業(yè)大學(xué)學(xué)報(bào)(人文社會(huì)科學(xué)版);2006年01期

，

本文編號(hào)：2079144