本文選題：胡漢關(guān)系 + 朝貢體系��； 參考：《復(fù)旦大學(xué)》2013年博士論文

【摘要】：自公元前3世紀(jì)末,西漢與匈奴,這兩個分別代表農(nóng)業(yè)與游牧文明的大帝國首次正面遭遇,到840年回紇帝國滅亡。胡、漢關(guān)系在這1000多年的發(fā)展過程中,經(jīng)歷了幾次重大的轉(zhuǎn)折。西漢與匈奴從和親走向戰(zhàn)爭,都試圖以武力將自己的意志強加于對方,在遭受巨大損失后,雙方萌發(fā)了探索彼此都能接受的和平方式的意識。公元前50年代匈奴的內(nèi)戰(zhàn)迫使呼韓邪單于臣服于漢朝,但也使?jié)h、匈雙方在實踐中學(xué)會了如何和平相處。呼韓邪留下的這筆政治遺產(chǎn)對后世的游牧人產(chǎn)生了重大影響,最初以對抗為基調(diào)的胡、漢關(guān)系在此后數(shù)世紀(jì)內(nèi)轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)橐院献鳛橹髁?同時也使草原上的游牧人長期陷于分裂的狀態(tài)。4世紀(jì)初“五胡之亂”爆發(fā),由塞外逐步南下的拓跋鮮卑建立的北魏最終統(tǒng)治了華北,平城時代的北魏諸帝具有皇帝與可汗兩種身份,抱有統(tǒng)治草原與漢地的野心,這促成了草原再次團結(jié)為統(tǒng)一政權(quán),開啟了新一輪的胡、漢對抗。而隨著北魏漢化漸深,其邊疆政策也逐漸趨同于漢式王朝。以六鎮(zhèn)之亂為契機,北魏與柔然形成了一種新的、彼此依存程度更深的合作關(guān)系,這可視作是唐與回紇在安史之亂中結(jié)成的共存互利關(guān)系的先聲。隨著北魏的分裂,一直以來以漢地王朝為主導(dǎo)的朝貢體系開始逆轉(zhuǎn),直到唐初擊滅東突厥汗國,胡、漢雙方對朝貢主導(dǎo)權(quán)的爭奪才告一段落。然而,唐朝對朝貢體系的主導(dǎo)權(quán)在與突厥第二汗國和回紇汗國的交往中逐漸變得有名無實。這是胡、漢雙方彼此調(diào)整、磨合與妥協(xié)的結(jié)果,使游牧帝國與漢地王朝最終都接受了朝貢體系作為處理彼此關(guān)系的基本模式,而朝貢體系也因此具有了更大的彈性和包容性。 本文第一章論述了公元前3世紀(jì)末農(nóng)、牧帝國首次遭遇后,如何從充滿敵意和不信任的沖突轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)樘剿鞅舜硕寄芙邮艿暮推椒绞降倪^程。第二章則討論了因匈奴內(nèi)戰(zhàn)而意外降臨的和平如何影響了此后數(shù)百年的胡、漢關(guān)系,使得雙方的沖突漸趨緩和,而合作成為雙方關(guān)系的主流。第三章主要討論了入主中原的游牧人與草原上的游牧人之間新一輪對抗的開始、緩和,并最終形成了一種新的、彼此依存程度更深的合作關(guān)系的過程。第四章論述了胡、漢雙方對朝貢體系主導(dǎo)權(quán)的爭奪,以及胡、漢雙方在調(diào)整、磨合、妥協(xié)下接受朝貢體系作為處理彼此關(guān)系的基本模式。在余論中,筆者指出自公元前3世紀(jì)以來,胡、漢之間的聯(lián)系日益密切,雙方對彼此的了解與影響逐漸加深。這使得雙方對彼此的態(tài)度和政策不斷發(fā)生變化。一方面漢地王朝的邊疆策略逐漸對級別越來越高的草原游牧政治體產(chǎn)生了效果,另一方面漢地王朝在與游牧國家的朝貢關(guān)系中需要作出越來越多的妥協(xié),而這也使得自北朝末年以來幾度出現(xiàn)反復(fù)、中斷乃至逆轉(zhuǎn)的胡、漢之間的朝貢關(guān)系至此也終于穩(wěn)定下來。
[Abstract]:Since the end of the third century BC, the Western Han Dynasty and the Xiongnu, the two great empires representing agriculture and nomadic civilization, first encountered each other, until the end of the Huihe Empire in 840. The relationship between Hu and Han has experienced several important turning points in the course of 1000 years of development. The Western Han Dynasty and the Xiongnu both tried to impose their will on each other by force from their kinship to war. After suffering great losses, the two sides developed the consciousness of exploring peaceful ways acceptable to each other. The civil war in the 50 s BC forced Hu-Han evil to submit to the Han Dynasty, but also made the Han and Hungarian sides learn how to live in peace in practice. The political legacy left by Hou Han evil had a great impact on the nomads of later generations. Hu, with the tone of confrontation at first, turned Sino-Han relations into the mainstream of cooperation in the following centuries. At the same time, it also caused the nomads on the grasslands to fall into a state of division for a long time. At the beginning of the 4th century, "the chaos of the five Hu" broke out, and the Northern Wei Dynasty, established by Tuoba Xianbei, which gradually went south from outside, finally ruled North China. The emperors of the Northern Wei Dynasty in Pingcheng era had the identity of emperor and Khan, and had the ambition of ruling the grassland and the Han land, which made the grasslands unite again for a unified regime and opened a new round of confrontation between Hu and Han. With the deepening of the Northern Wei Dynasty, its border policy gradually converged with the Han dynasty. Taking the chaos of six towns as a turning point, the Northern Wei Dynasty and Roran formed a new and more interdependent cooperative relationship, which can be regarded as the forerunner of the coexistence and mutual benefit between Tang Dynasty and Huihe in the Anshi Rebellion. With the division of the Northern Wei Dynasty, the tribute system dominated by the Han Dynasty began to reverse, until the early Tang Dynasty to destroy the Eastern Turkic khanate, Hu, Han two sides to pay tribute to the end of the dominant power. However, the Tang Dynasty's dominant power over the tributary system gradually became nominal in its contacts with the Turkic second khanate and Huihe khanate. This is the result of mutual adjustment, running-in and compromise between Hu and Han dynasties, so that both nomadic empires and Han dynasties eventually accepted the tributary system as the basic mode of dealing with each other's relations, and the tributary system was therefore more flexible and inclusive. The first chapter discusses how to transform the conflict of hostility and distrust into a peaceful way that is acceptable to each other after the first encounter of the farming and pastoral empires in the end of the third century BC. The second chapter discusses how the peace that came by accident because of the Xiongnu Civil War affected the Hu and Han relations for hundreds of years, which made the conflict between the two sides gradually relaxed, and cooperation became the mainstream of the relations between the two sides. The third chapter mainly discusses the beginning of a new round of confrontation between nomads entering the Central Plains and nomads on the grasslands, and finally forms a new, more interdependent process of cooperation. The fourth chapter discusses Hu and Han's contention for the dominant power of the tributary system, as well as the acceptance of the tributary system as the basic mode of handling the relationship between Hu and Han in the process of adjustment, running-in and compromise. In the conclusion, the author points out that since the 3rd century BC, the relationship between Hu and Han has become closer and closer, and the mutual understanding and influence between the two sides have gradually deepened. This has led to constant changes in attitudes and policies towards each other. On the one hand, the border strategy of the Han Dynasty gradually produced effect on the higher and higher level of grassland nomadic politics, on the other hand, the Han Dynasty needed to make more and more compromises in the tributary relations with nomadic countries. This also made several times since the end of the Northern Dynasty repeated, interrupted and even reversed Hu, Han tribute relations have finally stabilized.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：復(fù)旦大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2013
【分類號】：K23

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 陳尚勝;;中國傳統(tǒng)對外關(guān)系研究芻議[J];安徽史學(xué);2008年01期

2 鄭永年;;中國國家間關(guān)系的構(gòu)建:從“天下”到國際秩序[J];當(dāng)代亞太;2009年05期

3 姚大力;追溯匈奴的前史——兼論司馬遷對“史道”的突破[J];復(fù)旦學(xué)報(社會科學(xué)版);2004年04期

4 劉信君;;中朝與中國和東南亞藩屬國朝貢制度之比較[J];廣東社會科學(xué);2011年01期

5 張鋒;;解構(gòu)朝貢體系[J];國際政治科學(xué);2010年02期

6 鄭容和;;從周邊視角來看朝貢關(guān)系——朝鮮王朝對朝貢體系的認(rèn)識和利用[J];國際政治研究;2006年01期

7 簡軍波;;中華朝貢體系:觀念結(jié)構(gòu)與功能[J];國際政治研究;2009年01期

8 尚會鵬;;“倫人”與“天下”——解讀以朝貢體系為核心的古代東亞國際秩序[J];國際政治研究;2009年02期

9 謝寶富;北朝魏、齊、周宗室女性的通婚關(guān)系研究[J];廣西師范大學(xué)學(xué)報(哲學(xué)社會科學(xué)版);1998年01期

10 程尼娜;護烏桓校尉府探析[J];黑龍江民族叢刊;2004年05期

，

本文編號：1924786