In this paper, I examined the history of Baizu that the Brief History presented. PRC created Baizu as one the 55 ethnic minority nations, as it “nationalized” all the people living within its territorial boundary. And it constructed the narrative of the “ethnic history” of Baizu, while it constructed the grand narrative of the history of the unified, multinational “zhonghua minzu.” There are two major problems in the historical narrative of Baizu, thus constructed. First, the genealogy of the ancestors of Baizu constructed by PRC lacks sufficient historical evidence to prove it. Second, the politically-driven ethnic classification project by PRC produced ethnic minority nation, which does not have their own territory and Baizu was one of them. Because of this, the history of Baizu, who historically lived mixed with other ethnic groups together in Yunnan, cannot help but becoming a part of the larger Yunnan history, rather than constituting a history of an ethnic group. Then, what would be a historically sensible way to write a history of ethnic minorities in Yunnan, who have not transformed themselves into a modern nation? What I would like to suggest is, first, to abandon the construction of the history of Baizu as an ethnic group. I also suggest to distinguish Yunnan from China (zhongguo) as a unit of historical writing, and thus to cut the relationship between the Baizu history and the larger history of the unified, multitethnic “zhonghua minzu.” The narrative of the Chinese history (history of Zhongguo), which takes the PRC’s current territorial boundary as the unit of historical narrative, lacks historical objectivity. Names for historical communities survive, because they have been used by those who have lived in the communities as well as by other historical communities. Members of a certain historical community occupy distinctive historical space and share common historical experience. And their historical experience is mainly informed by political changes that affected the space that the historical community occupies. If one constructs the history of “Yunnan” as a distinctive historical space and community, which could be distinguished from the historical “China” (zhongguo), one may be able to construct the history of the people of Yunnan in its fullest sense.
목차
1. 서론 2. ‘白族社會歷史調査’ 사업과 『白族簡史』 (1) ‘白族社會歷史調査’ (2)『백족간사』의 형식과 내용 3. 白族의 族源과 계보에 대한 비판적 검토 (1) 白蠻과 烏蠻 (2) 爨과 僰 (3) 玀玀와 民家, 그리고 ‘白人(僰人)’ 4. 결론 참고문헌 논문초록
동북아시아문화학회 [The Association of North-east Asian Cultures]
설립연도
2000
분야
복합학>학제간연구
소개
동북아시아 문화의 다양성과 정체성을 연구 토론하고, 지역내 문화 교류의 다양한 모습을 연구하고 문화변동의 큰 틀을 집적함으로써 우리 민족 문화 및 상대 민족의 문화적 터전을 이해하여 문화공동체적 특성을 계발하고 상호 관련성의 강화를 유도하는 학술활동을 통해 동북아시아의 문화발전에 이바지함.