苗民起义 (1795–1806年)

苗民起义（1795－1806年）
	苗民起义的一部分
	; 兰草坪之战（1795年）
日期	1795年－1806年
地点	湖南省、贵州省
结果	清朝胜
参战方
清朝	苗民
指挥官与领导者
和琳（病亡）; 福康安（病亡）; 傅鼐; 观成; 孙士毅; 福宁; 勒保; 德楞泰; 额勒登保	石三保; 石柳邓; 吴八月; 吴半生; 王聪儿; 陈崇德; 胡正中
兵力
	至少20,000士兵

1795-1806年间的苗民起义（苗乱）是乾隆、嘉庆年间一起湖南省、贵州省的反清起义，由当地居民和汉族移民之间的紧张关系所催生，是规模大得多的1854－1873年苗民起义的前序。

这里说的“苗民”据人类学家诺玛·戴蒙德解释，并不仅仅指今天苗族的先人，而是指贵州和中国其他西南省份的共享相似文化特质的各种本地和山区部落。^[1]他们组成了本省40－60%的人口。^[2]

背景和起因

清朝对少数民族居民用羁縻而非强迫同化。在西南，从15世纪起，云南、贵州、广西、四川各省由半独立的当地首领即土司统治，皇帝授予土司们头衔，只要求他们纳税和维护治下平安。^[1]

但中原移民在迫使原住民离开最好的土地；贵州境内虽然人烟稀少，主要由高山组成，几乎无以提供适合耕种的土地。^[3]中央朝廷和移民们一样，建立机构，先是军事，再是民事，随着时间发展用常规部门取代了半独立的土司。这一改土归流政策引发了冲突。^[1]^[4]

这次起义是明朝征服该地区后一系列起义之一。每当紧张局势到了临界点时，人们就起事。每次叛乱被血腥镇压后都留下酝酿已久的仇恨，问题更多是被镇压而非解决。暴政的基本问题：官员滥用职权、敲诈勒索、过度税收和土地掠夺继续存在。大规模汉族移民使得稀缺的资源更紧张，但官员们掠夺而非治理当地人。贵州及其相邻地区的官风一直低劣。^[4]大起义发生于明朝时期及清朝年间的1735—1736年、1796—1806年和最后也最大的1854—1873年。

起义和后果

1795年讨伐苗民的战斗一景

先前1736年的起义遭到严厉处置，使得下半个18世纪相对平静，大量当地事件不足以挑战政府权威。但官员们被异端教派在汉族、苗族之间传播的教义所动摇。1795年紧张局势到了爆发点，石柳邓和石三保率领下的苗族人再度起事。起义者提出了“逐客民^[a]，复故地”^[5]的口号，要求收回被霸占的土地。^[2]

清军剿灭石柳邓、石三保

湖南是战斗的主要地区，一些战斗在贵州发生。清朝派出八旗、绿营并调动当地民兵和自卫队。叛乱苗人的土地被没收，以为对他们的惩罚，也为了增强政权势力；但因新的汉族地主无情剥削苗族佃户，这一举措却激发了进一步的矛盾。在已平定的地区建立了堡垒和军事殖民地，苗族和中原人的领地被带有烽堠的墙所分离。但朝廷也用了11年的时间最终平定此乱。^[2]朝廷于1795年将绿营兵从湖北重新部署到湖南处理苗人，因而对北方省份的控制削弱，助长了川楚教乱。^[6]

军事行动后是强迫同化的政策：传统的衣服被禁止，种族隔离被强制执行。也有引入儒家教育的尝试。然而，骚乱的深层次起因维持未变，紧张局势再次滋长，直至1854年爆发最大的苗民起义。在1795—1806年间被“平定”的湖南苗民，相对而言几乎没有参与1850年代的起义。^[7]

注释

^ ^1.0 ^1.1 ^1.2 Norma Diamond. Defining the Miao: Ming, Qing, and Contemporary Views. Stevan Harrell (编). Cultural Encounters on China's Ethnic Frontiers. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 1995. ISBN 0-295-97528-8.
^ ^2.0 ^2.1 ^2.2 Elleman, Bruce A. The Miao Revolt (1795–1806). Modern Chinese Warfare, 1795-1989 . London: Routledge. 2001: 7–8. ISBN 978-0-415-21474-2.
^ Robert D. Jenks. Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou: The "Miao" Rebellion, 1854-1873. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. 1994: 19–20, 25. ISBN 0-8248-1589-0. Guizhou had an overall population density ... rather low ... Han encroachment on Miao land was considered to be a serious problem by almost all officials in the nineteenth century ... [Immigrants] intensified the competition for land, which was already scarce ... poor soil and mountainous terrain.
^ ^4.0 ^4.1 John K. Fairbank; Denis Twitchett. The Cambridge History of China. Late Ch'ing 1800–1911, Part 1 . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1978: 132–133. ISBN 978-0-521-21447-6.
^ 魏源：《圣武记·乾隆湖贵征苗记》
^ Kuhn, Philip A. Rebellion and Its Enemies in Late Imperial China . Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. 1980: 53. ISBN 0-674-74954-5.
^ Robert D. Jenks. Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou: The "Miao" Rebellion, 1854-1873. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. 1994: 67. ISBN 0-8248-1589-0. Once again the measures taken against the Miao were draconian, but they were applied largely in western Hunan rather than in Guizhou. They included forced assimilation (e.g., the Miao were ordered to wear Chinese dress instead of tribal dress), ... and the construction of a long wall with manned watchtowers to insure that Miao and Han remained segregated ... it did achieve results in western Hunan, for very few of the Miao there participated in the rebellions of the Xianfeng-Tongzhi period.

^ “客民”指外来移民，尤其是清朝统治阶级和贵族地主。^{[来源请求]}

延伸阅读

Sutton, Donald S. Ethnic Revolt in the Qing Empire: The "Miao Uprising" of 1795-1797 Reexamined. Asia Major. 2003, 16 (2): 105–152. JSTOR 41649879.

另见

[diamond-1] 1.0 ^1.1 ^1.2 Norma Diamond. Defining the Miao: Ming, Qing, and Contemporary Views. Stevan Harrell (编). Cultural Encounters on China's Ethnic Frontiers. Seattle: University of Washington Press. 1995. ISBN 0-295-97528-8.

[elleman-2] 2.0 ^2.1 ^2.2 Elleman, Bruce A. The Miao Revolt (1795–1806). Modern Chinese Warfare, 1795-1989 . London: Routledge. 2001: 7–8. ISBN 978-0-415-21474-2.

[3] Robert D. Jenks. Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou: The "Miao" Rebellion, 1854-1873. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. 1994: 19–20, 25. ISBN 0-8248-1589-0. Guizhou had an overall population density ... rather low ... Han encroachment on Miao land was considered to be a serious problem by almost all officials in the nineteenth century ... [Immigrants] intensified the competition for land, which was already scarce ... poor soil and mountainous terrain.

[chc-4] 4.0 ^4.1 John K. Fairbank; Denis Twitchett. The Cambridge History of China. Late Ch'ing 1800–1911, Part 1 . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 1978: 132–133. ISBN 978-0-521-21447-6.

[6] 魏源：《圣武记·乾隆湖贵征苗记》

[kuhn-7] Kuhn, Philip A. Rebellion and Its Enemies in Late Imperial China . Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. 1980: 53. ISBN 0-674-74954-5.

[8] Robert D. Jenks. Insurgency and Social Disorder in Guizhou: The "Miao" Rebellion, 1854-1873. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. 1994: 67. ISBN 0-8248-1589-0. Once again the measures taken against the Miao were draconian, but they were applied largely in western Hunan rather than in Guizhou. They included forced assimilation (e.g., the Miao were ordered to wear Chinese dress instead of tribal dress), ... and the construction of a long wall with manned watchtowers to insure that Miao and Han remained segregated ... it did achieve results in western Hunan, for very few of the Miao there participated in the rebellions of the Xianfeng-Tongzhi period.

[5] “客民”指外来移民，尤其是清朝统治阶级和贵族地主。^{[来源请求]}

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[a]

[5]

[6]

[7]

苗民起义 (1795–1806年)

目录

背景和起因

起义和后果

相关画作

注释

延伸阅读

另见