苗民起義 (1795–1806年)

苗民起義（1795－1806年）
	苗民起義的一部分
	; 蘭草坪之戰（1795年）
日期	1795年－1806年
地點	湖南省、貴州省
結果	清朝勝
參戰方
清朝	苗民
指揮官與領導者
和琳（病亡）; 福康安（病亡）; 傅鼐; 觀成; 孫士毅; 福寧; 勒保; 德楞泰; 額勒登保	石三保; 石柳鄧; 吳八月; 吳半生; 王聰兒; 陳崇德; 胡正中
兵力
	至少20,000士兵

1795-1806年間的苗民起義（苗亂）是乾隆、嘉慶年間一起湖南省、貴州省的反清起義，由當地居民和漢族移民之間的緊張關系所催生，是規模大得多的1854－1873年苗民起義的前序。

這裡說的「苗民」據人類學家諾瑪·戴蒙德解釋，並不僅僅指今天苗族的先人，而是指貴州和中國其他西南省份的共享相似文化特質的各種本地和山區部落。^[1]他們組成了本省40－60%的人口。^[2]

背景和起因

清朝對少數民族居民用羈縻而非強迫同化。在西南，從15世紀起，雲南、貴州、廣西、四川各省由半獨立的當地首領即土司統治，皇帝授予土司們頭銜，只要求他們納稅和維護治下平安。^[1]

但中原移民在迫使原住民離開最好的土地；貴州境內雖然人煙稀少，主要由高山組成，幾乎無以提供適合耕種的土地。^[3]中央朝廷和移民們一樣，建立機構，先是軍事，再是民事，隨著時間發展用常規部門取代了半獨立的土司。這一改土歸流政策引發了衝突。^[1]^[4]

這次起義是明朝征服該地區後一系列起義之一。每當緊張局勢到了臨界點時，人們就起事。每次叛亂被血腥鎮壓後都留下醞釀已久的仇恨，問題更多是被鎮壓而非解決。暴政的基本問題：官員濫用職權、敲詐勒索、過度稅收和土地掠奪繼續存在。大規模漢族移民使得稀缺的資源更緊張，但官員們掠奪而非治理當地人。貴州及其相鄰地區的官風一直低劣。^[4]大起義發生於明朝時期及清朝年間的1735—1736年、1796—1806年和最後也最大的1854—1873年。

起義和後果

1795年討伐苗民的戰鬥一景

先前1736年的起義遭到嚴厲處置，使得下半個18世紀相對平靜，大量當地事件不足以挑戰政府權威。但官員們被異端教派在漢族、苗族之間傳播的教義所動搖。1795年緊張局勢到了爆發點，石柳鄧和石三保率領下的苗族人再度起事。起義者提出了「逐客民^[a]，復故地」^[5]的口號，要求收回被霸占的土地。^[2]

清軍剿滅石柳鄧、石三保

湖南是戰鬥的主要地區，一些戰鬥在貴州發生。清朝派出八旗、綠營並調動當地民兵和自衛隊。叛亂苗人的土地被沒收，以為對他們的懲罰，也為了增強政權勢力；但因新的漢族地主無情剝削苗族佃戶，這一舉措卻激發了進一步的矛盾。在已平定的地區建立了堡壘和軍事殖民地，苗族和中原人的領地被帶有烽堠的牆所分離。但朝廷也用了11年的時間最終平定此亂。^[2]朝廷於1795年將綠營兵從湖北重新部署到湖南處理苗人，因而對北方省份的控制削弱，助長了川楚教亂。^[6]

軍事行動後是強迫同化的政策：傳統的衣服被禁止，種族隔離被強制執行。也有引入儒家教育的嘗試。然而，騷亂的深層次起因維持未變，緊張局勢再次滋長，直至1854年爆發最大的苗民起義。在1795—1806年間被「平定」的湖南苗民，相對而言幾乎沒有參與1850年代的起義。^[7]

注釋

^ ^1.0 ^1.1 ^1.2 Norma Diamond. Defining the Miao: Ming, Qing, and Contemporary Views. Stevan Harrell (編). 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：《聖武記·乾隆湖貴徵苗記》
^ 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」指外來移民，尤其是清朝統治階級和貴族地主。^{[來源請求]}

延伸閱讀

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.

另見

[diamond-1] 1.0 ^1.1 ^1.2 Norma Diamond. Defining the Miao: Ming, Qing, and Contemporary Views. Stevan Harrell (編). 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：《聖武記·乾隆湖貴徵苗記》

[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」指外來移民，尤其是清朝統治階級和貴族地主。^{[來源請求]}

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[a]

[5]

[6]

[7]

苗民起義 (1795–1806年)

目次

背景和起因

起義和後果

相關畫作

注釋

延伸閱讀

另見