土司制度与王朝国家的治理  

The Native Chieftain System and the Governance of the Dynastic State

作　　者：温春来[1] WEN Chunlai(Centre for Historical Anthropology&Department of History,Sun Yat-sen University,Guangzhou,Guangdong,China,510275)

机构地区：[1]中山大学历史人类学研究中心/历史学系,广东广州510275

出　　处：《贵州大学学报（社会科学版）》2024年第1期64-71,共8页Journal of Guizhou University(Social Sciences)

基　　金：国家社会科学基金中国历史研究院重大历史问题研究专项“历史上的西南少数民族政权与国家整合研究”(LSYZD21010)。

摘　　要：受制于落后的交通和信息技术,传统国家治理的模式迥异于现代国家。广土众民的传统中国,长期以编户国家的模式进行治理,堪称人类历史上的奇迹。但在边远且有着自身“君长传统”与“毋君长传统”的西南地区,中央王朝总体上是用一种接近领地国家的模式进行治理。即便在所谓“改土归流”之后的地区,常常也存在“土流并治”的情形,或者即便制度上已无土官,但实际上却在很大程度上容忍过去土司政权中享有权力者继续在地方事务中发挥作用。同时,在内地流官治理的地区,士绅、宗族、胥吏等也常常控制着地方社会并世袭权力,因此土司制度与内地以编户齐民为核心的流官制度虽有较大差异,但也不无共通之处。Limited by unadvanced transportation and information technology,the mode of governance of traditional states was very different from that of modern ones.Traditional China,with its vast territory and many people,has long been governed under household registration system,which is a miracle in the history of mankind.However,in the remote southwestern region,which had its own“tradition of the head of the state”and“tradition of the absent head of the state”,the central government generally governed in a mode close to that of a territorial state.Even in the region after the so-called“bureaucratization of native officers”,there often existed the joint governance of native headman and government officers,or even if there were no more native officers in the system,but in practice,it was tolerated to a large extent that those who used to enjoy the power in the native chieftain regime continued to control the local society.At the same time,in the areas governed by the distributed government officials in the inland,the gentry,clans,and petty officials often controlled the local society.Therefore,although there were some major differences between the chieftain system and the inland assigned official system centering on the household registration,they also shared some common grounds.

关 键 词：土司制度 国家治理 领地国家 编户齐民 

分 类 号：K06[历史地理—历史学]