10~13世纪作为“秦-契丹”组成部分的天山北路与吐鲁番之地--以非汉文史料的记载为中心

Tianshan-Beilu(天山北路)and Turpan as part of the"Chin-Khitai"during 10 th to 13 th century--focusing on non-Chinese Historical Records

作为空间地理概念的“中国”一词在西域-中亚的非汉文史料中多被表述为“秦-契丹”。不少国外学者以为其在地域上仅仅涵盖通常意义上的中国内地(China Proper),并不包括历史上的今新疆地区,进而衍生出只有在18世纪中期经历了清朝对于准噶尔部的“征服”及其统治以后,新疆广大地区才成为中国一部分的观点。本文则以吐鲁番及天山北路一带为例,通过梳理排比及考察辨析宋元时期的非汉文史料,有力地揭示了这种认识缺乏史实依据。事实上,“秦-契丹”在地域上不仅指代内地,而且常常涵盖了西域地区的吐鲁番及天山北路一带。这一研究结论充分彰显出早在元朝之前,西北边疆和祖国内地即长期处在同一个中国的地理概念中,元朝和清朝对西域的统一则意味着实现了境内地域整合的中国(“秦-契丹”)最终发展为不可分割统一的多民族国家。

The term"China"as the concept of spatial geography is often expressed as"Chin-Khitai"in the non-Chinese historical documents in the Western Regions and Central Asia.While many foreign scholars now think this historical term of"Chin-Khitai"only covers the general Chinese Mainland(China Proper)in the geographical area,excluding Xinjiang.Based on this wrong concept the foreign scholars also generate the strange notion that Qing Empire had its"colonial conquest"of the Junggar in the mid-18th century and then think Xinjiang became part of China just after this"conquest".Taking Turpan and Tianshan-Beilu as examples,based on the analysis of these non-Chinese historical documents in the Song and Yuan Dynasties,this article pinpoints the misuse of these concepts and notions among the foreign scholars is due to the lack of basic knowledge and ignoring the historical facts.Actually,"Chin-Khitai"not only refers to the Chinese Mainland,but also often covers Turpan and Tianshan-Beilu in the Western Regions.This study fully demonstrates that before the Yuan Dynasty,the northwestern frontier and the Chinese Mainland were in the same geographical concept of China for a long time.The further unification of the Western Regions during the Yuan and the Qing Dynasties had consolidated China into a fully integrated and eventually developed into an indivisible and unified multi-ethnic country.