1600—1840年闽西的家族人口增长与生育模式——基于连城《龙足乡邹氏族谱》的统计与分析

The Family Population Growth and Fertility Model in Western Fujian from 1600 to 1840:An Analysis on The Longzu Zou Genealogy in Liancheng

根据清宣统三年(1911)编纂的福建省连城县《龙足乡邹氏族谱》,生活在闽西连城的邹氏家族,在1600至1840年间的人口发展,不仅表现出不同于全国其他地区家族人口的增长节奏和规模,而且还有着其独特的生育模式。该家族所在的闽西连城,地处山区,相对封闭,受外部因素影响小,因此在明清易代的战争与社会动乱之际,也保持较高的人口增长率;但闽西地区可利用土地较少,从而制约了人口发展的规模与速度,在雍正、乾隆时期,闽西的人口增长趋于放缓。这些极具区域特点的人口现象,都毫无例外地体现在邹氏家族的人口发展过程中。更加饶有意味的是,为了调适日趋严峻的人地关系,邹氏家族还长期施行生育控制,具体表现就是晚育、少子等比较特殊的人口现象。这种生育控制导致当地存在两种生育间隔。生育间隔与生育模式又影响了其家族人口的增长节奏与规模。这三者相互影响,彼此制约,一方面反映了该家族200多年间人口发展的整体面貌,另一方面又以个案的方式呈现出特定人地关系背景下同一家族不同世代或成员对环境的因应与选择。其间的因果联系及其历史演绎,均值得特别关注。

Based on The Longzu Zou Genealogy(Longzu xiang Zoushi zupu)compiled in 191l,this paper analyzes the population growth and fertility patterns of the Zou family in Liancheng,western Fujian from 1600 to 1840.This study shows that from 1600 to 1840,the Zou family was not only different in population growth rate and scale from families in other parts of the country,but also had its unique fertility pattern.The family lived in the mountainous area,relatively isolated and little affected by external factors.Therefore,it maintained a high population growth rate even when there were wars and social unrests between the Ming and Qing Dynasties.However,the available land in western Fujian was little,restricting the scale and speed of population growth.In the Yongzheng and Qianlong periods,the population growth in western Fujian slowed down.These regional characteristics of population could also be found in the Zou family.In order to adjust the increasingly severe relationship between human and land,the Zou family had implemented birth control for a long time,such as late childbearing and giving birth to few children.Birth control had resulted in two kinds of birth intervals in the local area.The birth interval and birth pattern had affected the growth pace and scale of the family population in turn.The three factors influenced and restricted each other.On the one hand,they revealed the overall family population change over the past 200 years.On the other hand,they showed how different generations and members of the same family responded to the environment when facing a specific human-land relationship.The causal connection and its historical interpretation deserve further studies.