Session 135: How to Remember? The Qing, the Japanese, and Historical Studies in Twentieth-Century China

Organizer: Shana J. Brown, University of Hawaii, Manoa

Chair: Wen-hsin Yeh, University of California, Berkeley

Discussants: Wen-hsin Yeh, University of California, Berkeley; Joseph W. Esherick, University of California, San Diego

Keywords: modern China, historiography, war with Japan, Qing dynasty.

This panel addresses the problem of history and memory in twentieth-century China. We examine three overlapping sets of phenomena: the recording and assessing of Qing dynasty history; resistance to and collaboration with Japan; and contemporary opinion of notorious events and personages from China’s long twentieth century. Individually and cumulatively, we ask the following questions: How are historical studies pursued—under what conditions and to what ends? What kinds of institutional and/or textual artifacts—archives, histories, memoirs—are the result? And how does this "history of history" affect our understanding of China’s contemporary culture, politics, and society?

Madeleine Yue Dong analyzes unofficial Qing Dynasty histories, such as the Qing bai lei chao and the Man qing ye shi, to probe the significance of the genre as well as to reflect on its influence on both popular and academic understanding of the Qing. Shana Brown discusses the historical research of Luo Zhenyu in Manchukuo, asking how his establishment of a Qing archive under Japanese management can help us better understand the intersection of Chinese and Japanese scholarship and politics in the twentieth century. Finally, Rana Mitter examines two recent biographical reflections of the Sino-Japanese War, inquiring how contemporary Chinese identity is influenced by a range of responses to the war, from interviews with Japanese soldiers to personal collections of war memorabilia. All three essays consider how and why we remember the past, and how this can result in changing cultural characteristics and political agendas.

Stories from the Wilderness: Unofficial Histories of the Qing

Madeleine Yue Dong, University of Washington

The Qing remains the only dynasty without an official dynastic history, which might be changing soon with the enormous Qing history project currently underway. The absence of such an official history might have resulted from a denial of its relevance by the rulers of the new republican regime which was founded on a different principle, yet the fascination with the past dynasty among the common people persisted. Unofficial histories of the Qing first emerged in the few decades before its fall and flourished during the Republican period. Unsubstantiated rumors of palace intrigues and word for word recounting of conversations which supposedly transpired in the bedchambers of historical protagonists are the genre’s stock and trade. These texts record history through details which academic historians usually deem as lacking historical significance.

That unofficial histories do not always present incontrovertible facts does not disqualify them as embodiments of social truths; rather, it reveals a gap between how academic historians and the producers and audiences of unofficial histories conceive of these truths. Examining some of the most important texts of unofficial history of the Qing, such as Qing bai lei chao and Man qing ye shi, this paper considers the question of how the ordinary people access history; how unofficial history establishes "truth"; and particularly, the role details play in such history. This study of the genre of unofficial history is inevitably also a critical meditation on historiography, on what constitutes appropriate or reliable sources, convincing arguments of causality, and facts worth knowing.

Luo Zhenyu in Manchuria, 1932–1940: History and Historiography

Shana J. Brown, University of Hawai’i, Manoa

Luo Zhenyu (1866–1940) is a central figure in twentieth-century Chinese intellectual history. Yet his role remains problematic, partly because he willingly spent his final decade in Manchukuo. Working with his long-term colleague Matsuzaki Kao and his eldest son Luo Fuyi, in 1932 Luo established the Luxun Archives Organizing Bureau, which published Qing Dynasty historical materials, or shiliao. This "traitorous" intellectual and political choice has continued to color appraisals of Luo Zhenyu’s scholarly contributions. Most contemporary biographers, if they intend to be complimentary of Luo Zhenyu, say virtually nothing about the content or manner of his scholarly work in Manchukuo.

This is a particular shame, since this interlude illuminates not only one scholar’s political choices, but more broadly the significance of Japanese concepts of historical research to Chinese intellectuals. Before the 1930’s, Luo Zhenyu’s publications focused primarily on ancient textual inscriptions and objects. His use of the term shiliao after the 1930’s reflected his changing understanding, under Japanese influence, of the definition of "history." Indeed, the concept of using recent government documents as "historical materials" marks a new approach in Chinese historiography.

This paper thus explores three themes. First is the basic narrative of Luo Zhenyu’s sojourn in the Northeast. Second is the influence of Japanese scholars (and perhaps government officials) in establishing a Qing "archives" in the new state. Finally, I discuss Luo Zhenyu’s role in helping establish modern historical research approaches, particularly through his adoption of the term shiliao.

The Past Is Myself: Revisionist Historiography of the War of Resistance to Japan and the Reformation of Personal Identity in Contemporary China

Rana Mitter, University of Oxford

This paper will consider how changes in the historiography of China’s War of Resistance to Japan (1937–45) have affected contemporary Chinese identity. It draws on two recent Chinese books, Fang Jun’s The Devil Soldiers I Knew (1997) and Fan Jianchuan’s One Person’s War of Resistance (2000). Throughout the Mao period, political necessity made it hard to discuss certain aspects of China’s war experience, such as the contributions made by the Kuomintang (Nationalists), collaboration with the enemy, and the extent of Japanese war atrocities. By the 1980s, the political atmosphere had changed, and worries about the U.S.-Japan Security Alliance, along with a concern for reunification with Taiwan, led to a historiographical shift. It became much commoner in China to find more objective—if critical—assessments of the Kuomintang’s war record, and horrors such as the Nanjing Massacre were given a new prominence in public discourse.

This paper examines one way in which changed historiography has affected wider popular identity. Both authors, Fan and Fang, are part of the generation born after the war itself, but have written memoirs in which they explore their own sense of Chineseness through their rediscovery of war history. For Fang, the journey comes through his interviews with Japanese veterans, the "devil soldiers" of the title. For Fan, it comes through a catalogued discussion on his collection of war memorabilia, including ID cards, battlefront crockery, and helmets. Yet their versions of the war diverge: Fang’s history is still monolithic, with the Japanese as arch-villains contrasted with patriotic Chinese, whereas Fan’s is more complex, using war experience to make uncomfortable parallels with the history of the Mao era and to reassess the legacy of Chiang Kai-shek.