Translucent Mirror: History and Identity in Qing Imperial Ideology

by Pamela Kyle Crossley

In this landmark exploration of the origins of nationalism and cultural identity in China, Pamela Kyle Crossley traces the ways in which a large, early modern empire of Eurasia, the Qing (1636-1912), incorporated neighboring, but disparate, political traditions into a new style of emperorship. Drawing on a wide variety of primary sources, including Manchu, Korean, and Chinese archival materials, Crossley argues that distortions introduced in seventeenth- and eighteenth-century historical records have blinded scholars to the actual course of events in the early years of the dynasty. This groundbreaking study examines the relationship between the increasingly abstract ideology of the centralizing emperorship of the Qing and the establishment of concepts of identity in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, before the advent of nationalism in China.

Concluding with a broad-ranging postscript on the implications of her research for studies of nationalism and nation-building throughout modern Chinese history, A Translucent Mirror combines a readable narrative with a sophisticated, revisionary look at China's history. Crossley's book will alter current understandings of the Qing emperorship, the evolution of concepts of ethnicity, and the legacy of Qing rule for modern Chinese nationalism.

Genres: History, China, Asia

423 pages, Paperback

First published January 16, 2000

About the author

Pamela Kyle Crossley is an historian who specializes in the history of modern China and northern Asia. Currently, she is Professor of History at Dartmouth College. She is a founding appointment of the Dartmouth Society of Fellows.

Reviews

[Eressea · Rating 3 out of 5]

文案說的新清史四書，當前只買得到這本
目前看過簡中版羅友枝《最後的皇族》和本書
歐立德《滿洲之道》、路康樂《滿與漢》沒翻譯...
反倒是後來的新清史台灣出了不少
我還以為新清史在台灣挺好賣
沒想到祖宗們的書卻出不齊??

作者的行文風格夾七纏八，挺不好讀
加上理論太多，我實在難以招架
很多地方要靠AI幫我解讀文本
還好看得是電子書，弄出書摘挺容易的
總而言之，本書就是立論乾隆爺以前
大清皇帝們如何建構出滿漢蒙藏回"族"
同時也塑造不同的形象，讓五族效忠自己
皇帝在半透明鏡之後，綜觀全局
被建構的臣民們則只能看到
皇帝為不同族群打造的形象
結果這套意識型態，在清末被革命黨反過來用
拿來建立排滿的理論基礎
大概就看懂這樣，剩下的就看不懂啦Orzz
另外注意到這本在新清史作者們難以解釋的穆斯林臣民
也是模糊以對，作者精心建立的族群建構論
難以說明大清的穆斯林臣民是如何效忠皇帝的
只好含糊帶過，甚至把突厥系民族和漢語穆斯林混在一起了
這問題在目前我找得著的中文書裡
只有異鄉人之地解釋得最好
其他的書都假裝沒看到大清的穆斯林臣民

在讀本書之前，還讀過作者寫的孤軍
也是一樣的風格一樣的難懂
既然看不懂，反而注意到作者引用史料多種誤讀或錯置
不禁好奇，到底該認同提出一個新的理論框架是一大創見
還是該在意，如果史料都無法完全掌握
該怎麼相信這套理論是有價值的呢?

[Ellie · Rating 3 out of 5]

Allow me to just say this: Crossley as an unfathomably unengaging style of writing.

[he chow · Rating 5 out of 5]

若以正確的角度觀之，謊言也能變成真理。

Every lie is a truth, of course, if seen from the right angle.
當然，若是從正確的角度來看，每一個謊言都是另一個真相。

+——————————————+

是否我讀的版本有問題：諸如「七大恨」錯別字為「七大根」。

在《奴兒干的政治名稱》一章節中，「阿哈出獲賜名稱漢名李誠善，釋迦奴則是李顯忠」。
原書其實寫的是，阿哈出獲賜名稱漢名李思誠。
Ahacu had been awarded the name Li Sicheng（李思誠） by the Chinese;Sigiyanu, in his relations with the Ming, was known as Li Xianzhong.51
注釋51也奇怪，原著寫的是Li Chengnian，譯者翻譯是「李成梁」。這個李成梁是鐵嶺的李成梁（1526年—1615年）嗎？時間線和子孫系都不對了。釋迦奴（李顯忠）是李滿住(b. 1407- † 1467年)的父親。

此處不解。

[Jessica Zu · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is an extremely unconventional book. So if you wanna get a gist of it, read some reviews first, and then proceed to the chapter. Don't read introduction and postscript until you finished the whole book, otherwise, you'll be utterly confused by the author's own words.
Crossley is so far the only historian that discards her pretense of objectivity and ventures into ridiculing the subjects that she wrote about: Qianlong is culturally null (uh?) Manchu is only a political construction. I mean as scholars, it's OK to stating your thesis and you conclusion, but is being cynical necessary at all?
I hope she is not as cynical in real life.
The part about Qing imperial cult could be expanded. several pages are not enough to explain the evolution of imperial cult in relation to statecraft and diplomacy