|
|
| November 2013 |
 |
1 |
|
 |
| 頁數：1-56 |
| 從「客家」到客家（一）: 中國歷史上本貫主義戶籍制度下的「客家」 |
| From "The Guest" to the Hakka (1): "The Guest" under the Principle of Bon-Gwan in the Household Registration System in the History of China |
|
 |
|
|
| 作者 |
施添福 |
| Author |
T'ien-fu Shih |
| 關鍵詞 |
本貫主義、方言主義、戶籍制度、「客家」、客家、族群 |
| Keywords |
The Principle of Bon-Gwan, the Principle of Vernacular Language, Household Registration System, "The Guest," the Hakka, Ethnic Group |
| 摘要 |
本文依據本貫主義和方言主義的分類原則（指標），並從發生的源頭，探索自魏晉到明清出現在傳世文獻上的各種客稱及其意義，企圖回答「什麼是客家」的「客家」問題。至於中國客家名稱的起源以及台灣的「客家」和客家用詞的演變則留待另文討論。
全文論證的重點有三：首先，如果區分客家與非客家所採取的是戶籍制度的籍貫概念（以下簡稱本貫主義），則客家的客指的應該是寄寓、暫居、離開本貫遷移他地的異鄉人或外來人，甚至是不入戶籍或脫漏戶籍而到處遷徙的流民。因此，客相對的是居住於本貫的主戶、土著或本地人。據此而言，在本貫主義下所產生的各種客稱，如客戶、客民、客人、客籍、客家等（以下簡稱「客家」），必然是通稱，而非專稱。因此明清落籍於閩粵贛三省交界地區，被稱為客家基本居地的居民，都是土著、主戶或本地人，而非「客家」，只有從這個基本居地向外遷徙者，才有可能成為「客家」。
其次，如果劃分的指標，依據的是鄉音方言概念（以下簡稱方言主義），則客家的客指的是使用客方言的人。在方言主義下所產生的各種客稱（以下簡稱客家），必然是專稱，而非通稱。因此，也就不存在相對於主戶、土著、本地人的客家，有的只是跟漢族其他方言群並立的客家。
其三，中國自魏晉到明清，在傳世文獻上所見的各種客稱，基本上都是依據戶籍制度的本貫主義所界定的「客家」，並非作為民系或族群名稱的客家，自清中葉以降才逐漸從本貫主義的「客家」向方言主義的客家轉移。然而，這個轉移的過程卻相當緩慢，至今可說尚未完全取代。「客家」和客家概念的長期混用和共存，結果不但對客家的研究者，同時也對客家指涉的實體造成認知上的落差，各種爭論乃由此而產生。以致至今「什麼是客家」，仍舊疑雲重重，而有待進一步釐清。 |
| Abstract |
The paper uses the principles of Bon-gwan and vernacular language to explore the meaning of the term Hakka, literally meaning "the guest," in the documentary sources from the Six Dynasties (220-658) to the Ming-Ch'ing (1368-1840) era in the history of China, and attempts to answer the question of "what the Hakka is." The paper does not intend to deal with the issues of the origin of the term Chinese Hakka and the evolution of the terms "the guest" and the Hakka in Taiwan, which will be discussed by other papers.
The paper proposes three main arguments:
First, if we employ the concept of ancestral hometown (the principle of Bon-gwan) to differentiate between "the guest" and "the non guest" peoples, then "the guest" would mean those who neither reside in their hometown nor register in the household registration system. Therefore, the term "the guest" in concept is the opposite of the term inhabitants, and it is a generic term in nature rather than a specific one according to the principle of Bon-gwan. Those registered in the border areas of Hokkien, Canton, and Kiangsi provinces but were called the Hakka are in fact the inhabitants, not "the guests." Then those being called "the guest" must be those who migrated out this area.
Second, if we employ the concept of provincial dialects (the principle of vernacular language) to differentiate, then the term Hakka indicates the speakers of Hakka language, and the term Hakka conveys the specific rather than the generic idea. Therefore, the Hakka signifies an ethnic group based on the vernacular language within the Chinese civilization.
Third, the term Hakka in the documentary sources from the Six Dynasties to the Ming-Ch'ing era in the history of China is after the principle of Bon-gwan rather than an ethnonym. After the early Ch'ing China the definition of Hakka gradually shifted from the principle of Bon-gwan to that of vernacular language, but the process is so slow and it has never been fully completed up to now. The long-term mixture of the terms Hakka and "the guests" leads to the confusion among the researchers and the identification of the Hakka people, which results in all kinds of controversial arguments that need to be further clarified.
|
|
|
 |
|
