论文部分内容阅读
在清代陕甘回民起义的研究中,有一个与起义性质相联系的重要问题长期没有得到很好的解决。这就是如何看待起义中的屡次出现的“求抚”问题。因为“求抚”总是由出身于民族宗教上层的领袖人物出面进行的,而且往往与斗争的成败相关联,所以“求抚”问题也就自然而然地与领袖人物的评价联系起来了。许多人对“求抚”问题的看法上存在着简单化、公式化的倾向,因而对求过抚的出身子民族宗教上层的领袖人物持否定意见,这是我们所不敢苟同的。下面,仅以同治年间的陕甘回民起义为例提出自己的几点看法。
In the study of the Hui uprising in the Shaanxi and Gansu in the Qing Dynasty, one important issue that had to do with the nature of the uprising had not been well resolved for a long time. This is how to view the repeated appeasement issue in the uprising. Since “seeking care” always comes from the leaders of the ethnic and religious upper classes and is often associated with the success or failure of the struggle, the issue of “solicitation” is naturally linked to the evaluation of the leader. Many people have a simplistic and formulaic view of the “solicitation” issue. Therefore, we disagree with those who have sought the leaders in the religious and religious ranks of the unrelated geniuses. In the following, I will make my own observations based on the example of the Muslim uprising in Shaanxi and Gansu in the Tongzhi period.