清末民初華北農村的村落組織和村際關係

VILLAGE ORGANIZATIONS AND EXTRA VILLAGE RELATIONS IN AGRARIAN VILLAGES IN NORTH CHINA IN LATE CH'ING DYNASTY AND EARLY REPUBLICAN TIMES

本文利用的資料是，中日戰爭之時，日本滿鐵的研究機構在河北和山東兩省的村落調查。本文的重點在村落組織和村際關係，先以個案方式，描述六個村落的村內以及村際的組織與活動，再進行比較與討論，並與其他的資料配合，討論村落與村際組織與活動的性質。從各村的村長與村落領袖的組成、村公會和青苗會的運作、村的自衛活動、以及村廟的祭祀和聚餐等，都可以看到村落的整體運作的性格。民國時代各種地方制度的改變，都未能破壞村整體運作的性質。我們可以視村落是村民與外在社會之間的重要的緩衝或協調點。從村的集體活動或集體負擔的分派原則，我們可以認為村落是默求內部社會公平的單位，不過這種社會公平不在於保障村民最低生活的需求，只是集體負擔的公平分配。由於土地是以家為最主要的運作單位，以及對國家政治正當性的認可，村落無法排斥外在經濟勢力的長期侵蝕和行政體制的需索。從村為起點，村際關係是多元的，因事務的性質形成不同的村際組織。村際組織在兩方面不同於村落組織：不少村際組織是偶發性的，當相應的事務消失之後，便瓦解或萎縮；大部分的村際組織是單一目標的。農民的日常活動範圍可以是在市集圈的範圍內，但是其關係網絡卻可以超過如此的範圍，同時從宗教活動，農民可以與更廣大的外在社會有著可以親身感受的連繫。

The data used in this essay are from village surveys in the provinces of Hopei and Shantung that were carried out during the Sino-Japanese war by the research arm of the Japanese-Manchurian Railroad. The essay's emphasis is on village organization and extra-village relations. First, I begin by reviewing village and extra-village groups and their activities in six village case studies. Second, I compare and discuss, partly by introducing additional data, the nature of village and extra-village groups and their activities in Hopei and Shantung. Village social processes are visible in the the organization of the village mayorship and village leadership, in the workings of town meetings and crop seedling associations, in village self-defense, and in worship and feasting in the village temples. Changes in local government during the nationalist era failed to undermine these village-level social processes. Village organization acted as an important buffer and regulator for relations between villagers and external society. In its channeling of group behavior and duties, one could assume that the village is a vehicle for the pursuit of intra-village social justice. Even so, the village did not insure the meeting of the minimal needs of villagers, but rather that people met their obligations as villagers. And since land is handled by the most important working unit of the village, the family, and political legitimacy lay with the state, the village was powerless to block either the long term encroachment of external economic forces or demands made by the state's administrative system. A village's extra-village relations were heterogeneous, with different groups ereated specific to the extra-village problems confronted. The extra-village groups differ in two ways from village groups. First, many extra-village groups are ephemeral, contracting or dissolving once the specific problem has disappeared. Second, most extra-village groups are for a single purpose. Nevertheless, though the range of the daily life activities of the peasants may fall within a market region, their interpersonal networks could exceed the bounds of that market region. For instance, peasants could form ties with an even wider outside society than the market region through their religious activities.