近十五年（1996－2010）清代旗人生計問題研究的回顧與討論

A Review and Discussion on the Problem of the Livelihood of Qing Bannermen in Researches of the Past Fifteen Years (1996-2010)

滿洲統治者視「八旗為國家根本」，而予旗人種種優於民人之待遇。然自滿洲人入關以來，八旗生計卻逐漸出現問題，統治者遂提出一系列補救措施，這些措施實可視為「滿洲本位政策」一環。針對此課題之討論，對研究清史有其重大意義。1996年以降，關於清代旗人生計問題的探討日益增多，尤以臺灣、中國、日本以及美國等地研究成果最為豐碩。就其研究議題上，研究者除更加深入討論舊有問題外，更展開清末新政時期籌劃旗人生計、八旗孀婦生計照顧、分析制錢搭放與旗人生計問題間的關係等新課題之研究。就解釋觀點言，近來在生息銀兩與出旗為民兩方面之研究成果，出現不同以往的論述。從史料運用而論，滿文檔案史料的直接使用，以及內務府、宗人府與地方檔案等史料之運用為近年特色。就研究方法言，在美國與日本清史學界，有不少學者運用社會科學理論討論旗人生計問題，此為臺灣與中國學界較為缺乏的特色。由以上種種，足可見旗人生計問題已成為中、外學界所共同重視的課題。儘管近年來旗人生計問題已取得相當研究成果，但目前學界對這項議題仍有許多相關問題尚未釐清，部分論述甚至有待商榷。為更全面理解旗人生計問題，上述課題皆有待後進學者投入更多心力研究。

Rulers of the Qing dynasty regarded the “Eight Banners system as the foundation of the country” and have therefore rewarded the bannermen with a variety of privileges. However, problems related to the livelihood of bannermen surfaced in the aftermath of the establishment of the Manchu regime. In order to resolve these problems, rulers have proposed a series of measures called the “Manchus-first policy” (滿洲本位政策). Since 1996, researches on the problem of the livelihood of Qing bannermen have been especially numerous in Taiwan, China, Japan, and the United States. These studies have not only deepened our understanding of topics which were already under discussion before 1996, but have also brought new issues to light, such as the organization of the bannermen's livelihood during the New Deal of late Qing and the management of the livelihood of bannermen's widows. Other researches have focused on the relationship between the “Official Coin Mixture Payment system” (制錢搭放) and the livelihood of bannermen. New approaches to the “Interest-Bearing Silver system” (生息銀兩) and Chuqiweimin (出旗為民) have also produced great results. The use of new primary sources such as documents in the Manchu language, local records as well as documents of the Internal Affairs Department and the Imperial Clan Court have also characterized recent researches. From the point of view of methodology, American and Japanese historians have been inclined to make use of theories borrowed from the social sciences in their discussion of the livelihood of bannermen, an approach which has been left wanting in Chinese studies. But regardless of these dissimilarities, a brief survey suffices to demonstrate that the issue of the livelihood of bannermen has become an important topic both in Chinese and foreign academic circles. However, despite the accomplishments of recent researches, many issues related to this topic have remained neglected thus far. For this reason, we look forward to new investigations enhancing our understanding of the livelihood problems of bannermen.