《China Marches West》是一本由Peter C. Perdue著作，Belknap Press出版的Hardcover图书，本书定价：USD 35.00，页数：752，特精心从网络上整理的一些读者的读后感，希望对大家能有帮助。

　　《China Marches West》精选点评：

　　●每一章拉出来都可以单独再写一本书。

　　●去年读的，忘了读完还是没了。。。

　　●这个学期一定要把这本书的书评写出来。

　　●新清史

　　●喜欢

　　●2012-13大致读完

　　●peter perdue的确是大师

　　●12/09/2015 “新清史”奠基作品之一。更改了内亚边疆书写的视角和框架。和一些人的看法不同，这部书从立意来说并不是天然反对大一统的，而只是对大一统采取了相对中立的态度，即便如此也已经不可能见容于贵国当局。

　　●為了讀書會重讀一次。

　　●和我预期不符…… 大部分内容已经在日本学者的著作上了解了…… 也就俄国人的内亚部分具有比较优势。。

　　《China Marches West》读后感(一)：what 20 years' work can produce

　　rof. Perdue’s work addresses the clash between empires. He introduces three “theoretical perspectives” of this work: frontier environments, state building, and the construction of national and ethnic identities through historical representation(15). The structure of this whole work roughly follows these three concerns. Part I introduces ecological conditions; parts II and III tell the rise of the empires, their contentions and their adaptation to the economic and environmental conditions; part IV studies the cultural performances and symbolic representations that legitimated the conquest; the remaining part explores the empires’ implications for modern China as a nation-state. The author so summarizes the flow of the work: “our story begins with nature, continues with individual actors, and ends with the historians(19).”

　　For this 700-page work, it is equally futile to try to summarize or to jump into details. Thus I will briefly talk about its methodology and its illumination on the study of empire and frontier.

　　Telling the history of such a monstrous entity as the competition between Empires, it is probably most difficult to keep a balance between analysis and story-telling, between structure and individual agency, and between historical determinism and contingencies. Equally difficult is it to do justice to all the actors in this historical drama. As shown in the summary above, this work skillfully incorporates all these factors. We see the opening introduction of the natural environments of the Central Eurasia, as well as how the individual person of Emperor Kangxi brought the Qing China onto the world stage of competition. It once and again reminds us of the potential alternative courses of historical development. It is not hard to see that such designs of this whole work are aimed at answering some fundamental questions about sociological and historical studies.

　　In terms of the study of empire in general, the last part “Legacies and Implications” compares different models of empire and sate building. It also reflects over the distinction between Asia and Europe.

　　Regarding the study of Chinese history, this work is consciously based on and converses with the many academic traditions. In the very beginning it introduces Fairbank and Skinner’s influence of Chinese study, and then uses the work itself as a counter-example. By the end it discusses the influence of the Qing empire over China’s nation building in the modern period.

　　An especially interesting part is Part IV, which, after the exploration of political and military expeditions of the empires, diverts its attention to the symbolic representation of the Manchu empire. It studies such spatial symbols as stelae and maps, as temporal retelling in official histories.

　　《China Marches West》读后感(二)：【转】田宓：《中国西征：清朝对欧亚大陆腹地的征服》书评

　　《中國西征：清朝對歐亞大陸腹地的征服》是濮德培（Peter C.Perdue）今年四月出版的關於明清中國西北邊疆發展史的一部力作。與既往研究不同的是，作者反對從民族國家本位主義出發來看待清王朝、俄國、蒙古在歐亞大陸中部地區的三方角力。他將清王朝、俄國、蒙古置於平等的位置上，在三者的互動關係中，解讀清帝國在歐亞大陸中部地區疆域拓展的歷史進程。然後作者將筆鋒轉至清代、民國直至現在，分析社會精英利用文字等媒介對這一歷史事件所進行的話語建構過程。作者對上述內容的闡釋其用意是在「全球化」的視野下，從中國歷史發展的自身理路來回答近代中國民族國家何以形成的問題，進而與西方歷史的發展進程形成比較。有別於以往中西比較研究，作者認為應重視國家行為對社會經濟的發展與制約作用。因此，在行文中，國家安全與戰略在中國歷史發展過程中的重要性是作者一再強調的重中之重。

　　本書除引言外，共分五部份。第一部份包括三章內容，主要圍繞歐亞大陸國家的形成展開。在這一部份，作者首先對歐亞大陸中部的自然環境進行了描述。他反對研究者帶着政治上的先入為主的偏見和種族優劣論對自然環境進行比較研究，他認為這樣做的目的無非是用地理環境的差異來為西方優於東方提供佐證。在作者看來如果研究者能夠放棄成見，真正體察人類與周邊環境的微妙關係，那麼許多問題都可以重新解釋。立足於這個觀點，作者指出歐亞大陸生態環境從東到西具有相當程度的一致性，這使得該地呈現出疆界和文化的模糊和不確定的顯著特徵，同時也使得人們可以在這裡任意遷徙，自由來去。既定的地理環境，無形中約束着人類的全部行為。易於移動的地理形勢，適合遊牧人群的生存，但環境的同質性也限制了他們的進一步發展；而對於明清帝國的締造者們來說，如何有效地適應這種環境與活躍在這裡的遊牧人群展開斡旋，也就成為在競爭中獲勝的關鍵。在這裡作者特別介紹了時最主要的作戰和運輸工具——馬在人們交往中扮演的重要角色，結合後文，我們可以發現，在人類交往方式未變的情況下，馬政得失於明清對蒙政策的成敗具有極為特殊意義。接下來，作者主要對15至17世紀末近二百年間的明蒙關係、俄羅斯帝國、準噶爾汗國的形成、滿洲的崛起以及他們的早期接觸進行了論述。

　　第二部份包括四章，主要圍繞歐亞大陸中部的權力競爭展開。在這裡作者反對單方面地探討中俄關係、俄蒙關係或中蒙關係，他強調應在清帝國、俄羅斯、蒙古三方交錯的利益關係中分析歐亞大陸中部的局勢。他認為由於清帝國和俄羅斯存在一致的經濟利益，因此在對外關係上俄羅斯最終導向了清帝國。1689年《尼布楚條約》和1727年《恰克圖貿易條約》的簽訂，使清帝國和俄羅斯達成某種程度的默契，這決定性地影響了歐亞大陸中部地區的權力格局。雙方關係的和解對準噶爾蒙古來說是沉重的一擊。這使他們不可能向俄國尋求結盟關係；不只如此，俄羅斯對清廷西征的默許態度也為準噶爾汗國的最終失敗埋下了伏筆。與周邊蒙古的良好關係，不僅使清帝國諳熟草原帝國的政治軍事邏輯，也使得他們在戰時得到了蒙古同盟的有力支持。而隨着準噶爾汗國不斷壯大，對清帝國的侵擾不斷，構成帝國安全的巨大威脅，戰爭已在所難免。這場曠日持久的戰爭以準噶爾及其後繼勢力的最終潰敗以及清帝國的全面勝利收場。在雙方的交戰中，作者一再強調了在歐亞大陸中部廣袤的土地上後勤保障對軍事戰爭的重要性。作者認為與前代比起來，清帝國之所以能夠取得前所未有的勝利，主要就是因為他們通過種種舉措有效地解決了糧餉、軍馬、武器等一系列的後勤補給問題。

　　第三部份分為四章，主要論及帝國的經濟基礎。在這一部份作者指出以往研究往往忽略了新疆地區由遊牧發展到定居經濟的至關重要的轉變過程。像清帝國在西北作戰飽受後勤補給不足的困擾一樣，準噶爾汗國同樣在這方面受到限制。因此在清帝國不斷向西北滲透之時，他們也在通過建立城市、發展農業、培植商業等各種手段來加強自己的經濟基礎。但不應把這一轉變簡單視為是被定居社會同化的過程，它實際上體現了準噶爾汗國動員各種資源，加強防禦的需要。接下來的內容主要涉及清帝國對新疆的經略。作者論述了新疆的屯田、土地清理、糧食倉儲、災荒救濟、商業貨幣等問題。但他並沒有把目光停留在對這些現象的敘述，而是進一步分析了清政府經營西北的真正動因，他指出如果我們回到當時的歷史情境中去，就會發現其實並不像一些學者所說的那樣，清廷是懷抱着發展西北經濟的目的而進行上述努力的。在清政府看來，經營新疆始終是一單明知折本卻不得不做的生意。朝廷的動機十分簡單，就是使新疆在經濟上能夠自給，不再仰賴內地，而最終的目的是為了保障帝國的安全。作者以為舉凡清代新疆的所有問題，都應在這個大前提下加以考慮。

　　第四部份有兩章，主要圍繞着中央王朝固定疆界的努力而展開。中央王朝在空間和時間兩個方面對疆界進行固定的努力。在空間方面，作者首先指出像西歐各國、俄羅斯和土耳其帝國一樣，17、18世紀，中國同樣發生了一個限制人口流動、明確空間界限、以及與周邊國家談判建立疆界的過程。接着書中主要考察了遊歷、碑刻、地圖這幾種被統治者慣常採用的技術手段，作者認為這幾種技術手段在劃定疆界、彰顯權力的同時也製造了帝國的想象。但帝國標識空間和人群的努力，從未真正取得成功，在「平定」的表象下，隱藏着深層的危機。

　　在時間方面，作者主要強調帝國如何通過編撰史書把對邊疆征服的歷史按照自己的方式加以詮釋；而這樣做的目的其實是為了證明清王朝是天命所歸，正因為他是天命所歸才能完成前朝未能完成的豐功偉業。但此種以帝王為中心的解釋，一廂情願地將西北的戰事定義為「叛亂」，將帝國的征服定義為「剿滅」，作者認為如此這般的做法，有失公允，因此他希望認真比對經過改造和原始的、官方與非官方的、王朝與蒙古的等各方面的史料，盡量能夠使我們傾聽更為多樣的聲音、看到更為多元的歷史。作者最後指出王朝的這種努力，雖然從未能夠彌合帝國內部的諸多差異性，但它極大地確立了帝國統治的合法性，並被他的後繼者——民族國家發揚光大。

　　第五部份的標題是「傳承與意涵」（Legaciesand Implication），這一部份又分為「書寫民族征服歷史」、「歐洲與亞洲國家的建立」、「從清朝沉浮看邊疆擴張」三章內容。在「書寫民族征服歷史」的章節，作者首先分析了在王朝內憂外患的情況下，龔自珍、魏源這些經世致用之才如何繼續並最終完成了民族征服歷史的書寫，同時指出龔自珍、魏源對邊疆開發、邊疆防禦的關注，顯示了其思想的進步性，但這樣的觀念並不是受西方的影響而產生，而是源自於他們所知道的王朝擴張的經驗。接下來作者指出西方史學家在地緣政治的視野中，也對清帝國疆域的擴張進行關注，而且他們跨越了國家的界限，把準噶爾、俄羅斯、清帝國三國的擴張，作為是世界歷史發展過程的一個重要事件來看待。然後作者闡釋了進入20世紀以後，中國的歷史學者如何在民族主義的情懷下，將中國建構成一個多民族的國家。他指出蘇聯和蒙古亦採用了同樣的假設，他們把清帝國看成是一個一貫的擴張者，強調其擴張對遊牧民族造成的災難。作者將上述編史方式歸納為目的論（teleology）、道德評判（moral evaluation）、自然邊界（natural fontiers）、實質化認同（essencialized identities）四個特點，並對這四個觀點一一加以駁斥。他指出：應回到歷史的場景中去，盡可能地從當時國家和行動者利益和動機來思考問題，而不是把其視為民族國家發展的必然階段；應把邊界和族群的認同當成是一個建構的過程來看待；應看到環境對人類的制約作用、給予物質基礎足夠的重視。

　　在「歐洲與亞洲國家的建立」這一章節中，作者指出主要由邊疆關係、軍事戰略、後勤補給、外交策略四方面內容組成的清王朝擴張的模式，可以最終回答為何清王朝得以成為中國歷史上最大的帝國這個問題。接着作者對基於歐洲經驗研究中國的政治理論以及遊牧國家形成理論這兩種史學傳統進行了學理上的爬梳。他贊同直到18世紀中期，歐洲與清帝國並沒有存在巨大差異的觀點，並引用了Charles Tilly有關歐洲國家體系形成的理論，來對中國民族國家形成的模式進行闡釋。Charles Tilly區分了現代歐洲民族國家形成的三種途徑，即資本密集型（capital-intensive mode）、高壓統治密集型（coercion-intensive mode）和資本化的高壓統治型（capitalized-coercion mode），作者認為Charles Tilly的研究使我們的討論可以轉移到軍事與商業活動的相互作用上來。接着作者試圖彌合「歐亞大陸相似論」和「阿爾泰學派」兩種理論的分歧。作者指出作為近年來清史研究領域新出現的兩種解釋傾向，前者強調明清時期的社會經濟組織與歐洲存在着很大的相似性（如R.Bin Wong、Kenneth Pomeranz等人的研究），而後者則強調清帝國與歐亞大陸中部的關係（如Mark Elliott、Evelyn Rawski等人的研究）。作者認為用軍事後勤（logistics）和戰略文化（strategic culture）兩方面的內容來入手來研究這段歷史，則可以有效地將二者的觀點結合起來。

　　在本書的最後一章，「從清代沉浮中看邊疆擴張」中，作者指出軍事擴張深刻地影響着清朝內政，使其擁有了前所未有的活力，最終成就了天朝大國的無上榮光。因此軍事擴張的停止不可避免使清朝喪失了活力之源，這導致了清朝統治基礎的日益削弱。接着作者從1780年代，英國侵略中國南部海岸的事件講起，論述了清廷錯誤地將西北經驗移植到中國南部去運用；作為一個談判的國家（negotiated state），在特定的時期，地方勢力與中央王朝平衡的破壞；國家的商業化與地方化幾個方面的內容，作者認為正是以上四個方面內容導致了19世紀王朝的日漸疲弱。

　　有關中國西北邊疆研究成果之多，無需筆者贅言，作為同樣一部關心這個問題的論著，筆者以為作者將西北的軍事擴張與清王朝命運的浮沉聯繫起來考察，進而在世界的格局中，重估清代中國歷史，這是與以往的研究最大的不同之處。近年來出現的有關中西比較史學研究著作（如R.BinWong、Kenneth Pomeranz等人的研究），在很大程度上拓寬了中國明清歷史研究的視野，同樣作為一部比較研究的著作，本書與既往不同的是：作者在書中更加強調了國家行為對各種社會資源的配置作用，他把國家的安全與軍事戰略和近代民族國家的形成緊密聯繫起來，強調國家安全與軍事策略在民族國家形成過程中的至關重要的作用，作者希望在這個基礎上比較中西民族國家形成的不同的歷程。筆者以為這樣的研究視角使我們更具整體感地看到了社會生活的生態、政治、經濟、文化等各個側面如何互相激發，推動社會發展至今天我們所見的面貌，在這個意義上，本書是一本能夠啟發我們思考的好書。

　　本書讀來令人意猶未盡之處是，作者在強調國家行為的同時，勢必過多地關注邊疆擴張過程中的王朝單向度推進以及王朝如何創制帝國的想象，但這只是事情的一半，它的另一半是那些在經由軍事征服已經納入王朝版籍的地域範圍內生活的人們，比方說作者在文中提到的新疆的伯克勢力，比方說在更為底層的普羅大眾，他們又怎樣表達對帝國的想象？這是作者的研究中關注不夠的地方。筆者以為如能更平衡地把握二者的關係，或許能夠更加深入地回答「帝國何以被想象並維繫」的問題。

　　作者：田宓，内蒙古大学历史系副教授。

　　原文出自《歷史人類學學刊》 第三卷，第二期（2005年10月）：187-191。 連結：http://www.vccoo.com/v/0397bc#

　　《China Marches West》读后感(三)：Peter C. Perdue, China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia

　　Over the last thirty years, Peter C. Perdue has emerged as likely one of the most important American historians of Chinese borderland history and environmental history. He is the author of two widely acclaimed books: Exhausting the Earth: State and Peasant in Hunan 1500-1850 A.D. (Harvard University Asia Center , 1987) and China Marches West: The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia (Harvard University Press, 2005), the latter of which won the 2006 Levenson Prize for Books in Chinese Studies. This 725-page tome, which focuses on the Qing–Zunghar conflict in Central Eurasia during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries confirms Perdue’s status and represents an impressive amount of research into this topic. He guides the reader through a very wide range of sources, ideas, desires, critiques, and experiences of this world of the Qing expansion. Moreover, it is clear that this book is easy to read, devoid of unnecessary jargon that would obstruct the flow of pleasurable reading.

　　The story begins with nature, continues with individual actors, and ends with the historians (p.19). Perdue divides this book into five parts, and he alternates between structural analysis and narrative. Part one (“The Formation of the Central Eurasian States”) describes the ecological conditions under which the contests took place, and highlights some of the major issues confronting these Central Eurasian regimes in their efforts to dominate the steppe. Besides, Perdue briefly summarizes the story that led up to the seventeenth-century conflict, including the rise of the Qing in Manchuria, the establishment of the Zunghar state, and the arrival of the Russians in the early seventeenth century. Part two(“Contending for Power”) depicts the basic process of the Qing–Zunghar conflict from the Kangxi emperor launched campaigns of expansion to the Qianlong emperor eliminated the Zunghar state and people.

　　In part three (“The Economic Basis of Empire”) , the book turns back to a structural analysis of the Qing efforts in economic and political-military integration to overcome the environmental constraints. However, the author points out that the integration was incomplete. Beneath the surface, diversity and contradictions strained at the imperial effort to hold things together (p.462). Part four (“Fixing Frontiers”) surveys the techniques that used by the Qing in dominating the collective memory of the conquest and in glorifying its unprecedented achievements in territorial expansion, including travel, inｓｃｒｉｐｔions, maps and official histories. In part five (“Legacies and Implications”), Perdue summarizes the implications for modern China and modern theorists about state building in China and elsewhere. It is worth noting that two new trends of interpretation have appeared in “the new Qing history”, which are called the “Eurasian similarity thesis” and the “Altaic school”. Finally, the author analyzes the fall and end of the Qing state from the perspective of the frontier. He believes that there is a connection between the completion of frontier expansion in the northwest and China’s numerous troubles with social order in the nineteenth century (p.549).

　　Why was the Qing able to eliminate the Mongol threat once and for all, and to dominate this region ever since, when no previous dynasty succeeded？ Why only in the eighteenth century could a dynasty ruled from Beijing eliminate its nomadic rivals and expand the Chinese realm？ What allowed the Qing to break through the limits that frustrated earlier imperial efforts？ These are the central questions throughout the five parts above. The author sums up four crucial features of Qing military expansion: frontier relations with nomadic state builders, military strategy, logistics, and negotiations with neighboring empires (p.520). After reading the whole book, I consider that frontier relations with nomadic state builders and logistics are two of the most important factors.

　　erdue’s stress on the importance of frontier relations covered three aspects. First and foremost, the “fatal individualism” (p.174), or divisions between the Zunghar and Khalkha Mongols, and within the Zunghars themselves, prevented any joint action by them against the Qing regime. These divisions ultimately caused the destruction of the Zunghar people in the mid-eighteenth century. Besides, in “a dual administrative system” (p.32、p.521) , like the Khitan Liao and Jurchen Jin dynasties, the Qing rulers combined both the settled and nomadic worlds under a kind of dual rule, especially in the military realm. In fact, as Perdue points out, the Qing succeeded because they pragmatically mixed together multiple traditions (p.128), such as Manchu clan-based organization, centralized bureaucracy, Tibetan Buddhism and Mongolian rulership. Last but not least, Perdue states clearly that the Manchus’ relations with the neighboring Mongol tribes contributed a great deal to the Qing conquest because the Mongols provided military allies and horses (p.127). Without them, the Qing could not extend their reach beyond the Great Wall.

　　In addition to introducing frontier relations, Perdue describes that the logistical barrier established a fundamental limit on the ability of Chinese expeditions to penetrate Central Eurasia from the Han dynasty up to the mid-Qing. The nomads were protected by the vast distances, barren deserts, and low-yielding lands of the frontier. Two crucial logistical components of preindustrial warfare, which, as Perdue points out, are horses and grain (p.72). On the one hand, the horse was the one essential element in war which dynasties of central plains could not breed in sufficient numbers for their own needs. Thus, the Qing took special care to develop close relations with the Eastern Mongols for reliable horse supplies. On the other hand, the obtainment of grain was to link state requisitions to the developing commercial economy of the interior, then devise means of transporting supplies to the northwest. Perdue shows that only when the commercialization of the eighteenth-century economy works as a whole, will the Qing officials be allowed to purchase large amounts of grain on the markets and ship them to the northwest (p.523). Therefore, the eighteenth-century economy was the base of the Qing conquest.

　　There are three points in the book which give me a lot of inspirations. To begin with, throughout the whole writing, the author always stresses the multiple opportunities available to all the actors and the indeterminacy of the outcome. He demonstrates the Qing conquest and elimination of the Zunghars was never inevitable for the reason that some factors favored the Qing while others supported the Zunghars. In the historical study, as Perdue notes, scholars often make the mistake of teleology whose primary flaws are anachronism and excessive determinism (p.514—p.515).Instead of presupposing an underlying historical process independent of human action, Perdue chooses to reintroduce contingency and tries to see events from the viewpoint of the actors themselves. This is one we may call the “empathic understanding”.

　　Furthermore, Perdue pays much attention to material factors such as food, water, animals, weaponry and commercial goods. In order to demonstrate their crucial role, he repeatedly states that the access to these resources was critical to the survival of states, the success of military expansion and the consolidation of imperial control. By the way, Perdue‘s discussion about how disease determined critical turning points in the conflict between the Manchus and Zunghars is very persuasive. In my opinion, the analysis of material factors is well worth of absorbing in the study of historical geography. Finally, Perdue critiques the prevailing nationalist ideology in modern Chinese historiography, which has a very strong concern with moral evaluation. He insists that historian should take a more objective stance, give equal weight to all the players, without preconceived judgments (p.515). Although moral evaluation and biases are unavoidable in historical interpretation, as far as I’m concerned, academic research should strive to neutral.

　　However, the book is not without its shortcomings. For one thing, since it is a large, voluminous book which involves in very wide field, it inevitably has some mistakes. For example, Perdue mentions that while six of Kangxi’s sons accompanied him on the campaign, his eldest son, Prince Yinreng remained in the capital to take charge of affairs in the emperor’s absence (p.185). Yet Prince Yinreng is Kangxi’s second son rather than the first son, namely the eldest son of the legal wife. Perdue also states that Guangxi is a landlocked frontier region even though Guangxi is a coastal area (p. 362-363). When it comes to Tumu incident, we can clearly see that Perdue is unfamiliar with this period of history. He declares that Yu Qian is the very capable finance minister ruling as regent in the Zhengtong emperor’s absence (p.59). But in fact Yu Qian is the military minister and Zhengtong emperor’s brother, later Jingtai emperor, acts as regent.

　　For another thing, perhaps the most disappointing aspect of this book is Perdue’s tendency to view the Qing conquest of the Zunghar, the setting of Ili Jiangjun, the defeat of Mongols, the incorporation of Qinghai and the control over Tibetan as the colonial expansion of Western European since the seventeenth century，as can be seen in his frequent use of terms “imperial expansion”, “colonization” and “penetration”. From an objective point of view, there is a significant difference between the Qing territorial expansion and modern colonial expansion. The Western European powers seized colonies by force, plundered and exploited the people of the colonial countries, inculcated their religious and cultural value, and suppressed colonial independence struggles. On the contrary, the tribes in Mongolia and the Muslims in eastern Xinjiang were organized as banners, with their chieftains designated as jasaks, who had autonomous control over their people (p.339). And the Qing never conducted ideological campaigns against Tibet’s religion and the Muslim faith. What’s more, since these regions never can be self-sufficient, continual subsidies from the interior were to hold the existing ecological and social balance in place. Therefore, it is an obvious mistake that Perdue regards tuntian (land clearance) and garrisons as military colonization.

　　Despite these disadvantages, China Marches West deserves recognition as a worthwhile endeavor that enhances our knowledge of the Qing expansion into the northwestern frontier with accurate information and balanced interpretation, while also raising key questions for future scholar to consider. One such question involves the nature of Qing territorial expansion, which is a culmination of earlier Chinese dynastic projects or a breakthrough that redefined the character of the Chinese state. Perdue argues that Qing expansion was not simply a linear outgrowth of previous dynasties with the evidences that of different character of the ruling elite, Qing’s success in mobilizing interior resources, and the empire’s diplomacy (p.506). Such an explanation loses credibility when one examines evidence from the past. From the Han dynasty to the Ming, economic investment, diplomacy, and a series of ambitious military were always combined together and used by the conqueror. The only difference is that the Qing emperors and generals had achieved something unprecedented. Finally, the question that whether the Qing court or Manchu sinicized (Hanhua) or not is certainly a topic worth further studying, which has brought out heated discussions among historians.