淸代 平略寨와 平秋寨의 界址 분쟁과 淸水江 중･상류 유역의 林業社會 = Border Dispute between Pinglue Hamlet and Pingqiu Hamlet and Forestry Society in the Middle and Upper Reaches of the Qingshui River during the Qing Dynasty

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The purpose of this paper is to clarify the characteristics of the forestry society in the Qingshui River basin during the Qing Period through the dispute between Pinglue hamlet and Pingqiu hamlet in Jingping district. To shed light on this problem, a judgment document(Documents of Linzingzhai, 5-1-4-088~091) on the lawsuit between the two hamlets in the 『Documents of the Qingshui River』 was used. The lawsuit lasted for about 200 years from the 10th year of Emperor Yongzheng to the 6th year of the Republican period, and the related document contains changes in sales and shares of tree-planter between litigants, as well as changes in society and the administrative authorities in charge of litigation.
Private documents in the Qingshui River basin during the Qing period, where forestry was developed, are common in this type of document dealing with lawsuits by individuals or villages, but we can see the following from the document containing 200 years of border disputes.
First, the period from ligation to its resolution has been prolonged, and the regions of origin of the people involved in the litigation have diversified, which means that the interests of minority regions and society, which were relatively simple during the rule of tusi(土司), have become more complex over time. Based on the changes in the stake of the litigants appearing in the judgment document, the time when such changes began was the reign of the Jiaqing~Daoguang period. The important reasons for this change are the influx of immigrants from outside and the increase in timber sales. Therefore, in order to cope with these social changes, the Qing government resolved this kind of lawsuit through the formal bureaucrats, instead of the chief’s office(長官司) which remained until the year of the Daoguang reign.
Second, as in other parts of the Qingshui River basin, a specific clan represented by Peng family purchased most of the property in Pinglue hamlet. However, toward the latter part of the Qing dynasty, they invested a lot of money in purchas of woods and shares of arborists in addition to real estate such as paddy and mountains. Through the judgment document, we can confirm that the defendants actively purchased the shares of arbiters. Of course, this phenomenon did not result in the interests of the arbiter, but it ultimately means that the stake of the arbiter or arbiter itself became more important as it went down to the second half of the Qing Dynasty than the mountains in the southeastern part of the Guizhou province.
Finally, a person like Long Zhaode, who virtually does not exist in the Linxingzhai Documents, accused Peng Renbin or Peng Renpan, who has great economic power, and the relevant ruling ends with a mention that there is no stake owned by Ou Rongben who is neither the defendant nor the plaintiff.
The answer to this situation can explain not only the meaning of the dispute between the two hamlets, but also social changes in southeastern Guizhou province after the middles of the Qing dynasty. Due to such social changes, unknown people such as Long Zhaode were able to challenge the Peng family, who were the influential people of Pinglue hamlet, and fierce competition also occurred among the influential people. It was an extension of such competition that other people in Pinglue hamlet tried to illegally purchase Peng Renbin’s property, or Peng Renbin, a leading family member of Pinglue hamlet, appeared as a defendant in a lawsuit related the land boundary.
The reason why Ou Rongben sued the economically influential people of Pinglue hamlet under the pretext of passing through Pingqiu hamlet after ignoring the logging was to secure wood or tp advantage the ownership of shares under the pretext of land boundary. This is evidence that tensions in the southeastern part of Guizhou province have risen over the sale of wood. And the existence of such competition, conversely, may be one of the important factors that kept the for...

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 張坤美, "歷史時期黔東南地區的林業變遷硏究" 貴州大學 2016

2 黔東南苗族侗族自治州地方志編纂委員會, "黔東南苗族侗族自治州志林業志" 中國林業出版社 1990

3 光緖, "黎平府志" 方志出版社 2014

4 道光, "黎平府志" 方志出版社 2014

5 徐曉光, "錦屛鄕土社會的法與民間糾紛解決" 民族出版社 2012

6 貴州省錦屛縣志編纂委員會, "錦屛縣志" 貴州人民出版社 1995

7 王宗勛, "錦屛文書與法文化硏究" 中國政法大學出版社 2017

8 高其才, "錦屛文書與法文化硏究" 中國政法大學出版社 2017

9 傅慧平, "錦屛加池苗寨文書的社會人類學考察" 知識産權出版社 2019

10 張應强, "錦屛" 三聯書店 2004

11 王宗勛, "鄕土錦屛" 貴州大學出版社 2008

12 唐立, "貴州苗族林業契約文書匯編(1736~1950)(第一卷~第三卷)" 東京外國語大學國立亞非語言文化硏究所 2003

13 李斌, "貴州苗侗地區漢文民間文獻整理的新成果-<<淸水江文書･黎平文書>>前言" 10 (10): 2018

14 程澤時, "自治與合作 : 淸至民國黔東南木業金融制度的內生與外塑" 13 (13): 2021

15 徐曉光, "淸水江流域傳統貿易規則與商業文化硏究" 社會科學文獻出版社 2018

16 吳述松, "淸水江兩百年爭江案判決與乾隆以蠻治蠻新政" (1) : 2014

17 張應强, "淸水江文書(第二輯)" 廣西師範大學出版社 2009

18 林芊, "淸水江文書 : 中國文書硏究的新視野" 35 (35): 2017

19 "淸實錄"

20 林芊, "淸到民國時期淸水江流域林業生産中租佃關系硏究 – 淸至民國西南內地邊疆侗苗地區土地關系硏究之三" 14 (14): 2019

21 徐曉光, "淸代黔東南錦屛林業開發中國家法與民族習慣法的互動" (2) : 2008

22 程澤時, "淸代錦屛木材“放洪”糾紛與地役權問題 – 從加池寨和文斗寨的幾份林契談起" 2 (2): 2010

23 羅康隆, "淸代貴州淸水江流域林業契約與人工營林業的發展" (2) : 2010

24 梁聰, "淸代淸水江下游村寨社會的契約規範與秩序 – 以文斗苗寨契約文書爲中心的硏究" 人民出版社 2008

25 정철웅, "淸代 錦屛縣 加池寨의 經濟的 有力層과 少數民族 社會 ― 『淸水江文書』의 加池寨 斷賣 文書를 중심으로 ―(2)" 명청사학회 (54) : 265-307, 2020

26 정철웅, "淸代 錦屛縣 加池寨의 經濟的 有力層과 少數民族 社會 ― 『淸水江文書』의 加池寨 斷賣 文書를 중심으로 ―(1)" 명청사학회 (52) : 375-425, 2019

27 徐曉光, "款約法 - 黔東南侗族習慣法的歷史人類學考察" 廈門大學出版社 2012

28 張應强, "木材之流動 – 淸代淸水江下游地區的市場, 權力與社會" 三聯書店 2006

29 정철웅, "明代 소수민족 통치의 一面 ― 黔東南 邊六衛 운용의 실상과 五開衛 款軍의 반란 ―" 동양사학회 (143) : 49-99, 2018

30 楊有賡, "文斗苗族地區的明淸社會經濟文化發展狀況 - <<姜氏族譜>>剖析" 1989

31 相原佳之, "從錦屛縣平鰲寨文書看淸代淸水江流域的林業經營" 2 (2): 2010

32 鄧剛, "從“鍬里”到“鍬家” : 淸水江下游三鍬人的移民歷史與認同建構" 社會科學文獻出版社 2019

33 劉彦, "姻親與“他者” : 淸水江北岸一個苗寨的歷史,權力與認同" 社會科學文獻出版社 2019

34 郭紅, "中國行政區劃通史(明代卷)" 復旦大學出版社 2017

35 Mary Rack, "Ethnic Distinctions, Local Meanings : Negotiating Cultural Identities in China" Pluto Press 2005

36 Zhang Ning, "Entre <> et loi sur les Miao : le cas du trafic d’être humains dans le Guizhou au XVIII siècle" (40) : 2016