This dissertation examines the broad revival of imperial touring during the High Qing period (early 1680s to 1800) by specifically focusing upon the six Southern Tours of the Qianlong emperor which occurred between 1751 and 1784. I not only detail the various facets of the Southern Tours, but also highlight their role in the on-going rearticulation and reiteration of a distinctively Manchu rule over an expanding multi-ethnic empire.; Qing rule over China-proper had from its very inception been founded upon two apparently contradictory principles: (1) Manchu acculturation to and fulfillment of venerated Chinese political ideals; and (2) the maintenance of a distinct identity as a conquering group—what recent scholars have dubbed “ethnic sovereignty.” How did Qing rulers negotiate the inherent tensions generated by this political paradox of rule by difference (conquest) versus rule by similarity (acculturation)?; By addressing this question I bring insights into the Altaic origins and Inner Asian ambitions of the Qing ruling house to bear upon my analysis of the Qianlong emperor's well-known Southern Tours and thereby challenge two dominant modes of interpretation—“fiscal irresponsibility” and “sinicization theory”—both of which do little to advance our historical understanding of why the Qianlong emperor actually found it advantageous, and perhaps even necessary, to revive the practice of imperial touring in the first place.; I underscore that both Kangxi and Qianlong's Southern Tours were but one part of an integrated and polyvalent system of imperial touring and hunting conceived in the last instance as a defense of ethno-dynastic prerogatives. By embarking on his Southern Tours the Qianlong emperor was able to simultaneously acknowledge regional concerns, political interests, and cultural sensibilities of Han literati-bureaucrats, without forsaking his identity as an Inner Asian overlord. The Southern Tours remained comprehensible to a broader audience of non-Han (Manchu, Mongol, Tibetan, Kazakh) constituents as a specifically Manchu mode of governance. Thus the practice of imperial touring marked Qing rule as both “meta-ethnic” and Manchu at the same time; it preserved the dynasty's “ethnic sovereignty” without undermining its universalistic claims to rule over a multi-ethnic empire.
展开▼
