Since the founding of the P.R.C. over 60 years ago, research on Six dynasties history in the Mainland of China has undergone many twists and turns: The first 17 years saw major steps forward, laying the foundation for progress to be made on Six dynasties historical research. During the period of the “The Great Cultural Revolution,” the research on Six dynasties came to a halt, with Reform and Opening-up heralding advances in terms of forming research bodies, academic activities, publications, the expansion of research fields, the opening-up of new ways of thinking among many others. Nevertheless, at the same time there existed gaps in the research, methodology, shoddy and rushed work, among other shortcomings.
Adopting the historical periodization and the “ethnic awakening” theory of Konan Naito, this essay discusses the early formation of East Asian states such as Koguryō, Paekche, Silla and Wa during the 4th and 5th centuries, as well as the political order within the East Asian society shaped by the enfeoffment of the Eastern Jin and the Southern dynasties by using Chinese sources. It argues that the cultural influences of the Qin and Han dynasties promoted the ethnic awakening of East Asian peoples, and during the turmoil periods of the Wei, the Jin, and the Division Era these ethnic groups leaped rapidly in their roads of state-formation. The enfeoffment system of the Eastern Jin played significant role in this process, and therefore set up the basic structure of the international relationship in early modern East Asia.
In the Six dynasties, the clans of the scholar-official stratum not only occupied a dominant place in social and cultural life but also played an important role in maintaining Chinese civilization. As a succession of northern minorities entered the Central Plains, foreign culture became widespread and the Chinese people and culture experienced an unprecedented crisis. Thanks to the scholar-official clans who shouldered the burden of preserving Chinese culture, Chinese civilization was able to persist through the ages to become an “unbroken” civilization. These clans can be categorized in three groups according to their territorial origin: “Clans of the Wu Area” which developed in Jiangnan after the Han dynasty; “Immigrant Clans” which moved to Jiangnan from the north during the Jin dynasty and the ensuing dynasties, these being referred to jointly as “the Southern Clans”; and “the Northern Clans,” being those clans that remained in their homelands (Shandong and the Central Shaanxi Plain) during the period of ethno-national amalgamation in the north of China. Though these clans had various cultural characteristics due to different historical roots, cultural traditions and ancestry, their clan learning had a common core, i.e., the study and practice of Confucian rites as established in the Han dynasty. This formed the basis for the integration of Han with other cultures, making a sound foundation for the further development of the Chinese civilization.
During the period of the Eastern Jin, the Sixteen States, the Southern dynasties, and the Northern dynasties, population movement caused the conflicts both between the Han and minorities in the north and immigrants and natives in the south. The traditional method of estimating the immigrants was based on the households of migration prefectures, subprefectures and counties recorded in local gazetteers, which is actually different between the actual distribution of immigrants and those registered in local gazetteers. Thus, the migration population and their descendents need to be recalculated. In fact, migrations in the Sixteen States were largely for military and agriculture purposes, while in the Northern dynasties, particularly the Northern Wei, population movements were mostly to fill the capitals, the boundary and inland areas, both were enforced by the governments. Population migration often determined government policies, enriched cultural contents, promoted economic developments, and changed the intellectual trends and social structure in certain dynasties, especially in the Eastern Jin and the Southern dynasties.
The U.S. policy toward Tibet has always changed in accordance with the U.S. international strategy and the U.S. foreign policy toward China. Before the foundation of the People’s Republic of China, the U.S. admitted Chinese sovereignty over Tibet. During the Cold War, due to its anti-communism strategy, the U.S. began to consider recognizing the independence claim of Tibetan separatists, especially after 1959, when the Dalai Lama was exiled abroad. However, the U.S. government has not openly admitted Tibet is an independent country, because, in the light of the historical development of Tibet within China, claims of independence cannot be substantiated and therefore Tibetan separatism cannot win the recognition or support of the majority of countries in the world.