In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

-79A ????? OK TI-PAO William T. Rowe Ph.D. Candidate Columbia University After languishing for more th=n a decade in the wake of Hsiao Kung-ch' nan's epic treatise, the pao-chia ('1^K T ) system seems once again to have captured the attention of historians of modern China. Among a flurry of recent references we have the articles of Alan Richard Sweeten and David Paure in the December 1976 issue of this journal, both of which treat the subject of local headmen in welcome detail. In this Note, occasioned by my current research on the city of Hankow, I wish to ma-te special reference to Mr. Sweeten's article on ti-pao (-¿-"fi Y^l) in Fukien. The experience of Hankow reveals almost immediately the validity of two of that article's major points, namely, the value of case studies in correcting mistaken impressions left by the existing general literature in English, and in particular the unexpected vitality and longevity of the headman system in at least certain areas of late Ch'ing China. Thus for Hankow there exists in a variety of sources a really enormous number of references to headmen functioning with evident effectiveness in actual situations , well into the closing decades of the nineteenth century . Ky discussion here, then, will focus on one ' problem which I believe central to clarifying our perception of the headman's amoiguous position in lato Ch'ing society. This problem is quite si ply to determine the connection, -80if any, between those functionaries known as "ti-pao" or "tifang " (-pti -h ) and the decimal group leaders of the pao-chia system. Sweeten adopts the position that "The pacp-chia headmen (the pao-chang fjc_ ^ or pao-cheng ?&. ^E ) should not be confused with the ti-pao , although the latter was called pao-chang in ? some areas." Hsiao Kung-ch'uan also notes this terminological overlap, finding that at times the various titles were synonymous in official as well as popular usage. Thus a certain amount of confusion probably in fact existed in the minds of even, knowledgable contemporaries on this matter. Most modern writers are in agreement on the fact that the two institutions derived from separate origins. Most also acknowledge that pao-chia, while modeled after the precedents of earlier dynasties, was a uniquely Ch'ing institution, articulated in increasing detail through successive edicts of the early Manchu emperors. Leas agreement exists regarding the ti-pao . Sweeten, following Ch'U T'ung-tsu, sees this functionary as essentially an eighteenth century creation. Li Tsung-huang, the prominent Kuomintang official and historian who spent a lifetime studying Chinese local government structures as the basis for his own local autonomy theories, more precisely dated the ti-pao from an edict of Ch'ien-lung second year (1737), in which they were assigned specific responsibility in the areas of population registration , land rights, marriages, and the enforcement of tax payments (tsui-liang -^ jf-J ) . More recently, Saeki Tomi has pointed to a possible earlier origin for this institution. Saexi's intriguing argument pro- -81ceeds from his identification of ti-pao with the hsiang-ytteh (fyáf á-§ ) ? a term which originally referred to a village compact , but which during the Hing had come to refer more frequently to an individual, a democratically elected headman representing a natural residence unit, the hsiang (fy(lf ) ¦ He notes that the early Ch'ing rulers were well aware of this institution, citing an edict fron Shun-chih third year (1646) in which the ti-pao are described and their operations evaluated. Although the Ch'ing sought to replace this system with their own pao-chia, they came increasingly to recognize the necessity for reliance on the older institution of ti-pao in order to exercise any signif-" 5 icant degree of control on the sub-county level. '.(¡lile Saeki's theme, that the ti-pao as a "naturally generated " (F £& ^j- jfc ) representative of community interests was necessarily more enduring than the pao-cheng as an artificial administrative contrivance, may be somewhat oversimplified, his account of the genesis of the two institutions appears to be the most convincing yet offered. Moreover, it provides ample basis for understanding...


Additional Information

Print ISSN
pp. 79-85
Launched on MUSE
Open Access
Back To Top

This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. Without cookies your experience may not be seamless.