数字人文研究 ›› 2021, Vol. 1 ›› Issue (1): 34-47.

• • 上一篇    下一篇

清代州的政区分等与知州选任的量化分析


  

  • 出版日期:2021-01-20 发布日期:2021-01-22
  • 基金资助:

    基金项目"本文系国家社会科学基金青年项目 清代地方行政的制度变迁与空间结构研究" l6CZS0l8)与香港研究资助局项目l660l7l8) 阶段性成果

  • Online:2021-01-20 Published:2021-01-22

摘要:

清朝于雍正年间创设政区分等制度,直隶州、散州作为统县政区与县级政区,虽数量不及府与县,但其政区分等及知州选任均各具特色。 借助新修《清史.地理志》中新整理的州的政区分等数据,可知直隶州缺分集中于要缺和中缺,而最要缺和简缺较少,体现出直隶州在府级政区中较为适中的地位。一般而言,直隶州、散州的冲繁疲难”与最要缺、要缺、中缺和简缺的对应关系较好;不合理想制度设计的特例占比,直隶州为l5.46%、散州为l9.46%,绝大部分与苗疆缺、沿河缺、边缺等特殊官缺设置有关。直隶州知州中题调缺占比82.l%,比例远超过府,这与清朝政区分等之初直隶州全部设定为督抚题调有关,后虽部分改为部选缺,但题调缺大多保留了下来。散州知州题调缺比例也达到45.l%,为督抚所掌握。州的这种缺分结构使得知州成为知县晋升较为重要的去处。通过提取《缙绅录》数据库300余万条记录中37320条直隶州、散州知州的记录,追踪其来源、升转与最终任职,证明知州多来自于地方晋升而非京官外放,与知府有很大不同,且晋升来源中知县比例最高。在研究县级官员晋升乃至整个地方官员流动体系中,知州理应引起学界更多重视。

关键词:

直隶州, 散州, 缺分等第, 知州选任;《缙绅录》数据库

Abstract: The Qing state established its system for categorizing local government administrative units during the reign of Yongzheng. In this categorization, zhilizhou (independent departments) were made up of counties and sanzhou (departments) were at same level as counties. Although there were fewer zhilizhou and sanzhou than there were counties and prefectures, their classification and the appointment of their officials had distinctive features. With the aid of the newly compiled data on the political divisions of the states in the newly revised History of Qing Dynasty, it can be seen that the quefen of zhilizhou are concentrated in the yaoque and the zhongque, while the zuiyaoque and jianque are less. Relatively moderate position in government-level administrative districts. The ratings (chongfanpinan) of zhou and sanzhou generally followed the same quefen categories as prefectures and counties: most significant, significant, medium, and simple. 15.4 percent of zhilizhou didn’t follow the rules of the system, as did 19.4 percent of the sanzhou. Most of the exceptions was related to the assignment of miaojiangque (quota in the ethnic Miao regions), yanheque (quota along the rivers), of bianque (border quota). 82.1 percent of zhilizhou were tidiaoque, that is with appointments made by the Governors-GeneralThis was a higher share than for prefectures. This is related to the classification of administrative units made at the beginning of the Qing, when the Imperial Court specified all of the zhou magistrates as positions to be appointed by the Governors-General. Later, some of the zhilizhou were reclassified so that their magistrates would be appointed by the Board of Personnel, while the majority remained as tidiaoque. Meanwhile, the proportion of tidiaoque of among sanzhou was 45.1 percent. As a result of this structure for quota assignment, the tidiaoque of sanzhou magistrates became the main channels of promotion for most county magistrates. In this article we track the origins, transitions, and promotions of zhou magistrates based on 37,320 records of zhilizhou and sanzhou magistrates extracted from CGED-Q (the Jinshenlu database). We demonstrate that zhou magistrates were largely promoted from among local officials, mostly county magistrates, rather than being sent from the central government. This is very different from the pattern of prefects. Through this analysis we draw attention to the key role of appointment as zhou magistrates in the career advancement of county level magistrates and the whole system of local officials.

Key words:

font-size:10.5pt, font-family:DengXian, "> font-family:", ">Zhilizhoufont-family:", ">, Sanzhou, QuefenDengdi, Magistrates Promotion, Jinshenlu Database">