Reluctant Pioneers: China's Expansion Northward, 1644-1937.

Reluctant Pioneers: China's Expansion Northward, 1644-1937. By James Reardon-Anderson (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2005. xvii plus 288 pp. $60.00).

In the past two decades an influential body of research has emerged on Qing (Manchu) statecraft and Manchu identity (Crossley, 1999; Elliot, 2001; Rawski, 1998; and Rhoads 2001). This literature, written by several leading Chinese studies scholars, has profoundly shaped the field of ethnic and ethnohistorical studies of late imperial and twentieth-century China. The focus in much of this work has been on the assimilation (or lack thereof) of the Manchus into Chinese society. Simultaneously, a separate set of scholars (Duara 2004; Fogel 1988; and Young, 1999) have fruitfully plumbed multiple facets of northeastern China society under the influence of Japan (1895-1945). As is all too often the case in the increasingly partitioned world of academia, these two sub-fields existed largely in isolation from one another; with the former concerned primarily with Manchu identity and statecraft in China proper and the latter appraising the form and character of Japanese activity in Manchuria during the 1930s and 40s.

In a narrow sense, James Reardon-Anderson's provocative study of China's 'reluctant pioneers' to the northeastern region of Manchuria bridges this significant lacuna in Chinese studies. He achieves this not by attempting to address the concerns central to both of these groups, but rather by coming at the topic from an entirely unique trajectory--that of the Chinese who sojourned and established communities in Manchuria. The book highlights Manchurian's implicit distinctiveness or its special status under the Qing (and later the Japanese).

Reardon-Anderson's primary goal is to underscore the traits Manchuria shared with 'China proper' (the eighteen provinces that form the interior, and wealthiest, portion of China) and China's other border regions. To achieve this, Reardon-Anderson contravenes several tacit chronological and thematic fault-lines within Chinese studies. Perhaps as a result of this choice, the book is broken up into three parts (of roughly equal length) labeled "Land" (part one), "People" (part two) and "Economy" (part three). Thankfully, the topics under discussion in each of these parts are not confined in any rigorous sense to these categories. The first third of the book is devoted to explaining the convoluted (but nonetheless significant) imperial systems of administration, relevant law codes, as well as the on-the-ground reality of such an organization of late imperial and early twentieth century northeastern China. The second third focuses primarily on the motivations, obstacles and consequences of Chinese migrants into Manchuria. The final third highlights the agricultural (especially the expansion of soybeans) and commercial growth of Manchuria's late nineteenth and twentieth century economy.

The books triadic structure is less a spontaneous product of the internal evidence than of the author's conscious effort set his findings in a broader theoretical context. Throughout the book, there is a refreshing comparative dimension that broadens the relevance of his work to a much broader audience both inside and outside of Chinese studies. In particular, Reardon-Anderson forcefully engages (and seeks to modify) the standard transference of frontier theories of Richard White, William Cronin and Frederick Jackson Turner familiar to American historians to non-American contexts. Specifically, the author argues that the notion of "frontier" or "middle ground" both tend "to highlight the differences ... while ignoring their underlying similarities (p. 6)." To support this contention Reardon-Anderson adopts a China-centered account that, in contrast to White, Cronin and Turner, argues the frontier region "was incorporated into the empire by the migration and settlement of Chinese and the transplantation or reproduction of this region of practices previously established in China proper (p.86)." In other words, in the case of Manchuria, the commonalities between the interior China and that of the frontier overwhelming played a more significant role than the differences. Significantly, he extends his argument to China's northwestern (Xinjiang), Tibetan, and Taiwanese border regions to draw out the significance of his findings. The author's primary point in establishing this comparative framework is to demonstrate that the frontier policy in Manchuria was not unique and that the Qing claims to protect the existing ethnic order and prevent Chinese immigration were largely false. Instead in the absence of external threats after the consolidation of Qing power in the 18th century, the central government became more concerned about "preventing the rise from within these territories of a force powerful enough to challenge the dynasty itself (p.88)" than protecting these regions from being culturally, economically and politically integrated into China proper.

To be sure Reardon-Anderson's study is far more than simply offering another regional history of China. First, it demolishes the conventional notion that the Qing emperors desired to preserve (or succeeded in preserving) their ancestral homelands from Han Chinese penetration--a lingering falsehood still perpetuated in many textbooks today. Second, it challenges with particular clarity the notion that Chinese culture and society were modified by its contact with the ecologically as well as ethnically different borderlands. As the author persuasively suggests modern Manchuria was "made less from the outside in, than from the inside out." (p. 7).

The primary strength of this book is the author's ability to draw attention to the motivations, methods and exploits of the Chinese settlers themselves. As a result of this emphasis, his study compares favorably in both quality and scope to James Millward's work on northwest China (Xinjiang) and James Shepherd's work on Taiwan. (1) What sets this work apart, however, is Reardon-Anderson's pervasive concern with the land itself. Not only does one come away from this study with a firmer understanding of the Manchurian physical landscape but how it was perceived, settled and modified to fit the needs of both Chinese immigrants and the central government.

David G. Atwill

Pennsylvania State University 

ENDNOTE 

1. James A. Millward, Beyond the Pass: Economy, Ethnicity and Empire in Qing Central Asia, 1759-1864 (Stanford, 1998); John Robert Shepherd, Statecraft and Political Economy on the Taiwan Frontier, 1600-1800 (Stanford, 1993).