汕尾民系文化

歐洲教授研究汕尾民系:潮汕文化點樣走向世界?European Professors Study Shanwei: How Does Chaoshan Culture Go Global?

【鄭哥點評】[Hany's take]

琴晚翻到一則消息,日本國立民族學博物館的橫田浩一教授發表咗一篇論文,題目叫《從潮汕地區和台灣南部重考客家邊界》。作為汕尾出生的潮汕人,鄭哥我讀到呢篇文章,第一個反應係:外國人點解對我哋咁上心?

我做外銷26年,去過唔少地方,每當外國人知道我係汕尾嚟嘅,總會問幾句:「汕尾喺邊?潮汕人?潮汕文化有乜嘢特別?」以前我淨係靠直覺答,而家終於有一個外國學者幫我哋梳理清楚。

第一幕:橫田浩一嘅論文——外國人眼中嘅潮汕民系

橫田浩一係日本國立民族學博物館的研究員,佢喺2023年發表咗呢篇論文,專門探討潮汕人同客家人的邊界問題。佢嘅核心論點話:所謂「潮汕人」同「客家人」嘅文化邊界,其實係非常模糊同不稳定嘅。

歐洲教授研究汕尾民系
場景一:外國學者研究汕尾民系——歐洲學者喺圖書館研究潮汕族譜Scene 1: European professor studying Shanwei genealogy in library
圖片由 AI輔助創作(Z-Image-Turbo)

呢個結論好大膽。橫田喺論文入便引用大量田野調查資料,發現好多被認為係「客家特色」嘅文化習俗,喺潮汕地區一樣可以搵到;反過來,被認為係「潮汕特色」嘅嘢,喺客家地區都有。

呢個觀點引起我注意,因為呢個同我一直以嚟嘅觀察吻合。我哋汕尾人,語言上同潮州話好接近,但係習俗上又有自己嘅特色。我哋唔係完全潮汕,亦都唔係完全客家——我哋係一個流動嘅、混合嘅身份。

第二幕:汕尾阿婆的故事——阿婆唔知自己咁特別

阿婆係我老母,今年82歲,汕尾馬宮人。一世人都未離開過汕尾,唔識字,但係對所有傳統節日記得一清二楚:正月十五鬧元宵、端午包糭、中秋拜月娘、冬至食糯米飯——全部都係中原傳過嚟嘅習俗,但係又加入咗海邊人嘅元素。

汕尾海邊鄉村
場景二:汕尾海邊鄉村——阿婆喺度過嘅大半世人Scene 2: Shanwei coastal village — where Ah-Po spent her whole life
圖片由 AI輔助創作(Z-Image-Turbo)

我曾經問阿婆:「阿婆,你知唔知你做嘅呢啲習俗,外國有大學教授專門研究?」阿婆笑笑話:「我唔知乜嘢教授,我淨係知阿媽教我點做,我就點做。」

呢個就係最打動我嘅地方。橫田浩一喺論文入便描述嘅,恰恰就係阿婆呢種「日用而不知」嘅文化傳承——我哋自己唔覺得特別,但係在外國學者眼中,呢啲正係研究人類學嘅珍貴素材。

第三幕:歐洲漢學家的興趣——點解老外咁上心?

其實唔單止日本學者,歐洲嘅漢學家對潮汕文化嘅興趣,近呢年越嚟越大。

2026年4月,廣東省非遺代表性項目管理培訓班喺汕尾舉行——呢個信息好少人留意,但係我留意到咗。來自全省各地非遺工作骨幹聚集汕尾,實地參觀汕尾市非物質文化遺產展示館、陸豐皮影博物館——汕尾嘅非遺資源,正式進入全省培訓體系。

汕尾老式茶樓
場景三:汕尾老式茶樓——老人家飲茶吹水,談古論今Scene 3: Shanwei old teahouse — elders chatting over tea about history
圖片由 AI輔助創作(Z-Image-Turbo)

外國學者關心潮汕文化,係因為我哋代表咗一種獨特嘅人類學樣本:中原文化、海洋文化、東南亞華僑網絡——三者交匯嘅節點。而家全球化的時代,海外華人嘅「再華化」傾向越嚟越明顯——越係離開祖國,就越想保留文化根源。

呢個先係外國學者真正感興趣嘅嘢:我哋汕尾人,唔單止係文化嘅傳承者,仲係文化嘅傳播者。

第四幕:鄭哥點評——我哋自己要上心

讀完橫田浩一嘅論文,我有一個遺憾——呢個日本學者對汕尾文化嘅理解,可能仲深過我哋好多汕尾人自己。

佢引用嘅汕尾三山國王崇拜,我哋自己都唔係個個知道。三山國王係潮汕地區傳統信仰,但係喺台灣,變成咗客家人群體嘅重要標記——呢個就係橫田所講嘅「邊界不穩定」。

外國學者研究我哋嘅文化,我哋自己人——尤其是海外嘅潮汕汕尾僑胞——點解唔可以更主動去記錄、去傳承、去傳播?

我做外銷26年,每逢春節都會收到海外汕尾鄉親嘅信息,問:「家鄉而家有乜嘢節日活動?」我發現一個幾悲哀嘅規律——海外鄉親對家鄉文化嘅渴求,往往大過家鄉人自己嘅自覺。

橫田浩一嘅研究提醒我哋一件事:我哋以為理所当然的日常,可能係人類學家眼入便嘅珍貴樣本。我哋唔上心,外國人就幫我哋上心——然後佢哋嘅話語權,反過來定義我哋係乜嘢人。

阿婆今年82歲,仲記得所有傳統節日。但係再過二十年、三十年,阿婆走了,邊個傳承?呢個先係值得我哋思考的問題。

補充:疍民、血統,與「裙屐翩翩似晉人」

一、汕尾疍民——長期被忽略的海洋族群

汕尾有一班人叫「疍民」。我係汕尾後生個陣,間中聽老一輩提起,但從來冇深入了解。 汕尾的疍民研究長期被忽略,翁烈輝先生寫咗《南海雄風——汕尾疍民歷史文化研究》, 被譽為「疍民百科全書」,並獲潮學優秀成果獎。

佢指出:「汕尾疍民是一個『特別』的族群,其向海洋拓展活動空間的勇敢行為, 是值得研究的重要課題。」歷史上,珠三角同汕尾一帶的疍民長期被陸地上的人視為「另類」 ——佢哋居於船上、以海為生,唔係耕讀傳家。但呢個族群其實係中國最早走向海洋的群體之一。

二、潮汕人從邊度嚟?——分子生物學給出的答案

汕頭大學醫學院研究發現:河南太行山人主要由北方漢族主要單倍群構成, 廣府同客家人則以南方原住民族主要單倍群為主,而潮汕人則表現為 北方漢族主要單倍群稍高於南方原住民族主要單倍群。

翻譯成一句話:三大民系(潮汕、廣府、客家)之中,潮汕人與中原漢族的血緣關係最近。 呢個係分子生物學的研究結果,唔係靠想象。

饒宗頤教授喺《福老》篇論述:「就其來自河南而言,則曰河老;就其處於福建而言,則名為福老。」 潮汕人祖先從中原南遷,主要嚟自河南一帶,輾轉經過福建莆田、漳州、泉州,再入粵東。

三、「裙屐翩翩似晉人」——魏晉風度的延續

清初詩人孟亮揆寫過:「怪他風俗由來異,裙屐翩翩似晉人。」徐乾學《潮州雜興》亦話: 「無分晴雨穿高屐,豈是風流學晉人。」晉代有「魏晉風度」,以褒衣博帶、高跟木屐聞名, 最著名係謝靈運用於登山的「謝公屐」。劉恂《嶺表錄異》記載: 「袍木產江溪中……今潮、循人多用其根,剜而為屐。」呢個傳統延續至改革開放後才逐漸消失。

四、潮汕人的 DNA 說明什麼?

研究指向一個更深層的問題:潮汕人南遷之後,與當地原住民(百越族、俚人、僚人) 融合得最少。對比之下,廣府人、客家人與南方原住民族群(壯族、黎族)有較大血緣關聯; 潮汕人則與中原漢族血緣最近。饒宗頤亦分析:「漳潮尚自稱曰河老」, 而河老唔係河南,而係河東——黃河河套以東的山西。

簡單嚟講:潮汕人係一批比較「忠於原著」的中原漢族後代, 南遷之後保留咗更多中原文化特色,包括語言、風俗、飲食習慣。

鄭哥三句話

第一句:我哋潮汕人,係中原南遷的「正版」後代。呢個唔係話我哋幾高尚, 而係話我哋攜帶的文化基因——語言、習俗、飲食——的確係從中原一脈相承。

第二句:「裙屐翩翩似晉人」——我哋的穿著傳統,係魏晉風度的延續。 清代詩人見到潮汕人的風俗,話似晉人,說明文化血統的深度唔係一兩代,而係整個文化系統的完整。

第三句:汕尾疍民代表另一種可能被忽略的歷史。當大家都關注潮商、潮汕文化的時候, 呢班向海洋討生活的群體長期係學術研究的盲區;外國學者專程嚟研究,說明呢個題目有國際學術價值。

鄭哥 Hany

關於作者About the Author

鄭哥,90年代大學畢業,26年橫跨電子,家電、服裝、珠寶、教育、AI算力多個行業。做過中學教師、翻譯、外贸,現在搞七善門科技和星辰算力。口頭禪:「點解唔得?」Hany, university grad from the 90s, 26 years across electronics, appliances, fashion, jewelry, education, and AI compute. Former teacher, translator, trader. Now running Qishanmen Tech and Star Compute. Catchphrase: "Why not?"

Last night I came across a piece of news: Professor Yokota Kouichi from Japan's National Museum of Ethnology published a paper titled "Rethinking Hakka Boundaries from the Chaoshan Region and Southern Taiwan." As a Shanwei-born Chaoshan person, when I read this article, my first reaction was: why are foreigners so interested in us?

After 26 years in export, I've been to many places. Whenever foreigners learn I'm from Shanwei, they always ask a few questions: "Where is Shanwei? Chaoshan people? What's special about Chaoshan culture?" In the past, I could only answer based on intuition. Now, finally, a foreign scholar has helped sort this out for us.

Act 1: Yokota Kouichi's Paper — The Chaoshan Ethnic Group Through Foreign Eyes

Yokota Kouichi is a researcher at Japan's National Museum of Ethnology. He published this paper in 2023, specifically exploring the boundary between Chaoshan people and Hakka people. His core argument: the so-called cultural boundaries between "Chaoshan people" and "Hakka people" are actually quite fuzzy and unstable.

European professor studying Shanwei genealogy
場景一:外國學者研究汕尾民系Scene 1: European professor studying Shanwei genealogy in library
Image AI-assisted (Z-Image-Turbo)

This conclusion is bold. Yokota cited extensive fieldwork data in his paper, finding that many cultural practices considered "Hakka characteristics" can also be found in the Chaoshan region; conversely, things considered "Chaoshan characteristics" exist in Hakka areas as well.

This viewpoint caught my attention because it aligns with my own observations. We Shanwei people, linguistically close to Teochew, but with our own cultural characteristics — we're not fully Chaoshan, nor fully Hakka. We're a fluid, hybrid identity.

Act 2: Ah-Po's Story — She Doesn't Know How Special She Is

Ah-Po is my mother, 82 years old, from Magong in Shanwei. She's never left Shanwei in her whole life, can't read, but remembers all traditional festivals clearly: Yuanxiao Festival on the 15th of the first lunar month, Dragon Boat Festival zongzi, Mid-Autumn Festival moon-worship, Winter Solstice glutinous rice — all customs passed down from Central China, but with added coastal elements.

Shanwei coastal village
場景二:汕尾海邊鄉村Scene 2: Shanwei coastal village — where Ah-Po spent her whole life
Image AI-assisted (Z-Image-Turbo)

I once asked Ah-Po: "Ah-Po, do you know that foreign university professors specially study the customs you practice?" She smiled and said: "I don't know anything about professors. I just do what my mother taught me to do."

This is what moved me most. What Yokota Kouichi described in his paper is precisely this kind of "daily use without conscious knowledge" in cultural transmission — we don't find ourselves special, but in the eyes of foreign scholars, these are precious materials for anthropological research.

Act 3: European Sinologists' Interest — Why Are Foreigners So Invested?

It's not just Japanese scholars. European sinologists' interest in Chaoshan culture has been growing in recent years.

April 2026, Guangdong Province's intangible cultural heritage representative project management training session was held in Shanwei — this information few people noticed, but I did. Cultural heritage work backbones from across the province gathered in Shanwei, visiting the Shanwei Intangible Cultural Heritage Exhibition Hall and Lufeng Shadow Puppet Museum — Shanwei's intangible heritage resources officially entered the provincial training system.

Shanwei old teahouse
場景三:汕尾老式茶樓Scene 3: Shanwei old teahouse — elders chatting over tea about history
Image AI-assisted (Z-Image-Turbo)

Foreign scholars care about Chaoshan culture because we represent a unique anthropological sample: Central Plains culture, maritime culture, Southeast Asian overseas Chinese networks — the intersection point of all three. In this era of globalization, overseas Chinese people's "re-sinicization" trend is becoming more pronounced — the further you are from your ancestral land, the more you want to preserve your cultural roots.

This is what foreign scholars are really interested in: we Shanwei people are not just cultural inheritors, but also cultural transmitters.

Act 4: Hany's Take — We Need to Care More Ourselves

After reading Yokota Kouichi's paper, I have one regret — this Japanese scholar's understanding of Shanwei culture might be deeper than many Shanwei people ourselves.

He cited the Sanshan Guowang worship in Shanwei, which many of us locals don't even know about. Sanshan Guowang is a traditional faith in the Chaoshan region, but in Taiwan, it became an important marker of Hakka identity — this is exactly what Yokota calls "unstable boundaries."

Foreign scholars are researching our culture. Why can't we — especially overseas Shanwei and Chaoshan diaspora — be more proactive in recording, inheriting, and spreading it?

After 26 years in export, every Chinese New Year I receive messages from overseas Shanwei folks asking: "What's happening with hometown festivals these days?" I've noticed a sad pattern — overseas villagers' desire for homeland culture often exceeds hometown people's own awareness.

Yokota's research reminds us of something: what we take for granted in daily life might be precious samples in anthropologists' eyes. If we don't care, foreigners will care for us — and then their discourse defines who we are.

Ah-Po is 82 this year, still remembers all traditional festivals. But in another twenty, thirty years, when Ah-Po is gone, who carries this on? This is the question worth our reflection.

Addendum: the Tanka, bloodlines, and "like the men of Jin"

1. The Shanwei Tanka — a maritime people long overlooked.

In Shanwei there is a group of people called the "Tanka" (danmin). When I was a boy in Shanwei I heard the older generation mention them now and then, but I never looked into them properly. Research on the Shanwei Tanka has long been neglected. Mr. Weng Liehui wrote South China Sea Rising: A Study of the History and Culture of the Shanwei Tanka, which has been called the "Tanka encyclopedia" and won an outstanding achievement award in Chaoshan studies.

He points out: "The Shanwei Tanka are a 'special' group, and their brave expansion of their living space out onto the sea is an important subject worth studying." Historically, the Tanka of the Pearl River Delta and the Shanwei coast were long treated by people on land as "the other sort" — they lived on boats and made their living from the sea, not from farming and schooling sons for the exams. Yet this group was in fact one of the earliest in China to head out onto the ocean.

2. Where did the Chaoshan people come from? — the answer from molecular biology.

A study by Shantou University Medical College found that the people of the Taihang Mountains in Henan are made up mainly of the principal northern Han haplogroups; Cantonese and Hakka people are dominated by the principal southern indigenous haplogroups; while Chaoshan people show a slightly higher share of the principal northern Han haplogroups than of the southern indigenous ones. In one sentence: of the three big Guangdong groups (Chaoshan, Cantonese, Hakka), the Chaoshan are genetically the closest to the Central Plains Han. That is a molecular biology result, not something imagined.

In his essay "Hoklo", Professor Jao Tsung-I writes: "As to their coming from Henan, they are called He-lao; as to their living in Fujian, they are named Fu-lao." The ancestors of the Chaoshan people moved south from the Central Plains, mainly from around Henan, and worked their way through Putian, Zhangzhou and Quanzhou in Fujian before entering eastern Guangdong.

3. "Skirts and clogs fluttering like the men of Jin" — a survival of Wei-Jin style.

The early Qing poet Meng Liangkui wrote: "Strange that their customs have always been so different — in skirts and clogs they trip along like the men of Jin." Xu Qianxue's Miscellaneous Notes on Chaozhou also says: "Rain or shine they wear high clogs — is this elegance, or are they copying the men of Jin?" The Jin dynasty had its "Wei-Jin manner", known for loose robes, broad sashes and high wooden clogs, the most famous being the "Xie Gong clogs" that Xie Lingyun wore for climbing mountains. Liu Xun's Lingbiao Lu Yi records: "The pao tree grows in the rivers and streams... today the people of Chaozhou and Xunzhou mostly use its roots, hollowed out to make clogs." The tradition lasted until it gradually died out after reform and opening up.

4. What does Chaoshan DNA tell us?

The research points to a deeper question: after moving south, the Chaoshan people mixed the least with the local indigenous peoples (the Baiyue, the Li, the Lao). By comparison, Cantonese and Hakka people have a greater blood connection with southern indigenous groups (the Zhuang, the Li), while the Chaoshan are the closest of all to the Central Plains Han. Jao Tsung-I also notes: "Zhangzhou and Chaozhou people still call themselves He-lao" — and He-lao is not Henan but Hedong: Shanxi, east of the Yellow River loop.

Put simply: the Chaoshan are a comparatively "faithful to the original" line of Central Plains Han descendants, who kept more Central Plains cultural features after moving south — language, customs, eating habits.

Hany's Three Sentences

First: we Chaoshan people are the "genuine article" among the descendants of those who moved south from the Central Plains. That is not to say we are noble; it is to say that the cultural genes we carry — language, customs, food — really do run in one line from the Central Plains.

Second: "skirts and clogs fluttering like the men of Jin" — our dress tradition is a continuation of Wei-Jin style. A Qing poet looked at Chaoshan customs and said they were like the men of Jin, which shows the depth of the cultural bloodline is not one or two generations, but the wholeness of an entire cultural system.

Third: the Shanwei Tanka represent another history that can easily be overlooked. While everyone watches Chaoshan merchants and Chaoshan culture, this group that makes its living from the sea has long been a blind spot in academic research; that foreign scholars come specially to study it shows the subject has international academic value.

鄭哥 Hany

關於作者About the Author

鄭哥,90年代大學畢業,26年橫跨電子,家電、服裝、珠寶、教育、AI算力多個行業。做過中學教師、翻譯、外贸,現在搞七善門科技和星辰算力。口頭禪:「點解唔得?」Hany, university grad from the 90s, 26 years across electronics, appliances, fashion, jewelry, education, and AI compute. Former teacher, translator, trader. Now running Qishanmen Tech and Star Compute. Catchphrase: "Why not?"