Source: Useless Xiantan
Since the Qin Emperor Ying Zheng achieved great unification of the world, the centralized orthodox dynasty has not lived for another 300 years. This matter is a bit confusing. Why did the emperor be the only one, the emperor's power is supreme, and all the rights in the world are nationalized, the dynasty's regime is not becoming more and more stable, and its existence is not becoming longer and longer, but the dynasty changes are becoming more and more frequent, and its existence is also long and short and different?
1.
People who compile and study history like to pursue the causes of historical phenomena, so they often look at the rise and fall of dynasties and discuss them in their own writings, either implicitly or explicitly. Putting aside the discussions of the ancients, in terms of the discussions of current researchers, [Note 1], the main reasons for the demise of the dynasty can be roughly summarized into the following aspects:
One of which is political reasons, mainly due to the unscrupulous power, leading to corruption in the administration, and thus the resistance of the people. This is a common problem of the defeat of all dynasties, but the performance of each dynasty is not exactly the same. For example, Qin Shihuang's severe punishments, relatives of the Western Han Dynasty, eunuchs from the Eastern Han Dynasty, Tang Dynasty, and Ming Dynasty, cliques from the Eastern Han Dynasty, Tang Dynasty, Song Dynasty, and Ming Dynasty, the Qing Dynasty's emperors' tours and the corruption of officials, etc., all directly promoted the power struggle within the dynasty, breeding a large amount of corruption, and causing political crises.
The second is economic reasons, mainly land mergers, heavy taxes and service, and other financial issues. Almost no dynasty has no economic and financial problems when it perishes, so this is also a common problem in the destruction of the dynasty. For example, in the Qin Dynasty, when the fourth volume of "General History of China" edited by Bai Shouyi summarized the tyranny of Qin, "respecting and rewarding the merger" and "heavy taxes and labor" were both related to the economy; when discussing the five reasons for the collapse of the Qin Dynasty, the last one listed was "over-tightness of resources." For example, in the Tang Dynasty, the problem of land annexation was not well solved, resulting in a large number of fugitive household registrations. The peasant uprising at the end of the Tang Dynasty took place under this background. Another example is the Qing Dynasty, due to the early implementation of the policy of rest and recuperation, and the late implementation of the policy of "never increase taxes for breeding people" in the Kangxi , the population increased significantly, from less than 100 million (some say 150 million) in the early Qing Dynasty to 350 million in the middle of the Jiaqing . The increase in population led to a shortage of land resources, and land annexation, huge national fiscal expenditure, corruption of officials, and later opium trade increased the government's financial difficulties. These burdens were eventually passed on to the people. Therefore, the civil unrest gradually increased in the middle and late Qing Dynasty, and the Taiping Heavenly Kingdom Uprising, which began in the 30th year of Daoguang, was the largest of them.
The third is military reasons, mainly referring to the consumption of national strength by domestic and foreign wars. In Chinese history, except for the few foreign wars in the true sense, such as the Ming Dynasty's war against Japan, the Qing Dynasty's war against Russia and Myanmar, and the Opium War, the other foreign wars were only foreign wars in the sense of the dynasty's territory at that time. For example, the battle between in the Han Dynasty , the battle against the Turks in the Tang Dynasty, the battle against the Jin Dynasty in the Song Dynasty, the battle against the Later Jin (Qing) in the Ming Dynasty, and the battle against the Southern Ming regime in the Qing Dynasty, all of which are wars between independent dynasties, which are not considered real foreign wars in the eyes of people today. Beyond this, more wars are civil wars. There are basically two types of civil wars: one is aristocratic rebellion, such as the rebellion of the Seven Kingdoms in the Han Dynasty, the Eight Kings in the Jin Dynasty, the Anshi Rebellion of the Tang Dynasty, the rebellion of the Ningwang Rebellion in the Ming Dynasty, the Three Feudal Rebellion in the Qing Dynasty, etc.; the other is civil rebellion (it is commonly known as "peasant uprising", which is more cover-oriented than calling "civil rebellion". Because there are struggles or uprisings launched by religious figures, industrialists and merchants, and soldiers, not necessarily peasants). Whether internally or externally, war is a way to consume national strength. For example, the war against the Huns in the Han Dynasty and the battle against the Qing Dynasty in the Ming Dynasty were all major reasons for the national fiscal emptiness. What is more noteworthy is that all dynasties in Chinese history ended up in wars, especially civil wars.Civil wars that led to the demise of the dynasty were such as the Green Forest and Red Eyebrow Uprising in the Western Han Dynasty, the Yellow Turban Uprising in the Eastern Han Dynasty, the Wagangzhai Uprising in the Sui Dynasty, the Huang Chao Uprising in the Tang Dynasty, the Peasant Uprising in the late Yuan Dynasty, the uprising by Li Zicheng and others in the late Ming Dynasty, the Tongmenghui Uprising in the late Qing Dynasty, etc.
The fourth is the causes of natural disasters, mainly referring to social and economic problems caused by natural disasters such as rollers, skate locusts, earthquakes, and plagues, which trigger social and political crises. For example, the Qin Dynasty Chen Sheng and Wu Guang Uprising were in the background of corvee labor, but the direct reason was "heavy rain and roads were blocked", which made the gathered garrison soldiers unable to be evacuated in time. For example, in the late Western Han Dynasty, years of floods and droughts led to famine, which displaced a large number of people and became refugees, making human preparations for the uprising. The most frequently mentioned thing is that the Little Ice Age happened in the late Ming Dynasty, which led to cold climates and reduced grain production, which affected people's livelihoods and led to a great peasant uprising in the late Ming Dynasty.
In terms of disaster causes, the most important thing to mention is the overflow and divert of the Yellow River. According to scholars' statistics, in the 2500 years from the pre-Qin period to the Republic of China, the lower reaches of the Yellow River had overflowed more than 1,500 times, and 26 major diverters were made. For example, in the 168th year of the Northern Song Dynasty, the Yellow River overflowed 89 times; the Ming Dynasty overflowed 131 times; and the Qing Dynasty overflowed 194 times. In addition to causing direct economic losses, river disasters also bring financial pressure and corruption among officials. In the volume of "The Extravagance of Nanhe Officials during the Daoguang period" in Li Yuerui's "Spring Bing Shi Yecheng" in the late Qing Dynasty, it was said that the existence of this phenomenon not only consumed the country's financial resources, but also led to the corruption of the administration, which became an inducement to the collapse of the regime.
In addition to the above four aspects, there are also cultural explanations for the demise of the dynasty. For example, in the analysis of the demise of the Qin Dynasty in "Cambridge History of the Qin and Han Dynasties", among the five reasons, the first "moral factor" and the third "discarding tradition" are discussed from a cultural perspective; when analyzing the reasons for the demise of the Han Dynasty, it is believed that the popularity of the dynasty-change idea based on the cycle of five virtues in the elite class led to Cao Wei's legal replacement of the Han Dynasty, which is also a cultural analysis method.
also explains this reason from the perspective of character. For example, when "Cambridge History of Qin and Han Dynasties" analyzed the demise of the Qin Dynasty, Qin Shihuang's character was regarded as a reason. In the second volume of "General History of China" by Fu Lecheng, "History of Qin and Han Dynasties", the "character of a giant spirit" is directly used as one of the reasons for the demise of the Qin Empire in .
2.
Although the above list does constitute the cause of the demise of the dynasty, it is obvious that these reasons cannot effectively explain the cycle of the dynasty, that is, why in Chinese history, the change of dynasties with the change of surnames and names constitutes the only form of regime change?
Mr. Zhang Jinfan mentioned in "History of Chinese Political Systems" that "Looking at the political chaos over more than 2,000 years, the root cause lies in the autocratic system itself." Although he did not make a more specific analysis of this, this observation is very keen.
The so-called "monarchical autocratic system" refers to the regime system of dynasties in China, and is a centralized regime composed of the absolute and only core of the monarch. The third volume of "General History of China's Political System" written by Bai Gang and written by Meng Xiangcai, "Qin and Han Dynasties" when talking about the distinction between "state system" and "political system": "The state system refers to the class essence of the country, that is, the dictatorship of which class. The political system refers to the organizational form of the regime." He also believed that the political system in the Qin and Han Dynasties was a "feudal autocratic centralized administrative system." The political system of the Qin and Han dynasties has always been used by future generations.
When Meng Xiangcai discussed the drawbacks of the Qin and Han political systems, he just said vaguely that "this system strives to protect and strengthen the emperor's arbitrary and dictatorship", which belongs to rule of man, so the emperor's own qualities will directly affect the quality of national governance. In the fifth volume of "General History of China's Political System" written by Yu Lunian, the discussion on the drawbacks of the political system of , Sui, Tang and Tang dynasties, the discussion on the disadvantages of , Sui, Tang and Tang still emphasizes the harm of "rule of man". When discussing the shortcomings of China's politics throughout the ages, Mr. Qian Mu believed that "Chinese politics has always been focused on the rule of law, that is, institutionalized", but he also believed that "the central government has a tendency to gradually centralize power" and "it has become a huge political problem in China until today."Although the specific expressions of each scholar are slightly different, it is consistent to believe that centralization has great disadvantages.
In fact, the description of the characteristics of this system can be traced from Confucius's "family world" theory:
There was no centralized regime in the Confucius era, and his evaluation of the "family world" system has no derogatory meaning, because in his concept, the restraining effect of "family world" and "propriety and righteousness" are equally effective for the monarch and ministers, father and son, brothers, and couples. However, in this observation, Confucius pointed out that the way of conveying the "family and the world" regime "is the world and the world" and its disadvantages "making use is the work, and the war starts from this", which is the common characteristic of the later monarchs' centralized regime.
"Great World" refers to the system of passing on the throne, and "making use is to make a move, and soldiers start from this" refers to power and war. After the formation of the unified empire, power struggles and wars constituted powerful means of political struggles and dynasty changes. In terms of war, according to preliminary statistics from the "History of Chinese Military" compiled by the compilation group of " Chinese War Chronicle ", from the 2131 years from the Qin Dynasty to the late Qing Dynasty, domestic and foreign wars occurred in total. Among them, there were 2027 occurrences in the 1294 years after the Tang Dynasty (including the Tang Dynasty). Most of these wars are civil wars, and the most direct harm of the war is the sharp decline in population and economic corruption. Among them, the price paid for changing dynasties is the most tragic.
"Chronology of War in China" before the volume
Take population as an example. According to the research results of "History of China's Population" edited by Ge Jianxiong, we roughly list the population data of several dynasties as follows:
15 million to 18 million in the early Western Han Dynasty and 60 million in the last period.
In the early Eastern Han Dynasty, 27 million to 30 million, the highest was about 65 million, and the last was 22.24 to 23.61 million.
Tang Dynasty: 12.35 million in the early days, Tianbao at the end of the last days, 52.92 million in the early years of the Suzong, 16.99 million in the late years, and less than 15.76 million in the late Tang Dynasty.
Northern Song Dynasty: 2.54 million households in the early stage of the north, 5.91 million households in the late stage; 3.87 million households in the early stage of the south, 10.93 million households in the middle stage, and 12.19 million households in the late stage.
At the end of the Southern Song Dynasty, 11.74 million households (i.e., southern China region).
Yuan Dynasty: In the early days, 2.37 million households in the north and 11.63 million households in the south. At the end of the Yuan Dynasty, there were 13.4 million households.
Ming Dynasty: In the early days, there were 10.65 million households and 59.78 million households; Chongzhen in the early years, about 192.51 million households, and about 152.47 million households in the late years.
Although there are many reasons for the decline in population and the incomplete consistency of demographic regions also reduces the comparability between dynasties, it is a visible fact that the population cost of changing dynasties is a significant fact. Taking the Ming Dynasty as an example, conservative estimates show that in the wars and disasters in the late Ming Dynasty, the population lost at least 40 million. The existence of this phenomenon
makes people think deeply: Why in the more than 2,000-year political culture, the Chinese have not cultivated a more peaceful and cost-effective concept and system to solve problems in addition to the "family and world" style change?
We have to admit that under the monarchy centralized system, the supreme absolute power of the emperor is one of the major reasons for the regime crisis. Qin II Hu Hai said:
It was under the guidance of this concept that Qin II did not adjust his ruling strategy, but instead became more and more powerful, killing his ministers and raising labor, which accelerated the demise of the Qin Dynasty.
This view of Qin II is not an isolated phenomenon. Han Gaozu was in the Changle Palace . Because he enjoyed the glory of the rituals of the monarch and ministers formulated by Sun Tong , he once said: "I know it is the most precious thing for the emperor today." Tang Taizong said: "People say that being the emperor will be respectful and fearless, but I think it is right and humble and always be afraid." Song Taizu also commented: "Since ancient times, those who have been kings have rarely restrained themselves." These remarks and comments all show that the imperial power itself has hidden political crises.
Not only that, because of the supremacy of imperial power, it also brought about the covetousness of others. Qin Shihuang visited Kuaiji . Among the people watching, items said: "That can be replaced." This concept is an important driving force for changing dynasties.
of the Jin Dynasty discussed this phenomenon:
Pi Rixiu of the Tang Dynasty also said:
Behind this kind of regime competition, on the one hand, it is the supreme attraction of imperial power to covettors, and on the other hand, it is the indifference to the "people's lives" for the sake of power.
What is strange is that although foolish and tyrannical kings emerge one after another, even Emperor Taizong of Tang once said, "If the emperor has the right, people will recommend it as the main one; if there is no right, people will abandon it without it." However, in ancient China, it was rare to see anyone reflecting on the monarchical centralized regime itself. Most people's discussions are only on the impact of the king's personal qualities on political governance. Even by the end of the Ming Dynasty, this situation did not change much.
The criticism of the monarchy in the late Ming Dynasty was issued by three major thinkers: Gu Yanwu, , Huang Zongxi, , and Wang Fuzhi, . In "Rizhilu Zhengshi", Gu Yanwu said, "changing the surname and changing the name is called the destruction of the country; benevolence and righteousness are filled with people and generals are called the destruction of the world." He directly distinguished the difference between "country" (characterized by the maintenance of power, that is, a dynasty in the same family) and "world" (characterized by the transmission of values, not by the time when the dynasty exists). In fact, even admitting that the imperial power cannot override the values with more universal significance.
, Wang Fuzhi discussed many times in "Reading the Comprehensive Relationship" that the survival of the "one surname" dynasty (private world) cannot be compared with the life and death of the people (public world). For example, "The world is not the private of a surname. There is a constant number of cultivation and shortness of rise and fall. If the surname changes without the bloodshed in the wilderness, then the people will be taught lightly and the people will not be sick." "In terms of the kindness of the superior, the rise and fall of a surname is private, and the life and death of the people is the public."
more fiercely criticized from Huang Zongxi. In "Mingyi Waiwenlu·Yuanjun", Huang Zongxi said:
In this passage, Huang Zongxi believed that the monarch "takes my great selfishness as the great master of the world,... regards the world as a great industry", which is "the great harm of the world". He pointed the finger directly at the originally sacred and inviolable imperial power. In the political background at that time, it did have a deafening power.
However, whether it is Wang Fuzhi, Huang Zongxi or Gu Yanwu, their criticism is actually only about changing dynasties (thus changing one surname to another, bleeding more and less), and does not deny the centralized monarchy. Their criticism is more about circles about the personal qualities of the emperor (wise monarchs or tyrants), rather than targeting the harm of this political system, and even more about creating a new political system. Therefore, even Huang Zongxi, at the end of "The Yuanjun", still turned the theme back to the argument of "understanding the position of being a king", rather than further questioning the legitimacy of the monarchy centralization.
3.
Although the unified monarchy system did not reduce the disasters that occurred during the process of changing dynasties, historically, the change of dynasties originated from the decline of dynasties' politics, and the political decline of dynasties and the final demise did not all occur during the heyday of the monarchy's power. On the contrary, most of the time, the decline of the dynasty began when the monarchy was weakened.
We might as well list some examples as evidence:
Qin Dynasty: The king's power was weakened by eunuch Zhao Gao during the Qin Dynasty.
Western Han Dynasty: The power of the monarch was weakened by foreign relatives and eunuchs after Emperor Yuan.
Eastern Han Dynasty: The power of the monarch was greatly weakened by foreign relatives and eunuchs after Emperor He.
Tang Dynasty: In the early stage, Wu Zetian usurped the Tang Dynasty. In the later period of Xuanzong, the monarchy was divided by separatist rule of the vassal states, and later weakened by eunuchs and cliques.
Northern Song Dynasty: The power of the monarch was weakened by the powerful minister Cai Jing during the Huizong period.
Southern Song Dynasty: The power of the king was weakened by the powerful minister Shi Miyuan during the Ningzong period.
Yuan Dynasty: The king's power was weakened by the powerful minister Boyan during the reign of Emperor Shun.
Ming Dynasty: The king's power was weakened by eunuch Wei Zhongxian in the Apocalypse era.
Qing Dynasty: The monarchy was weakened by the powerful minister Heshen in the late Qianlong period; during the Tongzhi and Guangxu period, the monarchy was controlled by the Empress Dowager Cixi .
From these dynasties, an important reason for the weakening of the monarchy was that the emperor was often very young when he ascended the throne.For example, in the Western Han Dynasty, Emperor Cheng and Emperor Ai ascended the throne at the age of 20, Emperor Ping was 9, and Ruziying was only 2 years old. In the Eastern Han Dynasty, no emperor who ascended the throne had been more than 20 years old, Emperor Ling at the end of the Han Dynasty was 13 years old, Emperor Shao was 14 years old, and Emperor Xian was only 9 years old. At the end of the Tang Dynasty, Emperor Xizong was 12 years old, Emperor Zhaozong was 22 years old, and Emperor Ai was 13 years old. In the Northern Song Dynasty, Zhezong was 10 years old and Huizong was 19 years old. At the end of the Southern Song Dynasty, Emperor Gong was 4 years old, Duanzong was 9 years old, and the young master was 8 years old. In the Yuan Dynasty, Ningzong was 7 years old and Huizong was 14 years old. In the Ming Dynasty, Emperor Tianqi was 16 years old and Emperor Chongzhen was 19 years old. In the Qing Dynasty, Emperor Tongzhi was 6 years old, Emperor Guangxu was 5 years old, and Emperor Xuantong was 4 years old. On the way to the dynasty, the emperor's young age may not be too harmful. For example, when Emperor Wu of Han ascended the throne, Emperor Shunzhi of Qing Dynasty, he was 6 years old when Emperor Kangxi ascended the throne, and he did not bring serious crises to the regime. However, when the dynasty was on the decline, the emperor's young age provided an opportunity for the stolen power of powerful ministers and close ministers, which led to the expansion of power of certain powerful groups and thus led to widespread corruption, which was one of the signs of the decline of the dynasty's politics.
A huge drawback brought about by the weakening of the monarchy is cliché politics. Fraternity did not begin in the era after the emergence of the monarchical centralized regime. "The Book of Documents: Hong Fan" "Without bias and no party, the king's way is volatile; without party, the king's way is mediocre", which refers to fraternity. Confucius also said that "a gentleman is circumspect but not a comparison, and a villain is circumspect but not a comparison". "Yi Zhou Book·Historical Records" has the term "fighting for the party below" and "fighting for the party inside". "The Strategies of the Warring States·Zhao Ce" Su Qin said that Zhao Wang also had the idea of "sticking rumors and blocking the door to the party". After the Qin Dynasty, the issue of fritories was a major political chronic disease in ancient China. There were great political strife in the late Han Dynasty, Tang Dynasty, Song Dynasty and Ming Dynasty. Regarding the harm of the cliques, Li Deyu of the Tang Dynasty, Wang Yuwei , Ouyang Xiu , Sima Guang , Su Shi , Fan Chunren , Huazhen, Li Gang, Li Shi , Chen Qiqing, Xu Qian of the Yuan Dynasty, Cui Xian , Wang Shizhen , etc., all discussed in special texts. The most famous saying is Ouyang Xiu's "A gentleman and a gentleman regard the same as his friends, and a villain and a villain regard the same profit as his friends", which is roughly derived from Confucius' statement.
But the cliques in Chinese history are definitely not the two parts of "gentleman" and "villain". Behind the clique is the redistribution of political power resources, so the parties formed cannot be distinguished from a completely moral perspective. What's worse is that in a society that advocates power, people who are often regarded as "villains" are more likely to form factions and eliminate dissidents under the name of "clubs". The party and finings in the late Han Dynasty, the Qingliu in the late Tang Dynasty, the pseudo-learning in the Song Dynasty, and the Donglin in the Ming Dynasty were all killed under such a name.
Friends are almost the inevitable result of the weakening of the monarchy, but even at the heyday of imperial power, friends are an indelible shadow in dynastic politics. The most typical example in this aspect is in the Qing Dynasty. In view of the party struggles in the Ming Dynasty, the rulers of the early Qing Dynasty severely cracked down on frites since the beginning of the country. In the 11th year of Shunzhi, Chen Mingxia, the leader of the Southern Party, was killed. The following year, it was compiled against the Chen Mingxia incident and promulgated by the "Imperial Ministers' Warning of the Heart" designated by Shunzhi . The first article was "Zhi Party". It can be seen that the main reason for killing Chen Mingxia was that Emperor Shunzhi was worried that the Han ministers' gangs would threaten the imperial power. In the 17th year of Shunzhi, it was also ordered that scholars should be strictly prohibited from forming associations and forming alliances and controlling the government. During the Kangxi period, there were many imperial edicts prohibiting the formation of gangs. In the eighth year of Kangxi, Oboi was eliminated in the name of forming a clique. Later, the crown prince Yinreng was deposed in the name of a clique. Yongzheng Emperor specially wrote "On the Fraternity" to ban the fraternity. In the fourth year of Yongzheng, he also punished the minister of life in the name of forming a clique for personal gain. During the Qianlong period, the imperial power reached its peak. Although many edicts were issued to urge the ministers not to form cliques, Heshen, a corrupt official who had caused great damage to the political dynasty in the Qing Dynasty, was leaving this dynasty.
This is a phenomenon worthy of attention. The authority of the monarch can effectively suppress cliques, but cliques will not decrease or disappear due to this inhibition. On the contrary, using the authority of the monarch to form cliques is a more common political phenomenon . Therefore, the weakening of the monarchy does not mean that the institutional power of the monarchy is weakened.The weakening of the power of the monarch is just a way of power splitting under the centralized system. Behind it is the powerful institutional power that provides support. The manipulators of power always act as a mighty man under the banner of the monarchy. In other words, it is the authority of the monarchy that provides guarantees for the power manipulator to manipulate power. The sayings of "Tai'a's rebelliousness" and "stealing the power" that often appear in history books refer to this.
4.
It is precisely because the power of the monarch can effectively suppress cliques that the ancient Chinese people often turn their attention to wise monarchs in political design, hoping that the emergence of wise monarchs can achieve political clarity and great rule in the world. The "Ming" of "wise ruler" is not only a moral requirement, but also a requirement for political governance methods. Therefore, on the one hand, the ancient Chinese advocated strengthening the monarch's power (granting the monarch's power to sacredness), and on the other hand, they advocated that the monarch and his ministers "govern the world together."
Strengthening the monarchy and co-governance of the world, both of which can be traced back to the Warring States Period. The former is like Shang Yang and Han Feizi's statements, and there is no need to discuss them. "Yin Wenzi·The Great Dao II" also calls "the ruler and the ministers" the "unchanging method", and the king must use his skills to control the subordinates. When discussing the six signs of the survival of the country, Yin Wenzi also said:
Yin Wenzi regards "the power of the king is light and the power of the ministers" as a sign of the destruction of the country, and also expresses the idea of strengthening the power of the king very well. Therefore, he believes: "The foundation of chaos in politics is the power of the lower government, the subordinates invade the superiors, the ministers use the skills of the king, and do not fear the prohibitions of the times, and do not act in the way of the times. This is the way of chaos."
However, Yin Wenzi's "the upper one cannot defeat the lower ones, the lower ones do not violate the superiors, and the upper and lower ones do not defeat each other" means that the use of the power of the king must have a certain standard. "Victory" refers to bullying. The king blindly bullying his subordinates is also one of the reasons for the chaos. Although Yin Wenzi did not involve the issue of "the ruler and ministers are governed together", the statement that "the upper and lower levels do not defeat each other" shows that he does not agree with the infinite expansion of the monarch's power, but also needs a balance between the monarch and ministers.
What is more radical than Yin Wenzi and can be regarded as the source of the concept of "co-governance of the monarch and ministers" in later generations is the statement in "Six Strategies" and "Lüshi Chunqiu". "Liu Tao·Wen Tao·Wen Tao·Wen Shi" says:
Similar statements are also found in "Liu Tao·Wu Tao·Fai" and "Shun Qi", as well as "This Bamboo Book Anniversary" and "Yi Zhou Book·Yin Zhu Jie". It can be roughly judged that this is an idea that was born in the Warring States Period and even before the ages.
In "Lüshi Chunqiu·Mengchun Ji·Guigong", this concept is explained in more detail:
Comparing the previous statements of Wang Fuzhi and Huang Zongxi, it is not difficult to find their similarity to this text. It can be seen that the source of the thought of "Public World" can be traced back to "Lüshi Chunqiu".
"Public" on the one hand means that the king should be selfless in governing the world, and on the other hand, it means that the world cannot be exclusively enjoyed by a single surname, but should obey the higher "morality" principle, which is the so-called "this position of the emperor, those with the Tao can take over it" ("Yi Zhou Shu·Yin Zhu Jie").
"Those who have the truth take it away" also represents a way of transferring power. This is an important basis for the new dynasty to find legitimacy for its own replacement of the old dynasty when the dynasties of later generations changed. Therefore, we cannot over-explain the concept of "public world". However, the spread of this concept in future generations has turned the concept of "co-governance of the monarch and ministers" into a common political discourse, which is a precious legacy in the history of Chinese political thought.
The idea of "co-governance of the king and his subjects" was common in the Han Dynasty. Jia Yi's "New Book: Xiu Zhengyu" uses the mouth of his master Shangfu ( Jiang Shang ) to say: "The world is surrounded by a turtle, and one person has it; the people are turtle, and one person is responsible for it. Therefore, the world is not a family, but a Taoist. Therefore, the world is only a Taoist, and only a Taoist, and only a Taoist, and only a Taoist, and only a Taoist, and only a Taoist, and only a Taoist, and it is suitable for a long time." The turtle, vast. The twig (cluster), many appearances. The so-called "one person has it" and "one person has it (govern it)" means what Shi Kuang said in the 14th year of "Zuo Zhuan" that Shi Kuang said, "a king born to the people and established himself, and the ministers and ministers are the ministers." But the meaning of the word is a bit different from the statements in "Yi Zhou Shu" and "Lüshi Chunqiu", which is that it highlights the privilege of "one person" (the emperor) having and governing the world.
More clearly uses this word as Emperor Xuan of Han. Historical records have said: "The only one who governs the world with me is the only one who has good deeds!" [Note 2] This statement points out that the rule of the king and his subjects is the ruler authorized by the king to handle specific affairs, and does not mean that the king and his subjects jointly own the world. The world is just the king (name).
A passage from the minister of Emperor Cheng of Han Gu Yong can be used as a footnote to this way of governing the country:
The "public" world mentioned here does not really emphasize that "the world" belongs to the people, but only warns those who are the emperor and princes who are "unrighteous" and do not consider the people, they will be at risk of losing power ("not being private in one surname"). The statements similar to
are listed in historical books in a variety of ways. For example, in the 15th year of Jian'an, Cao Cao said: "Since ancient times, the king who received the order and revived was unable to have wise and gentlemen ruled the world together?" Even in the Ming Dynasty in the era of totalitarianism, Zhu Yuanzhang also said in the edict:
Emperor Qianlong of the Qing Dynasty also said:
From this we can see that "governing the world together" is only a limited decentralization under the wings of the monarch's power, and does not mean that the "governing the world" has much power to speak out.
What is more noteworthy is that the "partners" of "co-governance" are not the vast majority of the people, but just the best among them - ministers or wise people. For example, Dong Zhongshu compares the relationship between the king, the minister and the people to the human body: the king is the heart, the ministers and officials are limbs, organs and poles, and sages are the figures who make all parts of the body surrender to the control of the heart, while the people are just "body". A clearer way to distinguish this difference is Wen Yanbo from the Song Dynasty. Volume 221 of "Such Zizhi Tongjian Changbian":
Wen Yanbo's words clearly show that the "literati and officials" (mainly officials) who rule the world with the emperor is not "people" [Note 3].
Although "partners" have such restrictions, the concept of "governing the world together" still leaves a little gap in the layers of shady curtains of the monarchy centralization system. This is: a king cannot take the world as his own and voluntarily, and should use the welfare of the people as his purpose of rule. Therefore, selecting virtuous people to govern the world together is the meaning of governing the country.
5.
It should be admitted that there are indeed some political concepts in Chinese history that are quite advanced, and "governing the world together" is one of them. Although "co-governance" under the monarchical centralized system is often a "true lie", in an era of relatively active thinking, other more radical statements have been derived from this concept. To give a few examples:
"How to discuss coins by the ministers and ministers" in the Song Dynasty:
"The King's Power" in the Song Dynasty:
Qiu Jun of the Ming Dynasty " University of Yanyi Supplement " Volume 10 "The Essence of Governing the Country and Pacifying the World":
Wang Yangming of the Ming Dynasty "Shandong Township Examination Record·Rites·The King and the People Who Love You Must Be Peace":
It can be found that the ancient Chinese were not completely ignorant of the drawbacks of the political system of the era he lived in, but had a deep understanding and tried to propose solutions. For example, Huang Luweng directly linked some political disadvantages to the power of the monarch: if the emperor does everything himself, he will definitely not be able to cover everything, so this practice burys the disaster ("the origin of trouble"); the supremacy of the imperial power can be used by those who steal the authority ("the gradual power of power"). Behind these conceptual "co-governance" ideas is the requirement that the emperor should transfer some of his power.
Unfortunately, although ideas can form part of political philosophy, they may not necessarily affect the direction of real politics. In reality, "co-governance" is often a supplementary means of monarchy. In dynasties where monarchy is weakened, empirical centralization is preferred. What’s even more unfortunate is that the high centralization itself is the beginning of the decline of the dynasty. This situation is very specific in Emperor Wu of Han, Emperor Xuanzong of Tang , Emperor Xuanzong of Tang , Jiajing of Ming Dynasty, and Qianlong of Qing Dynasty, and will not be described in detail here.
It needs to be reflected in that from the 2131 years from the Qin Dynasty to the late Qing Dynasty, China's large and small dynasties experienced dozens of large and small dynasties, but its evolution in political system was very limited. Even if there are some evolutions, they are still towards autocracy and dehumanization, with the focus on preventing the people.Just as Ye Shi said in the Song Dynasty: "In ancient times, the king not only nourished the people, but also taught the people, and then governed the people, but his strength was always more than his strength. In later generations, he did not raise or teach, and he specialized in governing the people, but his strength was still insufficient." "Specially governing the people" became the fundamental driving force for the existence of these dynasties. Therefore, in an era of political decline, those who want to revitalize the dynasty only think about strengthening the monarchy and increasing the weight of centralization. No one has ever considered giving up power (such as Zhang Juzheng's reform in the Ming Dynasty). The rulers of the dynasty themselves have no intention of living for hundreds of years, and they are satisfied if they can live for hundreds of years. Zhu Yuanzhang's statement that "three hundred, only eight are enough" comes from this. The cycle of dynasties not only led to the lack of continuity of the regime, but also led to the concept of "winning the world" into a political culture, which is not contrary to the practice of almost everyone, and thus became the driving force for the cycle of dynasty. The cost of dynasty cycle is war and displacement and death of the people.
Therefore, under the issue of dynasty cycle, how to transfer power to truly achieve a situation where a people "govern the world together" is not so much a change in political system, but rather a cultural transformation. ——Ideas are always more illusory than reality.
First draft on February 8, 2021 is in Wuluzhai
[Original published on February 8, 2021 My headline account]
[Note]
[1] I chose several works of general Chinese history at hand as samples. These books are: "General History of China" edited by Fan Wenlan and Cai Meibiao in mainland China, "General History of China" edited by Bai Shouyi, "General History of China" edited by Fu Lecheng in Taiwan, "General History of China" edited by Chen Zhiping in , "General History of China" edited by Cambridge Chinese History (Chinese translation) in the United States (Chinese translation, missing Song Dynasty volume and early and mid-Qing volume), "Harvard Chinese History" edited by Bu Zhengmin, as well as "Chinese History Series" published by Shanghai People's Publishing House and "Chinese History Series" published by Kotanshe in Japan. In addition, we refer to Qian Mu's "Outline of National History", Meng Sen's "Lecture Notes on History of Ming and Qing Dynasties", and the "Complete History of the Qing Dynasty" in the library of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Lu Simian's "General History of China", American Yi Peixia "Cambridge Illustrations History of China" and other references have not been included. Not every of these works has obvious chapters to discuss the reasons for the rise and fall of dynasties, and even the writings of different dynasties are different, but each works involve this issue in their narrative. For example, when "Cambridge History of Qin and Han Dynasties" talked about the demise of the Qin Dynasty, it had a special section "The Reasons of Collapse"; but there was no such special section in the Han Dynasty, but it only discussed this issue in the chapter "The Demise of the Han Dynasty" (especially the "Analysis of the Demise of the Han Dynasty"). In addition, different authors' views are not completely consistent during specific discussions. The summary of this article is only a summary of its general idea and does not correspond to the specific expressions of each book.
[2] Note: See "Book of Jin·Biography of Liu Wei" with "Liu Bo" Biography, and many historical records in later generations quote this article. "The Book of Han·Biography of Xunli", "The Book of Later Han·Biography of Zuo Xiong", Wang Fu's "The Lurking Theory·Three Styles" and others all wrote, "If you share this with me, only two thousand good stones are the only good ones."
[3] Mr. Yu Yingshi quoted this passage in Chapter 3 of "Zhu Xi's Historical World", believing that "literati" and "people" cannot be regarded as an "class" that is opposed to "schools and officials" because "literati" are "people" who have obtained the qualification to rule the world through the imperial examination. This view is obviously problematic. In addition to ignoring the metaphor of Dong Zhongshu's "body" (see "Spring and Autumn Festival: Traveling of Heaven and Earth"), he did not notice the statement of Emperor Xuan of Han, and he also ignored the true meaning of the concept of "governing the world together" preserved in various historical books since the pre-Qin period. It is obvious that Wen Yanbo did not agree to govern the world with the "literati" because the literati came from the people. He used this word in traditional semantics. What's more, the "literati and officials" and "people" (the words of Shenzong) in the entire context of this passage are both opposites.
