‘Bang’ as the Community Administrative Organization in the Chinese Early States

Abstract

It is widely accepted by scholars from China and overseas that China has entered the phase of state in Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties (though some foreign scholars do not acknowledge the existence of Xia dynasty). However, they were best categorized as early states, since they held some vestiges of pre-state. Specifically, kinships and correspondent organizations adopted from primitive clan society still played important and expansive functions, which was imprinted on the community administrative organizations of the three dynasties and reflected in the management and manipulation of the state over these organizations. ‘Bang’ (chiefdom), inherited from clan society, was the unit of the community administrative organization in that era. The central management over chiefdoms was a ‘ji fu’ (or ‘fu’) system, which, based on differences in consanguinity, stipulated and distributed a gradient of obligations to ‘inner and outer domains’ (see part 3 and 4). It was clearly different from the region-based family registry system developed in mature states in the Warring States period, and Qin and Han dynasties. The following passages will explore relevant historical records and provide a detailed analysis on the community administrative organization in Chinese early states. ‘THE LAND UNDER HEAVEN’ WITH MYRIAD CHIEFDOMS People in the three dynasties named their states as the ‘tian xia’ (the land under heaven), which comprised ‘zhong yang’ (the center) and ‘si fang’ (the four quarters). ‘Tian xia’ was formed by many ‘bang’ Shen Changyun / ‘Bang’ as the Community Administrative Organization 181 with different sizes, so they were also referred as ‘tian xia wan bang’ (myriad chiefdoms on the land under heaven). During Chinese early states, a major chiefdom in the center reigned minor chiefdoms at its periphery. Records and documents of Zhou dynasty indicate that the ‘tian xia wan bang’ pattern was well-established. For instance, Qiang pan, a famous bronze vessel (basin) manufactured in Zhou dynasty has an inscription, saying that ‘The heavenly King Wen... humbly owned the land under heaven, and unified myriad chiefdoms’. It shows that the government of King Wen was extoled by chiefdoms; while people in Zhou considered King Wen as the founder of their state. ‘Luogao’ (Announcement Concerning Luo; 洛诰) in Shangshu (The Book of Documents) records the comment of Zhougong (the Duke of Zhou) on the significance of Luoyi (Luo) that ‘from this time, by the government administered in this central spot, all the states will be conducted to repose.’ Myriad chiefdoms would be perfectly governed by Zhou s officers from the center of the land. The poem ‘Daya: Wenwang’ (Greater Odes of the Kingdom: King Wen; 大雅文王 · ), in Shijing (The Book of Poetry) says that ‘The doings of High Heaven, / Have neither sound nor smell. / Take your pattern from king Wen, / And the myriad regions will repose confidence in you.’ The logos is subtle, but if one imitates the deed of King Wen, he would be trusted by myriad chiefdoms under heaven. At the end of the Western Zhou, similar pattern persisted in eulogies to eminent governors, as ‘Xiaoya: Liuyue’ (Minor Odes of the Kingdom: the Sixth Month; 小雅六月 · ), Shijing lauds: ‘For peace or for war fit is Ji-fu, / A pattern to all the States.’ Yin Jifu was the paragon of all chiefdoms. ‘Wan’ (myriad) was not an exact number; instead, it merely indicated the huge number of chiefdoms. Thus it was replaced by ‘duo’ (many) or ‘shu’ (various) at times. For instance, ‘Dagao’ (Great Announcement; 大诰) and ‘Wuyi’ (Against Luxurious Ease; 无逸) in Shangshu documents respectively: ‘The king speaks to the following effect: ‘Ho! I make a great announcement to you, (the princes of) the many states, and to you, the managers of my affairs...’ ‘King Wen did not dare to go to excess in his excursions or his hunting, and from the various states he would receive only the correct amount of contribution.’ ‘Duo bang’ was also called as ‘duo fang’ (many regions), because of the proximity in pronunciation. For example, in ‘Duofang’ (Numerous Regions; 多方), Shangshu, the announcement of the Duke of Zhou to conquered clans of Xiang and Shang starts with the phrase: ‘I make an announcement to you of the four states, and the numerous (other) regions...’ Social Evolution & History / March 2019 182 The custom was inherited from people in Shang dynasty. In records of divination on oracle bones, chiefdoms were called as ‘fang’ by Shang people, such as ‘tu fang’, ‘gui fang’, ‘qiang fang’, ‘qiong fang’, ‘ren fang’, ‘jing fang’, ‘ma fang’, ‘yu fang’, ‘lin fang’, ‘zhou fang’, ‘shao fang’, ‘wei fang’, ‘yin fang’, etc., which were collectively referred as ‘duo fang’. For example: In the day ding-you, (the king) asked (whether it is fortunate) to call for an assembly of many ‘fang’... (Guo 1999: No. 28008) To divine: (whether it is fortunate) to designate Ming to lead many ‘fang’... (Li 1982: No. 528) Literature in later ages referred ‘bang’ or ‘fang’ in Shang and Zhou dynasties as ‘zhu hou’ (vassal state) or ‘guo’ (state). In Zhan Guo Ce: Qi Ce (Records of the Warring States: Ch’I; 国策 战 策 齐 · ), Yan Chu (Yen Ch’u), who was coeval with King Xuan of Qi (King Hsüan of Ch’i), said: ‘I have heard that of old, in the time of Yü (Yu) the Great, there were nobles ruling over ten thousand States... Coming down to the time of T’ang (Tang), the nobles were three thousand.’ Lüshi Chunqiu:Yongmin (Lü’s Annals: the Use of People; 氏春秋 吕 用民 · ) recapitulated this statement: ‘In the time of Yu the Great, there were myriad kingdoms; only more than three thousand existed in Tang’s time.’ It can be inferred that the ‘myriad chiefdoms’ pattern prevailed in the age of Xia as well. Actually, the political pattern stemmed from pre-state legendary eras. According to documents, the ‘five emperors’ period was characterized by myriad chiefdoms. ‘Yaodian’ (Canon of Yao; 典 尧 ), Shangshu, memorized achievements of Yao, saying that he ‘thence proceeded to the love of (all in) the nine classes of his kindred, who (thus) became harmonious. He (also) regulated and polished the people (of his domain), who all became brightly intelligent. (Finally), he united and harmonized the myriad states; and so the black-haired people were transformed. The result was (universal) concord.’ In Shiji: Wudi Benji (Records of the Grand Historian: Annals of the Five Emperors; 史记五帝本纪 · ), similar notion was rephrased as ‘the various states were at peace.’ Meanwhile, Shiji also recorded ‘myriad chiefdoms’ in Huangdi s (Yellow emperor) time that ‘he appointed a chief and deputy superintendent over international affairs, and the various states being at peace...’ Additionally, ‘Gaoyaomo’ (Counsels of Gao-yao; 皋陶谟), Shangshu, mentioned ‘myriad chiefdoms’ in Shun s era: ‘I [Yu] urged them [people] (further) to exchange what they had for what they had not, and to dispose of their accumulated stores. (In this way) all the people got grain to eat, and the myriad regions began to come under good rule...’ and ‘So far good! But let your light shine, O Di, all under heaven, even to every grassy corner of the sea-shore, and throughout the myriad regions the most worthy of the people will Shen Changyun / ‘Bang’ as the Community Administrative Organization 183 all (wish) to be your ministers.’ All the quotations indicate that the notion ‘myriad chiefdoms’ in the age of five emperors was unanimous among ancient literature and documents. In other word, the phase of ‘myriad chiefdoms’ was established in China at the age of preand early civilization. On the other hand, is the nature of ‘bang’ in clan society identical to that of the three dynasties? The answer would be positive. Except several vassal states established by the royal court of Zhou in the Western Zhou period (they were called ‘bang’, but should be considered as secondary), the inner or outer structure of the rest of ‘bang’ was not fundamentally different from their precursors. The only difference was that in the three dynasties, a state began to form, as a great ‘bang’ governed all other chiefdoms with hereditary sovereignty. Although all chiefdoms should accept the central administration of the sovereignty, their nature was not altered radically. Moreover, the great central chiefdom (or the king s chiefdom) was still one ‘bang’ among myriad chiefdoms under heaven, whose structure and nature did not change either. It was not a state independent to other chiefdoms; instead, the commonwealth of the king s chiefdom and other chiefdoms controlled by the great one formed the state. Zhao Boxiong s analysis on this issue was exemplary. Although he only discussed the nature of state in Zhou dynasty, it can be plausibly applied to Xia and Shang dynasties. Since all chiefdoms strewed on the land submitted to the power of a single sovereignty, it is reasonable to consider them as administrative organizations subordinate to the state, which was represented by the central chiefdom. As it was reflected in ‘Zicai’ (Timber of the Rottlera; 梓材), Shangshu, the king issued decrees to chiefs, who were obliged to ensure the obedience of the people to these orders. ‘The king says, O Feng, to secure a good understanding between the multitudes of his people and his ministers (on the one hand), and the great families (on the other); and (again) to secure the same between all the subjects under his charge, and the sovereign – is the part of the ruler of a state. If you regularly, in giving out your orders...’ It was the exhortation of the King to Feng, the Duke of Kang, that his order should be regularly transferred from the great families to their subjects, from the king s court to his ministers. Moreover, ‘Dagao’ stated that ‘The king speaks to the following effect: Ho! I make a great announcement to you, (the princes of) the many states, and to you, the managers of my affairs.’” While ‘Duofang’ documented that ‘The king speaks to the following effect: “Ho! I make an announcement to you of