Chinese Despotism Reconsidered: Monarchy and Its Critics in the Ch'in and Early Han Empires.

Abstract

Despotism has been considered a characteristic feature of the Chinese imperial system throughout its two-thous and year history. By examining the development of the concept and the institution of emperorship from the time of Ch'in Shih-huang-ti through the early years of Han Wu-ti's reign, this study demonstrates that the power and the authority of these monarchs were limited by custom, by practical exigencies, and by law. Part One analyzes Ch'in Shih-huang-ti's patrimonial rule and then shows how the imperial institution was redefined and rebuilt by the early Han monarchs, who negotiated with their advisors, their kinsmen, and an entrenched bureaucracy to regain the privileges the First Emperor had once claimed. Parts Two and Three look at how certain late Warring States and early Han texts--particularly Lu Chia's Hsin-yu, Chia I's Hsin-shu, the Kuan Tzu, the Huai-nan Tzu, the Ching-fa and the memorials of Tung Chung-shu in the Han-shu--discuss the role of the ruler in the legal life of the community. These texts share an assumption that the ruler was bound by a complex network of laws from the vague and unchangeable laws of the ancestors to more abstract rules formulated on timeless and universal st and ards. Like political thinkers in the early medieval West, whom I draw upon for comparative insights, these writers contended that the right to rule was conditional, that there were laws that could be called upon to judge the emperor, and that there was justification for removing an unlawful ruler. I conclude that the rulers of Ch'in and Han times were despotic neither in theory nor in practice.