Cambridge History of China: Qin and Han Dynasties (221 BC - 220 AD)

Author: (British), (British)
Publisher:
Publishing Date: 2006-12-01
Features: This Cambridge History of China: The Qin and Han Periods, originally the first volume of the Cambridge History of China edited jointly by John K. Fairbank and, was published by Cambridge University Press in 1986. The Cambridge History of China was not printed in chronological order of its volumes. Before this volume, Volumes 10, 11, and 3 had already been published and translated by the Translation Office of the Institute of History, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, under the titles The Cambridge History of Late Imperial China and The Cambridge History of the Sui and Tang Dynasties, respectively. Now, friends at the Institute of History have translated this volume as The Cambridge History of China: The Qin and Han Periods, and they asked me to write a few words for the book. I feel both honored and somewhat apprehensive. My knowledge in the field of Qin and Han history is limited, and I hardly qualify to write anything. However, thanks to the kindness of Professor, I received a copy of this volume immediately after its publication, making me one of the earliest readers in China. Upon careful review of the entire volume, I wrote some reflections as a book review and published them in Historical Intelligence. In it, I called for the urgent translation of this volume. Now, thanks to the efforts of everyone at the Institute of History, this wish has been realized, and it is indeed my duty to write a preface. The Cambridge History of China is a monumental work, bringing together the efforts of many Western scholars who specialize in the history of China. This volume is no exception. It consists of 16 chapters, with the original text spanning 981 pages. The authors of each chapter are generally well-versed in their respective fields of study. For example, the author of Chapter 1, The State of Qin and the Qin Empire, is Professor (Burkhard Karlgren), a retired professor from the University of Pennsylvania, who published The Unification of China in the 1930s. The author of Chapter 3, Wang Mang, the Revival of the Han, and the Later Han, is Professor (Bennett J. Bronson), a professor at Columbia University, who wrote The Revival of the Han. The author of Chapter 6, Foreign Relations of the Han Dynasty, is Professor (Yue Yongsheng), a professor at Princeton University, who authored Trade and Expansion in Han China. The author of Chapter 9, Qin and Han Law, is Professor (Hsiao Chih-wai), a retired professor at Leiden University, who wrote Qin Legal Bamboo Slips and Han Legal Bamboo Slips. The authors of Chapters 7, The Structure and Activities of Government, and 12, Religion and the Background of Intellectual Culture, are Dr. (Loewe), a research fellow at the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of Cambridge, who has published Han Administrative Documents and The Way to Paradise. Similar examples abound. Other scholars, such as Professor (Jacques Gernet) of the Collège de France and Professor (Nishijima Kazuo), a retired professor at the University of Tokyo, are even more widely recognized. Thus, the authorship of this volume represents a peak achievement in Western academic circles, making it a culmination of Western scholarship on the Qin and Han periods. Western research on the Qin and Han periods has a long history. The Introduction to this volume provides a comprehensive overview, tracing it back to the works of the Jesuit missionary (Alain M. Pelliot) who arrived in China during the late Ming and early Qing dynasties. The Twenty-Four Histories of China begin with the Records of the Grand Historian and the Book of Han, and readers typically start with the first four histories, so they encounter the Qin and Han periods early in their study of Chinese history. Moreover, the Qin and Han dynasties hold a special and important position in the broader context of Chinese history. Western scholars have made significant contributions to the study of the Qin and Han periods, and their achievements are substantial. A glance at the bibliography of this volume gives a fair impression of this. This Cambridge History of China: The Qin and Han Periods is a synthesis and advancement of such research, built on this foundation. For readers unfamiliar with Western scholarship, this volume provides a clear outline of its scope. It also cites extensively from Japanese scholars, offering valuable references for further study. This book has several distinctive features, which I would like to introduce here. First, the study of the Qin and Han periods is listed as the first volume of the Cambridge History of China. This may be difficult for domestic readers to understand and may even draw criticism. The preface to the General Editor's Introduction of the Cambridge History of China explains this, noting that when planning this monumental work, the editors had originally intended to begin with the origins of Chinese history. However, archaeological discoveries in China have been made at an unprecedented pace since the 1970s, fundamentally altering our understanding of prehistoric and even pre-thousand-year-old Chinese history. At present, it has not been possible to fully integrate these new archaeological findings with traditional written records to produce a consensus. Therefore, the volume begins with the Qin and Han periods, which have a wealth of reliable documentary evidence. This perspective differs significantly from the doubts about ancient history that emerged in the late Qing dynasty. The Cambridge History of China: The Qin and Han Periods extensively uses documentary materials and pays close attention to their authentication and textual criticism, a practice long upheld by many Western sinologists. As you can see, the citations in each chapter are mostly based on well-edited and annotated versions, including those by scholars from China, Japan, and the West. The charts and tables in the volume are also supported by sufficient documentary evidence, reflecting the authors' emphasis on textual sources. This does not mean that the volume does not value archaeological findings. On the contrary, many authors in this volume have cited significant achievements in Chinese archaeology. For example, the excavations of ancient capitals and the discoveries of large tombs are introduced and referenced in several chapters. Particularly in the sections on economic and social history, archaeological evidence is more prominent. Since some authors of this volume are experts in the study of Qin and Han bamboo slips and silk manuscripts, their chapters effectively incorporate this material. For instance, when discussing law, they cite the Bamboo Slips from Lüshu in Yunmeng, and when discussing military garrisons, they reference the Bamboo Slips from Dunhuang and Juyan of the Han dynasty, thereby integrating specialized research into historical narratives. Chinese scholars studying the Qin and Han periods also adopt this approach. However, it is still common today for some to overemphasize the pre-Qin era when discussing the contributions of archaeology to historical research, neglecting the importance of Qin and Han archaeology. This, in my opinion, is not entirely fair.