Double-track governance in traditional Chinese society: Dialectics between the enfeoffment system of fiefdom and the bureaucratic prefectural system

Beginning in the Yin-Zhou and Qin-Han periods, development of the Chinese imperial system revolved around the dialectical tension between the “enfeoffmental system of fiefdom” ( fengjian zhi, or the fengjian system) and the bureaucratic prefectural system ( junxian zhi, or the junxian system). In Fei Xiaotong’s words, this was a dual-track politics of the “power of the monarch” and the “power of the gentry”. Under the enfeoffmental system of fiefdom, the relationship between the monarch and his kinsfolk was governed by the Confucian hierarchical principle of “favoring the intimate” ( qin-qin) and “respecting the superior” ( zun-zun), and ritualized by the patriarchal order of clan, mourning rites, and ancestral worship. In addition, the “mandate of Heaven” solidified an organic relationship between the emperor and his subjects and became the foundation for monarchical rule. The bureaucratic prefectural system highlighted the historical change since the Warring States period, which had abolished the enfeoffmental fiefdom system and given birth to the concept of “all-under-Heaven” ( gong tianxia). Thinkers like Wang Fuzhi and Gu Yanwu placed emphasis on the enfeoffmental system of fiefdom as a counterpart of to the bureaucratic prefectural system which helped break up the centralization of power and renew the debate on the dialectic between “public” and “private”. In sum, the enfeoffmental system of fiefdom in China still needs to be clarified through re-examining the Classics.

王夫之「詩史」說析辨

<p>「詩史」說自唐代孟棨提出，繁衍出「敘事」、「實錄」、「忠君愛國」等內涵，多在肯定層面論說。至明清之際，王夫之的觀點頗為特出，他對「詩史」諸多內涵均加以批評，更在整體上否定此說。對抗史對詩的陵越，是船山在處理詩史關係時的根本主張，其言「詩道性情」，認為「史」不能代「詩」而言「性之情」。根本而言，王夫之出於人心危淺的儒者意識，賦予詩體以獨特意義，期望藉詩之力量導情復性，於詩之審美中尋求道德之潛力，這是他的詩歌理想；而「詩史」對此僅有破壞，而無建構，故其深惡此說。本文將分析王夫之對「詩史」部分內涵的批評，論述他於明清之際推崇「詩史」之歷史語境下的嚴峻批判態度由來，並闡述他所堅持的「詩」之獨特意義。</p> <p>&nbsp;</p><p>Since Meng Qi from the Tang Dynasty proposed the concept of &quot;Shishi&quot; (Poetry-History), multiple interpretations, most of them were on an affirmative level, had been created, such as &quot;narrate&quot;, &quot;record as the author has witnessed &quot;, &quot; loyal and patriotic &quot; etc. By the time of late Ming and early Qing Dynasties, Wang Fuzhi (1619-1692) ’s viewpoint stood out by criticized not only part of the interpretations but the whole concept of &quot;Shishi&quot;. When dealing with the relation between &quot;history&quot; and &quot;poetry&quot;, Wang Fuzhi’s fundamental proposition was to defy history&rsquo;s violation of poetic form. Wang Fuzhi stressed that poetry should express &quot;Xing&quot; (human nature) and &quot;Qing&quot; (feelings). The history’s violation of poetic form would undermine the expression of Qing and therefore weaken the power of it, which could enhance the cultivation of people and help brace up the national power. Once the history was emphasized egregiously in poetic form, the essence of poetry would be vandalized. Essentially, Wang Fuzhi endowed the poetic form of a unique meaning due to his consciousness of Confucianism. He hoped that the power of poetry would guide Qing to Xing. This was his poetic ideal to seek moral potential in the aesthetics of poetry. Therefore, he rebelled at the concept of &quot;Shishi&quot; which impeded destructively. This paper analyzes Wang Fuzhi’s criticism of &quot;Shishi&quot;, discusses the reason for his unique critical attitude amid the atmosphere of this concept during the late Ming and early Qing and explains his interpretations of poetry.</p> <p>&nbsp;</p>

What Remains of Mountains and Waters: Fragments, Mutilation, and Creation in Early Qing Literature and Culture

This article examines the discourse and representation of canshan shengshui (devastated landscape) in early Qing literature and culture through a focused interpretation of the works of Ming loyalists Zhang Dai (1597–1684) and Wang Fuzhi (1619–92). Connecting aesthetics with ethics, these authors symbolically translate the devastated landscape (aesthetically objectified) into ethical sites, namely, the mutilated body and the shattered psyche. They push beyond the orthodox discourse of canshan shengshui, which seeks to supplement the natural landscape with artistic representation and thereby re-create nature. Zhang and Wang stand as outliers of this tradition as they explore the nuances of creation through destruction—their symbiosis, the dark forces behind creation, and destruction beyond redemption. Their insights liberate the aesthetics of the devastated landscape from the immediate political context, evoke social and intellectual trends predating the dynasty's demise, and infuse new and lasting life into the writings of the loyalists.

Wang Fuzhi (1619–92)

A seventeenth-century neo-Confucian and Ming loyalist, Wang Fuzhi is best known for his nationalism and his theories of historical and metaphysical change. His classical commentaries and other writings, not published until the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, present an exceptionally comprehensive and vigorously argued synthesis and critique of China’s intellectual tradition. His ideas on topics such as politics, cosmology and knowledge have fascinated readers of widely differing philosophic persuasions.