Was imperial China a tribe?

[bushbush]

The chinese ancestors were gods, more so the f.emperor was god too or equal to god. The "celestial harmony" supposed to reign in the universe was only possible through fulfilling emperor's desires/orders on earth in god's/emperor's one country -China. An individual was lost in all this picture, and some isolated confucians and other phylosophers strived to but hardly changed that. He was not even an emperor/which supposes to rule over citizens- cause the chinese were not citizens in the western term/ - he was god chosen tribal chief. F retarded. History knowledge -zero.

And if you are gonna call me names I am gonna rip everything chinese in you and send it back to where you belong in a basket.

to avoid more off-topic crap in another thread, let's just open up this debate here.

what's a tribe?

"A tribe, viewed historically or developmentally, consists of a social group existing before the development of, or outside of, states. Many anthropologists use the term to refer to societies organized largely on the basis of kinship, especially corporate descent groups (see clan and lineage)."


"leadership is typically neither formalized nor permanent."


so the key is:
1. it was a form of administration before the emergence of state.
2. it was largely on the basis of kinship.
3. leadership role was not institutionalized.

so did imperial china fit into this definition?

1. Chinese empires by the time of Qin were already states that had sovereign control of their own geographical sphere, had extensive bureaucratic control, had formal institutions in tax collecting, public project building, army mobilizing and other powers associated being a STATE.

2. Chinese empires or kingdoms after Shang and Zhou were by and large countries that ruled beyond just one or two large families (kinship), instead they ruled over millions and later hundreds of millions of people.

3. Chinese imperial institution formally and permanently established the role and power of emperors and his bureaucrats.

so by all definition, Chinese empires were NO TRIBES and emperors NO TRIBAL LEADERS.

---------------------

"He was not even an emperor/which supposes to rule over citizens"

another thing is Dracula's logic here. By his definition, emperors were supposed to rule over "citizens" and chinese weren't citizens. Ok, what's the definition of a citizen? especially before modern time?

"A person owing loyalty to and entitled by birth or naturalization to the protection of a state or nation."
"a native or naturalized member of a state or other political community"

were chinese in imperial china NOT citizens by those definitions? Did they not owe loyalty to their state and enjoy protection of their state? were they NOT residents of their city and and thus natives and naturalized members of their state and political community (in this case chinese empires)?

so was china a tribe during its imperial era or not?

[hellheaven1987]

A citizen is a man or woman who having two clay plate with records on the plate suggesting that he/she is a citizen.

[Lysimachos11]

You could/should add point number 4.:

4. Membership is not insitutionalized or fixed.

Point number 2 (it was largely on the basis of kinship) is only partially true IMO. In many instances anyone could join a tribe, and anyone could assume a new tribal identity. A well-known example are the Germanic tribes of the Late Roman Empire: The tribe called "Goths" that attacked Italy was probably composed of a core of "true" Goths, but also included numerous Germans from other tribes, but also llyrians and even Romans: deserted legionaries, adventurers, escaped slaves etc. All these non-Germanic Goths were still members of the Gothic tribe as long as they identified themselves as such and followed the hierarchy. Another example is the "Turks", in the early stages also a tribe. It has been proven that Turk initially meant "fierce warrior", and after the first tribe assumed this title, numerous other Central-Asiatic tribes joined the Turk tribe. After a few centuries, anyone from Afghanistan to Russia could call himself a Turk, pointing to the fact that tribal identities were very easily changed.

So in a way, maybe, since the peoples of China have become "Chinese", you might say China started as a tribal identity? I don't know but I can imagine there being some parallels.

[bushbush]

You could/should add point number 4.:

4. Membership is not insitutionalized or fixed.

Point number 2 (it was largely on the basis of kinship) is only partially true IMO. In many instances anyone could join a tribe, and anyone could assume a new tribal identity. A well-known example are the Germanic tribes of the Late Roman Empire: The tribe called "Goths" that attacked Italy was probably composed of a core of "true" Goths, but also included numerous Germans from other tribes, but also llyrians and even Romans: deserted legionaries, adventurers, escaped slaves etc. All these non-Germanic Goths were still members of the Gothic tribe as long as they identified themselves as such and followed the hierarchy. Another example is the "Turks", in the early stages also a tribe. It has been proven that Turk initially meant "fierce warrior", and after the first tribe assumed this title, numerous other Central-Asiatic tribes joined the Turk tribe. After a few centuries, anyone from Afghanistan to Russia could call himself a Turk, pointing to the fact that tribal identities were very easily changed.

you are right, but i think that stage where tribe no longer being limited to one or few families, it's probably moving towards being a tribal federation, with the next step being a state once formal institutions emerged.

So in a way, maybe, since the peoples of China have become "Chinese", you might say China started as a tribal identity? I don't know but I can imagine there being some parallels.

absolutely, before Xia dynsaty (mostly legends) china was almost certainly in the stage of a bunch of tribes that later became tribal federations (actually quite explicitly mentioned that early leaders of China were heads of ALLIANCES of tribes, each with their distinct family names). But around Shang i would argue, a bureaucracy (palaces, records and etc), so did a priest class (evidence was the bone oracles) and professional armies and china entered the stage of a feudal state.

[Sher Khan]

As Imperial China was chock full of Warring States (tribes/dynasties) until the reunification and conquest by an emperor now ruling various provinces through appointed governors and administrators chosen through by meritocracy for civil service, it definitely counts as a kingdom/empire with a monarchy holding power by tradition and bureaucracy rather than by tribal politics.

If Imperial China was a tribe, then so too was Capetian France.

[bushbush]

As Imperial China was chock full of Warring States (tribes/dynasties) until the reunification and conquest by an emperor now ruling various provinces through appointed governors and administrators chosen through by meritocracy for civil service, it definitely counts as a kingdom/empire with a monarchy holding power by tradition and bureaucracy rather than by tribal politics.

If Imperial China was a tribe, then so too was Capetian France.

eloquent but nonetheless basic historical knowledge, but Dracula doesn't know for some reason.

[★Bandiera Rossa☭]

Well originally all humans could be considered tribal.. However the emperor was an emperor and his position was institutionalized.. so how exactly could it be a tribe?

[Pious Agnost]

Of course they were.

Everyone knows, only white people can not be tribes .

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Sad this must be here, but yes, I am joking, and no, China was not a tribe. The existance of a 'China' would indicate otherwise in the first place!

[Blarni]

Of course they were.

Everyone knows, only white people can not be tribes .

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Sad this must be here, but yes, I am joking, and no, China was not a tribe. The existance of a 'China' would indicate otherwise in the first place!

Odd joke, especially as even Victorian scholars applied to word 'tribalism' to countless European societies, but anyway...

As I understand it (and I don't understand it well), China was created by the dominating Han group's conquest and absorption of other groups, with there being many ethnicities acculturalized into becoming Han...?

If that is the case, isn't China more like the world's oldest, most successful empire?

[Pious Agnost]

We're a bit past Victorian times.

But more and more, moreso on these forums, people seem to be thinking that only Europeans (And therefore white people) advanced beyond huts and clubs.

[Blarni]

We're a bit past Victorian times.

But more and more, moreso on these forums, people seem to be thinking that only Europeans (And therefore white people) advanced beyond huts and clubs.

Yes, my point was simply that Europeans have frequently talked about their society being originally 'tribal'.

And I know some ignorant rednecks make silly comments on these forums. And the ones who speak disparagingly about non-European cultures are just as likely to trash-talk other European/western nationalities, it's tiresome, but I know from personal experience that westerners unfortunately aren't the only ones with such dismissive attitudes towards other cultures.

[Pious Agnost]

I know, it's just that it wasn't one of them that sparked this thread

[bushbush]

not responding Dracula?

[Dracula]

Aaah, there had been a thread started on my words. F. tiresome, since I never had interest in China.

But anyway. Citizen is one who has rights. Old chinese most probably didn't. An emperor has been chosen originally in Rome to protect and guide the common policy of the citizens. Since there wasn't anything" common" in China rather than the tribe, leist so citizens, it is not likely that China could be called an empire in the western sense of the word. That's the whole logic. Though probably you could use it in the sense like "Charlemagne's empire" or alike, but it must be noted, the state overwent regress in feudalism.

[bushbush]

Aaah, there had been a thread started on my words. F. tiresome, since I never had interest in China..

meh, but you had enough ignorance about china....for some reason So you dont know jack about china, never learned anything about china, but YOU HAVE THE BALLS to make ridiculous comments?

sorry my friend, if you do that, you will embarrass yourself. That's what is happening now. Ignorance, especially purposeful ignorance like your posts have shown, is embarrassing.

But anyway. Citizen is one who has rights. Old chinese most probably didn't. An emperor has been chosen originally in Rome to protect and guide the common policy of the citizens. Since there wasn't anything" common" in China rather than the tribe, leist so citizens, it is not likely that China could be called an empire in the western sense of the word. That's the whole logic.

FIRST, let's use your logic on what's an empire. (your logic is all wrong btw as everyone else has pointed out).

Are you saying as native inhabitants of chinese empires, who had their property rights and personal lives protected (tell me how they were different from ordinary folks in Roman empire), while those educated had rights for offices and policy contribution (probably comparable to the elite class of the roman empires), were NOT CITIZENS OF CHINESE EMPIRES?

what were they then? guests?

if emperor is to "protect and guide the common policy of the citizens", that was EXACTLY what chinese emperors do, they protect their state and guide the overall policy. How did they become tribal leaders again?

Though probably you could use it in the sense like "Charlemagne's empire" or alike, but it must be noted, the state overwent regress in feudalism.

what? Charlemagne's kingdom could be called an empire but chinese empires, 10 times bigger, stronger and had more extensive culture, bureaucracy and science was just were tribes?

your logic is just astonishingly silly hehehe.