Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

A discussion of the concept of “feudal”

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Frontiers of History in China

The Western terms “feudal” and “feudalism” have been widely and improperly translated as “fengjian” in contemporary China. The early Western Sinologists and Chinese scholars, including Yan Fu, did not originally make such a translation. Yan initially transliterated the term “feudalism” as fute zhi in his early translations. It was not until the 20th century, when Western classical evolutionism found its way into China, that “feudalism” was reduced to an abstrac t concept, and the Western European model was generalized as a framework for understanding development in China and the whole world. Only then did Yan Fu first equate “feudalism” with “fengjian,” and China was believed to have experienced a “feudal society” in the same sense as Europe. From the perspective of intellectual history, using evidential and theoretical analyses, this article attempts to show that feudalism was a historical product in the development of Western Europe and existed only in Europe, “fengjian” is a system appropriate only in discussions of pre-Qin China, and China from the Qin to the Qing experienced instead a system of imperial autocracy. The medieval periods in the West and in China evidence widely divergent social forms and hence should not be confused with the same label.

10.1007/s11462-007-0001-0
/content/journals/10.1007/s11462-007-0001-0
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1007/s11462-007-0001-0
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1007/s11462-007-0001-0
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1007/s11462-007-0001-0
2007-01-01
2016-12-02

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Frontiers of History in China — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation