just as long as the Western ruling races had been in Assyria and
Egypt respectively, for imagining that they, the sole recorders of
events amongst surrounding inferiors, were the world; and that the
incoherent tribes rushing aimlessly from all sides to attack them,
were the unreclaimed fringe of the world.
It does not appear clearly why the Chou dynasty took the new title
of wang, which does not seem to occur in any titular sense
previous to their accession: the Chinese attempts to furnish
etymological explanation are too crude to be worth discussing. No
feudal Chinese prince presumed to use it during the Chou
_régime_ and if the semi-barbarous rulers of Ts'u, Wu, and
Yiieh did so in their own dominions (as the Hwang Ti, or "august
emperor," of Annam was in recent times tacitly allowed to do),
their federal title in orthodox China never went beyond that of
viscount. When in the fourth century B.C. all the powers styled
themselves _wang_, and were recognized as such by the insignificant
emperors, the situation was very much the same as that produced in
Europe when first local Caesars, who, to begin with, had been
"associates" of the Augustus (or two rival Augusti), asserted their
independence of the feeble central Augustus, and then set themselves
up as Augusti pure and simple, until at last the only "Roman Emperor"
left in Rome was the Emperor of Germany.
It is not explained precisely on what grounds, when the first Chou
emperors distributed their fiefs, some of the feudal rulers, as
explained in Chapter VII., were made dukes; others marquesses,
earls, viscounts, and barons. Of course these translated terms are
mere makeshifts, simply because the Chinese had five ranks, and so
have we. In creating their new nobility, the Japanese have again
made use of the five old Chinese titles, except that for some
reason they call Duke Ito and Duke Yamagata "Prince" in English.
The size of the fiefs had something to do with it in China; the
pedigree of the feoffees probably more; imperial clandom perhaps
most of all. The sole state ruled by a duke in his own intrinsic
right from the first was Sung, a small principality on the
northernmost head-waters of the River Hwai, corresponding to the
modern Kwei-t&h Fu: probably it was because this duke fulfilled
the sacrificial and continuity duties of the destroyed dynasty of
Shang that he received extraordinary rank; just as, in very much
later days, the Confucius family was the only non-Manchu to
possess "ducal" rank, or, as the Japanese seem to hold in German
style, "princely" rank. But it must be remembered that the Chou
emperors had imperial dukes within their own appanage, precisely
as cardinals, or "princes of the Church," are as common around
Rome as they are scarce among the spiritually "feudal" princes of
Europe; for feudal they once practically were.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account