{"title":"‘Bang’ as the Community Administrative Organization in the Chinese Early States","authors":"Shen Changyun","doi":"10.30884/SEH/2019.01.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is widely accepted by scholars from China and overseas that China has entered the phase of state in Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties (though some foreign scholars do not acknowledge the existence of Xia dynasty). However, they were best categorized as early states, since they held some vestiges of pre-state. Specifically, kinships and correspondent organizations adopted from primitive clan society still played important and expansive functions, which was imprinted on the community administrative organizations of the three dynasties and reflected in the management and manipulation of the state over these organizations. ‘Bang’ (chiefdom), inherited from clan society, was the unit of the community administrative organization in that era. The central management over chiefdoms was a ‘ji fu’ (or ‘fu’) system, which, based on differences in consanguinity, stipulated and distributed a gradient of obligations to ‘inner and outer domains’ (see part 3 and 4). It was clearly different from the region-based family registry system developed in mature states in the Warring States period, and Qin and Han dynasties. The following passages will explore relevant historical records and provide a detailed analysis on the community administrative organization in Chinese early states. ‘THE LAND UNDER HEAVEN’ WITH MYRIAD CHIEFDOMS People in the three dynasties named their states as the ‘tian xia’ (the land under heaven), which comprised ‘zhong yang’ (the center) and ‘si fang’ (the four quarters). ‘Tian xia’ was formed by many ‘bang’ Shen Changyun / ‘Bang’ as the Community Administrative Organization 181 with different sizes, so they were also referred as ‘tian xia wan bang’ (myriad chiefdoms on the land under heaven). During Chinese early states, a major chiefdom in the center reigned minor chiefdoms at its periphery. Records and documents of Zhou dynasty indicate that the ‘tian xia wan bang’ pattern was well-established. For instance, Qiang pan, a famous bronze vessel (basin) manufactured in Zhou dynasty has an inscription, saying that ‘The heavenly King Wen... humbly owned the land under heaven, and unified myriad chiefdoms’. It shows that the government of King Wen was extoled by chiefdoms; while people in Zhou considered King Wen as the founder of their state. ‘Luogao’ (Announcement Concerning Luo; 洛诰) in Shangshu (The Book of Documents) records the comment of Zhougong (the Duke of Zhou) on the significance of Luoyi (Luo) that ‘from this time, by the government administered in this central spot, all the states will be conducted to repose.’ Myriad chiefdoms would be perfectly governed by Zhou's officers from the center of the land. The poem ‘Daya: Wenwang’ (Greater Odes of the Kingdom: King Wen; 大雅文王 · ), in Shijing (The Book of Poetry) says that ‘The doings of High Heaven, / Have neither sound nor smell. / Take your pattern from king Wen, / And the myriad regions will repose confidence in you.’ The logos is subtle, but if one imitates the deed of King Wen, he would be trusted by myriad chiefdoms under heaven. At the end of the Western Zhou, similar pattern persisted in eulogies to eminent governors, as ‘Xiaoya: Liuyue’ (Minor Odes of the Kingdom: the Sixth Month; 小雅六月 · ), Shijing lauds: ‘For peace or for war fit is Ji-fu, / A pattern to all the States.’ Yin Jifu was the paragon of all chiefdoms. ‘Wan’ (myriad) was not an exact number; instead, it merely indicated the huge number of chiefdoms. Thus it was replaced by ‘duo’ (many) or ‘shu’ (various) at times. For instance, ‘Dagao’ (Great Announcement; 大诰) and ‘Wuyi’ (Against Luxurious Ease; 无逸) in Shangshu documents respectively: ‘The king speaks to the following effect: ‘Ho! I make a great announcement to you, (the princes of) the many states, and to you, the managers of my affairs...’ ‘King Wen did not dare to go to excess in his excursions or his hunting, and from the various states he would receive only the correct amount of contribution.’ ‘Duo bang’ was also called as ‘duo fang’ (many regions), because of the proximity in pronunciation. For example, in ‘Duofang’ (Numerous Regions; 多方), Shangshu, the announcement of the Duke of Zhou to conquered clans of Xiang and Shang starts with the phrase: ‘I make an announcement to you of the four states, and the numerous (other) regions...’ Social Evolution & History / March 2019 182 The custom was inherited from people in Shang dynasty. In records of divination on oracle bones, chiefdoms were called as ‘fang’ by Shang people, such as ‘tu fang’, ‘gui fang’, ‘qiang fang’, ‘qiong fang’, ‘ren fang’, ‘jing fang’, ‘ma fang’, ‘yu fang’, ‘lin fang’, ‘zhou fang’, ‘shao fang’, ‘wei fang’, ‘yin fang’, etc., which were collectively referred as ‘duo fang’. For example: In the day ding-you, (the king) asked (whether it is fortunate) to call for an assembly of many ‘fang’... (Guo 1999: No. 28008) To divine: (whether it is fortunate) to designate Ming to lead many ‘fang’... (Li 1982: No. 528) Literature in later ages referred ‘bang’ or ‘fang’ in Shang and Zhou dynasties as ‘zhu hou’ (vassal state) or ‘guo’ (state). In Zhan Guo Ce: Qi Ce (Records of the Warring States: Ch’I; 国策 战 策 齐 · ), Yan Chu (Yen Ch’u), who was coeval with King Xuan of Qi (King Hsüan of Ch’i), said: ‘I have heard that of old, in the time of Yü (Yu) the Great, there were nobles ruling over ten thousand States... Coming down to the time of T’ang (Tang), the nobles were three thousand.’ Lüshi Chunqiu:Yongmin (Lü’s Annals: the Use of People; 氏春秋 吕 用民 · ) recapitulated this statement: ‘In the time of Yu the Great, there were myriad kingdoms; only more than three thousand existed in Tang’s time.’ It can be inferred that the ‘myriad chiefdoms’ pattern prevailed in the age of Xia as well. Actually, the political pattern stemmed from pre-state legendary eras. According to documents, the ‘five emperors’ period was characterized by myriad chiefdoms. ‘Yaodian’ (Canon of Yao; 典 尧 ), Shangshu, memorized achievements of Yao, saying that he ‘thence proceeded to the love of (all in) the nine classes of his kindred, who (thus) became harmonious. He (also) regulated and polished the people (of his domain), who all became brightly intelligent. (Finally), he united and harmonized the myriad states; and so the black-haired people were transformed. The result was (universal) concord.’ In Shiji: Wudi Benji (Records of the Grand Historian: Annals of the Five Emperors; 史记五帝本纪 · ), similar notion was rephrased as ‘the various states were at peace.’ Meanwhile, Shiji also recorded ‘myriad chiefdoms’ in Huangdi's (Yellow emperor) time that ‘he appointed a chief and deputy superintendent over international affairs, and the various states being at peace...’ Additionally, ‘Gaoyaomo’ (Counsels of Gao-yao; 皋陶谟), Shangshu, mentioned ‘myriad chiefdoms’ in Shun's era: ‘I [Yu] urged them [people] (further) to exchange what they had for what they had not, and to dispose of their accumulated stores. (In this way) all the people got grain to eat, and the myriad regions began to come under good rule...’ and ‘So far good! But let your light shine, O Di, all under heaven, even to every grassy corner of the sea-shore, and throughout the myriad regions the most worthy of the people will Shen Changyun / ‘Bang’ as the Community Administrative Organization 183 all (wish) to be your ministers.’ All the quotations indicate that the notion ‘myriad chiefdoms’ in the age of five emperors was unanimous among ancient literature and documents. In other word, the phase of ‘myriad chiefdoms’ was established in China at the age of preand early civilization. On the other hand, is the nature of ‘bang’ in clan society identical to that of the three dynasties? The answer would be positive. Except several vassal states established by the royal court of Zhou in the Western Zhou period (they were called ‘bang’, but should be considered as secondary), the inner or outer structure of the rest of ‘bang’ was not fundamentally different from their precursors. The only difference was that in the three dynasties, a state began to form, as a great ‘bang’ governed all other chiefdoms with hereditary sovereignty. Although all chiefdoms should accept the central administration of the sovereignty, their nature was not altered radically. Moreover, the great central chiefdom (or the king's chiefdom) was still one ‘bang’ among myriad chiefdoms under heaven, whose structure and nature did not change either. It was not a state independent to other chiefdoms; instead, the commonwealth of the king's chiefdom and other chiefdoms controlled by the great one formed the state. Zhao Boxiong's analysis on this issue was exemplary. Although he only discussed the nature of state in Zhou dynasty, it can be plausibly applied to Xia and Shang dynasties. Since all chiefdoms strewed on the land submitted to the power of a single sovereignty, it is reasonable to consider them as administrative organizations subordinate to the state, which was represented by the central chiefdom. As it was reflected in ‘Zicai’ (Timber of the Rottlera; 梓材), Shangshu, the king issued decrees to chiefs, who were obliged to ensure the obedience of the people to these orders. ‘The king says, 'O Feng, to secure a good understanding between the multitudes of his people and his ministers (on the one hand), and the great families (on the other); and (again) to secure the same between all the subjects under his charge, and the sovereign – is the part of the ruler of a state. If you regularly, in giving out your orders...’ It was the exhortation of the King to Feng, the Duke of Kang, that his order should be regularly transferred from the great families to their subjects, from the king's court to his ministers. Moreover, ‘Dagao’ stated that ‘The king speaks to the following effect: 'Ho! I make a great announcement to you, (the princes of) the many states, and to you, the managers of my affairs.’” While ‘Duofang’ documented that ‘The king speaks to the following effect: “Ho! I make an announcement to you of ","PeriodicalId":42677,"journal":{"name":"Social Evolution & History","volume":"1 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Social Evolution & History","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.30884/SEH/2019.01.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL ISSUES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
It is widely accepted by scholars from China and overseas that China has entered the phase of state in Xia, Shang, and Zhou dynasties (though some foreign scholars do not acknowledge the existence of Xia dynasty). However, they were best categorized as early states, since they held some vestiges of pre-state. Specifically, kinships and correspondent organizations adopted from primitive clan society still played important and expansive functions, which was imprinted on the community administrative organizations of the three dynasties and reflected in the management and manipulation of the state over these organizations. ‘Bang’ (chiefdom), inherited from clan society, was the unit of the community administrative organization in that era. The central management over chiefdoms was a ‘ji fu’ (or ‘fu’) system, which, based on differences in consanguinity, stipulated and distributed a gradient of obligations to ‘inner and outer domains’ (see part 3 and 4). It was clearly different from the region-based family registry system developed in mature states in the Warring States period, and Qin and Han dynasties. The following passages will explore relevant historical records and provide a detailed analysis on the community administrative organization in Chinese early states. ‘THE LAND UNDER HEAVEN’ WITH MYRIAD CHIEFDOMS People in the three dynasties named their states as the ‘tian xia’ (the land under heaven), which comprised ‘zhong yang’ (the center) and ‘si fang’ (the four quarters). ‘Tian xia’ was formed by many ‘bang’ Shen Changyun / ‘Bang’ as the Community Administrative Organization 181 with different sizes, so they were also referred as ‘tian xia wan bang’ (myriad chiefdoms on the land under heaven). During Chinese early states, a major chiefdom in the center reigned minor chiefdoms at its periphery. Records and documents of Zhou dynasty indicate that the ‘tian xia wan bang’ pattern was well-established. For instance, Qiang pan, a famous bronze vessel (basin) manufactured in Zhou dynasty has an inscription, saying that ‘The heavenly King Wen... humbly owned the land under heaven, and unified myriad chiefdoms’. It shows that the government of King Wen was extoled by chiefdoms; while people in Zhou considered King Wen as the founder of their state. ‘Luogao’ (Announcement Concerning Luo; 洛诰) in Shangshu (The Book of Documents) records the comment of Zhougong (the Duke of Zhou) on the significance of Luoyi (Luo) that ‘from this time, by the government administered in this central spot, all the states will be conducted to repose.’ Myriad chiefdoms would be perfectly governed by Zhou's officers from the center of the land. The poem ‘Daya: Wenwang’ (Greater Odes of the Kingdom: King Wen; 大雅文王 · ), in Shijing (The Book of Poetry) says that ‘The doings of High Heaven, / Have neither sound nor smell. / Take your pattern from king Wen, / And the myriad regions will repose confidence in you.’ The logos is subtle, but if one imitates the deed of King Wen, he would be trusted by myriad chiefdoms under heaven. At the end of the Western Zhou, similar pattern persisted in eulogies to eminent governors, as ‘Xiaoya: Liuyue’ (Minor Odes of the Kingdom: the Sixth Month; 小雅六月 · ), Shijing lauds: ‘For peace or for war fit is Ji-fu, / A pattern to all the States.’ Yin Jifu was the paragon of all chiefdoms. ‘Wan’ (myriad) was not an exact number; instead, it merely indicated the huge number of chiefdoms. Thus it was replaced by ‘duo’ (many) or ‘shu’ (various) at times. For instance, ‘Dagao’ (Great Announcement; 大诰) and ‘Wuyi’ (Against Luxurious Ease; 无逸) in Shangshu documents respectively: ‘The king speaks to the following effect: ‘Ho! I make a great announcement to you, (the princes of) the many states, and to you, the managers of my affairs...’ ‘King Wen did not dare to go to excess in his excursions or his hunting, and from the various states he would receive only the correct amount of contribution.’ ‘Duo bang’ was also called as ‘duo fang’ (many regions), because of the proximity in pronunciation. For example, in ‘Duofang’ (Numerous Regions; 多方), Shangshu, the announcement of the Duke of Zhou to conquered clans of Xiang and Shang starts with the phrase: ‘I make an announcement to you of the four states, and the numerous (other) regions...’ Social Evolution & History / March 2019 182 The custom was inherited from people in Shang dynasty. In records of divination on oracle bones, chiefdoms were called as ‘fang’ by Shang people, such as ‘tu fang’, ‘gui fang’, ‘qiang fang’, ‘qiong fang’, ‘ren fang’, ‘jing fang’, ‘ma fang’, ‘yu fang’, ‘lin fang’, ‘zhou fang’, ‘shao fang’, ‘wei fang’, ‘yin fang’, etc., which were collectively referred as ‘duo fang’. For example: In the day ding-you, (the king) asked (whether it is fortunate) to call for an assembly of many ‘fang’... (Guo 1999: No. 28008) To divine: (whether it is fortunate) to designate Ming to lead many ‘fang’... (Li 1982: No. 528) Literature in later ages referred ‘bang’ or ‘fang’ in Shang and Zhou dynasties as ‘zhu hou’ (vassal state) or ‘guo’ (state). In Zhan Guo Ce: Qi Ce (Records of the Warring States: Ch’I; 国策 战 策 齐 · ), Yan Chu (Yen Ch’u), who was coeval with King Xuan of Qi (King Hsüan of Ch’i), said: ‘I have heard that of old, in the time of Yü (Yu) the Great, there were nobles ruling over ten thousand States... Coming down to the time of T’ang (Tang), the nobles were three thousand.’ Lüshi Chunqiu:Yongmin (Lü’s Annals: the Use of People; 氏春秋 吕 用民 · ) recapitulated this statement: ‘In the time of Yu the Great, there were myriad kingdoms; only more than three thousand existed in Tang’s time.’ It can be inferred that the ‘myriad chiefdoms’ pattern prevailed in the age of Xia as well. Actually, the political pattern stemmed from pre-state legendary eras. According to documents, the ‘five emperors’ period was characterized by myriad chiefdoms. ‘Yaodian’ (Canon of Yao; 典 尧 ), Shangshu, memorized achievements of Yao, saying that he ‘thence proceeded to the love of (all in) the nine classes of his kindred, who (thus) became harmonious. He (also) regulated and polished the people (of his domain), who all became brightly intelligent. (Finally), he united and harmonized the myriad states; and so the black-haired people were transformed. The result was (universal) concord.’ In Shiji: Wudi Benji (Records of the Grand Historian: Annals of the Five Emperors; 史记五帝本纪 · ), similar notion was rephrased as ‘the various states were at peace.’ Meanwhile, Shiji also recorded ‘myriad chiefdoms’ in Huangdi's (Yellow emperor) time that ‘he appointed a chief and deputy superintendent over international affairs, and the various states being at peace...’ Additionally, ‘Gaoyaomo’ (Counsels of Gao-yao; 皋陶谟), Shangshu, mentioned ‘myriad chiefdoms’ in Shun's era: ‘I [Yu] urged them [people] (further) to exchange what they had for what they had not, and to dispose of their accumulated stores. (In this way) all the people got grain to eat, and the myriad regions began to come under good rule...’ and ‘So far good! But let your light shine, O Di, all under heaven, even to every grassy corner of the sea-shore, and throughout the myriad regions the most worthy of the people will Shen Changyun / ‘Bang’ as the Community Administrative Organization 183 all (wish) to be your ministers.’ All the quotations indicate that the notion ‘myriad chiefdoms’ in the age of five emperors was unanimous among ancient literature and documents. In other word, the phase of ‘myriad chiefdoms’ was established in China at the age of preand early civilization. On the other hand, is the nature of ‘bang’ in clan society identical to that of the three dynasties? The answer would be positive. Except several vassal states established by the royal court of Zhou in the Western Zhou period (they were called ‘bang’, but should be considered as secondary), the inner or outer structure of the rest of ‘bang’ was not fundamentally different from their precursors. The only difference was that in the three dynasties, a state began to form, as a great ‘bang’ governed all other chiefdoms with hereditary sovereignty. Although all chiefdoms should accept the central administration of the sovereignty, their nature was not altered radically. Moreover, the great central chiefdom (or the king's chiefdom) was still one ‘bang’ among myriad chiefdoms under heaven, whose structure and nature did not change either. It was not a state independent to other chiefdoms; instead, the commonwealth of the king's chiefdom and other chiefdoms controlled by the great one formed the state. Zhao Boxiong's analysis on this issue was exemplary. Although he only discussed the nature of state in Zhou dynasty, it can be plausibly applied to Xia and Shang dynasties. Since all chiefdoms strewed on the land submitted to the power of a single sovereignty, it is reasonable to consider them as administrative organizations subordinate to the state, which was represented by the central chiefdom. As it was reflected in ‘Zicai’ (Timber of the Rottlera; 梓材), Shangshu, the king issued decrees to chiefs, who were obliged to ensure the obedience of the people to these orders. ‘The king says, 'O Feng, to secure a good understanding between the multitudes of his people and his ministers (on the one hand), and the great families (on the other); and (again) to secure the same between all the subjects under his charge, and the sovereign – is the part of the ruler of a state. If you regularly, in giving out your orders...’ It was the exhortation of the King to Feng, the Duke of Kang, that his order should be regularly transferred from the great families to their subjects, from the king's court to his ministers. Moreover, ‘Dagao’ stated that ‘The king speaks to the following effect: 'Ho! I make a great announcement to you, (the princes of) the many states, and to you, the managers of my affairs.’” While ‘Duofang’ documented that ‘The king speaks to the following effect: “Ho! I make an announcement to you of
中外学者普遍认为,中国已进入夏、商、周时期的国家阶段(尽管一些外国学者不承认夏朝的存在)。然而,它们最好被归类为早期状态,因为它们保留了一些前状态的痕迹。具体而言,从原始氏族社会中继承的亲属关系和往来组织仍然发挥着重要而广泛的作用,这一特点在三朝的社区行政组织中得到了深刻的烙印,并体现在国家对这些组织的管理和操纵上。“邦”是继承于氏族社会的社区行政组织单位。对酋邦的中央管理是一种“赋”(或“赋”)制度,它基于血缘的差异,规定并分配了对“内外域”的梯度义务(见第3部分和第4部分)。这与战国时期和秦汉时期成熟国家发展的以区域为基础的户籍制度明显不同。本文将对相关历史记录进行梳理,并对中国早期国家的社区行政组织进行详细分析。“天下的土地”,无数酋长制三个朝代的人叫它们的状态为“田夏”(土地天下),它由“钟阳”(中心)和“四方”(四个季度)。“天下”是由许多“邦”沈长云/“邦”组成的大小不一的共同体管理组织181,所以它们也被称为“天下万邦”(天下无数酋邦)。在中国早期的国家中,中心的大酋长统治着周边的小酋长。周代的记录和文献表明,“天下万邦”模式已经确立。例如,周代制造的著名青铜器(盆)羌盘上就有“天文王……谦卑地拥有天下的土地,统一了无数的酋邦。这说明文王的政府受到了各酋邦的赞扬;而周国人则认为文王是他们的国父。“罗高”(关于罗的公告;《尚书》(The Book of Documents)记载了周公(Duke of Zhou)对洛邑(Luo)的意义的评论:“从此,由这个中心的政府管理,所有的国家都将被引导休息。”周国的官员将会从国家的中心完美地治理无数的酋邦。《大雅:文王》诗;《诗经》中说:“上天之作为,无声无香。”向文王学习,万邦都必信赖你。“道理是微妙的,但如果一个人模仿文王的行为,他就会得到天下无数酋长的信任。西周末年,类似的颂词也出现在对显要统治者的颂词中,如《小雅六月》;《世经》称赞:“宜和宜战,乃吉福,天下之范本。”殷继夫是诸侯国的典范。“万”(无数)不是一个确切的数字;相反,它只是表明了大量的酋长管辖地。因此,它有时被“多”(许多)或“数”(各种)所取代。例如,“大通知”(Great Announcement;“反奢”和“反奢”;《尚书》中分别写道:“王说:‘嗬!我有一件大事要宣布给你们,许多国家的王子们,还有你们,我的事务的管理者们……“文王不敢去远足或他过度狩猎,和各种状态,他将仅接收正确的出资额。“多邦”也被称为“多坊”(许多地区),因为发音相近。例如,在《多方》中;《尚书》是周公向征服了湘商两族的诸侯发出的诏书,它的开头是这样说的:“我向你们宣布四邦和众多的地区……社会演变与历史/ 2019年3月182这个习俗是从商朝人那里继承下来的。在甲骨文卜筮的记载中,商代将酋邦称为“坊”,如“土坊”、“桂坊”、“强坊”、“琼坊”、“人坊”、“靖坊”、“马坊”、“玉坊”、“林坊”、“周坊”、“少坊”、“卫坊”、“阴坊”等,统称为“多坊”。例如:在“叮你”的日子里,(国王)问(是否幸运)召集许多“芳”集会……(郭1999:第28008号)占卜:(是否幸运)指定明领许多‘方’……(李1982:不。 (528)在后世的文学中,商周时期的“邦”或“方”被称为“诸侯”或“国”。《战国策:齐策》(《战国志》);齐宣王(齐安王)的同辈晏楚(晏楚)说:“我听说,在Yü(禹)大王的时候,有贵族统治万国……到了唐朝,贵族有三千人。<s:1>史春秋:永民(Lü)编年史:人的使用;)概括了这句话:“大禹时,天下诸国林立;唐代只有三千多只。由此可以推断,“多酋邦”模式在夏代也很盛行。实际上,这种政治模式源于建国前的传奇时代。据文献记载,五帝时期的特点是有无数的酋邦。《尧典》;(尧)《尚书》记载了姚的成就,说他“从此开始与九族所有的人相爱,他们因此变得和谐。”他还规范和磨炼(他的领域)的人,他们都变得聪明伶俐。(最后)他统一和协调了无数的国家;所以黑头发的人被改变了。结果是(普遍的)和谐。《史记》:《武帝本纪》;),类似的概念被改写为“诸国太平”。与此同时,《史记》还记载了黄帝时期的“诸侯国”,“立大副,天下太平……”此外,“高尧摩”(“高尧摩”);《尚书》(www.谟)提到了舜时代的“无数酋邦”:“我[禹]敦促他们[人民](进一步)以物换物,并处理他们积累的储备。”(这样)所有的人都有粮食吃,无数的地区开始得到良好的统治……和“到目前为止还好!”帝啊,愿你的光普照天下,普照海滨的每一个草叶葱葱的角落,普照万邦最值得尊敬的人民,愿沈昌云“邦”作为社区行政组织的183人,都作你的大臣。所有的引语都表明,五帝时代“无数酋邦”的概念在古代文献中是一致的。换句话说,“无数酋邦”的阶段在中国早文明时代就已经建立起来了。另一方面,宗族社会的“bang”的性质是否与三朝社会相同?答案是肯定的。除了西周时期周朝建立的几个诸侯国(它们被称为“邦”,但应被认为是次要的),其余“邦”的内部或外部结构与它们的前身并没有根本的不同。唯一不同的是,在三个朝代,一个国家开始形成,作为一个伟大的“bang”统治所有其他酋长的世袭主权。虽然所有酋邦都应接受中央对主权的管理,但其性质并没有根本改变。此外,大中央酋邦(或王权酋邦)仍然是天下无数酋邦中的一个“邦”,其结构和性质也没有改变。它不是一个独立于其他酋长领地的国家;取而代之的是,由国王的酋长领地和其他酋长领地组成的联邦,由伟大的统治者控制。赵伯雄对这一问题的分析堪称典范。虽然他只讨论了周朝的国家性质,但也可以适用于夏商朝。由于分布在土地上的所有酋邦都服从于单一主权的权力,因此有理由认为它们是隶属于以中央酋邦为代表的国家的行政组织。正如《紫菜》(Rottlera的木材;梓材)、Shangshu国王发布法令首领,他们必须确保人民服从这些订单。’楚王说:‘冯啊,为了与广大的臣民、大臣和大家族搞好关系,确保他所管辖的所有臣民,以及君主之间的平等,是一个国家统治者的职责。如果你有规律地下达命令……这是秦王对康公封的劝告,他的命令应该定期地从大家族传到臣民,从朝廷传到他的大臣。《大高》还说:“王说:嗬!我有一件大事要宣布给你们,许多国家的王子,还有你们,我的事务的管理者。 ’”而《多方》记载说:“王说:‘嗬!我向你们宣布一件事