There is no consensus in international academia on the absolutely universal appearance of chiefdom in all parts of the world. Making this point clear has positive significance for the correct understanding of the orig...There is no consensus in international academia on the absolutely universal appearance of chiefdom in all parts of the world. Making this point clear has positive significance for the correct understanding of the original meaning of the concept and theory of chiefdom. Further researches on the distribution of chiefdoms in Europe and other parts of the world, based on studies of ancient Greek and early medieval Germanic cases, will not change our basic understanding of the chiefdom model＇s applicability to the case of China, nor will it pose a serious challenge to the ongoing researches on state emergence in China. It is undoubtedly very helpful if we diligently apply foreign academic findings to our own studies in this subject, but genuine and in-depth understanding is necessary, if researchers are to accurately interpret and sum up the real implications of these foreign materials. At present, some Chinese scholars have produced various generalizations based on their own understanding of foreign research results. However, since they are not based on careful study of the original literary sources and other materials, those ＂generalized＂ views are often inaccurate. This is a problem that deserves our serious attention in current researches.展开更多
基金sponsored by "Cultural Ecology for Ordinary People in Transitional China," the Phase 3 Program of the "211 Project" of Shanghai University (grant no.: A.15-A 011-09-001)
文摘There is no consensus in international academia on the absolutely universal appearance of chiefdom in all parts of the world. Making this point clear has positive significance for the correct understanding of the original meaning of the concept and theory of chiefdom. Further researches on the distribution of chiefdoms in Europe and other parts of the world, based on studies of ancient Greek and early medieval Germanic cases, will not change our basic understanding of the chiefdom model＇s applicability to the case of China, nor will it pose a serious challenge to the ongoing researches on state emergence in China. It is undoubtedly very helpful if we diligently apply foreign academic findings to our own studies in this subject, but genuine and in-depth understanding is necessary, if researchers are to accurately interpret and sum up the real implications of these foreign materials. At present, some Chinese scholars have produced various generalizations based on their own understanding of foreign research results. However, since they are not based on careful study of the original literary sources and other materials, those ＂generalized＂ views are often inaccurate. This is a problem that deserves our serious attention in current researches.
