英文摘要 |
Historical sociology in international relations promises to undermine the Eurocentrism that is characteristic of mainstream international relations theories. To date, however, few empirical studies in historical sociology have been carried out to deliver on that promise. Victoria Tin-Bor Hui's groundbreaking comparative study of state formations in early modern Europe and ancient China is a rare exception. The main question she addresses in her work is why under similar pressure of military competition, Europe continued to be a multi-actor system while China ended up with a unified empire? Hui argues the key to this question is that Qin adopted the strategy of 'self-strengthening reforms' whereas most European states adopted the strategy of 'self-weakening reforms.' Although her explanation does touch on the significance of institutional reforms triggered by military competition, she nevertheless overemphasizes the role of military factor while paying insufficient attention to other potential explanations, such as ideology. Inspired by Zhao Dingxin's illuminating study on the same subject, in contrast, this paper opts for Michael Mann's IEMP model, which includes ideology, economy, military and politics as four sources of social power, in the belief that it will offer a more comprehensive answer to the question Hui raises. The purpose of this paper is to access to what extent these four factors contribute to the great divergence between the state formation of early modern Europe and that of ancient China. |