What do you think?
Rate this book
Cambridge History of China #2
The Cambridge History of China, Volume 1: The Ch'in and Han Empires, 221 B.C.-A.D. 220
This volume begins the historical coverage of The Cambridge History of China with the establishment of the Ch'in empire in 221 BC and ends with the abdication of the last Han emperor in AD 220. Spanning four centuries, this period witnessed major evolutionary changes in almost every aspect of China's development, being particularly notable for the emergence and growth of a centralized administration and imperial government. Leading historians from Asia, Europe, and America have contributed chapters that convey a realistic impression of significant political, economic, intellectual, religious, and social developments, and of the contacts that the Chinese made with other peoples at this time. As the book is intended for the general reader as well as the specialist, technical details are given in both Chinese terms and English equivalents. References lead to primary sources and their translations and to secondary writings in European languages as well as Chinese and Japanese.
1024 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1986
43 people are currently reading
567 people want to read
About the author
Denis C. Twitchett
15 books5 followersDenis Crispin Twitchett was a British Sinologist and scholar who specialized in Chinese history and greatly expanded the role of Chinese studies in Western intellectual circles.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews
June 16, 2021
The best and most thorough treatment of the subject I've seen. It needs two things:
1. Update from the old Wade-Giles pinyin which has been greatly superseded by the Hanyu, particularly on Wikipedia
2. A chapter on science and technology, though one can use Needham as a supplement in this regard
1. Update from the old Wade-Giles pinyin which has been greatly superseded by the Hanyu, particularly on Wikipedia
2. A chapter on science and technology, though one can use Needham as a supplement in this regard
August 6, 2015
Nah ini baru puas mwahahahhahhahaha.
September 27, 2021
剑桥中国史，被翻译成中文，也很好。很多中国人也想通过外国人的视角看中国。
Read
May 16, 2025they kicked me out of the school library while i was going through this series last year and for that this gets five stars
August 16, 2025
Volume One of The Cambridge History of China — like Sten’s cake in Dragon Age: Origins — is a lie.
It’s a collection of essays by subject-matter experts ranging across China’s history from the height of the Qin Dynasty to the emergence of organised Buddhism and Daoism during the contention of the Northern and Southern Dynasties. Afterwards came the conquests of Yáng Jiān (楊堅), the Cultured God-King of the Sui Dynasty (隋文帝).
I was about five hundred pages in before realising that the series has a companion book, The Cambridge History of Ancient China, that was more deserving of the title *Volume One*. Oh well — tears can’t be unspilt, and volume one can’t be rewritten. Such is life.
---
What it covers:
Completing this volume will leave you well-informed about the history of China over the four-hundred-some years that saw the emergence, entrenchment, and ultimate survival of the imperial institution.
It covers the dynastic histories of the Qin, Western Han, Xin, and Eastern Han, and alludes to the era of the Warring States to come. The writers also delve into dynastic foreign policy, state institutions, law, economic history, philosophy, and religion.
---
What doesn’t work:
* Uneven prose quality (inevitable when multiple authors are involved).
* No quarter given to beginners — expect your notes to need notes!
* Published in the 1980s, so it uses Wade-Giles transliteration. The style isn’t just repulsive; it’s *labour-intensive* to correct. You haven’t lived until you realise “Pen-chi ching” is really Běnshǐ Jīng (本始經).
Wise men say only fools rush in. They also say don’t teach kids to play with fire. I suppose playing with fire is the equivalent of giving this book to a Cao Cao-stanning, eunuchs-understanding, Don’t Trust the Confucians partisan like me.
I’ll admit: a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. It makes you question orthodoxy — which, in the past, could have gotten you killed! Thankfully, under online pseudonymity, the worst is ALL CAPS responses.
The book relies heavily on literary sources — essentially retelling the official imperial histories in English. That’s like getting your history of WWII from Churchill. Valuable, yes, but hardly neutral.
Yet the erudition of the authors left me with more questions than answers. For example:
* What do we mean by “China”? Is it an it — a place or idea? Or a she — a defined country?
* If “China” comes from “Qin” via Portuguese, how could the Indians have known about the Qin Empire when Buddhism (the bridge between the regions) only reached China centuries after Qin had perished?
* Isn’t the Former Qin (前秦: 351–394) — with its attested links to India and Buddhist transmission — a more plausible “China” for Indian contacts than the short-lived Qin Empire?
The literati dismissed the Former Qin because its rulers were of proto-Tibetan Di stock. They also swung wildly on Buddhism: first claiming Laozi and Buddha were the same person, then that Laozi was Buddha’s student, and finally denouncing Buddhism as a pernicious foreign faith. Why some still treat their words as gospel is beyond me.
Millennia later, I can say: Buddha was Indian, but Chan Buddhism is Chinese. Reading this volume convinced me that — in these centuries — “China” was primarily an idea. E Pluribus Unum impels empire. The notion that many could be forged into one began as a Confucian dream, but it was brought (kicking and screaming) into being by the wolves of Qin and the tiger-generals of Han.
The authors see China more narrowly, but their effort is still invaluable.
Reading Volume One of The Cambridge History of China is a far better use of time than watching polished Wikipedia summaries on YouTube. You’ll finish it with a hunger to know more.
Shame about that Wade-Giles bidness though.
⭐️⭐️⭐️
It’s a collection of essays by subject-matter experts ranging across China’s history from the height of the Qin Dynasty to the emergence of organised Buddhism and Daoism during the contention of the Northern and Southern Dynasties. Afterwards came the conquests of Yáng Jiān (楊堅), the Cultured God-King of the Sui Dynasty (隋文帝).
I was about five hundred pages in before realising that the series has a companion book, The Cambridge History of Ancient China, that was more deserving of the title *Volume One*. Oh well — tears can’t be unspilt, and volume one can’t be rewritten. Such is life.
---
What it covers:
Completing this volume will leave you well-informed about the history of China over the four-hundred-some years that saw the emergence, entrenchment, and ultimate survival of the imperial institution.
It covers the dynastic histories of the Qin, Western Han, Xin, and Eastern Han, and alludes to the era of the Warring States to come. The writers also delve into dynastic foreign policy, state institutions, law, economic history, philosophy, and religion.
---
What doesn’t work:
* Uneven prose quality (inevitable when multiple authors are involved).
* No quarter given to beginners — expect your notes to need notes!
* Published in the 1980s, so it uses Wade-Giles transliteration. The style isn’t just repulsive; it’s *labour-intensive* to correct. You haven’t lived until you realise “Pen-chi ching” is really Běnshǐ Jīng (本始經).
Wise men say only fools rush in. They also say don’t teach kids to play with fire. I suppose playing with fire is the equivalent of giving this book to a Cao Cao-stanning, eunuchs-understanding, Don’t Trust the Confucians partisan like me.
I’ll admit: a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. It makes you question orthodoxy — which, in the past, could have gotten you killed! Thankfully, under online pseudonymity, the worst is ALL CAPS responses.
The book relies heavily on literary sources — essentially retelling the official imperial histories in English. That’s like getting your history of WWII from Churchill. Valuable, yes, but hardly neutral.
Yet the erudition of the authors left me with more questions than answers. For example:
* What do we mean by “China”? Is it an it — a place or idea? Or a she — a defined country?
* If “China” comes from “Qin” via Portuguese, how could the Indians have known about the Qin Empire when Buddhism (the bridge between the regions) only reached China centuries after Qin had perished?
* Isn’t the Former Qin (前秦: 351–394) — with its attested links to India and Buddhist transmission — a more plausible “China” for Indian contacts than the short-lived Qin Empire?
The literati dismissed the Former Qin because its rulers were of proto-Tibetan Di stock. They also swung wildly on Buddhism: first claiming Laozi and Buddha were the same person, then that Laozi was Buddha’s student, and finally denouncing Buddhism as a pernicious foreign faith. Why some still treat their words as gospel is beyond me.
Millennia later, I can say: Buddha was Indian, but Chan Buddhism is Chinese. Reading this volume convinced me that — in these centuries — “China” was primarily an idea. E Pluribus Unum impels empire. The notion that many could be forged into one began as a Confucian dream, but it was brought (kicking and screaming) into being by the wolves of Qin and the tiger-generals of Han.
The authors see China more narrowly, but their effort is still invaluable.
Reading Volume One of The Cambridge History of China is a far better use of time than watching polished Wikipedia summaries on YouTube. You’ll finish it with a hunger to know more.
Shame about that Wade-Giles bidness though.
⭐️⭐️⭐️
April 10, 2025
A rather dull and plodding book but it does cover the ground albeit in what is now a very out-of-date viewpoint. But as a pretty thorough coverage of the facts it takes a lot of beating.
Displaying 1 - 6 of 6 reviews