| Literature DB >> 34189322 |
Abstract
We develop a framework for studying state division and unification, and as a case study we focus on modelling the territorial patterns in imperial China during periods of unity and upheaval. As a modelling tool we employ discrete dynamical systems and analyse two models: the logistic map and a new class of maps, which we name ren maps. The critical transitions exhibited by the models can be used to capture the process of territorial division but also unification. We outline certain limitations of uni-modal, smooth maps for our modelling purposes and propose ren maps as an alternative, which we use to reproduce the territorial dynamics over time. As a result of the modelling we arrive at a quantitative measure for asabiyyah, a notion of group solidarity, whose secular cycles match the historical record over 1800 years, from the time of the Warring States to the beginning of the Ming dynasty. Furthermore, we also derive an equation for aggregate asabiyyah which can be employed in other cases of interest.Entities:
Keywords: Chaotic map; Chinese dynasties; History; Mathematical modelling; Territorial division
Year: 2021 PMID: 34189322 PMCID: PMC8220190 DOI: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2021.e07293
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Heliyon ISSN: 2405-8440
Figure 1The iteration function, bifurcation diagram and Lyapunov exponent for the logistic map (1) (left column) and the ren map (2) (right column).
The different periods of Chinese history ordered chronologically and classified according to their territorial integrity (Meskill, 1965; Taagepera, 1979, Taagepera, 1997; Song, 1994; Gernet, 1996; Dardess, 2010; Von Glahn, 2016). The average duration of a historical period in the imperial era is approximately 350 ± 50 years.
| Period | Time range | Duration (years) | Type |
|---|---|---|---|
| Western Zhou | 1045 BCE - 771 BCE | 274 | Unified |
| Spring and Autumn Period | 771 BCE - 476 CE | 295 | Intermediate |
| Warring States and the Qin Dynasty | 476 BCE - 206 CE | 270 | Divided |
| Han Dynasties | 202 BCE - 220 CE | 422 | Unified |
| Period of Disunion and Sui Dynasty | 220 CE - 618 CE | 398 | Divided |
| Tang Dynasty | 618 CE - 907 CE | 289 | Unified |
| Five Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms, Tripartition | 907 CE -1271 CE | 364 | Divided |
| Yuan Dynasty and Ming Dynasty | 1271 CE - 1636 CE | 365 | Unified |
| Qing Dynasty | 1636 CE – 1912 CE | 276 | Unified |
Figure 2(Top) The evolution of λ (dotted) that we determined according to the data sources (Song, 1994; Taagepera, 1979, Taagepera, 1997). The λ for the dynasties (dots) indicates a single dominant dynasty in the stable periods (Han, Tang, Ming, Qing) and several in the chaotic periods. The Warring states period, the Period of Disunion, the period after the fall of the Tang and the Tripartition, all correspond to values of λ in the chaotic regime, above λ = 4/3 (dashed line). (Bottom) The corresponding evolution (grey dots) of the ren map in model (5) for λ values determined above. We compare the prediction from (5) with the maximum area for the dynasties (black dots) throughout their lifespan (solid line). The evolution of λ and the corresponding map values according to model (5) show a departure from the archaeological record starting with the Ming or Qing dynasties.
Figure 3The population data (Zhao and Xie, 1988) (solid line) is divided by P = 50 million people and the 3rd order Fourier series approximation (dashed line) is computed. We compare the evolution of λ (dotted line) with the population trends.