China - Europe

Division and Unification

-Outline-

DIVISION AND UNIFICATION

China and Europe have shared greatest portion of their history together: it was in 1271 when the
Italian explorer and Ambassador Marco Polo travelled along the Silk Road and brought back to
Europe some of the most famous Chinese inventions. However, China and Europe are not very
similar in a various number of ways. In regard of the aim of this research and presentation, we will
understand why China and Europe cannot be compared under the political and geopolitical
spectrum.

Europe cannot be defined as nation-state like China is, for several factors that span from:
political, geographical, economic and historical. The concept of Europe can be traced back to
Ancient Greece: in fact, Charles Magne referred the name of goddess Europa ( ) as the
toponymical name for the Holy Roman Empire in IX century. Europe was therefore only a
geographical expression with no intention of total unity under one same flag or same ruler. In fact,
the geographical conformation, the political and language differences, topped with the deep ethnical
differences made it impossible for Europe to be united until the end of World War II, after which the
European countries decided that to avoid further violence a set of institutions was needed to
guarantee peace and prosperity: the European Community was born, but still this unity didnt mean
Europe became one country, but as the name suggests a community of states sharing values and
interests as Immanuel Kant or Victor Hugo described the united Europe.

Political Europe and China: main differences

The first difference that we should be looking at is the diverse linguistic and ethnical
composition of Europe and China. As we can see in picture 1, Europe is divided into twelve
predominant ethnic groups and as many different languages and dialects. Now, the main problem
facing these ethnicities and different cultures was indeed the lack of sustenance and the need to
conquer more fertile lands for the sake of one own peoples survival. While China has witnessed a
very long period of overall unity (ever since Qin dynasty), the first period in which Europe was
united was during the Roman era. They managed to create a safe zone around the pirates-infested
Mediterranean Sea and to protect his neighbours on the Northern front from the attacks of the
Germans, Svevs and other minor tribes. Who were indeed looking to conquer the most resourceful
area in the todays Southern France, ultimately this would have put a threat as a whole to the Roman
Empire. As highlighted by Koyma (Koyma, et al., 2014), while the collapse of the Roman Empire
favoured the emergence of numerous different European states (we might assume that the majority
of these originated from the former Roman provinces) and therefore conflicts, China had fewer
states. The most interesting aspect is, despite the fact that Qins first unification of China did not
last long as a centralized state, the Chinese empire lasted until the XX century. Furthermore,
Chinese Han population had to defend themselves from outer aggression as the steppe aided the
nomads coming from the north to have the upper hands in conflicts. Contrary, in Europe, there was
less fear of nomads aggressions and therefore the European states did not really seek to achieve
central unification. However, the moments in which Europe agreed to put aside their conflicts and
join a league of mutual defence was indeed during external invasion. Remarkably, the Muslim
invasion of the Iberian Peninsula, and the threat posed by the Ottoman empire in early XVI century
with the battle of Lepanto and the siege of Vienna. We may also argue that while the prevalent
political strategy during the Roman era Dividi et Impera (Divide and Govern) characterized the
European history up until the end of World War II. In fact, contrary to Europe, the Chinese
civilization-driven unity was centripetal and pushed the various provinces to stick together against
external aggressions. The Europeans, rather, needed to obtain full sovereignty of their own states as
that would guarantee fair relationship and safety of the citizens. It was simply impossible that so
many civilization and diverse people would simply come together under one same rule. It was,
indeed, impossible to centralize the government. This was far evident at the breaking of the Roman
Empire. With the advent of Christianism, corruption, continuous pressure on the borders and overall
moral and civic decadency, the Roman Empire broke up in two parts (Western Empire and Eastern
Empire). The weakening of the Empire only favoured and accelerated its fall to smaller and less
powerful para-states entities. Europe was now entering its Middle Age: the feudal castes and

governing system was put in place and favoured the ambitions of small land owners that were
subordinate to the local kings. This fomented the fragmentation of the European civilizations into
many subgroups. Such fragmentation was propelled not only by the diverse political and economic
ambitions, but also by the language and the religion. The main fracture was represented by the
divide between Catholic and Orthodox Christianism, then by the Lutheranism, Calvinism,
Anglicism and so on and so forth. Notably, the Thirty Years war (1618-1648) was the deadliest
religious conflict in Europe that was to determine which branch of Christianism would be prevalent.
This resulted in the failure of the peace of Augusta in 1555, which recited Cuius Regio, Eius
Religio (Whose realm, his religion), and was an attempt to reconcile the political differences
between Lutheranism and Catholicism. This was supposed to shift the balance and make sure that
the population of each European realm would be as homogenous as possible. This, however, only
fomented hatred and conflict amongst the European kingdoms that were smaller and, therefore, in
need for resources. A good result toward national unity of each single state in Europe was reached
with the pace of Westphalia, which also determined the end of the Thirty Years war and confirmed
-with improvements- the conditions of the 1555 peace of Augusta. The peace of Westphalia was the
first time in which each European state entity recognized each others sovereignty, a huge
improvement from the political instability that characterized the continent since the fall of the
Roman Empire.

China
Unification in China is a process that would repeat itself many times throughout history. First
time China was unified during the Xia dynasty which was formed in order to provide solutions
against natural disasters. Initially the Chinese population was establish along the valley of the
Yellow River due to easy access to water and fertile soil for agriculture. Still floods would pose a
big threat for the tribes and their agriculture so these tribes decided to unite and cooperate to create
dams and canals to avoid futher disasters.
Chinas ability to reunify after periods of division has helped it remain one of the oldest
civilizations on Earth. While there are many factors that have contributed to the success of China in
keeping its territory relatively unified, there are a few ideas and innovations that proved essential.
Two reforms that were introduced were the unified writing system and a centralized governing
system. China also had a way of thinking brought about by the idea of The Mandate of Heaven
that promoted a unified China. And one of the most important abilities China possessed was being
able to assimilate different cultures and people into Chinese society.
In explaining China unity and division cycles geography poses a very important role
because unlike Europe, China was well protected by geographical barriers in the south, east and
west but not in the north which is where the nomad populations threat emerged. The threat of steppe
nomads has had an important contribution in state formation in Ancient China. While the nomadic
problem acted as a centripetal force towards political centralization, it must be said that external
threats were unidirectional, coming mostly from the north, so there was no threat coming from other
parts to increase the need for political decentralization.
The unified writing system was first introduced during the Qin dynasty (221 BC 206 BC)
by a man named Li Si who was the prime minister under Emperor Ying Zheng. Li Si standardized
his Small Seal Script throughout the empire. Its implementation in currency, transportation,
writing, laws, weights, and measures allowed for people to communicate more effectively with each
other. It has also proved useful in that people who speak different dialects are still able to

communicate because the writing system has been very similar. Chinas unified writing system has
been essential to its unity, as it has brought and kept its people together.
Another important aspect of Chinese society was implemented during the Qin dynasty and
adopted/improved by future dynasties such as the Han. Before the Qin dynasty, China consisted of
vassal states and independent kingdoms with nobility holding a lot of power. It was a feudal system
much like that of Europe. Once the Qin came into power they introduced a centralized/bureaucratic
form of government, power was now focused solely on the emperor. They also introduced a system
of civil service examinations to decide administrative appointments, these officials would govern
different provinces, cities, and counties on behalf on the emperor. This gave the emperor to rule a
vast territory while maintaining direct control of his empire, rather than having vassal states ruling
territories for him.
The Zhou dynasty (1046 BC 256 BC), after overthrowing the Shang Dynasty just the
Mandate of Heaven to justify their rule. It argues that the ruler/emperor governed by divine right,
and if that person was overthrown (even by rebellion or natural disaster) it was because they had
lost the right to rule. It also promoted the idea that China should only have one ruler at any time,
which inspired leaders to attempt to unify China. Various dynasties such as the Song dynasty (960
1279) used the Mandate to justify unifying China after the Five Dynasties period, arguing that the
Mandate had transferred to them. It might have helped to quell any resent that citizens of the
conquered dynasty would have to their new rulers. Many scholars also argued that the Mandate
justified the removal of cruel or incompetent rulers, which would promote a ruler that ruled fairly
and benevolently.
China has always had an impressive ability to easily assimilate different people and cultures
into Chinese society. When the Mongols took over China they did not destroy the Chinese systems
and institutions, rather they adopted them and became Chinese by forming the Yuan dynasty
(1271 1368). The same happened when the Manchus overthrew the Ming dynasty, they adopted
the Chinese way of life and started the Qing dynasty (1644 1921). One argument for this
phenomenon is that China possessed such an advanced society, culture, and institutions that the
foreign invaders had to adopt them. This could even be considered a type of defense, the process
of transforming external forces into Chinese. This ability helped preserve Chinas identity,
because China could have been dramatically altered by conquerors not willing to adopt the Chinese
way of life.
While there are many reasons why China has remained unified through-out history, these
four have proved essential. Unifying and standardizing the writing system across the empire
allowed for easy communication between all people, centralizing power on the emperor and
appointing officials to govern on behalf of the emperor helped keep a huge territory together, the
Mandate of Heaven promoted the idea of a unified China, and the ability to assimilate outsiders
allowed China to retain its identity.

Europe
First of all, in comparison to China, where we can talk about a core of the population, of a
central point from where the population started expanding, in Europe we see a different situation.
There were multiple ethnic groups spreaded around Europe so we can see that building empires and
countries in Europe was a process started from different places on the continent. Whereas in China
the first kingdom was establish in the area most populated which was on the banks of the Yellow

River. From this point the empire and the population started spreading to the south to the west and
north, but this was not the case for Europe. So we claim that there is a lack of legitimacy in Europe
for one king or empire to claim the right of unifying Europe. Even if the Roman and Greek fusion
culture was considered the core of European civilization, still there are not enough arguments to
argue in favour of a central government in Italy or Greece to rule over the European continent.
Secondly, Europe is seen as a big civilization but it is composed of many important cultures
and ethnic groups. For example, in Mediteranean Europe we see Latin descendent groups, we see
Italians, Spanish, French , more in the north we can find Germanic groups and in eastern Europe the
Slavic ethnicities. In China the Han population represents more than 90% of the population, but in
Europe there is no main ethnicity which has made unification more difficult to attain. Throughout
European history hatred between different ethnicities has caused wars and continuous problems.
Here we can give the example of Romania which in the Middle Ages was divided and the major
population in Transylvania which was the Romanians, were considered a lower class and had fewer
rights than the Hungarians or the Germans, because back then Transylvania was conquered by the
Hungarian Empire and later the Habsburgic Empire. Consequently, the Romanian population which
was the majority was not pleased with the idea of a unified Europe because the ruling power would
never give them the same rights and treatment as to the other ethnic groups.
Thirdly, when looking at European history it becomes clear than the struggle for power and
supremacy was one of the reasons of European fragmentation. Kings were often competing for
power over larger territories and often led wars in order to conquer new territories. It was hard to
envision a unified Europe under one king when every attempt of expanding an empire was
considered a threat by the neighbouring countries. No king could claim legitimacy of ruling over
Europe. Why would Napoleon Bonaparte be the ruler of Europe in the eyes of Polish people for
example? He could never be considered legitimate or receive in Chinese terms the Mandate of
Heaven. Instead the other European leaders from England, Prussia and Belgium fought and
defeated him. Therefore big attempts of conquering the European continent were blocked by those
rulers who wanted to preserve their political identity. No king from west to east would want to give
up their power in the name of a united Europe. Divide et impera (divide and conquer) describes
European leaders and the way they perceived politics in Europe. Also in Europe the feudal system,
the vassal-states system was widely spread and it benefited both the emperors and the local kings or
dukes, ones would receive money, gifts and army, while the others would maintain domination over
their territory. But in China, vassality was forbidden, the power was centralized and princes could
not have independent land.
Another aspect explaining European fragmentation is the role of the Church in politics,
because in Europe the clerics used to have a lot of influence over kings and leaders. Usually the
Church would have to give its blessing once a king is crowned, so the Church had a lot of political
influence both in the West and East. Christianity has indeed been a basis for unity in Europe, but on
the other hand the Church was a cause of division due to the conflicts between catholics versus
orthodox and later on catholics versus protestants. Often times the catholics would persecute the
protestants or there would not be equality between catholic citizens and protestant or orthodox ones.
So on the whole, it was more convenient for the Church to have a divided Europe instead of a
united one.
Geography can also provide some answers to the European question of division because it is
directly related to the threat of nomadic populations. While in China attacks from the north pushed
towards political centralization, in Europe the numerous invasions of Magyars, Vikings and

Muslims made it hard to maintain unity. For example after the fall of the Roman Empire, there were
some attempts at rebuilding unity under Carol the Great and his successors but nomadic invasions
posed a big obstacle. It can be argued that the Otoman threat from the east contributed to less
interstate wars in Europe but it did not lead to unity because the European kings together with the
Vatican would often make alliances in order to fight the common enemies in crusades.

Italy: Unity and Disunity

Italy is one of the youngest European nation state, having acquired full national unity respectively
in 1861 (unification of mainland Italy), 1870 (capture of Rome) and 1918 (annexation of Sud-Tirol
and other irrident lands). Up until the Risorgimental wars, Italy was divided into four major
blocks: Kingdom of Sardinia, Austro-Hungarian Empire, Papal State and the Kingdom of two
Sicilies. Before that, there would be even more small states, grand duchies, principalities, etc that
were soon absorbed either into mutual allegiances or other bigger -and stronger- states. The divides
were mainly dictated not only by different religious feelings, but also by the different monarchic
families from which the Savoy (Kingdom of Italy) and the Bourbons (Kingdom of the two Sicilies)
descended. In fact, the former had a stronger attachment to the French dynasty, while the latter to
the Spanish. This indeed could resemble a semi proxy wars with the Spanish and French
monarchies in contentions. At that point, there was also the problem of having to unify such a
diverse country and with so many players and interests at stakes. While the Kingdom of Sardinia
sought the unification of the Italian peninsula and to impose itself upon the other actors, the Papal
State did not want its influence to be reduced also because the Kingdom of Sardinia had a shade of
anti-clericalism (an inheritance from the post-revolutionary France). This meant that, would
Kingdom of Italy prevail, the Papal State would have lost -as would happen later on- its power and
influence. The Kingdom of the Two Sicilies is, instead, a curious case: developed (first Italian
railway was in Naples in 1839) and underdeveloped (sharecropping and estate). The most relevant
aspect in this dispute is that -still today- people from northern and southern Italy is still polarized
with reminiscences of phenomenon such as Neo-Bourbonism that wish for a return of the
Bourbon family to rule what was once known as the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. Italy is a country
with profound differences from North to South. Different languages, customs and traditions makes
of Italy a small continent of its own, something that we can compare to China for example, but in a
smaller scale.

Reference(s):
Chiu Yu Ko, Mark Koyama, Tuan-Hwee Sung, Unified China and Divided Europe, December 2007
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2382346