The Unprecedented Challenge of Unification

In 221 BCE, Ying Zheng, later known as Qin Shi Huang, accomplished what no ruler before him had achieved – the complete unification of China under a single imperial banner. As the dust settled after decades of warfare against the six rival states, the Qin leadership faced a monumental question: how to govern this vast new empire stretching from the Yellow River basin to the southern frontiers.

The traditional Zhou dynasty model of decentralized feudal rule (the fengjian system) had dominated Chinese political thought for nearly eight centuries. Under this system, the king granted territories to relatives and allies who governed semi-autonomously while pledging loyalty to the central authority. This was precisely the solution proposed by Chancellor Wang Wan when the question of governance arose in the Qin court.

The Great Debate: Feudalism vs Centralization

Wang Wan, speaking from historical precedent, argued passionately for maintaining the feudal system: “The states of Yan, Qi and Chu are particularly distant from us. Unless we establish kings there, we may not be able to pacify these regions. I suggest Your Majesty grant these lands to your sons as feudal lords.”

His argument carried significant weight. The Qin had achieved military conquest but not yet political integration. The vast distances and regional differences across the former warring states made centralized control seem impractical. Wang Wan invoked the longevity of the Zhou dynasty as proof of feudalism’s effectiveness, describing it as a system where “your closest relatives guard various regions, watching over each other while you rest securely at the center.”

However, Ying Zheng was not a ruler inclined to follow tradition blindly. When he turned to his advisor Li Si for an alternative perspective, the stage was set for one of history’s most consequential policy debates.

Li Si countered with a revolutionary argument: “When Kings Wen and Wu of Zhou established their feudal system, it was because Zhou power couldn’t reach certain areas. But today we’ve conquered the entire realm – there’s no need for feudalism.” He highlighted how feudal lords inevitably grew distant from the central authority over generations, leading to the very warfare that had plagued China for centuries.

The Emperor’s Decisive Judgment

The debate grew heated, with Wang Wan momentarily abandoning his dignified demeanor to argue passionately. But Ying Zheng’s verdict was decisive: “Li Si is correct. The endless warfare that plagued the world stemmed precisely from the existence of feudal states. Now that we’ve finally achieved peace through unification, establishing feudalism would be sowing seeds of future conflict.”

This marked a watershed moment in Chinese history. Rejecting thousands of years of tradition, Ying Zheng implemented a completely centralized administrative system dividing the empire into 36 commanderies (jun) and numerous counties (xian). Each commandery had three appointed officials – a civil administrator (taishou), military commander (wei), and imperial inspector (jian) – creating a system of checks and balances. All appointments came directly from the central government, establishing unprecedented imperial control.

The Philosophical Underpinnings of Centralization

That evening, a distraught Wang Wan returned to plead his case, tearfully arguing that the emperor’s own sons deserved territories and power. Ying Zheng’s response revealed the deeper rationale behind his decision.

Over bowls of spicy soup (a culinary detail that humanizes these historical figures), the emperor explained: “The reason Qin could unify China was talent. Under competing states, talented individuals could simply move to another kingdom if not valued. With centralized rule, all talent must come to us.” This insight showed remarkable foresight – by eliminating alternative power centers, Qin could monopolize human capital essential for maintaining dominance.

When Wang Wan later raised concerns about defense against nomadic invasions without feudal lords to provide reinforcements, Li Si acknowledged the validity of the concern but maintained that avoiding the mistakes of the past took precedence. “Each generation must address its own challenges,” he concluded, recognizing that no system could be perfect but that centralized rule offered the best solution for their historical moment.

The Lasting Impact on Chinese Civilization

The Qin’s establishment of centralized bureaucratic governance created an administrative template that would endure, with modifications, for over two millennia. Several key innovations proved particularly enduring:

1. The meritocratic bureaucracy: While not fully developed under Qin, the seeds were planted for a system where officials governed based on competence rather than hereditary right.

2. Standardized administration: Uniform systems of law, measurement, writing, and currency facilitated governance across diverse regions.

3. Direct imperial control: By eliminating intermediate feudal authorities, the emperor could theoretically exert direct influence throughout the realm.

The system’s resilience was proven when later dynasties, even after initially experimenting with limited feudalism, consistently returned to centralized models. Han dynasty rulers, despite some early feudal concessions, ultimately strengthened centralized institutions. Subsequent dynasties refined but never fundamentally abandoned this Qin innovation.

Modern Perspectives on Qin’s Administrative Revolution

Contemporary historians continue to debate Ying Zheng’s decision. Some argue that the abrupt imposition of centralization contributed to Qin’s rapid collapse, as local elites chafed under alien rule. Others contend that the system’s subsequent endurance proves its fundamental soundness, with later dynasties learning to implement it more flexibly.

The debate between Wang Wan and Li Si encapsulates enduring tensions in governance – between central control and local autonomy, between innovation and tradition, between immediate stability and long-term resilience. In choosing centralization, Ying Zheng prioritized control over flexibility, unity over diversity – choices that would profoundly shape China’s political development.

As China’s first emperor reportedly stated during these deliberations: “If we establish feudal states again, we plant the seeds of future wars.” This recognition that political structures create path dependencies – that institutional choices constrain future possibilities – shows remarkable political foresight. While the Qin dynasty itself was short-lived, its fundamental governance model became one of history’s most enduring political innovations, shaping Chinese civilization to the present day.