Debunking the Myth of “Polygamy” in Chinese History

A common misconception persists that ancient China practiced “polygamy”—a system where one man could have multiple wives. In reality, the structure was far more nuanced: it was a “one wife, multiple concubines” (一夫一妻多妾制) system. Only one woman held the formal title of wife; all others were concubines, a distinction even emperors followed. The gap between wives and concubines was vast and legally enforced, extending to their children, who were categorized as di (嫡, born to the wife) or shu (庶, born to a concubine).

Modern literature and dramas often exaggerate this divide, even portraying it as a central plot device. Online communities have ironically spawned a “Di-Shu Doctrine,” romanticizing the superiority of di offspring. Yet historical evidence reveals a more complex picture, shaped by China’s unique patrilineal principle—where a child’s status depended solely on the father’s rank, not the mother’s.

The Patrilineal Principle: Status Flowed from Father to Child

Unlike societies where maternal lineage dictated status (e.g., Korea’s matrilineal principle), ancient China operated on a rigid patrilineal hierarchy. If a father was nobility, his children were nobles—even if their mother was a concubine or from the jianmin (贱民, “base” class). The jianmin, a legally defined underclass (including performers and enslaved people), faced systemic discrimination: banned from civil exams and trapped in hereditary servitude. However, if a noble took a jianmin concubine, their children inherited his status.

A striking example is Yinsi (胤禩), the eighth son of Emperor Kangxi. His mother was a Xinzhuku (辛者库) servant, yet Yinsi became a prince—proof that maternal background was irrelevant under patrilineal rules.

Korea’s Contrast: When Mothers Determined Status

Neighboring Joseon Korea adopted the opposite approach after a bloody 14th-century succession crisis. When King Taejo favored a concubine’s son over his di heir, a coup led by Queen Jeongsin’s sons cemented the “base-born follow the mother” law. In Joseon, shu children were treated as servants within their own households—a stark contrast to China’s system, where half-siblings stood as equals in lineage.

Concubines as “Invisible Mothers”: A Harsh Social Reality

In Chinese families, all children—di or shu—were legally considered offspring of the father and his wife. Concubines, though biological mothers, held no parental rights. As depicted in The Scholars (《儒林外史》), a concubine’s son addressed the wife as “mother,” while his birth mother was relegated to a wet nurse or caretaker. This legal fiction ensured that even children of low-status concubines were recognized as full heirs.

When Did Birthright Matter? Class and Era Differences

The di-shu gap fluctuated across time and social strata:

– Among Nobility: The divide was starkest here, especially for inheriting titles. Under Confucian primogeniture, only the di eldest son could inherit family titles and lands. Ritual roles (e.g., ancestral rites) also favored di children.
– Among Commoners: Most peasants couldn’t afford concubines, making di-shu distinctions irrelevant.
– Historical Shifts:
– Pre-Qin Era: Rigid divisions, tied to feudal enfeoffment.
– Han–Northern Dynasties: Elite clans emphasized “pure” bloodlines, widening the gap.
– Tang Dynasty Onward: As aristocracy waned, so did birthright prejudices. By the Qing era, even emperors like Yongzheng (a shu son) could ascend the throne.

Dream of the Red Chamber: A Misleading Case Study?

Critics cite Jia Huan—the shu son in Dream of the Red Chamber (《红楼梦》)—as proof of systemic bias. Yet his marginalization stemmed from personality flaws, not legal inferiority. By contrast, his half-sister Tan Chun (also shu) commanded respect and even managed household affairs. The novel thus reflects emotional favoritism, not institutional hierarchy.

Legacy and Modern Misconceptions

Today’s media often distorts history by amplifying the di-shu conflict for drama. In reality, by the late imperial era, merit increasingly outweighed birthright—a lesson echoing in contemporary debates about equity and lineage. While nobles clung to primogeniture, most of society moved toward pragmatism.

So, unless your family had a throne to inherit, the “sacredness of di” was likely irrelevant. After all, as Yongzheng proved, even emperors could rise above birthright.