双语汇 | 韩建业：中华文明到底是五千年还是八千年，分歧在标准上

In recent years, “civilization” has become a subject of heated debate. Does Chinese civilization date back 5,000 years, 8,000 years, or even earlier—or somewhat later? Opinions vary widely. At the root of these disagreements are differing scholarly understandings of the meaning of “civilization” and the criteria by which it should be identified.

Modern and contemporary scholars have understood “civilization” in the Western context in diverse ways, which can broadly be summarized along two dimensions. In temporal or evolutionary terms, Lewis Henry Morgan interpreted “civilization” as an advanced stage of social development set against “barbarism”—the civilized era. This remains an influential understanding both in China and abroad. Viewed in this way, “civilization” is often associated with the “state,” to the point that many treat the two as virtually synonymous. Strictly speaking, however, “civilized society” is closer in meaning to the “state.”

A second understanding approaches “civilization” in spatial or historical-morphological terms. Liang Qichao wrote of the “five great ancient civilizations,” while Arnold J. Toynbee identified more than 20 civilizations across human history. From this perspective, “civilization” can be understood as long-lasting cultural traditions or broadly defined cultural entities.

As a comprehensive cultural entity, “civilization” has both an origin and a process of formation, and these two stages should be judged by distinct criteria. Many scholars have noted that “civilizational elements”—such as cities, bronze artifacts, and writing—had already appeared before the advent of full-fledged civilizations.

According to the definition adopted here, the origin of civilization entails three aspects: the emergence of a comprehensive cultural entity that carries “civilization,” namely the initial formation of a relatively large-scale cultural community; the onset of social complexity, marked by preliminary social stratification and the division of labor in handicrafts; and the emergence of complex spiritual concepts and knowledge systems.

Measured against these criteria, several early civilizations across Asia, Europe, and Africa followed roughly similar two-stage trajectories: the first beginning more than 8,000 years ago, and the second around 6,000 years ago.

At what point can the development of civilization be said to have produced a fully formed civilization, or to have entered the civilized era? In political science, the decisive criterion is the emergence of the state. According to Engels, in contrast to the old gentile organization, the state is distinguished firstly by the grouping of its members on a territorial basis, and secondly by the institution of a public force. Territorial grouping means organizing society primarily on the basis of geographic rather than blood relations. Public force is concentrated in “sovereign power” standing above society—including military, political, and economic authority—and rests on the foundation of social stratification. If material criteria for the formation of civilization must be established for use in archaeological practice, the most appropriate benchmark is the emergence of large central cities or duyi, the capital city.

In sum, definitions of “civilization” and the criteria used to identify it should integrate Eastern, Western, and global perspectives. Civilization’s origin and formation are two distinct stages, each requiring its own set of criteria. The origin of civilization involves the emergence of a comprehensive cultural entity that carries civilization, the onset of social complexity, and the emergence of complex spiritual concepts. In political science, the formation of civilization—or entry into the civilized era—is marked by the emergence of the state, while the rise of large central cities or duyi serves as its material benchmark.