Keywords: China, China and Inner Asia, World History
How to Cite:
A. Lee, A.
(2016) “Table that Accompanies Periodization and Historical Patterns in Chinese History: Approaches to Historical Thinking Skills in AP World History”,
Education About Asia. 21(1).
doi: https://doi.org/10.65959/eaa.1390
Chart and questions developed by Angela A. Lee
Discussion Questions:
What are the problems with the traditional dynastic approach? Suggests changes in Chinese life when change not evident (only political) Suggests degree of continuity that is not always there (other side of coin) Stresses history of political elite
Overlooks economic and agricultural life (which affected a much higher percent of population throughout Chinese history)
Does Gernet’s model have the same issues? What else does it offer?
Does Elvin’s model have the same issues? What else does it offer?
Does the Marxist model have the same issues? What else does it offer?
Synthesis Questions:
Should each Chinese dynasty be seen as a “separate” empire? Or should Chinese dynasties be considered ONE continuous empire?
Compare the traditional dynastic model with Mark Elvin, who asks the question “why did the Chinese Empire stay together when the Roman Empire, and every other empire of antiquity or the middle ages, ultimately collapse?”
How do these different models help deepen our understanding of Chinese history?
Can these different types of models be applied to other empires in world history?
