Meritocracy (merit,
from Latin mereō, and -cracy, from Ancient Greek κράτος kratos "strength, power") is a political philosophy holding that power should
be vested in individuals almost exclusively based on ability
and talent.[1] Advancement in such a system is based on
performance measured through examination and/or demonstrated achievement in the
field where it is implemented.
Definitions[
Early definitions
The
"most common definition of meritocracy conceptualizes merit in terms of
tested competency and ability, and most likely, as measured by IQ or standardized achievement tests."[2] In government or other administration
systems, meritocracy, in an administrative sense,
is a system of government or other administration (such as business administration) wherein
appointments and responsibilities are assigned to individuals based upon their
"merits", namely intelligence, credentials,
and education, determined through evaluations or examinations.[3]
In
a more general sense, meritocracy can refer to any form of government based on
achievement. Like "utilitarian" and "pragmatic",
the word "meritocratic" has also developed a broader definition, and
may be used to refer to any government run by "a ruling or influential
class of educated or able people."[4]
This
is in contrast to the original, condemnatory use of the term in 1958 by Michael Young in his work "The Rise of the Meritocracy", who was
satirizing the ostensibly merit-based Tripartite
System of education
practiced in the United Kingdom at the time; he claimed that, in the Tripartite
system, "merit is equated with intelligence-plus-effort, its possessors
are identified at an early age and selected for appropriate intensive education,
and there is an obsession with quantification, test-scoring, and
qualifications.
Meritocracy
in its wider sense, may be any general act of judgment upon the basis of
various demonstrated merits; such acts frequently are described in sociology and psychology.
Supporters of meritocracies do not necessarily agree on the nature of
"merit"; however, they do tend to agree that "merit" itself
should be a primary consideration during evaluation. Thus, the merits may
extend beyond intelligence and education to any mental or physical talent or to work ethic.
As such meritocracy may be based on character or innate abilities.
In rhetoric,
the demonstration of one's merit regarding mastery of a particular subject is
an essential task most directly related to the Aristotelian term Ethos. The equivalent
Aristotelian conception of meritocracy is based upon aristocratic or oligarchical structures, rather than in the context
of the modern state.
More recent definitions[
In
the United States, the assassination of President James A.
Garfield in 1881
prompted the replacement of the American Spoils System with a meritocracy. In 1883, The Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act was passed, stipulating government
jobs should be awarded on the basis of merit through competitive exams, rather
than ties to politicians or political affiliation
The
most common form of meritocratic screening found today is the college degree.
Higher education is an imperfect meritocratic screening system for various
reasons, such as lack of uniform standards worldwide, lack of scope (not all occupations and
processes are included), and lack of access (some talented people never have an
opportunity to participate because of the expense, most especially in developing countries). Nonetheless, academic degrees serve
some amount of meritocratic screening purpose in the absence of a more refined
methodology. Education alone, however, does not constitute a complete system,
as meritocracy must automatically confer power and authority, which a degree
does not accomplish independently.
Etymology[
Although
the concept has existed for centuries, the term "meritocracy" is
relatively new. It was used by British politician and sociologist Michael Young in his 1958 satiricalessay[3][12][13][14][15] The Rise of the Meritocracy, which
pictured the United Kingdom under the rule of a government favouring
intelligence and aptitude (merit) above all else, being the combination of the
root of Latin origin "merit" (from "mereō" meaning
"earn") and the Ancient Greek suffix "-cracy" (meaning
"power", "rule").[ In this book the term had distinctly
negative connotations as Young questioned both the legitimacy of the selection
process used to become a member of this elite and the outcomes of being ruled
by such a narrowly defined group. The essay, written in the first person by a
fictional historical narrator in 2034, interweaves history from the politics of
pre- and post-war Britain with those of fictional future events in the short
(1960 onward) and long term (2020 onward
The
essay was based upon the tendency of the then-current governments, in their
striving toward intelligence, to ignore shortcomings and upon the failure of
education systems to utilize correctly the gifted and talented members within
their societies.
Young's
fictional narrator explains that, on the one hand, the greatest contributor to
society is not the "stolid mass" or majority, but the "creative
minority" or members of the "restless elite". On the other hand, he claims that
there are casualties of progress whose influence is underestimated and that,
from such stolid adherence to natural science and intelligence, arises
arrogance and complacency.[ This
problem is encapsulated in the phrase "Every selection of one is a
rejection of many".
It
was also used by Hannah Arendt in her essay "Crisis in
Education",[20] which was written in 1958 and refers to the
use of meritocracy in the English educational system.
History[edit]
Ancient times: China[
According to scholarly consensus, the earliest example of an
administrative meritocracy, based on civil service examinations, dates back to
Ancient China. The concept originates, at least by the sixth century BC, when
it was advocated by the Chinese philosopher Confucius,
who "invented the notion that those who govern should do so because of
merit, not of inherited status. This sets in motion the creation of the
imperial examinations and bureaucracies open only to those who passed tests.
As
the Qin and Han dynasties developed a meritocratic system in order to maintain
power over a large, sprawling empire, it became necessary for the government to
maintain a complex network of officialsProspective officials could come from a
rural background and government positions were not restricted to the nobility.
Rank was determined by merit, through the civil service examinations, and education
became the key for social mobility After
the fall of the Han Dynasty, the nine-rank system was established during the Three Kingdoms period.
According
to the Princeton Encyclopedia on American History
One of the oldest examples of a
merit-based civil service system existed in the imperial bureaucracy of China.
Tracing back to 200 B.C., the Han Dynasty adopted Confucianism as the basis of
its political philosophy and structure, which included the revolutionary idea
of replacing nobility of blood with one of virtue and honesty, and thereby
calling for administrative appointments to be based solely on merit. This
system allowed anyone who passed an examination to become a government officer,
a position that would bring wealth and honor to the whole family. In part due
to Chinese influence, the first European civil service did not originate in
Europe, but rather in India by the British-run East India Company... company
managers hired and promoted employees based on competitive examinations in
order to prevent corruption and favoritism.
Both Plato and Aristotle advocated meritocracy, Plato in his The Republic, arguing that the most wise
should rule, and hence the rulers should be philosopher
kings.
Middle Ages: Middle East[
After Muhammad's
death in 632 CE, the Medinan Ansar debated which of them should succeed
him in running the affairs of the Muslims while Muhammad's household was busy
with his burial. Umar and Abu Ubaidah ibn al-Jarrah pledged their loyalty to Abu Bakr,
with the Ansar and the Quraysh soon following suit. Abu Bakr thus
became the first Khalīfatu
Rasūli l-Lāh "successor
of the Messenger of God", or caliph,
and embarked on campaigns to propagate Islam. First he would have to subdue the
Arabian tribes which had claimed that although they pledged allegiance to
Muhammad and accepted Islam, they owed nothing to Abu Bakr. As a caliph, Abu
Bakr was not a monarch and never claimed such a title; nor did any of his three
successors. Rather, their election
and leadership were based upon merit.
17th century: spread to Europe
The
concept of meritocracy spread from China to British India during the
seventeenth century, and then into continental Europe and the United States. With the translation of Confucian
texts during the Enlightenment, the concept of a meritocracy
reached intellectuals in the West, who saw it as an alternative to the
traditional ancient regime of Europe. Voltaire and François Quesnay wrote favourably of the idea, with
Voltaire claiming that the Chinese had "perfected moral science" and
Quesnay advocating an economic and political system modeled after that of the
Chinese.
The
first European power to implement a successful meritocratic civil service was
the British Empire,
in their administration of India: "company managers hired and promoted
employees based on competitive examinations in order to prevent corruption and
favoritismBritish colonial administrators advocated the spread of the system to
the rest of the commonwealth, the most "persistent" of which was
Thomas Taylor Meadows, Britain's consul in Guangzhou, China. Meadows
successfully argued in his Desultory Notes
on the Government and People of China, published in 1847, that
"the long duration of the Chinese empire is solely and altogether owing to
the good government which consists in the advancement of men of talent and
merit only," and that the British must reform their civil service by
making the institution meritocratic. "This practice later was adopted in
the late nineteenth century by the British mainland, inspired by "Chinese
mandarin system."
The
British philosopher and polymath John Stuart Mill advocated meritocracy in his book, Considerations on Representative
Government. His model was to give more votes to the more educated voter. His views are explained in
Estlund (2003:57–58):
Mill's proposal of plural
voting has two motives. One is to prevent one group or class of people from
being able to control the political process even without having to give reasons
in order to gain sufficient support. He calls this the problem of class
legislation. Since the most numerous class is also at a lower level of
education and social rank, this could be partly remedied by giving those at the
higher ranks plural votes. A second, and equally prominent motive for plural
voting is to avoid giving equal influence to each person without regard to
their merit, intelligence, etc. He thinks that it is fundamentally important
that political institutions embody, in their spirit, the recognition that some
opinions are worth more than others. He does not say that this is a route to
producing better political decisions, but it is hard to understand his
argument, based on this second motive, in any other way.
So, if Aristotle is right that the deliberation is best if participants are numerous (and assuming for simplicity that the voters are the deliberators) then this is a reason for giving all or many citizens a vote, but this does not yet show that the wiser subset should not have, say, two or three; in that way something would be given both to the value of the diverse perspectives, and to the value of the greater wisdom of the few. This combination of the Platonic and Aristotelian points is part of what I think is so formidable about Mill's proposal of plural voting. It is also an advantage of his view that he proposes to privilege not the wise, but the educated. Even if we agreed that the wise should rule, there is a serious problem about how to identify them. This becomes especially important if a successful political justification must be generally acceptable to the ruled. In that case, privileging the wise would require not only their being so wise as to be better rulers, but also, and more demandingly, that their wisdom be something that can be agreed to by all reasonable citizens. I turn to this conception of justification below.
Mill's position has great plausibility: good education promotes the ability of citizens to rule more wisely. So, how can we deny that the educated subset would rule more wisely than others. But then why shouldn't they have more votes?
So, if Aristotle is right that the deliberation is best if participants are numerous (and assuming for simplicity that the voters are the deliberators) then this is a reason for giving all or many citizens a vote, but this does not yet show that the wiser subset should not have, say, two or three; in that way something would be given both to the value of the diverse perspectives, and to the value of the greater wisdom of the few. This combination of the Platonic and Aristotelian points is part of what I think is so formidable about Mill's proposal of plural voting. It is also an advantage of his view that he proposes to privilege not the wise, but the educated. Even if we agreed that the wise should rule, there is a serious problem about how to identify them. This becomes especially important if a successful political justification must be generally acceptable to the ruled. In that case, privileging the wise would require not only their being so wise as to be better rulers, but also, and more demandingly, that their wisdom be something that can be agreed to by all reasonable citizens. I turn to this conception of justification below.
Mill's position has great plausibility: good education promotes the ability of citizens to rule more wisely. So, how can we deny that the educated subset would rule more wisely than others. But then why shouldn't they have more votes?
Estlund
goes on to criticize Mill's education-based meritocracy on various grounds.
19th century: United States[In the United States, the federal bureaucracy used the Spoils System from 1828 until the assassination of United States President James A. Garfield by a disappointed office seeker in 1881 proved its dangers. Two years later in 1883, the system of appointments to the United States Federal Bureaucracy was revamped by the Pendleton Civil Service Reform Act, partially based on the British meritocratic civil service that had been established years earlier. The act stipulated that government jobs should be awarded on the basis of merit, through competitive exams, rather than ties to politicians or political affiliation. It also made it illegal to fire or demote government employees for political reasons.[
To
enforce the merit system and the judicial system, the law also created the United States Civil Service
CommissionIn the modern American meritocracy, the president may hand
out only a certain number of jobs, which must be approved by the Senate.
Australia[
Australia
began establishing public universities in the 1850s with the goal of promoting
meritocracy by providing advanced training and credentials. The educational
system was set up to service urban males of middle-class background, but of
diverse social and religious origins. It was increasingly extended to all
graduates of the public school system, those of rural and regional background,
and then to women and finally to ethnic minorities.[36] Both the middle classes and the working
classes have promoted the ideal of meritocracy within a strong commitment to
"mateship" and political equality.[37]
Social Darwinism[
In his book Meritocratic
Education and Social Worthlessness (Palgrave,
2012), the philosopher Khen Lampert argued that educational meritocracy is
nothing but a post-modern version of social Darwinism. Its
proponents argue that the theory justifies social
inequality as being
meritocratic. This social theory holds that Darwin's
theory of evolution by natural
selection is a model,
not only for the development of biological traits in a population, but also as
an application for human social institutions—the existing social
institutions being implicitly declared as normative.
Social Darwinism shares its roots with early progressivism,
and was most popular from the late nineteenth century to the end of World War II.
Darwin only ventured to propound his theories in a biological sense, and it is
other thinkers and theorists who have applied Darwin's model to unequal
endowments of human ambitions.
Modern meritocracy in practice[
Singapore[
Singapore describes meritocracy as one of its
official guiding principles for domestic public policy formulation, placing
emphasis on academic credentials as objective measures of merit
There
is criticism that, under this system, Singaporean society is being increasingly
stratified and that an elite class is being created from a narrow segment of
the population.[39]Singapore
has a growing level of tutoring for children, and top tutors are often paid
better than school teachers. Defendants
recall the ancient Chinese proverb "Wealth does not pass three
generations" (Chinese: 富不过三代), suggesting that the nepotism or cronyism of elitists eventually will be, and
often are, replaced by those lower down the hierarchy.
Singaporean
academics are continuously re-examining the application of meritocracy as an
ideological tool and how it's stretched to encompass the ruling party's
objectives. Professor Kenneth Paul Tan at the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public
Policy asserts that "Meritocracy, in trying to 'isolate' merit by treating
people with fundamentally unequal backgrounds as superficially the same, can be
a practice that ignores and even conceals the real advantages and disadvantages
that are unevenly distributed to different segments of an inherently unequal
society, a practice that in fact perpetuates this fundamental inequality. In
this way, those who are picked by meritocracy as having merit may already have
enjoyed unfair advantages from the very beginning, ignored according to the
principle of nondiscrimination.
Meritocracy
in the Singapore context relates to the application of pragmatism as an
ideological device which combines strict adherence to market principles without any aversion to social engineering and
little propensity for classical social welfarism, is further illustrated by
Kenneth Paul Tan in subsequent articles:
There is a strong ideological
quality in Singapore's pragmatism, and a strongly pragmatic quality in
ideological negotiations within the dynamics of hegemony. In this complex
relationship, the combination of ideological and pragmatic maneuvering over the
decades has resulted in the historical dominance of government by the PAP in
partnership with global capital whose interests have been advanced without much
reservation.
Ecuador[
Within
the Ecuadoran Ministry of Labor, the Ecuadorian
Meritocracy Institute was created
under the technical advice of Singapore government.
Modern meritocratic movements[]
Osho[
According
to Osho,
only persons with appropriate qualifications should be allowed to vote.
Moreover, all politicians should have appropriate college or university
degrees. Only the geniuses of the world should govern. Osho suggested that,
first the various nations should become meritocracies, after which they could
all be joined to form a global meritocracy.
The Meritocracy Party[
In
2007 an anonymous British group called The Meritocracy Party published its
first manifesto, to which they have now added more than two million words on
the subject (discussing Hegel, Rousseau, Charles Fourier, Henri de Saint-Simon, and various other
philosophers, scientists, reformers, and revolutionaries). In summary, The
Meritocracy Party wants to achieve the following:
1.
A world in which every child gets an equal chance to succeed in
life.
2.
The abolishment of party politics.
3.
Only those with a relevant education and work experience should
be allowed to vote, rather than just anyone who has reached the age of 18 or
21.
4.
The introduction of 100% Inheritance Tax, so that the super-rich
elite can no longer pass on their wealth to a select few (their privileged
children) rather than the Commonwealth, would mean the end of the elite
dynasties and hereditary monarchy.
5.
A radically reformed educational system, based on the MBTI personality types, and insights from
radical innovators such as Rudolf Steiner and Maria Montessori.
6.
To replace free market capitalism with social capitalism and to
replace democracy with a fully transparent meritocratic republic, under a meritocratic
constitution.
On
their website the Meritocracy Party lists five meritocratic principles and
thirteen primary aims. The Meritocracy International is the host of all
meritocratic political parties in the world and the place where these may be
found by country of origin.
In computing[
Due
to the nature of online interaction, where identity and
anonymity are more readily managed than in direct interaction, the effects of
offline social inequity often may be discounted in online communities.
Intelligence, effort, education, and personality may be readily conveyed in an
online interaction, but a person's gender, race, religion, and social standing
can be obfuscated easily, or left entirely unaddressed.
Criticism:
The term "meritocracy" was originally intended as a negative
concept. One of the primary
concerns with meritocracy is the unclear definition of "merit".What
is considered as meritorious can differ with opinions as on which qualities are
considered the most worthy, raising the question of which "merit" is
the highest—or, in other words, which standard is the "best"
standard. As the supposed effectiveness of a meritocracy is based on the
supposed competence of its officials, this standard of merit cannot be
arbitrary and has to also reflect the competencies required for their roles.
The
reliability of the authority and system that assesses each individual's merit
is another point of concern. As a meritocratic system relies on a standard of
merit to measure and compare people against, the system by which this is done
has to be reliable to ensure that their assessed merit accurately reflects
their potential capabilities. Standardized
testing, which reflects the meritocratic sorting process, has come
under criticism for being rigid and unable to accurately assess many valuable qualities
nor the potential of students. Education theorist Bill Ayers, commenting on the
limitations of standardized testing, writes that "Standardized tests can't
measure initiative, creativity, imagination, conceptual thinking, curiosity,
effort, irony, judgment, commitment, nuance, good will, ethical reflection, or
a host of other valuable dispositions and attributes. What they can measure and
count are isolated skills, specific facts and function, content knowledge, the
least interesting and least significant aspects of learning. Merit determined through the
opinionated evaluations of teachers, while being able to assess the valuable
qualities that cannot be assessed by standardized testing, are unreliable as
the opinions, insights, biases, and standards of the teachers vary greatly. If
the system of evaluation is corrupt, non-transparent, opinionated or misguided,
decisions regarding who has the highest merit can be highly fallible.
The
level of education required in order to become competitive in a meritocracy may
also be costly, effectively limiting candidacy for a position of power to those
with the means necessary to become educated. An example of this was Chinese
student self-declared messiah, Hong Xiuquan,
who despite ranking first in a preliminary, nationwide imperial examination, was unable to afford
further education. As such, although he did try to study in private, Hong was
ultimately noncompetitive in later examinations and unable to become a
bureaucrat. This economic aspect of meritocracies has been said to continue
nowadays in countries without free educations, with the Supreme Court of the United States,
for example, consisting only of justices who attended Harvard or Yale and generally only considering
clerkship candidates who attended a top-five university, while in the 1950s the
two universities only accounted for around one fifth of the justices. Even if
free education were provided, the resources that the parents of a student are
able to provide outside of the curriculum, such as tutoring, exam preparation,
and financial support for living costs during higher education will influence
the education the student attains and the student's social position in a
meritocratic society. This limits the fairness and justness of any meritocratic
system.
Another
concern regards the principle of incompetence, or the "Peter Principle".
As people rise in a meritocratic society through the social hierarchy through
their demonstrated merit, they eventually reach, and become stuck, at a level
too difficult for them to perform effectively; they are promoted to
incompetence. This reduces the effectiveness of a meritocratic system, the
supposed main practical benefit of which is the competence of those who run the
society.
Meritocracy
also has been criticized by egalitarians as a mere myth, which serves only to
justify the status quo,
with its proponents only giving lip service to equality.
Khen Lampert has argued that the principle of
meritocracy stems from neo-capitalist ideas of aggression and competition
The Chinese
imperial examinations were a civil service examination system in Imperial China to select candidates for the state bureaucracy. Although there were imperial
exams as early as the Han dynasty, the system became widely utilized
as the major path to office only in the mid-Tang dynasty, and remained so until its
abolition in 1905. Since the exams were based on knowledge of the classics and
literary style, not technical expertise, successful candidates were generalists
who shared a common language and culture, one shared even by those who failed.
This common culture helped to unify the empire and the ideal of achievement by
merit gave legitimacy to imperial rule, while leaving clear problems resulting
from a systemic lack of technical and practical expertise.
The examination helped to shape China's intellectual, cultural,
political, shopping, arts and crafts, and religious life. The increased
reliance on the exam system was in part responsible for Tang dynasty shifting
from a military aristocracy to a gentry class of scholar-bureaucrats.
Starting with the Song dynasty, the system was regularized and
developed into a roughly three-tiered ladder from local to provincial to court
exams. The content was narrowed and fixed on texts of Neo-Confucian orthodoxy. By the Ming dynasty, the highest degree, the jinshi (進士/进士), became essential for
highest office, while there was a vast oversupply of holders of the initial
degree, shengyuan (生員), who
could not hope for office, though these were granted social privilege. Critics
charged that the system stifled creativity and created officials who dared not
defy authority, yet the system also continued to promote cultural unity.
Wealthy families, especially merchants, could opt into the system by educating
their sons or purchasing degrees. In the 19th century, critics blamed the
imperial system, and in the process its examinations, for China's lack of
technical knowledge and its defeat by foreign powers.
The influence of the Chinese examination system spread to
neighboring Asian countries, such as Vietnam, Korea, Japan (though briefly) and Ryūkyū. The Chinese examination system was
introduced to the Western world in reports by European missionaries and
diplomats, and encouraged the British East
India Company to use a
similar method to select employees. Following the initial success in that
company, the British government adopted a similar testing system for screening
civil servants in 1855. Other European nations, such as France and Germany,
followed suit. Modeled after these previous adaptations, the U.S established
its own testing program for certain government jobs after 1883.
Although, in a general way, the formative ideas behind the
imperial exams can be traced back at least to Zhou dynasty times
(or, more mythologically, Yaosuch as imperial promotion for displaying
skill in archery contests, the imperial examination system in its classical
manifestation is historically attested to have been established in 605, during
the Sui dynasty; which in the quickly succeeding Tang dynasty was
used only on a relatively small scale, especially in its early phase. However,
the structure of the examination system was extensively expanded during the
reign of Wu Zetian: the impact of Wu's use of the
testing system is still a matter for scholarly debate. During the Song dynasty the
emperors expanded both examinations and the government school system, in part
to counter the influence of military aristocrats, increasing the number of
those who passed the exams to more than four to five times that of the Tang.
Thus the system played a key role in the selection of the scholar-officials,
who formed the elite members of society. During the Ming and Qing dynasties,
the system contributed to the narrowness of intellectual life and the
autocratic power of the emperor. The system continued with some modifications
until its 1905 abolition under the Qing dynasty. Other brief interruptions to
the system occurred, such as at the beginning of the Yuan dynasty in
the 13th century. The modern examination system for selecting civil servants
also indirectly evolved from the imperial one.[
The operations of the examination system were part of the
imperial record keeping system, and the date of receiving the jinshi degree is often a key biographical
datum: sometimes the date of achieving jinshi is the only firm date known for even
some of the most historically prominent persons in Chinese history.
History by dynasty
The civil service examination for recruitment into service of
the imperial government spanned several dynasties, although the degree to which
this process was utilized varied over its existence, and its use was even
discontinued for periods of time. In the modern sense of an open examination
system, the imperial civil service examinations did not take place until the
Sui dynasty, when they then began to recognizably take on the form of standardized tests.
Nevertheless, the tests had a lengthy historical background in Chinese thought,
including evaluating the potential of possible people to fill positions through
various contests, competitions, or interviews: even as early as the Zhou dynasty promotions
might be won through winning archery competitions. Even more, the bureaucratic
system which the examination system was intended to recruit persons of merit to
fill the ranks of service first had to be developed: much of the development of
the imperial bureaucracy in the Confucian form
in which it was known in later times had much of its origin in the Han dynasty
rule of Han Wudi (Emperor Wu of Han).
Through the Three Kingdoms and the Sui dynasty recruitment was viewed as
basically a bottom-up process: promotions being generally through preferment
from the local and lower levels of government up to each successively higher
level until recommendations finally might be offered to the emperor himself, in
continuation of the Zhou idea that the lower levels of government were
responsible for finding recruits for the higher ones. This changed during the
Sui, when recruitment into the imperial civil service bureaucracy became to be
considered an imperial prerogative, rather than a duty to be performed by the
lower levels. By the Tang dynasty, most of the recruitment into central
government bureaucrat offices was being performed by the bureaucracy itself, at
least nominally by the reigning emperor. However, the historical dynamics of
the official recruitment system involved changes in the balances of the various
means used for appointments (all theoretically under the direction of the
emperor); including, the civil service examinations, direct appointments
(especially of members of the ruling dynastic family), nominations by quotas
allotted to favored important families, recommendations, clerical promotions,
direct sale of official rank, and special induction procedures for eunuchs. The regular higher level degree
examination cycle was nominally decreed in 1067 to be 3 years. In practice both
before and after this, the examinations were irregularly implemented for
significant periods of time: thus, the calculated statistical averages for the
number of degrees conferred annually should be understood in this context. The jinshi tests were not a yearly event and
should not be considered so; the annual average figures are a necessary
artifact of quantitative analysis.[
Han dynasty[edit]
From the time of the Han dynasty (206
BC – AD 220) until the later, fuller implementation of the imperial
examination system, most appointments in the imperial bureaucracy were based on
recommendations from prominent aristocrats and local officials whilst recommended
individuals were predominantly of aristocratic rank. Oral examination on policy
issues were sometimes conducted personally by the emperor himself, during
Western Han.[5] Emperor Wu of Han (141 - 87 BC) started an early form of
the imperial examinations, in which local officials would select candidates to
take part in an examination of the Confucian classics,
from which he would select officials to serve by his side. While connections
and recommendations remained much more meaningful than the exams in terms of
advancing people to higher positions, the initiation of the examination system
by emperor Wu had a cultural significance, as the state determined what the
most important Confucianist texts were. During the Han dynasty, the
examinations were primarily used for the purpose of classifying candidates who
had been specifically recommended; and, through the Tang dynasty the quantity
of placement into government service through the examination system was only
averaged about 9 persons per year, with the known maximum being less than 25 in
any given year.
Three Kingdoms era through the Sui dynasty[
Beginning in the Three Kingdoms period (with the nine-rank system in the Kingdom of Wei), imperial officials were
responsible for assessing the quality of the talents recommended by the local
elites. This system continued until Emperor Yang of Sui established a new category of
recommended candidates for the mandarinate (进士科) in AD
605. For the first time, an examination system was explicitly instituted for a
category of local talents. However, the Sui dynasty was short-lived, and the
system did not reach its mature development until afterwards.
Tang dynasty and Wu interregnum[
Over the course of the Tang dynasty (唐朝) and during the Zhou dynasty of the Wu Zetian interregnum,
the examination system developed into a more comprehensive system, developing
beyond the basic Sui process of qualifying candidates based on questions on
policy matters and then followed by an interview. Oral interviews as part of the
examination and selection system were theoretically supposed to be an unbiased
process, but in practice favored candidates from elite clans based in the
capitals of Chang'an and Luoyang (speakers
of solely non-elite dialects could not succeed).
A pivotal point in the development of imperial examinations
arose with the rise of Wu Zetian. Up
until that point, the rulers of the Tang dynasty were all male members of the
Li family (李氏). Wu
Zetian was exceptional: a woman not of the Li family, she came to occupy the
seat of the emperor in an official manner in the year of 690, and even
beforehand she had already begun to stretch her power within the imperial
courts behind the scenes. Reform of the imperial examinations to include a new
class of elite bureaucrats derived from humbler origins became a keystone of
Wu's gamble to retain power.
In 655, Wu Zetian graduated 44 candidates with the jìnshì degree (進士), and
during one 7-year period the annual average of exam takers graduated with a jinshi degree was greater than 58 persons per
year. Wu lavished favors on the newly graduated jinshi degree-holders, increasing the
prestige associated with this path of attaining a government career, and
clearly began a process of opening up opportunities to success for a wider
population pool, including inhabitants of China's less prestigious southeast
area. Most of the Li family supporters were located to the northwest,
particularly around the capital city of Chang'an. Wu's progressive accumulation
of political power through enhancement of the examination system involved
attaining the allegiance of previously under-represented regions, alleviating
frustrations of the literati, and encouraging education in various locales so
even people in the remote corners of the empire would work on their studies in
order to pass the imperial exams, and thus developed a nucleus of elite
bureaucrats useful from the perspective of control by the central government.
In 681, a written test on knowledge of the Confucian classics
was introduced, meaning that candidates were required to memorize these works
and fill in the blanks on the test
In 693, Wu Zetian's government further expanded the civil
service examination system,[ part of a policy to reform society and to
consolidate power for her self-proclaimed "Zhou dynasty". Examples of
officials whom she recruited through her reformed examination system include Zhang Yue, Li Jiao,
and Shen Quanqi. She introduced major changes in
regard to the Tang system, increasing the pool of candidates permitted to take
the test by allowing commoners and gentry previously disqualified by their
non-elite backgrounds to attempt the tests. Successful candidates then became
an elite nucleus of bureaucrats within her government.
Sometime between 730 and 740, after the Tang restoration, a
section requiring the composition of original poetry (including both shi and fu) was added to the tests, with rather
specific set requirements: this was for the jinshi degree, as well as certain other
tests. The less-esteemed examinations tested for skills such as mathematics,
law, and calligraphy. The success rate on these tests of knowledge on the
classics was between 10 and 20 percent, but for the thousand or more candidates
going for a jinshi degree each year in which it was
offered, the success rate for the examinees was only between 1 and 2 percent: a
total of 6504 jinshi were created during course of the Tang
dynasty (an average of only about 23 jinshi awarded per year).
During the early years of the Tang restoration, the following
emperors expanded on Wu's policies since they found them politically useful,
and the annual averages of degrees conferred continued to rise; however with
the upheavals which later developed and the disintegration of the Tang empire
into the "Five
Dynasties and Ten Kingdoms period", the examination system gave
ground to other traditional routes to government positions and favoritism in
grading reduced the opportunities of those taking the tests who lacked
political patronage.[17] Ironically this period of fragmentation
resulted in the utter destruction of old networks established by elite families
that had ruled China throughout its various dynasties since its very
conception. With the disappearance of the old aristocracy, Wu's system of
bureaucrat recruitment once more became the dominant model in China, and
eventually coalesced into the class of nonhereditary elites who would become
known to the West as "mandarins," in reference to Mandarin, the dialect of Chinese employed in
the imperial court.
Song dynasty[
The
emperor receives a candidate during the Palace Examination. Song dynasty.
In the Song dynasty (960
to 1279) more than a hundred higher level examinations were held. Officials
selected through the exams became dominant in the bureaucracy. Theoretically,
the examinations were open to adult Chinese (at least in terms of literacy)
males, with some restrictions, as, in parallel was the opportunity to become a
high-ranking government official. This included even individuals from the
occupied northern territories.[19] Many individuals moved from a low social
status to political prominence through success in imperial examination.
Examples include Wang Anshi, who proposed reforms to make the
exams more practical, and Zhu Xi, whose interpretations of the Four Classics became the orthodox Neo-Confucianism which dominated later dynasties. Two
other prominent successful entries into politics through the examination system
were Su Shi and
his brother Su Zhe: both of whom became political
opponents of Wang Anshi. Indeed, one of the major objectives of the examination
system was to promote diversity of viewpoints and to avoid over-filling of
offices with individuals of particular political or partisan alignment, as
might occur with alternative, more biased methods, which could allow for active
recruitment. Yet the process of
studying for the examination tended to be time-consuming and costly, requiring
time to spare and tutors. Most of the candidates came from the numerically
small but relatively wealthy land-owning scholar-official class.
Since 937, by the decision of the Taizu Emperor of Song, the
palace examination was supervised by the emperor himself. In 992, the practice
of anonymous submission of papers during the palace examination was introduced;
it was spread to the departmental examinations in 1007, and to the prefectural
level in 1032. The practice of recopying the papers in order not to allow
biases by revealing the candidate by his calligraphy was introduced at the
capital and departmental level in 1105, and in the prefectures in 1037. Statistics
indicate that the Song imperial government degree-awards eventually more than
doubled the highest annual averages of those awarded during the Tang dynasty,
with 200 or more per year on average being common, and at times reaching a per
annum figure of almost 240.[
Various reforms or attempts to reform the examination system
were made during the Song dynasty, including by Fan Zhongyan and
those by Wang Anshi. Fan's memorial to the throne actually initiated a process
which lead ending up resulting in major educational reform, through the
establishment of a comprehensive public school system.
Yuan dynasty (The Mongols)[
Governmental examinations ended with the defeat of the Song in
1279 by a disintegrating Mongol empire. After a period of turmoil, the
part of the Mongol empire that was led by Kublai Khan established
itself in China as the Yuan dynasty. Kublai ended the imperial
examination system, as he believed that Confucian learning was not needed for
government jobs.
The examination system was revived in 1315, with significant
changes, during the reign of Emperor Renzong.
The new examination system was one of regionalism with Mongol characteristics.
The northern areas of Mongolia and its vicinity were favored, and a quota
system (both for number of candidates and number of degrees awarded) which was
based on the classification of the imperial population into four racially-based
groups (or castes and/or ethnicities) was instituted, the groups being
Mongols, their non-Han allies (Semu-ren), Northern Chinese,
and Southern Chinese, with further restrictions by province. Under the revived
and revised system the yearly averages for examination degrees awarded was
about 21.[ As the degrees were arithmetically divided
between the four "races" (although with further modification), rather
than being proportionally based on either population or number of qualified
candidates, this tended to favor the Mongols, Semu-ren, and North Chinese: the
South Chinese were by far the greatest part of the population, the 1290 census
figures recording some 12,000,000 households (about 48% of the total Yuan
population), versus 2,000,000 North Chinese households, and the populations of
Mongols and Semu-ren were both less. The restrictions on candidates by the new
quota system allowed only 300 candidates for each testing session of the three
year examination cycle. The provincial restrictions resulted in a greater
effect; for example, only 28 Han Chinese from South China were included among
the 300 candidates, the rest of the South China slots (47) being occupied by
resident Mongols or Semu-ren, although 47 "racial South Chinese" who
were not residents of South China were approved as candidates.[
Ming dynasty[
A
15th-century portrait of the Ming official Jiang Shunfu. The two cranes on
his chest are a "Mandarin square"
for a civil official of the first rank.
The Ming dynasty (1368-1644)
retained and expanded the system it inherited. Shortly after the inauguration
of the dynasty, the Hongwu emperor in 1370 declared that the exams should
cover the Four Books, discourses, and political
analysis, accepting the Neo-Confucian canon put forth by Zhuxi in
the Song dynasty. But he firmly insisted on including the martial arts. The
curriculum at the National Academy emphasized law, mathematics,
calligraphy, horse riding, and archery in addition to
Confucian classics required in the exams.The emperor especially emphasized
archery.
The Ming established Neo-Confucian interpretations as the
orthodoxy guidelines and created what the historian Benjamin Elman called a "single-minded and
monocular political ideology" that "affected politically and socially
how literati learning would be interpreted and used." The imperial civil
service system adopted this rigid orthodoxy at a time when commercialization
and population growth meant that there was an inflation in the number of degree
candidates at the lower levels. As a result, the higher and more prestigious
offices were dominated by jinshi (Palace) degree-holders, who tended to
come from elite families. The Ming thus started a process in which access to
government office became harder and harder and officials became more and more
orthodox in their thought. Near the end of the Ming dynasty, in 1600, there
were roughly half a million licentiates in a population of 150 million, that
is, one per 300 people; by the mid-19th century the ratio had shrunk to one
civil licentiate for each 1,000 people.
The social background of metropolitan graduates also narrowed as
time went on. In the early years of the Ming dynasty only 14 percent of
metropolitan graduates came from families that had a history of providing
officials, while in the last years of the Ming roughly 60 percent of
metropolitan exam graduates came from established elite families.
Qing dynasty]
The Taiping Heavenly
Kingdom, which attempted to overthrow the Qing dynasty in the middle
of the 19th century, in 1853 offered the first exam in Chinese history to admit
women as exam candidates. The exams administered by the Heavenly Kingdom
differed from those administered by the Qing dynasty, in that they required
knowledge of the Bible. Fu Shanxiang took
the exam and became the first female zhuangyuan in
Chinese history.[33]
The end of the imperial examination system[
With the military defeats in the 1890s and pressure to develop a
national school system, reformers such as Kang Youwei and Liang Qichao called
for abolition of the exams, and the Hundred Days' Reform of 1898 proposed a set of
modernizations. After the Boxer Rebellion, the government drew up plans
to reform under the name of New Policies, then abolish the exams. On 2
September 1905, the throne endorsed a memorial which ordered that the old examination
system be discontinued at all levels in the following years. The new system
provided equivalents to the old degrees; a bachelor's degree, for instance,
would be considered equivalent to the xiu
cai. The details of the new system remained to be worked out by the fall of
the dynasty in 1911, but the end of the system meant the end of Confucianism as
an official state ideology and of the scholar official as a legal group.
General discussion of late imperial system[
Yet the system also promoted resistance to change. Reformers
charged that the set format of the "Eight-legged essay"
stifled original thought and satirists portrayed the rigidity of the system in
novels such as The Scholars.
In the twentieth century, the New Culture Movement portrayed the examination system as a
cause for China's weakness in such stories as Lu Xun's "Kong Yiji." Some have suggested that
limiting the topics prescribed in examination system removed the incentives for
Chinese intellectuals to learn mathematics or to conduct experimentation,
perhaps contributing to the Great Divergence, in which China's scientific
and economic development fell behind Europe.
In late imperial China,
the examination system was the major mechanism by which the central government
captured and held the loyalty of local-level elites. Their loyalty, in turn,
ensured the integration of the Chinese state, and countered tendencies toward
regional autonomy and the breakup of the centralized system. The examination
system distributed its prizes according to provincial and prefectural quotas,
which meant that imperial officials were recruited from the whole country, in
numbers roughly proportional to each province's population. Elite individuals
all over China, even in the disadvantaged peripheral regions, had a chance at
succeeding in the examinations and achieving the rewards and emoluments office
brought.[
The examination based civil service thus promoted stability and
social mobility. The Confucian-based examinations meant that the local elites
and ambitious would-be members of those elites across the whole of China were
taught with similar values. Even though only a small fraction (about 5 percent)
of those who attempted the examinations actually passed them and even fewer
received titles, the hope of eventual success sustained their commitment. Those
who failed to pass did not lose wealth or local social standing; as dedicated
believers in Confucian orthodoxy, they served, without the benefit of state
appointments, as teachers, patrons of the arts, and managers of local projects,
such as irrigation works, schools, or charitable foundations.
Republic of China
See also: History of
the Republic of China
After the fall of the Qing in 1911, Dr. Sun Yat-sen, the leader of the newly risen Republic of China, developed similar
procedures for the new political system through an institution called the Examination Yuan, one of the five branches of
government, although this was quickly suspended due to the turmoil in China
between the two world wars, such as the warlord period and the Japanese invasion.
The Kuomintang administration
revived the Examination Yuan in 1947 after the defeat of Japan. This system
continues into present times in Taiwan along with the government itself after
loss of the mainland to the Communist Party of
China.
Taking the exams[
"Cribbing
Garment" worn as underwear into the examination
The examinations consisted of tests administered at the
district, provincial, and metropolitan levels. Tight quotas restricted the
number of successful candidates at each level — for example, only three
hundred students could pass the metropolitan examinations. Students often took
the examinations several times before earning a degree.
·
Entry-level examinations were held annually and accessible to
educated individuals from their early teenage years. These were held locally
and were collectively called Háizi
kǎoshì (孩子考試, "Child Exam"). Háizi
kǎoshì was broken down
hierarchically into the Xiàn
kǎoshì (縣考試, "County Exam"), the Fǔfǔ kǎoshì (府府試,
"Prefectural exam") and Yuànshì (院試,
"college exam").
·
Provincial exams: Xiāngshì (鄉試,
"township exam") were held every three years in provincial capitals.
·
Metropolitan exams: Huìshì (會試,
"conference exam") were held every three years in the national
capital.
·
Palace exams: Diànshì (殿試,
"court exam") were held every three years in the Imperial palace and often supervised by the emperor
himself.
Each candidate arrived at an examination compound with only a
few amenities: a water pitcher, a chamber pot, bedding, food (which he had to
prepare himself), an inkstone, ink and brushes. Guards verified a student's identity
and searched for hidden printed materials. In the Ming and Qing periods, each
exam taker spent three days and two nights writing "eight-legged essays" —
literary compositions with eight distinct sections — in a tiny room with a
makeshift bed, desk and bench. There were no interruptions during those three
days, nor were candidates allowed any communication. If a candidate died,
officials wrapped his body in a straw mat and tossed it over the high walls
that ringed the compound.[
Intense pressure to succeed meant that cheating and corruption
were rampant, often outrunning strenuous attempts to prevent or defeat them. In
order to discourage favoritism which might occur if an examiner recognized a
student's calligraphy, each exam was recopied by an official copyist. Exact quotes
from the classics were required; misquoting even one
character or writing it in the wrong form meant failure, so candidates went to
great lengths to bring hidden copies of these texts with them, sometimes
written on their underwear
Details of the imperial examination
Curriculum[
By 115 AD, a set curriculum had become established for the
so-called First Generation of examination takers. They were tested on their
proficiency in the "Six Arts":
·
Scholastic arts: music, arithmetic, writing, and knowledge of
the rituals and ceremonies in both public and private life.
·
Militaristic: archery and horsemanship
The curriculum was then expanded to cover the "Five
Studies": military strategy, civil law, revenue and taxation, agriculture
and geography, and the Confucian classics.
In this form, the examinations were institutionalized during the sixth century
AD, under the Sui dynasty. These examinations are regarded
by most historians as the first standardized tests based on merit.
Degree types[
Stone
flagpole planted at the examiner's abode indicating the jinshi imperial examination
status
The examinations and degrees formed a "ladder of
success", with success generally being equated with being graduated as jinshi, which is a degree
similar to a modern Doctor of Literature degree, or PhD.
Modifications to the basic jinshi or other degree were made for
higher-placing graduates, similar to the modern Summa cum laude. The examination process extended
down to the county level, and included examinations at the provincial and
national levels. The highest level tests would be at the imperial court or
palace level, of which the jinshi was the highest regular level,
although occasional special purpose tests were occasionally offered, by
imperial decree:
·
Tongsheng (童生, lit.
"child student"), an entry-level examinee who had passed the
county/prefecture exams.
·
Shengyuan (生員, lit.
"student member"), also commonly called xiucai (秀才, lit.
"distinguished talent"), an entry-level licentiate who
had passed the college exam. Xiucai enjoyed officially sanctioned social
privileges such as exemption from statute labour, access into local government
facilities and limited immunity against corporal punishments.
They were further divided into three classes according to exam performance.
·
Linsheng (廩生, lit.
"granary student"), the first class of shengyuan, who were the best
performers in the college exam, and got to receive government-issued rations
and pay for their academic achievements. The top performers within this class
would get accepted into the Imperial Academy as gongsheng (貢生, lit.
"tribute student"), who will then be eligible to sit the provincial
or even the national exam directly.
·
Anshou (案首, lit.
"first on the desk"), the highest ranking linsheng, and thus the top shengyuan who ranked first in college exam.
·
Zengsheng (增生, lit.
"expanded student"), the second class of shengyuan, who performed less
well than linsheng and enjoyed similar legal perks, but
not the material allowance.
·
Fusheng (附生, lit.
"attached student"), the third class of shengyuan and considered substitute recruits
outside the official quota of enrollment. They were considered passable in
exams but needed more improvements.
·
Juren (舉人, lit.
"recommended man"), a qualified graduate who passed the triennial
provincial exam.
·
Jieyuan (解元, lit.
"top escorted examinee"), the juren who ranked first in provincial exam.
·
Gongshi (貢士, lit.
"tribute scholar"), a recognized scholarly achiever who passed the
triennial national exam.
·
Huiyuan (會元, lit.
"top conference examinee"), the gongshi who ranked first in national exam.
·
Jinshi (進士, lit.
"advanced scholar"), a graduate who passed the triennial court exam.
·
Jinshi Jidi (進士及第, lit.
"distinguished jinshi"),
graduates ranked first class in the court exam, usually only the top three
individuals were qualified for this title.
·
Bangyan (榜眼, lit.
"eyes positioned alongside"), the jinshi who ranked second overall just below zhuangyuan.
·
Tanhua (探花, lit.
"flower snatcher"), the jinshi ranked third overall.
·
Jinshi Chushen (進士出身, lit.
"jinshi background"),
the graduates who ranked second class in court exam, ranking immediately after
the tanhua.
·
Tong Jinshi Chushen (同進士出身, lit.
"along with jinshi background"), graduates ranked
third class in the court exam.
Degree examinations[
Besides the regular tests for the jinshi and other degrees, there were also
occasionally special purpose examinations, by imperial decree (zhiju).
These decree examinations were for the purpose of particular promotions or to
identify talented men for dealing with certain, specific, especially difficult
assignments. During the Song dynasty, in 1061, Emperor Renzong of
Song decreed special
examinations for the purpose of finding men capable of "direct speech and
full remonstrance" (zhiyan jijian): the testing procedure required
the examinees to submit 50 previously prepared essays, 25 on particular
contemporary problems, 25 on more general historical governmental themes. In
the examination room, the examinees then had a day to write essays on six
topics chosen by the test officials, and finally were required to write a 3,000
character essay on a complex policy problem, personally chosen by the emperor,
Renzong. Among the few successful candidates were the Su brothers, Su Shi and Su Zhe (who
had already attained their jinshi degrees, in 1057), with Su Shi scoring
exceptionally high in the examinations, and subsequently having copies of his
examination essays widely circulated.[
During the reign of Wu Zetian the imperial government created
specialized military examinations for the selection of army officers as a
response to the breakdown of garrison militias known as the Fubing system. The first formal military
examinations were introduced in 702. Before the military exams, the
participants who were from military families studied at military schools.[42]Successful candidates were
awarded military versions of Jinshi and Juren degrees: Wujinshi (武進士) and Wujuren (武舉人), and
so on.[] Military degrees were considered inferior
to civil degrees and never held the same prestige until the end of the
examinations during the Qing dynasty. The names of civil jinshi were carved in marble whereas military jinshi were not. Nevertheless, the civil and
military elements of government were in Chinese political theory sometimes
compared to the two wheels of a chariot; if either were neglected, government
would not run smoothly. Thus, the
military examinations had the same general arrangement as the regular exams,
with provincial, metropolitan and palace versions of the exams. The ideal
candidate was expected to master the same Confucian texts as the civilians, in
addition to martial skills such as archery and horsemanship as well as Chinese military
texts, especially Sun Tzu. At
the entry level exam, for instance, which was conducted by the district
magistrate, the candidate had to shoot three arrows while riding his
horse toward the target, which was the shape of a person. A perfect score was
three hits, a good score two, and one hit earned a pass. The candidate failed
if he made no hits or fell from his horse. The higher levels were made up of
more and more challenging exams until the highest level, conducted at the
palace in the presence of the emperor, which included not only mounted archery,
but bow bending, halberd brandishing, and weight lifting.
Despite the intention of raising more military officers through
these examinations, rarely did famous generals and strategists ever arise from
military degree holders. With some exceptions such as the Tang general Guo Ziyi, the father of the founder of the
Song dynasty Zhao Hongyin, Ming generals Yu Dayou and Qi Jiguang, and Qing general Wu Sangui, graduates of the official military
examinations have left few traces. Even in desperate times, the majority of
distinguished military figures in Chinese history have come from civil degree
holders. In total, 282 military metropolitan exams were held between their
inception in 702 and abolishment in 1901. The practices of the Qing and Ming
military exams was incorporated into physical education during the Republic of
China.
Besides China, the military examinations were also a practice of
certain Korean and Vietnamese dynasties.
Examination procedures[
.
By 1370, the examinations lasted between 24 and 72 hours, and
were conducted in spare, isolated examination rooms; sometimes, however, it was
held within cubicles. The small rooms featured two boards which could be placed
together to form a bed or placed on different levels to serve as a desk and
chair. In order to obtain objectivity in evaluation, candidates were identified
by number rather than name, and examination answers were recopied by a third
party before being evaluated to prevent the candidate's handwriting from being
recognized.
In the main hall of the imperial palace during the Tang and Song
Dynasties there stood two stone statues. One was of a dragon and
the other of Ao (鳌), the mythical turtle whose chopped-off legs serve as pillars
for the sky in Chinese legend. The statues were erected on stone plinths in the
center of a flight of stairs where successful candidates (jinshi) in the palace
examination lined up to await the reading of their rankings from a scroll known
as the jinbang (金榜). The
first ranked scholar received the title of Zhuàngyuán (狀元/状元), and
the honor of standing in front of the statue of Ao. This gave rise to the use
of the phrases "to have
stood at Ao's head" (占鳌头 [Zhàn ào tóu]), or "to have stood alone at Ao's
head" (独占鳌头 [Dú zhàn ào tóu]) to
describe a Zhuàngyuán, and more generally to refer to someone who excels in a
certain field.
Restrictions[
Some people were banned from taking the imperial exam, although
this varied to some extent over history. Traditionally, Chinese society was
divided into officials/nobility and commoners. The commoners were divided by
class or status into 4 groups by occupation, ranked in order of prestige:
scholars, farmers, artisans, and merchants. Beneath these in terms of prestige
were the so-called "mean" people, with various regional names and
attributes; but, boat-people, beggars, sex-workers, entertainers, slaves, and
low-level government employees were all people included among the
"mean" class: among other forms of discrimination, "mean"
people were forbidden to serve as government officials or to take the imperial
exam. This was the case for the
caste of "degraded" outcasts in Ningbo city,
where around 3,000 people, said to be Jin dynasty descendants, were barred from taking
the Imperial Exams, among numerous other restrictions.[53] Women were generally excluded from taking
the exams. Butchers and sorcerers were
also excluded at timesMerchants were generally restricted from taking the exams
until the Ming and Qing dynasties.[ During Sui and Tang artisans were also
restricted from official service; during the Song dynasty artisans and
merchants were specifically excluded from the jinshi exam; and, in the Liao dynasty,
physicians, diviners, butchers, and merchants were all prohibited from taking
the examinations.[ At times, quota systems were also used to
restrict the number of candidates allowed to take or to pass the imperial civil
service examinations, by region or by other criteria.
Comments
Post a Comment