Previous studies have indicated that “fulao” 父老 (elders) during the Qin and Han dynasties had the dual role of representing their respective villages in negotiations with government authorities and leading the villagers in their daily lives. Due to a lack of historical materials, however, these past discussions have generally failed to distinguish between “fulao” as a social role and “li fulao” 里父老 (village elders), namely representatives installed by the government with li here being an administrative unit, as an institutional position. The confusion held between these two functions has caused different interpretations concerning both the influence of the former as well as the characteristics and institutional meanings of the latter. Based on newly unearthed materials, such as Qin legal documents, this article attempts to not only elucidate the differences between the above two roles, but also discuss the institutional contents of both “li fulao” and “sanlao” 三老, a formal appointment of an elder, while deciphering whether the two were viewed as “fulao.” Secondly, “fulao” described by historical sources as representing a local area is analyzed to ascertain which specific social bases were employed to lead. Finally, this article uses a legal case found within Qin bamboo slips to explain how “fulao” functioned within ordinary society and quotidian life.
“fulao” 父老 (elders); “li lao” 里老; “li fulao” 里父老; “sanlao” 三老; civil order
Citations are generated automatically from bibliographic data as a convenience, and may not be complete or accurate.