We have just shared at SocArXiv a manuscript on the kinship networks of degree holders in the late Qing that revisits Robert Hymes’ critique of Ho Ping-ti’s conclusions in Ladder of Success in Imperial China. Based on a study of elites in Fuzhou, Hymes argued that many of the degree holders who by Ho Ping-ti’s standard were ‘new’ (father, grandfather, and great-grandfather did not have a degree) had other kin who held degrees.
Here is a link to the manuscript at SocArXiv: https://osf.io/preprints/socarxiv/s2u3w_v1
We present direct estimates the shares of degree holders whose direct patrilineal ancestors did not hold degrees who had other kin like uncles who held degrees. According to results, something like half of Jinshi degree holders who by Ho Ping-ti’s standards were new, actually had other kin who held degrees. Ho had originally found that in the late Qing, a relatively small share of degree holders were ‘new blood’ and our analysis shows that even among those men, many were not really ‘new blood.’
We also present within network correlations in attainment of degrees. These are higher than father-son correlations, in the range of 0.3 to 0.4.
The analysis is based on our new dataset of Tongnianchilu 同年齿录 and related records that record the kin networks of degree holders, and we introduce that data as well.
The manuscript will appear next year as a chapter in the volume edited by Christian Henriot, Cecile Armand and Ling-ling Lien called Performing Power: Elites and the Making of Modern China