战国以来官僚制国家的形成，伴随着郡县、赋役、文书等具体制度与技术的出现与运作，进而塑造了民众生活与社会，既将民众主要生活、联结的范围限制在乡里，又为他们依托县域构建与维系关系网络提供了契机。随着国家力量的扩张，父老、豪杰、游侠乃至群盗等人群及其自发联结形式规模小且组织松散，日益边缘化。因此，当秦末出现反抗秦的统治、寻求建立新王朝的行动时，也需依赖官僚制及其技术，以实现大规模人群整合。首事的陈涉及其戍卒是规模较大、组织性强的军队，响应的少年以县为单位发动，群盗与豪杰等人则被改造或纳入官僚化组织，起事或附从的秦豪吏、守令也借助官僚系统与徭戍制度征发民众反秦。在征发与裹挟的强制下，更多民众被卷入反秦，导致起事团体或政权迅速膨胀。但其下层组织性参差不齐，上层面临难以控御的难题，逐渐形成的山东六国秩序更多也只有名义上的意义。战争胜败与军队组织化程度、控制力强弱密切相关，组织性更强、官僚制贯彻更彻底的团体往往更具战斗力且容易生存，并通过淘汰、兼并而壮大，整合形成山东六国诸侯-将相的权力结构。因这一结构的约束和自身快速崛起，亡秦后面对楚军内有山头、外有诸侯联军的情势，项羽分封建立起霸王-楚地三王-服属十五王的圈层秩序。而楚汉战争中，刘邦麾下直属将相与既附从又相对独立的诸侯王的结构，成为汉初郡国并行制的远源。寻求创建新秩序的过程中，陈涉、刘邦等秦汉之际诸团体、政权，发展建立起文书、功劳制等一系列官僚化管理方式与技术，来维系团体运作和内部控制。这些方式、技术来自战国时期以来的官僚制国家传统，早已为时人所熟悉、习惯，并为反秦诸团体继承，以此再造官僚制国家。但同时，人的联结关系又与再造官僚制国家的努力纠缠在一起，陈涉、刘邦及其核心成员基于相对平等的恩义关系起事，平衡尊卑有序的官僚制运作和成员的亲近关系成为团体能否维系的关键。汉初诸侯将相因名位、分属与实际经历的不同，以及与刘邦的关系，产生制度化的人群类别与临时性、应激性的同类感知，而塑造了汉初的权力关系。

The formation of bureaucratic states since the Warring States period was accompanied by the emergence and wide application of concrete institutions and techniques such as commanderies and counties, taxation and labor obligations, and documentation. The operation of these systems further shaped the lives and society of the people, restricting their main activities and closely combining them into local communities, while also providing opportunities for them to enter the social networks within the counties. With the expansion of state power, groups such as elders, strongmen, rangers, and even bandits, as well as their spontaneous forms of association, were small in scale and loosely organized, gradually marginalizing. In the later part of the Qin Dynasty, the movement to overthrow the Qin dynasty and seek to establish a new dynasty also relied on the bureaucratic technology to achieve mass population integration. Chen Sheng and his troops who initiated uprising were a relatively large and well-organized military force, and the responding youth were mobilized at the county level. The bandits and local strongmen were either transformed or incorporated into the bureaucratic organization, and the Qin officials who rebelled or followed suit against the Qin Dynasty also relied on the bureaucratic system and the institution of conscription and garrison to mobilize the people.Under the coercion of conscription and containment, more and more people were drawn into the anti-Qin movement, leading to the rapid expansion of uprising groups and regimes. However, the degree of organization within the lower levels varied, while the upper echelons faced difficulties in control. The resulting order of the Six Kingdoms east of Xiao Mountain was more nominal than actual. The victory or defeat of the war was closely related to the degree of organization of the army and the strength of its control, so groups with stronger organization and more thorough implementation of bureaucratic systems had greater combat capabilities and were more likely to survive. They grew stronger through elimination and annexation, eventually forming a power structure of the Six States led by kings-generals. After overthrowing the Qin Dynasty, Xiang Yu faced the situation of internal factions within the Chu army and external coalition forces of the kingdoms. Under the structure of kings-generals and ministers, as Xiang Yu rapidly rose to power, he established a hierarchical order centered around the Hegemon with the three kings of the Chu region on the outside and the fifteen subordinate kings on the outermost layer. In the Chu-Han War, the structure of direct subordinate generals to Liu Bang and the relatively independent kings resulted in a system where commanderies and kingdoms coexisted in the early Han Dynasty.In the process of seeking to a new order, various groups and regimes such as Chen Sheng and Liu Bang between the Qin and Han periods developed and established a series of specific bureaucratic institutions and techniques, such as documentation, merit systems, and criminal justice, in order to maintain operation and internal control. These institutions and techniques originated from the bureaucratic tradition since the Warring States period and were already familiar to and integrated in the people of that time. From the anti-Qin movement onwards, these groups have been inheriting and reconstructing the bureaucratic state. However, at the same time, the relationships that connected people were entangled in efforts to recreate the bureaucratic state. Chen Sheng, Liu Bang, and the core members of their groups initiated their uprising based on a relatively equal relationship of trust and loyalty. Balancing the hierarchical operation of the bureaucratic system and the close relationships among members became a key factor in the division or cohesion of their groups. The kings, generals and ministers in the early Han Dynasty, based on differences in official ranks, affiliations, and practical experiences, as well as their relationships with Liu Bang, formed institutionalized categories of people and temporary, responsive perceptions of affinity, shaping the power dynamics of the early Han Dynasty.