"5000 years of Chinese history"
Printed From: History Community ~ All Empires
Category: Regional History or Period History
Forum Name: East Asia
Forum Discription: The Far East: China, Korea, Japan and other nearby civilizations
URL: http://www.allempires.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=20902
Printed Date: 20-May-2024 at 01:15
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 9.56a - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: "5000 years of Chinese history"
Posted By: The Charioteer
Subject: "5000 years of Chinese history"
Date Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 10:11
|
Many ordinary Chinese will tell others that they have 5000 years of history, but what is the basis for such claim? any ideas? |
Replies:
Posted By: Dream208
Date Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 18:12
|
It is all depends on one's perspective on the exisitance and time period of Xia dynasty. But most of time, people says 5000 years of history simply because it sounds better than 4200, 3863, or etc years of history |
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 24-Jul-2007 at 22:16
|
Standard propaganda to push the envelop on origins now days. "Our country is better than your country because we came first!" At first is was impossible to have a Chinese civilization because of flooding by the Yellow River and other water networks. Their sudden rise began after the invention of irrigation. No evidence tells of advance cultural activity beforehand. But now I have opened the floodgates of telling me otherwise... ------------- elenos |
Posted By: Preobrazhenskoe
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 12:45
|
^ What? Irrigation came long after Chinese civilization had been well established. The tradition of large-scale irrigation and hydraulic works did not come about until the early 6th century BC with engineers and statesmen such as Sunshu Ao, and a bit later with Ximen Bao in the 5th century BC. Although bronze artifacts dated before 2100 BC have been found, that is the traditionally marked date for the beginning of the Chinese Bronze Age. Already by the 16th century BC the Chinese had advanced bronze-smelting technology during the Shang Dynasty.
But no, the Chinese do not have 5,000 years of written history, it is more like 4,000, which is actually quite a big difference. It is pretty certain that ancient Sumerian, Egyptian, and Harappan civilizations were developed 5,000 years ago around 3,000 BC, yet China as a higher civilization under the Shang mirrored the time frame of the rise and fall of Mycenaean Greece, from the late 17th/early 16th century BC until the 11th century BC.
Eric
|
Posted By: Siege Tower
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 14:06
|
it's very strange to me that i have never found any books ith exclusive studies on chinese society before 2500BC, maybe anyone can help me with that. ------------- |
Posted By: jebusrocks
Date Posted: 10-Aug-2007 at 20:51
|
<QUOTE>The Xia Dynasty ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_language - Chinese : 夏朝; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pinyin - Pinyin : xià cháo; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wade-Giles - Wade-Giles : hsia-ch'ao), ca. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/21st_century_BC - 2070 BC – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/16th_century_BC - 1600 BC , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xia_Dynasty#_note-0 - [1] of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/China - China is the first http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynasty - dynasty to be described in the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Records_of_the_Grand_Historian - Records of the Grand Historian and unofficial http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bamboo_Annals - Bamboo Annals ,
which record the names of seventeen kings over fourteen generations
lasted 431 or 471 years. The dynasty was preceded by the legendary http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Three_Sovereigns_and_Five_Emperors - Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors , and followed by the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shang_Dynasty - Shang Dynasty .</QUOTE> Here you go. 2070BC to 2000CE around 4000 yrs of CIVILIZATION |
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 07-Nov-2007 at 23:20
|
I would agree on about 2500 BC. It would seem the question is what is a civilization? Many answers are given. Control of the Yellow River was the big task in settling the land. Even today they still have the occasional monster floods. 1) A society in an advanced state of social development (e.g., with complex legal and political and religious organizations) "the people slowly progressed from barbarism to civilization" 2) The social process whereby societies achieve civilization 3) A particular society at a particular time and place e.g. "Indus valley civilization" ------------- elenos |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: 08-Nov-2007 at 00:31
By the way, places like Jerico and other ancient CITIES from the Middle East are from 7.000 years ago. Mohenho Dahro in India and of course the cities of Mesopotamia are a lot older than the first Chinese spark. Egypt starts closer to 5.000 years ago its PEAK. Caral in Peru, the Americas is from 2634 years ago.
Now, it is highly doubtful the "civilization" of the Xia is the same of the Han or the one of modern Chineses
 . It is like saying Egypt is the same since the Pharaons, Iraq since Sumer, Britain is the same since Stoneage or Peru since Caral. Radical changed had happened since, so the idea a civilization last too 5.000 years is quite forced.China civilization like we know today, with Kung Fu-Tse, Lao Tse, etc., stars in the Spring and Autum period, a couple of centuries B.C., contemporary with the Helenistic Period, and its first major empire is the Han, contemporary with the Roman.
The glory of China, though, is during the Tang and Sung periods of the Middle Ages, where technology, science, literature, arts and poetry flourished and reached its peak.
|
Posted By: LuckyNomad
Date Posted: 08-Nov-2007 at 04:47
| Koreans believe that their country is also 5,000 years old. The proof?? Well, I've yet to see it. Though they set the date for the founding of their original Gojoseon dynasty at 2,333bc. Once again, I'm not sure if they have any proof of this other than records from later dynasties. Not sure how 4,340 years equals 5,000. A lot of nationalism comes into play with these things. |
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 08-Nov-2007 at 11:24
|
You can name highly organized tribal societies from all over the world
that failed the "test" of civilization. Building , sculpture and all
that sort of thing. On the other hand that is also branding
'civilization" as "organized materialism" for they leave much stuff
behind for those of the future to find. To say a groups of people with
a common heritage didn't form a civilization is a poor indication of
how smart they were. They were often enough better off living in tribal societies and didn't want to go any further in having centralized forms of government where power inevitably falls into the hands of the few. The Celts in Europe remained divided into competing tribes although having the world's first Common Market and they also worked in metal that could travel from the Black Sea the Irish Sea. So far as China is concerned everybody would like to find more and there are some exciting early finds of casting and metal working and so on, but no real evidence of cooperation between the early clans and tribes. But then again much of the early evidence got washed away and left behind no conclusive records of what their achievements were. One always hopes to find out about ways of life we have never heard about before. ------------- elenos |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 08-Nov-2007 at 11:57
you are from Taiwan i reckon you would know the history of nationalist government well.
first of all, the so called "5000 years history" is a creation by early nationalist revolutionary government when they overthrew the Manchu Qing dynasty, although the stress of a long and continuous Chinese history is not completely unfounded, it was to a degree associated with "anti-Manchu" background of the time.
secondly, the so called "5000 years history" was "calculated" on the count of Huangdi period, rather than the Xia dynasty.
furthermore, the view that Chinese history started since the era of Huangdi was however not simply a creation by nationalist government. Sima qian in his famous history work 《record of the grand historian》considered the era of Huangdi as the begining of China's history, and based on this perception, later works tried to calculate the "exact date" of Huangdi's reign and those legendary rules(such as ZhuanXu, Yao, Shun etc) that subsequently followed him as they were also recorded by Shiji in chronicle order but without exact date.
Nationalist government inherited this traditional view regarding Chinese history and its "calculation" was based on previous similar works such as the one by Huangfu Mi(215-282AD)'s 《历代帝王世纪》of late Eastern Han to early Western Jin era, and that of Shao Yong(1011-1077AD)'s《皇极经世书》of Northern Song dynasty.
As matter of fact, when Sun Yat Sen became the Provisional President, he issued the open declaration nationwide that the year 1912, is the first year of the ROC which is the 4609th year of Huangdi. The nationalist government in reality utilized previous calculations(which are questionable to say the least) to serve its own purpose.
So Chinese history is approximated to around "5000 years of history" ever since.
|
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 08-Nov-2007 at 19:41
|
What excites me and many others about Chinese culture is the ideas like "chi"
force said to run through all living things. This tells of ways of thought
original to the Eastern world for thousands of years. To my mind the
unique ways of living with nature predates the rise of Chinese "civilization" though many tend to confuse one with the other.
------------- elenos |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 10-Nov-2007 at 00:07
some characters found on the pottery works of Taosi archaeological site(in Xiangfen County of Shanxi province) match later ones
http://www.zgxqs.cn/data/uploadfile/200605/20060504135856925.jpg">
 1- Taosi pottery
2-4 oracle bone inscription
5-9 bronze ware inscription
http://www.zgxqs.cn/data/uploadfile/200605/20060504140259812.jpg">
 1- Taosi pottery
2-5 oracle bone inscription
6-9 bronze ware inscription
not a big difference there between the three
Taosi site is carbon dated to 2600-2200BC
http://images13.51.com/30/b/af/0e/thecharioteer/1194744533_0.39580400.jpg">
 |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 11-Nov-2007 at 01:31
|
The origin of Chinese character might be traced to even earlier stage, some charaters found on the tortoise-shell from Jihu archaeological site(7000BC-5800BC) resembles the one found on tortoise-shell of Shang dynasty, for instance, the character for "eye" could be mistaken as Shang oracle bone inscription if it wasnt actually found at Jiahu. "Eye" from Jiahu "Eye" from oracle bone inscription, bronze ware inscription, standardized version by Qin dynasty "Eye" in modern form  both the Shang and Jiahu people carved characters on tortoise-shell for divination purpose, http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2956925.stm - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2956925.stm |
Posted By: Omnipotence
Date Posted: 11-Nov-2007 at 02:24
| 3000 yrs would be the most conservative estimate. 5000 would be arguable, though it would be a VERY liberal estimate. It was previously 4000(judged by historic length through word of mouth) until they found evidence of more sophisticated cultures(although it does not contain any historical writings to a significant degree) around 5000 yrs ago. Although when it comes to the actual existence of recorded history, 3000 would make a better estimate. In short, 5000 was probably made to sound better, for usually historic length means the length of "written" history. |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 11-Nov-2007 at 05:04
|
this is a bronze jue excavated at erlitou site(Xia dynasty)
http://img134.imageshack.us/img134/9610/64860496de9.jpg"> this is a Shang dynasty bronze jue http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/5044/99209737ad3.jpg"> a Ming dynasty bronze jue http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/5749/resizedqy5.jpg"> a Qing dynasty Bronze jue which was casted for emperor Qianlong for rituals http://img444.imageshack.us/img444/5874/resizedtx0.jpg"> "In the west of the Eurasian continent, bronze items were in most cases used for agriculture and warfare. In China, the greatest part of discovered and preserved bronze items was not forged to ploughs or swords but cast to sacrificial vessels. Even a great part of weapons had a sacrificial meaning like daggers and axes that symbolized the heavenly power of the ruler. The strong religious sense of bronze objects brought up a great number of vessel types and shapes which became so typically that they should be copied as archaic style receptacles with other materials like wood, jade, ivory or even gold until the 20th century" "Jue - one of the oldest wine mugs, the earliest found dates the Erlitou culture. The jue's typical features are the long, canal-like beak (liu 流) and the shorter counterpart on the other side (wei 尾). On both sides, small handles (pan 鋬) are fitted. the Shang dynasty on, jue beaks are crowned by one or two zhu 柱 buttons. This vessel type has been very popular and was copied oftenly. It has been in use until the upcoming of bowls and cups during Song dynasty. " the three legged vessel used to contain liquors for ritual purpose by that of Qing is rather consistent with its earliest Xia counterpart. besides the origin of Chinese script might be traced to that period, the "ancestor" of three legged vessel which is so typical of Chinese culture might be found at Jiahu as well.
btw, erlitou palace mirror the forbidden city in such way that we can say the basic cultural pattern for the layout of palace was already established since the Xia and was passed down all the way to Qing dynasty just like the basic idea of the bronze jue was passed down all the way to Qing.
|
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 01:34
   |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 01:45
|
  |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 01:59
 |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 02:10
 |
Posted By: Omnipotence
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 03:32
| Can you tell me the date/location of these sites/artifacts found? |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 07:20
The lacquered chest is one of the relics found in the tomb of marquis Yi(曾侯乙) of Zeng state, in Sui Zhou(随州) city of Hubei province in 1978. Its dated to 475-433BC.(warring states period)
The tomb with astronomical pattern made of shells and human bodies which is part of Xi shui po(西水坡) archaeological site was discovered in Pu yang(濮阳)city of Henan province in 1987. Its dated to 4500BC which belongs to the "Yangshao culture".
|
Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 12:52
|
There seems to be one great but common misunderstanding in this thread.
The term "history" refers exclusively to written history, there is no such thing as written and unwritten history, it's either written or it isn't history. Archaeological remains are not history, they're archaeology. For laymen it is common to cover both with the term history, but this is incorrect.
So, the interesting question here is how far back the (written) accounts of Chinese history go, and how reliable these sources are. ------------- |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 14:29
shiji puts the begining of Chinese history in the era of Huangdi. Though it also record the existence of Huangdi's former Yandi, and their predecessor shaodian. so traditional calculations puts them to around 2700BC, but archaeology disputes the traditional view, as Yangshao culture is said to be representing the culture of Huangdi and yandi, specifically speaking, the banpo phase represent Yandi, while the Miaodigou phase represent Huangdi, with cultures like Peiligang may represent shaodian.
as to how reliable these ancient Chinese sources are, it depends on what angle one is perceiving reliability.
but basically, without archaeological substance, alot of "Chinese history" were/are considered as "myth"(especially by the "west"), for instance the Shang and Xia dynasty.
and without these "myth" which were recorded by a decent "history" work as Sima qian's shiji, what archaeology found are nothing but "bunch of strange worlds"
its very intereting how modern archaeology both at times confirm written records to certain degree and at times make historians rethink of their perceived "history".
For instance, the origin of Chinese script after Jiahu's discovery, and the origin of Chinese astronomy after Xi shui po site was discovered.
they thought the origin of Chinese script might only go back to the markings on the objects from Yangshao, Liangzhu, Dawenkou etc cultures, and the Chinese historian who believe Chinese astronomical tradition (as demonstrated by my pictures) originated in China rather than borrowed from India etc and concluded after analysis of ancient documents that it was originated in China around 6-8 century BC, but Xi shui po archaeological discovery only confirmed them to be partially right. Yes, current archaeological evidences support its origin in China but only at much earlier stage than previously thought.
|
Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 15:03
|
Well, these myths often have some truth in them, but the difficulty lies in separating truth from fiction. Like with Troy from the Iliad, a city which was believed to be fictional, was all of a sudden found and excavated in the 19th century. Still, this doesn't prove all the extraordinary events of the Iliad as fact. Vice versa, imagine if we found the city but didn't have the text, it would be as you say nothing but a glimpse into a strange and incomprehensible world.
I'm no expert on Chinese history, but in Japan's case its history begins with the 6th century Emperor Jimmu, and the account of this period is considered to be largely mythical. Jimmu is descended from the gods and his contemporaries fight all manners of supernatural creatures, so there is certainly reason for doubt, but then again I don't think we should dismiss the possibility that this story is rooted in reality, in an actual emperor or warlord whose life grew into legend. This is often considered to be the case with legendary Greek heroes as well, such as Hercules, Heracles, Perseus and Theseus.
Is it perhaps sensible to approach the accounts of the Xia and Shang eras in the same manner? ------------- |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 15:43
the Chinese concept for "history", as its called in Chinese "Lishi" , "Li" refer to calendar, and "shi" is the person who make records. the composite term "lishi" as early as in three kingdoms period work, "shi" was used to mean "history" before that.
as "shi" is referring to the government official in charge of record, when the concept of "history"(shi) was there in China, there should be appropriate political structure there to sustain it. which means the Shang and Xia are more reliable as compared to the era of Huangdi. since their complex political structure points to possible exsitence of the "shi", as this also correlated with later historical records.
"history" is the government making records based on the calendar.
so what about the concept behind the English term "history"?
|
Posted By: Reginmund
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 20:41
|
I suppose that makes sense.
"Lishi" sounds more like what we would call chronicling in English. Of course chronicles are historical records too, but a particular type of historical record which gives a strict date by date account of events. ------------- |
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 22:23
|
Interesting thought to question the meaning of history. Like so many other words “history” never has been an exact term with a set meaning and is still being defined. The word is derived from the Greek noun “historia” meaning ’inquiry or research.’ Aristotle regarded it as a “systematic account of a set of natural phenomena, whether or not chronological ordering was a factor in the account.” The term “history” has now come to be applied to accounts of events and deal with the past of mankind alone. Yet, as Aristotle pointed out, (Aristotle is considered part of Greek history and development) the word can apply to natural events (natural history). The tendency to define history by written records alone is not without merit, but much of what is considered significant in the major records was recorded a long time after the events. We could define history as “the significant developments that took place in the past with reference to the countries and the men and women who played a noteworthy part.” That is if we know anything about what happened! The most recent find
in Sorry to drift away from our Asian connection in trying to make the point. Great job there Charioteer in presenting all those marvelous images for us to admire. Such wonderful artifacts preserve traditional values and often enough don’t need words to make a personal link between the present and the past. ------------- elenos |
Posted By: Omnipotence
Date Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 23:50
| Can you give me any sources on the "cave of Romulus and Remus"? It'll be nice to find out that the pair really are raised by a she-wolf! |
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 03:35
|
http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/longlost-cave-of-romes-founders-discovered/2007/11/21/1195321813383.html - http://www.smh.com.au/news/world/longlost-cave-of-romes-founders-discovered/2007/11/21/1195321813383.html
Picture of interior http://news.yahoo.com/photos/ss/events/sc/112007romecave - http://news.yahoo.com/photos/ss/events/sc/112007romecave ------------- elenos |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 04:40
The Chinese concept for "history" implies that it has to be in chronological order(Li), and it has to be recorded by professionals employed in the government(Shi). only with these elements will such "history" be regarded as "reliable history". thats how entire Chinese "history" was recorded.
Sima qian was such professional.
it seems the original "western" concept for "history" is quite different from Chinese concept.
|
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 05:06
|
Believe me, many so-called democratic Western governments would give anything to have historians employed by the ruling party to write what they are told in an order that pleases the current regime. Some call this political correctness and the people that use such a system are called mandarins. The mandarins of the left even use a different set of history books than those those of the right. ------------- elenos |
Posted By: Omnipotence
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 05:39
|
^Actually, SiMaQian was VERY critical of emperor Han Wudi(Besides, most of western history weren't written by "democratic" governments anyway). It's probably even overly-critical considering WuDi castrated Simaqian, which would give the latter good reason to make the former look as bad as possible. I doubt any of us would believe that WuDi starved half the population to death. The dynasty would collapse before that happened. It was reported that WuDi fell sick with anger when reading what SiMaQian was going to publish, but in the end he let it become published anyway. I would be angry too if some historian wrongfully criticized me just because I unjustly castrated him for sticking up for a friend . SiMaQian also spoke highly of Xiangyu, who was basically the archnemesis of the Han dynasty. He was to the Han what Hannibal was to Rome, and it is worthy to note that Roman history also spoke highly of Hannibal.
Thus there are capable historians on both sides of the globe who don't do what the upper divisions tell them to do. I am reminded of the Chinese fable(true story) of how a King would execute a historian for writing down a crime that the king had commited. The newly installed historian, knowing this, not only wrote down the King's previous crime in history, but also the execution of the previous historian. The King killed him too. The third historian did exactly what the second historian did, and also wrote down the execution of the second historian. The King realized that killing all these historians would only make himself look worse and worse, so he let the third historian live, and thus we have the knowledge of this event. If any of the historians backed down, we would have never known that this had happened.
Now there's no need to hint at which history is "better". SiMaQian used stories from word-of-mouth as much as Heroditus did when it comes to the Xia dynasty and pre-Xia history. He had to, there's no written records of these time periods.
|
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 06:04
|
Good points, Omnipotence.
------------- elenos |
Posted By: Omnipotence
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 06:08
| Thank you, but I already know that. jk.. :) |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 07:05
|
Sima qian wasnt the only one VERY critical of Han wudi, Han wudi was actually VERY critical(not many rulers would or could do the same) of himself thats why he issued the famous Luntai imperial edict during his late reign repenting his past faults in which he acknowledged that his reign has made the people of China suffer. "朕自即位以来，所为狂悖，使天下愁苦，不可追悔。自今事有伤害百姓、靡费天下者，悉罢之" dont forget that his own son, the crown prince rebelled against him, if it wasnt for certain desperate situation he wouldnt have done that. the castration of Sima qian to me actually makes the man more "reliable" . The emperor and majority of court officials pointed fingers at Liling's defeat and surrender to Xiongnu, Sima qian was castrated because he disagree with the court. he dared against the will of the ruler and suffered personally because he wants to preserve the integrity of that historical event. not just simply to record Liling as "a shame and a failure" in history.Just like he wouldnt simply portrait the greatness of Han wudi but also criticize his reign.
i only said the original concepts are different. and when i say these official history are regarded as "reliable history" in comparison to unofficial history. The written accounts of Xia exist quite extensively in the pre-Qin literatures, when he writes the history of Yue state he visited the temple of Yu built by King Goujian, and the tomb of Yu was already in Kuaiji mountain. so was the tomb of Huangdi, these arent stories from word of mouth, they were physical evidences to Sima qian.
The accounts of Xia and Pre-Xia history exist extensive in Pre-Qin literatures, plus there were physical evidences supplementing the possible existence of them. Sima qian as a professional historian just couldnt deny these "myth" in his history work. i think he actually expressed this situation. on one hand he had no way to find out the exact dates prior to Western Zhou, they are either lost or confusing among different sources,( thats why some Chinese historians from early 20th century claimed China has no "history" before Western Zhou.) on the other hand the overwhelming evidences of early times cant be denied, as previous "history" works didnt deny them. Sima qian was continueing with what Confucius left for them. btw: i think Li ao once said Sima qian is greater than Han wudi. |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 08:02
what joke of the day
|
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 11:37
|
Well, I feel that way because it's election time in Australia tomorrow. There are many loan words English uses from Chinese, like a person being a mandarin, meaning a high official or they think they are. ------------- elenos |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 19:30
Well, the history of Qin was written by Han historian, the history of Jin dynasty-sixteen kingdoms-northern and southern dynasties were written by Tang historians, and then history of "five dynasties and 10 kingdoms" was written by Song historian, history of Liao, Jin, Song was written by Yuan dynasty, history of Ming dynasty was written by Qing.
for most part they were writing the history of previous dynasties and regimes, not exactly "have historians employed by the ruling party to write what they are told in an order that pleases the current regime" like you say.
|
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 21:02
talking about the relics of Marquis Yi of Zeng state, and the history of Xia, i just remember another detail from the relics of Marquis Yi
 this depicts the first Xia king Qi. Zeng state was ruled by Ji clan which belongs to the Zhou household.
The Zhou often regard themselves as successor of Xia, in their writtings they often refer themselves as "the people of Xia", they not only regard Yu the great highly, but use him as example to lecture themselves.
perhaps the appearance of Xia figure on this Zeng relic reflects such connection?
|
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 21:57
|
As I was saying Charioteer, It's election time in Australia today and we have been swamped by messages about which party has the weight of history on their side. I was commenting on the Australian way and not trying to roast China over the record of ever having free and fair elections. As you say there is a different way of interpreting the world that not all of us can grasp. You are doing a good job of explaining the long history except in your account I find it hard to follow which people or clan come from where. A map of ethnic types and regions could help, not all of us are familiar with the many distinctions being made. Beside that point keep us the good work, I love seeing the artwork! ------------- elenos |
Posted By: Omnipotence
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 22:14
| Thanks for the info Charioteer. It seems that my statement was unclear when I said that there was no Xia and pre-Xia written accounts. What I meant was that there was no Xia recorded history of the Xia. But I didn't know there's such a variety of documents about the Xia not long afterwards(and SimaQian's sources on the Xia), so you learn something new everyday. |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 22:37
ofcourse, just becareful your post might be hidden by the "Aussie" mod, the "boss" says "no more Australian politics"
btw, i already did my vote by postal, so whats screwed with the dirty election campaign tactics with anti-muslim racism? nah, i have already label this government "racist" anyway, so i said "f**k off" to these racist pigs with my ballot paper. Labor all the way!
sure, there are overseas Chinese forumers come here to get some Chinese history, i am always here to offer.
acutally im not interested in lecturing newbies. sorry mate.
|
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 23:35
There was also no written record of Shang to prove its existence before oracle bone inscription was discovered. They were regarded as "myth"(mainly by the western historians) back then.
but the problem is there were those successor states to the Shang, like the Song. if the Shang didnt exist, where did the Song come from?
likewisely the Xia
Shiji, Xia dynasty
"太史公曰：禹为姒姓，其後分封，用国为姓，故有夏后氏、有扈氏、有男氏、斟寻氏、彤城氏、襃氏、费氏、杞氏、缯氏、辛氏、冥氏、斟戈氏。孔子正夏时，学者多传夏小正云。自虞、夏时，贡赋备矣。或言禹会诸侯江南，计功而崩，因葬焉，命曰会稽。会稽者，会计也"
to Sima qian, there were many successor states to the Xia, the accounts of the existence of Xia were preserved through their existence, perhaps thats why his predecessor Confucius couldnt ignore the existence of Xia as well because the evidences are too overwhelming to deny .
we all know the last Western Zhou king favored the concubine Bao si, that girl was from bao state, a descendant of the Xia.
another well known descendant state of the Xia, the Qi state, its ruler was referred to as "duke of Xia" by other states. There are various pre-Qin documents can be referenced with. for instance
"有夏虽衰，杞、鄫犹在"《国语·周语》
"夫杞，明王之后也"《管子·大匡》
"殷汤封夏后于杞，周又封之"《世本·王侯》
"成汤卒受大命……乃放夏桀，散亡其佐，乃迁姒姓于杞""《大戴礼记·少间》
"(卫成)公命祀相，宁武子不可，曰，‘鬼神非其族类，不歆其祀，杞、鄫何事？"《左传-僖公三十一年记》
"(称杞为)"夏肄(余)"";《左传-襄公二十九年记郑子大叔之语》
oracle bone inscription have the record of the people of Qi as well
"丁酉卜，殼贞，杞侯炬弗其祸，有疾"
"癸巳卜，令登赉杞"
"己卯卜行贞，王其田亡灾，在杞"
"庚辰卜行贞，王其步自杞，亡灾"
"庚寅卜在女香贞，王步于杞，亡灾"
"壬辰卜，在杞贞，王步于意，亡灾"
if the Xia didnt exist, where did the people of Qi come from? just like if the Shang didnt exist, where did the people of Song come from?
the difference is archaeologist havent found any written evidences from erlitou site like they found the oracle bones from Shang ruins.
but to historians like Confucius and Sima qian to prove the existence of Xia and Shang and include it in their history works doesnt have to be determined by archaeology. even they can dig the graves the custom of their society were different from ours.
if anyone say to Confucius that the Shang didnt exist because there was no archaeological evidence of it, he would probably remind them that hes actually the descendant of Shang.
thus in 《逸周书·王会》the ruler of Qi state was referred to as "duke of Xia"(夏公),while the ruler of Song state was referred to as "duke of Yin(Shang)"(殷公)
and Confucius actually equals the Song to Shang, and the Qi to Xia
"夏礼，吾能言之，杞不足征也；殷礼，吾能言之，宋不足征也" 《论语·八佾》
btw, there is a village near the mausoleum of Yu the great, about more than a thousand people live there today still bear the surname of Si
http://images13.51.com/60/b/af/0e/thecharioteer/1195862581_0.33218300.jpg - http://images13.51.com/60/b/af/0e/thecharioteer/1195862581_0.33218300.jpg
the clan name of Xia ruling household, the ancestor of these people belonged to Xia household and was assigned to Kuaiji mountain to maintain the mausoleum.
We dont have to dig graves to know the existence of these people.
|
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 23:54
|
My post wasn't actually about Australian politics, sorry if the elections permeated my post. "btw, i already did my vote by postal, so whats screwed with the dirty election campaign tactics with anti-muslim racism? nah, i have already label this government "racist" anyway, so i said "f**k off" to these racist pigs with my ballot paper. Labor all the way!" As our readers can see by what you saying the politics here have an aggressive flavor all of their own! "acutally im not interested in lecturing newbies. sorry mate." Ah so, always keep the inscrutable oriental face or lose face. ------------- elenos |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2007 at 00:21
nah i only become aggressive when facing biased and ignorant f**ks like those racist pigs, i have no regard for them you can bet on that.
keep performing, im rather enjoying the show, its entertaining really.
you want trolling i will give what you want.
|
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2007 at 02:24
|
Please don't be put out because of me, you are teaching me things here some of us never knew before. Would you say you are typical of a fair minded person by saying Chinese history is only for the Chinese? And does that qualify you to make informed comments on the politics of other countries? ------------- elenos |
Posted By: Omnipotence
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2007 at 04:08
|
Hate to step in, but calling someone a newbie do tend to kindle the flame. I do value your knowledge Charioteer, but I doubt there's need to get so emotional. btw, I'm not really against cussing, but there are very touchy moderators who would smear these cuss words all over you. Just a word of advise. |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2007 at 04:39
you mean Chinese history is for trolls only?
and I actually care more about Australian politics, because it is the only politics would affect my life.
and as an ethnic minority i especially care about racism in Australia.
|
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2007 at 04:44
and i value this advice very much, thank you.
|
Posted By: elenos
Date Posted: 24-Nov-2007 at 06:38
|
"you mean Chinese history is for trolls only?" Chinese history is for everybody isn't it? Like everybody else, no matter what their ethnicity, you can share in the Australian experience, welcome. ------------- elenos |
Posted By: The Charioteer
Date Posted: 25-Nov-2007 at 00:01
I know what you were referring to, the Xia recorded history of the Xia and Sima qian get Xia and pre-Xia history from word of mouth basis just like his western counterpart, but i was trying to say this wasnt exactly the situation as reponse to your latter saying.
thats where i think its necessary to trace the difference in the original concepts, and to understand how it may not attribute necessarily to uniformity in the analogy of "history" because of that difference.
there are similarities as well differences, neither should be neglected.
my focus was on the difference between the "history", not necessarily which one is "better".
perhaps my statement was the one thats unclear.
|