Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)
"5000 years of Chinese history" |
Post Reply 
|
Page <123> |
| Author |
 Share Topic Printable Version Google Delicious Digg StumbleUpon Windows Live Yahoo Bookmarks reddit Facebook MySpace Newsvine Furl Topic Search  Topic Options
|
|
Omnipotence 
Baron 
Joined: 16-Nov-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 494 |
 Quote Reply
 Topic: "5000 years of Chinese history"Posted: 22-Nov-2007 at 03:32 |
|
|
Can you tell me the date/location of these sites/artifacts found?
|
||
 |
||
|
The Charioteer
Colonel 
Joined: 16-Feb-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 735 |
Quote Reply
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". Edited by The Charioteer - 22-Nov-2007 at 07:25 |
||
|
||
|
Reginmund
Arch Duke 
Joined: 08-May-2005 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1943 |
Quote Reply
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. Edited by Reginmund - 22-Nov-2007 at 12:54 |
||
|
||
|
The Charioteer
Colonel
Joined: 16-Feb-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 735 |
Quote Reply
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.
Edited by The Charioteer - 22-Nov-2007 at 15:10 |
||
|
||
|
Reginmund
Arch Duke
Joined: 08-May-2005 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1943 |
Quote Reply
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? Edited by Reginmund - 22-Nov-2007 at 15:04 |
||
|
||
|
The Charioteer
Colonel
Joined: 16-Feb-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 735 |
Quote Reply
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"?
|
||
|
||
|
Reginmund
Arch Duke
Joined: 08-May-2005 Online Status: Offline Posts: 1943 |
Quote Reply
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. |
||
|
||
|
elenos
Chieftain 
Joined: 13-Jun-2007 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1457 |
Quote Reply
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 dont need words to make a personal link between the present and the past. Edited by elenos - 23-Nov-2007 at 03:40 |
||
|
elenos
|
||
|
||
|
Omnipotence
Baron
Joined: 16-Nov-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 494 |
Quote Reply
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!
|
||
|
||
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1457 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 03:35 |
|
|
Picture of interior http://news.yahoo.com/photos/ss/events/sc/112007romecave Edited by elenos - 23-Nov-2007 at 03:51 |
||
|
elenos
|
||
|
||
|
The Charioteer
Colonel
Joined: 16-Feb-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 735 |
Quote Reply
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. Edited by The Charioteer - 23-Nov-2007 at 04:47 |
||
|
||
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1457 |
Quote Reply
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
|
||
|
||
|
Omnipotence
Baron
Joined: 16-Nov-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 494 |
Quote Reply
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. Edited by Omnipotence - 23-Nov-2007 at 06:06 |
||
|
||
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1457 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 06:04 |
|
|
Good points, Omnipotence.
|
||
|
elenos
|
||
|
||
|
Omnipotence
Baron
Joined: 16-Nov-2004 Online Status: Offline Posts: 494 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 06:08 |
|
|
Thank you, but I already know that. jk.. :)
|
||
|
||
|
The Charioteer
Colonel
Joined: 16-Feb-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 735 |
Quote Reply
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. Edited by The Charioteer - 23-Nov-2007 at 07:34 |
||
|
||
|
The Charioteer
Colonel
Joined: 16-Feb-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 735 |
Quote Reply
Posted: 23-Nov-2007 at 08:02 |
|
what joke of the day
Edited by The Charioteer - 23-Nov-2007 at 08:02 |
||
|
||
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007 Location: Australia Online Status: Offline Posts: 1457 |
Quote Reply
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.
Edited by elenos - 23-Nov-2007 at 11:41 |
||
|
elenos
|
||
|
||
|
The Charioteer
Colonel
Joined: 16-Feb-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 735 |
Quote Reply
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. Edited by The Charioteer - 23-Nov-2007 at 21:11 |
||
|
||
|
The Charioteer
Colonel
Joined: 16-Feb-2006 Online Status: Offline Posts: 735 |
Quote Reply
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? Edited by The Charioteer - 23-Nov-2007 at 21:03 |
||
|
||
|
Post Reply
|
Page <123> |
| Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz
This page was generated in 0.061 seconds.
