solarz
Brigadier
China is the longest continuous civilization in the world. Its documented history is unmatched by any other civilization in history.
What is fascinating to me is how, as we go further back in China's history, we start to see history turning to legends, and legends turning into myths.
The earliest surviving Chinese historical records date from the Zhou dynasty, iirc circa 3rd century BC (I'm referring to the time the records were penned, not the periods they covered). Those records describe the first Chinese dynasty, Xia. Aside from those records, written more than a thousand years after Xia fell, no "direct" archaeological evidence of a Xia dynasty exists.
Did the Xia dynasty exist, or was it a fiction created by the ruling powers of Zhou to justify their conquest of Shang? Western archaeologists tend to follow this view. Chinese archaelogists are more divided.
A though exercise: the Records of the Three Kingdoms was written shortly after the end of the Three Kingdoms era. The Romance of the Three Kingdoms was written 1000 years later, using elements from the historical text while adding its own embellishments.
What if, in another 1000 years, only fragments of the Romance survived? (A very likely possibility, as the Romances are far more ubiquitous than the Records.) Would future historians compile a new history book using elements from a fictional novel?
Still, whether Romance or Records, the existence of the Three Kingdoms are not in doubt. Yet, while we have found evidence of advanced societies dating to the time of the Xia dynasty, there is still no evidence that a hegemonic political power existed at the time.
Nevertheless, it's worth noting that we had no evidence of the existence of the Shang dynasty until the discovery of the oracle bones in 1899, yet the writings on the bones matched Chinese historical accounts to an astonishing degree. We are always discovering new things, so a lack of evidence on the existence of Xia cannot be construed as evidence of its non-existence.
Yet, while Xia is considered to be the first Chinese dynasty, it is not the earliest Chinese legend, by far. The Chinese people are said to be descended from the Yellow and Yan Emperors, whose battle with Chi You is probably the closest thing to the founding myths of the Chinese civilization.
The famous Han historian, Sima Qian, considered the Yellow Emperor to be a historical figure. Sima Qian lived circa 100 BC, and the Yellow Emperor is thought to have reigned around the 27th century BC, so to him, the Yellow Emperor was as historical as the First Emperor is to us.
Yet, even the Yellow Emperor had his predecessors. The Records of the Grand Historian notes "Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors". Among them are Fuxi and Nuwa, the latter a goddess who is said to have created humankind from mud, and repaired the Heavens when it cracked.
If Nuwa is definitely Myth, then the Yellow Emperor and the Xia dynasty fall in the realm of Legends. Some might even argue that they're more Myths than Legends.
What is fascinating to me is how, as we go further back in China's history, we start to see history turning to legends, and legends turning into myths.
The earliest surviving Chinese historical records date from the Zhou dynasty, iirc circa 3rd century BC (I'm referring to the time the records were penned, not the periods they covered). Those records describe the first Chinese dynasty, Xia. Aside from those records, written more than a thousand years after Xia fell, no "direct" archaeological evidence of a Xia dynasty exists.
Did the Xia dynasty exist, or was it a fiction created by the ruling powers of Zhou to justify their conquest of Shang? Western archaeologists tend to follow this view. Chinese archaelogists are more divided.
A though exercise: the Records of the Three Kingdoms was written shortly after the end of the Three Kingdoms era. The Romance of the Three Kingdoms was written 1000 years later, using elements from the historical text while adding its own embellishments.
What if, in another 1000 years, only fragments of the Romance survived? (A very likely possibility, as the Romances are far more ubiquitous than the Records.) Would future historians compile a new history book using elements from a fictional novel?
Still, whether Romance or Records, the existence of the Three Kingdoms are not in doubt. Yet, while we have found evidence of advanced societies dating to the time of the Xia dynasty, there is still no evidence that a hegemonic political power existed at the time.
Nevertheless, it's worth noting that we had no evidence of the existence of the Shang dynasty until the discovery of the oracle bones in 1899, yet the writings on the bones matched Chinese historical accounts to an astonishing degree. We are always discovering new things, so a lack of evidence on the existence of Xia cannot be construed as evidence of its non-existence.
Yet, while Xia is considered to be the first Chinese dynasty, it is not the earliest Chinese legend, by far. The Chinese people are said to be descended from the Yellow and Yan Emperors, whose battle with Chi You is probably the closest thing to the founding myths of the Chinese civilization.
The famous Han historian, Sima Qian, considered the Yellow Emperor to be a historical figure. Sima Qian lived circa 100 BC, and the Yellow Emperor is thought to have reigned around the 27th century BC, so to him, the Yellow Emperor was as historical as the First Emperor is to us.
Yet, even the Yellow Emperor had his predecessors. The Records of the Grand Historian notes "Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors". Among them are Fuxi and Nuwa, the latter a goddess who is said to have created humankind from mud, and repaired the Heavens when it cracked.
If Nuwa is definitely Myth, then the Yellow Emperor and the Xia dynasty fall in the realm of Legends. Some might even argue that they're more Myths than Legends.