TRUTH FROM LEGEND
Wang Wei, chief expert with the Origins Project, talks with Newschina about the development of Chinese civilization and how myths and legends shape its narrative
“Five thousand years of Chinese civilization” is an idea deeply embedded in the minds of Chinese people. Its modern-day prevalence owes in part to a history book series for teenagers, Five Thousand Years of Chinese History. First published in 1979, it has been popular for decades.
In the 32-character eulogy Ode to the Yellow Emperor,
Sun Yat-sen, the leader of China’s republican revolution and known as the father of modern China, famously wrote in 1912 that “Chinese civilization has lasted for 5,000 years since the reign of the Yellow Emperor.”
While the Yellow Emperor – one of the mytho-historical Five Emperors portrayed as ruler of a Chinese centralized state nearly 5,000 years ago – is first recorded in the second century BCE in Records of the Grand Historian by Sima Qian, the father of Chinese historiography, there is lack of archeological evidence for thousands of years before and after.
Since the birth of modern Chinese archeology in 1921, experts have examined the claim of 5,000 years of Chinese civilization. Pinpointing credible origins is a significant mission for Chinese scholars.
In 2002, the Chinese government launched the “Trace the Origins of Chinese Civilization
Project” (Origins Project), a program at an unprecedented scale. Now in its second decade, the project is China’s largest and most comprehensive interdisciplinary archeological program, involving over 400 scholars and experts from the natural and social sciences.
As chief expert of the Origins Project, Wang Wei spoke with Newschina about how archeologists examine the mythology of China’s early peoples. According to Wang, director of the Institute of Archeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, human civilization in China originated about 8,000 years ago. Over the next three millennia, extensive areas within China’s modern borders developed into civilized societies. By 2300 BCE, the Central Plains civilizations along the Yellow River flourished. Nearly three centuries later, China’s first dynasty – the Xia (2070-1600 BCE) – emerged. Nearly 1,500 years later, the Qin Dynasty (221-207 BCE) conquered competing States to become China’s first multi-ethnic imperial state.
Newschina: How important is the Origins Project to the development of Chinese archeology?
Wang Wei: Over the past two decades, the Origins Project has brought about a golden age in the history of Chinese archeology, during which the field has undergone drastic changes. The aim of our project is to delve into a huge topic – the origins, formation and development of Chinese civilization, examine how the pluralistic and integrated pattern of Chinese civilization developed, and how the foundations of the unified multi-ethnic state were gradually laid.
In the past, archeologists specialized in a particular site or kind of cultural object. But after this project launched, scholars not only have specific goals in their areas of expertise but also keep the larger goals of the Origins Project in mind.
The greatest significance of the project is gathering different disciplines together to promote the application of science and technology in archeology. The project also encouraged Chinese archeologists to go global. We can’t ignore the influences of other civilizations when studying Chinese civilization. Comparative studies between Chinese civilization and other civilizations are essential. In the last 10 years, over 30 Chinese archeological teams visited over 20 countries for field research. Conducting research overseas not only expands the global mindset of Chinese archeologists but also the international influence of Chinese archeology.
Over the last two decades – particularly in the most recent decade – Chinese archeology has entered a golden age. I have dedicated the last two decades of my 40-year career as an archeologist to the Origins Project. I led several archeological teams abroad for research. I feel so fortunate to have played a role in fostering the development of Chinese archeology.
NC: You argue that ancient civilization in China originated about 8,000 years ago and formed about 5,000 years ago. This is a new interpretation of the idea of 5,000 years of Chinese civilization. What happened about 8,000 years ago?
WW: There was a period of global warming from 8,000 to 6,000 years ago. Paleoecologists found that the climate of the Yellow River region was like that of the Yangtze River region today, and the climate of the Yangtze River region was like that of today’s South China.
As the climate increasingly became warmer and wetter, rice farming spread north toward the Huai River region (today’s Henan, Anhui and Jiangsu provinces), while millet farming took root in the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River and the Yanshan Mountains (today’s Hebei Province and Beijing). In the [Hemudu] ruins [in the lower Yangtze River coastal plain] we found many shovels made of stone and bone, which suggests during that period (5500-3300 BCE) agriculture had already developed from slash-and-burn farming to si agriculture – a Neolithic farming practice that uses spadeshaped tools made of bones called si. This fueled population
growth, formed villages and fostered the development of handicrafts and other aspects of society.
In the Jiahu Ruins, in Wuyang County, Henan Province in the upper reaches of the Huai River, we discovered evidence that about 8,000 years ago our ancestors were growing rice, rearing pigs, distilling wine and crafting turquoise. They also discovered a seven-hole flute made of bone. In sites such as the Jiahu Ruins and the Xinglongwa Ruins in Chifeng County, now Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, a few large-scale burials with jade and turquoise burial objects were unearthed. This suggests social differentiation, which marks the dawn of civilization.
We propose a pair of two important concepts – “the origins of civilization” and “the formation of civilization.” The claim of “5,000 years of Chinese Civilization” is not false. It’s historical fact. Some scholars also point out Chinese civilization has lasted way longer than 5,000 years. The Jiahu Ruins, dating back 8,000 years, show that people engraved symbols on tortoise shells and played music on bone flutes. Isn’t that civilization?
We realize we must clarify all ambiguities, so we argue that there are different phases in the evolution of Chinese civilization – origin, formation and development. The formation phase occurred about 5,000 years ago. Currently, scholars on the project are still not quite clear about the origin phase, but we all agree on the formation phase.
Until now, the Origins Project focused on the period between 5,500 and 3,500 years ago. The most important argument the project has put forth is that China entered a civilized society about 5,000 years ago. This is the key conclusion drawn from existing research. But a civilization doesn’t form overnight. Chinese civilization originated 8,000 years ago, and its formation sped up about 6,000 years ago. In the future, we hope the project can look back an additional 3,000 years to explore Chinese civilization’s age of origins and focus research on these three millennia.
NC: Are there any aspects within the 2,000 years the project has focused on so far that need to be further explored?
WW: Of course. There are still too many unsolved historical mysteries. For instance, the problem of writing. Were written characters used in the Xia Dynasty? When comparing the symbols on tortoise shells from the Jiahu Ruins engraved 8,000 years ago with the oracle bone inscriptions of the Shang Dynasty (1600-1046 BCE), we found they belong to the same square-shaped symbol system. But there are 5,000 years between the emergence of these two sets of inscriptions. How should we understand this void? Can we find evidence to prove the existence of earlier writing prior to the appearance of the oracle bone inscriptions of the Shang Dynasty?
Concerning the Hongshan culture (a Neolithic culture in the West Liao River Basin of Northeast China), a good deal of critical evidence is still missing, including the site of the capital city and palace ruins. These are all areas that need to be explored.
NC: The evolution of Chinese civilization includes the development from plurality to integration. The project’s research emphasizes integration. Does this emphasis undermine our understanding of plurality in the origins of Chinese civilization?
WW: It won’t. Plurality and integration are two sides of the same question. The pluralistic origins of Chinese civilization and trends of integration during the formation period occurred successively in history. Research into regional civilization development actually includes diversity, which already
highlights plurality in Chinese civilization.
Before the Origins Project launched, many regions in China overemphasized their particular characteristics and values, while aspects of integration were largely neglected. Some even denied the leading role of the Central Plains civilization. That is why we have to emphasize the aspect of integration today.
Take the Sanxingdui Ruins [in Sichuan Province] as an example. The uniqueness of Sanxingdui is apparent, but it is also a significant component comprising the pluralistic and integrated pattern of Chinese civilization. With Sanxingdui, many experts highlighted its uniqueness but overlooked integration. But these two aspects are of equal importance.
The current notion of integration refers to how different regional civilizations with distinctive characteristics gradually integrated during the Xia, Shang and Zhou dynasties. The concept does not mean that the Central Plains culture was always the most advanced in the development of Chinese civilization – this is the major difference with past interpretations.
NC: For a long time, people tried to link archeological sites with Chinese mythology and pinpoint the birthplaces of legendary figures to trace the origins of Chinese civilization. What do you think of this tendency?
WW: Of course, the Origins Project and regional archeological research should be based on precise archeological findings. But, in the meantime, mythological legends and folktales are important references. In fact, more myths and folklore, once deemed fictional, are being proven to have credibility through archeological findings. At least we can find some clues in history. Of course, archeological evidence must back them.
Take the Taosi late Neolithic site in Xiangfen, Shanxi Province. Archaeological evidence has been found that proves the existence of a kingdom in what is today’s southern Shanxi Province dating back 4,300 to 4,100 years ago. Even an observatory was found. All this evidence accords with the “Chronology of Emperor Yao” (in The Book of Documents, one of the five Confucian classics on the history from the pre-dynastic Emperor Yao to the Western Zhou Dynasty in
8th century BCE). We assumed the site is probably the capital of the legendary Emperor Yao’s kingdom, since the time, location, scale and characteristics correspond with descriptions about Yao’s rule in The Book of Documents.
Another example is the Shicun Ruins in Yuncheng, Shanxi Province, where experts unearthed many intricately fashioned stone and earthen silkworm carvings dating back 6,000 years. There are many local folktales about Leizu, the legendary empress and wife of the Yellow Emperor. Leizu was said to have invented the silk spinning wheel. It is interesting that so many silkworm carvings were found in a place where tales of Leizu
tales abounded. At the very least, it provides important insight into the legends of the Yellow Emperor and Leizu.
Our duty is to examine these legends with archeological findings. We can’t treat myths and folklore as history, but we can’t just simply ignore them. Our mission is not to use archeological evidence to verify myths and folklore, but to examine and analyze the historical information they contain.
NC: How do you distinguish your own personal opinions from the Chinese archeological community?
WW: There is actually no consensus within the community. Opinions vary among scholars. We might only agree on some irrefutable facts, such as the Yin Ruins (a site in Anyang, Henan Province) are remnants of the capital of the Shang Dynasty. But scholars hold different opinions on most questions.
I argue that Chinese civilization originated about 8,000 years ago. This argument is strictly based on existing archeological findings. What quantifies the origin of civilization? A key sign is the emergence of social stratification. For example, at the Jiahu Ruins that date back 8,000 years, we have not only found bone flutes, but also evidence of social stratification. In some burial pits, only a few simple pottery vessels were unearthed, while in others precious objects were found such as cloth studded with exquisite turquoise stones. These findings show signs of social stratification.
My arguments are based on archeological findings, not something I conjured up. So they won’t cause much controversy. But so far, few have come to conclusions in this way.
NC: In the long run, what further efforts should be made to develop the Origins Project?
WW: We’ve made four suggestions. First, it’s necessary to expand the scope of research. The project mainly covers 5,500-3,500 years ago. We advise a longer time span, from 8,000 years ago to the late Western Zhou Dynasty (1046-771 BCE). Evidence shows that social differentiation and cultural development existed 8,000 years ago. We also advise to further expand the focus of research from 3,500 years ago to the late Western Zhou Dynasty, since it was during that time that pluralistic integration and the Rites of Zhou manifested.
Apart from focusing on the Yellow River and Yangtze River regions, we also suggest expanding to the northeast, northwest, southeast and southwest China. In the Shang and Zhou dynasties, the cultures in these regions had already merged into the larger structure led by the Central Plains culture, developing towards the formation of a unified multi-ethnic state during the Qin and Han dynasties.
Second, we suggest incorporating disciplines from the humanities and social sciences. Natural sciences already played an enormous role in the progress of our project, but we still lack support from the humanities and social sciences. The future development of our project cannot merely rely on archeology and natural sciences. The humanities and social sciences are very necessary to further address issues such as summarizing the characteristics of civilization.
In addition, we should strengthen comparative studies with other civilizations. Without thorough comparisons, we cannot have a precise and comprehensive view of the characteristics of our own civilization.
The last is to further promote our academic findings not only in the international academic community but also among the Chinese people to boost their cultural confidence.