The Sunday Review

Send your feedback or enquiries to [email protected]. You can also fax your comments to 65-734-6301.

Just how old is Chinese history?

For The Record

A recent debate over whether it goes back 5,000 or 10,000 years has raised some key questions over the yardsticks for determining history. China Correspondent MARY KWANG reports

CHINESE historians are locked in debate over just how old Chinese history is. A group of around 100 scholars want the historical accounts to be revised to state that they go back 10,000 years.

They are pitted against a bigger, more conservative, camp which says all that can be claimed safely, based on archaeological evidence, is that Chinese history is 5,000 years old.

The debate rakes up several fundamental questions over the definition of history and the yardsticks to apply to determine it.

Professor Shi Shi, 76, president of the Research Society on the History of the Chinese Nation, spearheads the group which wants history books to be amended to state that Chinese history is twice as ancient as is currently believed.

The idea to extend Chinese history was first mooted in 1991 by the late renowned archaeologist Sun Bingqi.

Since 1993, Prof Shi has convened several gatherings of historians, archaeologists, anthropologists, ethnologists and other scholars from all over the country, Taiwan, Hongkong, Singapore and elsewhere to promote this perspective of history.

Last month, the group went a step further when its members signed an open petition on the subject.

Prof Shi wants to debunk the popular belief that Chinese history dates to Huang Di, the Yellow Emperor who ruled, according to legend, from 2697 to 2597 BC and who is regarded as the earliest ancestor of the Chinese nation.

In a telephone interview, the Hainan-based historian said that the 5,000 years' catchphrase was simplistic and sweeping as it was based on the writings of the country's first historian, Sima Qian, of the Han dynasty (206 BC-AD 24).

But the latter, who lived from 145 to 90 BC and who wrote China's first historical account, did not have archaeological evidence since gathered by the modern historians, he said.

Discoveries in archaeology, anthropology and folklore in more recent times had peeled back the layers of ancient history, according to Prof Shi.

Archaeological digs show that Chinese civilisation began at least 9,000 years ago. Silk-weaving, thought to have been invented by Huangdi's concubine, is now known to have existed at least 2,000 years earlier or about 7,000 years ago.

Relics unearthed in Hunan show that land was farmed as far back as 9,000 years ago.

Prof Shi said that excavations in Zhejiang's Hemudu and Hunan's Chengtoushan showed that people who lived at least 6,000 years ago had worn silk, cultivated food crops like rice, lived in fenced-in dwellings and travelled by boat.

They also painted, sculpted and decorated their homes.

"It's clear that they were not primitive, living on what nature provided directly. They created things, which showed that they had attained a certain level of material and spiritual culture.

"They lived as long ago as 6,000, 7,000, even 8,000 and 9,000 years. Almost 10,000 years," he said.

However, these discoveries do not include the written language and would appear to fall short of the widely-accepted standard that history begins with the invention of writing.

Prof Shi rejected this as an orthodoxy established by the West and suggested that Chinese historians could establish their own criteria for deciding what was history.

In China, the oldest writings unearthed so far are inscriptions on sheep bones in Huantai county in Shandong province that date to around 3,500 years ago.

They are just 300 years older than the oracle-bone inscriptions first found in the Yin ruins, or remains of the late Shang dynasty (16th-11th century BC) in Anyang in Henan province, that had led to the earlier belief that Chinese history began in the Shang period.

Another scholar, Professor Liang Baiquan, 70, who retired from his post as curator of the Nanjing Museum last July, backed the view that the written language was not essential to determining history.

"There are at least 20 to 30 other yardsticks which can be applied, such as rice-cultivation and the use of jade ornaments. These are cultural relics that reflect the labour, and the level of the arts, of people living then.

"If any two or three of these factors are found to have existed contemporaneously at a certain age, then there is a basis for establishing that civilised human settlement existed at that age and that can be included as history."

An archaeologist, Professor Song Zhaolin of the National Museum of Chinese History in Beijing, said that the focus of research into the beginnings of Chinese civilisation should be on the period dating to some 10,000 years ago.

"It was around then that there was a New Stone Age economic revolution, which saw the emergence of new developments such as farming, animal husbandry, pottery, weaving, jadecraft, other arts and crafts, and permanent settlement.

"Some elements of civilisation have their origins in them. The world's ancient countries started from farming communities and agriculture is the base of civilisation.

"From this point of view, it is quite meaningful to propose writing a 10,000-year history of China," he said.

Yet, the expert in prehistoric studies prefers to take a more cautious approach to rewriting the history books.

"How do we set down when Chinese civilisation came into being? We must first of all have a scientific standard.

"A civilised age has certain features. I feel that the markers are: a class society, monarchical power, the use of bronze, a written language, the building of fortifications and a system of rites and ceremonies. These are what separate a civilised age from a barbaric one."

The view from the conservative camp is that while it is fine to write about what happened in the last 10,000 years given the wealth of material available, "this does not mean that Chinese civilisation is 10,000 years old" as one scholar put it.

Standards for determining history must be applicable universally, he added, opposing suggestions that Chinese historians formulate their own criteria.

According to standards in use worldwide, apart from the written language, important aspects of the earliest historic period would include the building of fortresses, to show that some form of political organisation existed, and the use of metal such as bronze, to indicate the arrival at a certain level of technological sophistication.

The scholar from the conservative camp suggested that nationalistic sentiments could be behind the push to rewrite history.

"It is accepted widely that the civilisations of Egypt, Babylon and India are older than that of China and that Chinese history is the fourth oldest in the world.

"By saying that Chinese history is 10,000 years old, China would then have the world's oldest history, which can be a matter of pride to some people," he said.

History must be determined, not by emotion, but from facts gleaned from physical evidence uncovered through archaeological excavations, he added.

"Mythical kings or ancient communities become real when inscriptions referring to them are found."

Prof Song, who takes a similar stand, said: "Let archaeology present the facts. Previously, the belief was that Chinese history started with the Shang dynasty. But now, this is seen as too conservative.

"In fact, in the late stages of the primitive age, a number of elements of a civilised age had started to emerge.

"We should use archaeological research as the foundation and work with anthropologists and historians and other scholars to rewrite the history of Chinese civilisation.

"That way, our work will stand up to the test of time. We don't only need historians but we also need archaeologists who have an even bigger right to speak. A lot of work awaits them."

There are a number of other long-held beliefs which Prof Shi's group also wants to correct.

"It is accepted that the Yellow River Basin is the cradle of Chinese civilisation. But archaeological discoveries show that Chinese culture sprang from more than one birthplace," he said.

Traces of civilisation have also been found along the Yangtze River, in Hunan, Hubei and the south-eastern coastal regions.

Prof Shi called for more attention to be paid to southern China, where less research had taken place compared to the north.

There is evidence suggesting that ancient people had migrated from the south to the north, in contrast to the current wisdom that Chinese civilisation had originated in the north and spread to the south.

Current history books also tend to focus on the country as a single farming nation while ignoring seafaring communities despite the latter's early beginnings.

Prof Shi urged that studies be done on the maritime civilisations of the south as well as on southern minority ethnic groups.

To promote their views, he and some of his colleagues have published a book on their bid to revise Chinese history.

They are also working on a volume outlining China's history over 10,000 years.

"We are planning a television documentary on the subject as well," he said.

Both professors Shi and Liang acknowledge that converting others to their perspective would be a long, hard grind.

"We need to win a consensus as opinions are now divided. Many scholars are cautious," said Prof Liang, admitting that the conservative camp far outnumbered those who share their theories.

Prof Shi believes that it will be a long time before their research findings make their way into school textbooks.

"The work may not be accomplished in my lifetime. We're focusing on doing our research thoroughly," he said.

"As long as we reach reliable and irrefutable conclusions, we are not afraid that they would not have society's acceptance."

Winning and losing big
Model village now a dinosaur in new China