Jump to content

Xia–Shang–Zhou Chronology Project

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Kanguole (talk | contribs) at 17:26, 25 February 2012 (→‎Reception: add url). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Template:Contains Chinese text The Xia–Shang–Zhou Chronology Project (Chinese: 夏商周断代工程; pinyin: Xià Shāng Zhōu Duàndài Gōngchéng) was a multi-disciplinary project commissioned by the People's Republic of China in 1996 to determine with accuracy the location and time frame of the Xia Dynasty, the Shang Dynasty and the Zhou Dynasty. Some 200 experts took part in the project, which correlated radiocarbon dating, archaeological dating methods, historical textual analysis, astronomy, and other methods to achieve greater temporal and geographic accuracy. Preliminary results of the project were released in November 2000. However several of the project's methods and conclusions have been disputed by other scholars.

Chronological table

Sima Qian, writing in the Han Dynasty, gave a year-by-year chronology back to the start of the Gonghe Regency in 841 BC, but he and later scholars were unable to identify precise dates for Chinese history earlier than that. The Xia Shang Zhou Chronology Project concluded precise dates for the accessions of rulers from Wu Ding, the Shang Dynasty king whose reign produced the oldest known oracle bone records. These dates are here compared with those used in the Cambridge History of Ancient China:[1][2]

Dynasty King Accession date (BC)
XSZ Project Cambridge History
Shang Wu Ding 1250 before 1198
Zu Geng 1191 after 1188
Zu Jia – ca. 1177
Lin Xin – ca. 1157
Kang Ding – ca. 1148
Wu Yi 1147 ca. 1131
Wen Ding 1112 ca. 1116
Di Yi 1101 1105
Di Xin 1075 1086
Zhou King Wu 1046 1045
King Cheng 1042 1042
King Kang 1020 1005
King Zhao 995 977
King Mu 976 956
King Gong 922 917
King Yi 899 899
King Xiao 891 872?
King Yi 885 865
King Li 877 857

Earlier dates are given more approximately:[1][3]

  • The relocation of the Shang capital to Yin during the reign of Pan Geng is dated ca. 1300 BC.
  • The establishment of the Shang Dynasty was identified with the building of the Yanshi walled city and dated ca. 1600 BC, compared with the Cambridge History's ca. 1570 BC and the traditional date of 1766 BC (based on the calculations of Liu Xin).
  • The project identified all four phases of Erlitou culture with the Xia Dynasty, dating its beginning at ca. 2070 BC, compared with the traditional date of 2205 BC.

Reception

Coverage of the project in the Western press has focussed on alleged conflicts between nationalism and scholarship.[4][5] One of the criticisms is that the project supports the concept of a 5,000-year, unbroken and homogeneous history of China, wherein the three ancient dynasties (Xia, Shang and Zhou) were large and powerful states—ignoring the fact that many other groups of people (perhaps equally advanced) existed throughout China and Central Asia during this period.[6]

Technical controversies involve the following matters.

  • The archaeological boundaries between Xia and Shang and between Shang and Zhou have been disputed partly due to the methods adopted for radiocarbon-dating.[citation needed]
  • Some of the radiocarbon dates were specified with only 68%-confidence intervals, instead of the standard 95%-confidence intervals; this makes the date ranges narrower than they properly should be.[7]
  • The principal astronomical calculation for a solar eclipse in 899 BC is incorrect.[8][9]
  • It has been argued that the astronomical-literature bases of the project are ill-founded. This was partly caused by persistent doubts about the reliability and interpretation of the historical records used for the deduction.[8][9] It was also partly caused by selective use of the presumed historical record (which, if used in its entirety, might have no solution at all).[1]
  • Critical changes have been introduced into the bronze vessel inscriptions, which affect the entire chronology.[1]
  • Lack of understanding of the ancient calendar further complicated the matter.[10]

References

  1. ^ a b c d XSZCP Group (2000), 夏商周断代工程1996—2000年阶段成果报告·简本 (The Xia-Shang-Zhou Chronology Project Report for the years of 1996–2000.
  2. ^ Shaughnessy, Edward L. (1999), "Language and Writing", in Loewe, Michael; Shaughnessy, Edward L. (eds.), The Cambridge History of Ancient China, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp. 19–29, ISBN 978-0-521-47030-8.
  3. ^ Li, Xueqin (2002), "The Xia-Shang-Zhou Chronology Project: Methodology and results", Journal of East Asian Archaeology, 4: 321–333, doi:10.1163/156852302322454585
  4. ^ Eckholm, Erik (November 10, 2000), "In China, Ancient History Kindles Modern Doubts", New York Times, p. A3.
  5. ^ Gillery, Bruce (July 20, 2000), "Digging into the Future", Far Eastern Economic Review, pp. 74–77, archived from the original on April 13, 2001.
  6. ^ Lee, Yun Kuen (2002), "Building the chronology of early Chinese history", Asian Perspectives: the Journal of Archaeology for Asia and the Pacific, 41 (1): 15–42, doi:10.1353/asi.2002.0006.
  7. ^ Keenan, Douglas J. (2007), "Defence of planetary conjunctions for early Chinese chronology is unmerited" (PDF), Journal of Astronomical History and Heritage, 10: 142–147.
  8. ^ a b Keenan, Douglas J. (2002), "Astro-historiographic chronologies of early China are unfounded" (PDF), East Asian History, 23: 61–68.
  9. ^ a b Stephenson, F. Richard (2008), "How reliable are archaic records of large solar eclipses?", Journal for the History of Astronomy, 39: 229–250.
  10. ^ e.g. Keenan (2002), p. 67.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Xia–Shang–Zhou_Chronology_Project&oldid=478799881"