4 ms·

> a non-Han Chinese civilization in the area of Sichuan From TFA: Huang Di Yuan Concubine Leizu Xiling taught others to raise silkworms, and the legend Leizu

by est 2y ago

> a non-Han Chinese civilization in the area of Sichuan From TFA: Huang Di Yuan Concubine Leizu Xiling taught others to raise silkworms, and the legend Leizu is from the people of Chengdu in Sichuan Huang Di was regarded the ancester of every Han Chinese, and Sichuan was the birth place of Han. The literal meaning of "Han" traces back to LiuBang, the Great King of Han, founder and first emperor of the Han dynasty, literally established his fief over Sichuan (Ba, Shu, Hanzhong and its 41 counties). Liubang spent his next 5 years elimilated all his enemies and began the first Pax Sinica of 300 years. If you mean the pre-Qin history of Sichuan, the Shu state was one of the "8 partners of Oath" that together with the Zhou state rebeled against the Shang, forming the foundation of Chinese civilization over its 800 years course. The Ba & Shu kingdom were conquered by Lord Hui-wen, the great-grandparent of Qin-Shi-Huang the first emperor of China. Do you call this a "civilization was destroyed by the Han Chinese" or am I missing something? So how do you define "non-Han"? Or you just like to spin a narrative here?

contingencies 2y ago
How do we know the Shu weren't Chinese? Well, written Chinese history existed that touched on the Shu but those records were only confirmed through archaeological discovery very recently in the 1980s. We also know they were non Han Chinese because they were illiterate, had distinct beliefs and technologies (such as very technically impressive large scale bronze casting) which China did not, and China destroyed them as attested by its own records. More generally, the response references later Chinese written legends dealing with other geographies which are tangential if not irrelevant whereas the thread and original article were discussing archaeologically evidenced prehistory and the Shu. So who is "spinning a narrative" here is clear, which accords with the presumed nature of the aspersion-casting post - ie. a 10c brigade-esque fanciful reinterpretation based upon modern Chinese nationalism (and one assumes the poster is Chinese as evidenced by their misspelling of English words). In short, the Confucian parent may be safely ignored.
- est 2y ago
  > is Chinese as evidenced by their misspelling of English words Ad hominem and wrong logic. Evidenced by your correct English spelling so you must be white English people? > distinct beliefs Like what? The belief was exactly repeated by Chinese mythology, the Di's of 5 Color, the 10 suns, the birdie thing. All Chinese rulers inherited the "Di" title from Shu. Yellow Emperor had a Shu wife, his son had a Shu wife, I'd argue it's been Shu all along. > bronze casting ... which China did not Please do more research. Some of the major bronze casting set were replicas found in other parts of Yangtze river > because they were illiterate > Confucian parent funny you mentioned Confucian. Did you know (one of) Confucius's teacher came from Shu? During Zhou dynasty, several early "teacher of the king", including (quite possibly) the incredible Jiang Ziya "Esteemed Father", were from the Shu & Qiang clans, to be specific, Jiang and Qiang are basically the same character on bronze inscriptions, literally meaning the shepherd people, which lives in western China. > based upon modern Chinese nationalism Hey bro I thought you were calling Han vs non-Han bullshit? Why change the subject to "Chinese"? Are you suggesting Han == China or something? Mind you, Han is a nationalism invention during the 1910s. Overall I think "China/Chinese" is a messed up umbrella term, so sorry I am more like Basuria/Shu-ism. If you want to show off your online racial supremacy you have won, but if you want to discuss about some East Asian history or archaeological findings, I don't like your arrogance and bigotry.

by est 2y ago

contingencies 2y ago

How do we know the Shu weren't Chinese? Well, written Chinese history existed that touched on the Shu but those records were only confirmed through archaeological discovery very recently in the 1980s. We also know they were non Han Chinese because they were illiterate, had distinct beliefs and technologies (such as very technically impressive large scale bronze casting) which China did not, and China destroyed them as attested by its own records. More generally, the response references later Chinese written legends dealing with other geographies which are tangential if not irrelevant whereas the thread and original article were discussing archaeologically evidenced prehistory and the Shu. So who is "spinning a narrative" here is clear, which accords with the presumed nature of the aspersion-casting post - ie. a 10c brigade-esque fanciful reinterpretation based upon modern Chinese nationalism (and one assumes the poster is Chinese as evidenced by their misspelling of English words). In short, the Confucian parent may be safely ignored.

est 2y ago
> is Chinese as evidenced by their misspelling of English words Ad hominem and wrong logic. Evidenced by your correct English spelling so you must be white English people? > distinct beliefs Like what? The belief was exactly repeated by Chinese mythology, the Di's of 5 Color, the 10 suns, the birdie thing. All Chinese rulers inherited the "Di" title from Shu. Yellow Emperor had a Shu wife, his son had a Shu wife, I'd argue it's been Shu all along. > bronze casting ... which China did not Please do more research. Some of the major bronze casting set were replicas found in other parts of Yangtze river > because they were illiterate > Confucian parent funny you mentioned Confucian. Did you know (one of) Confucius's teacher came from Shu? During Zhou dynasty, several early "teacher of the king", including (quite possibly) the incredible Jiang Ziya "Esteemed Father", were from the Shu & Qiang clans, to be specific, Jiang and Qiang are basically the same character on bronze inscriptions, literally meaning the shepherd people, which lives in western China. > based upon modern Chinese nationalism Hey bro I thought you were calling Han vs non-Han bullshit? Why change the subject to "Chinese"? Are you suggesting Han == China or something? Mind you, Han is a nationalism invention during the 1910s. Overall I think "China/Chinese" is a messed up umbrella term, so sorry I am more like Basuria/Shu-ism. If you want to show off your online racial supremacy you have won, but if you want to discuss about some East Asian history or archaeological findings, I don't like your arrogance and bigotry.