Supposed redatings of ancient China

[Steve Farmer]

Indologists may take strange consolation in the fact that the
fantasic redatings of ancient Indian civilization by Indian
nationalists are now being matched by Chinese writers with
similar tendencies.

This news is being widely discussed today on the Warring States
Group List (a private List consisting of 175-odd specialists in
premodern China). This follows the release of official
"redatings" of ancient Chinese history by an official commission
of the Chinese government. NB: The head of the commission was
headed by a physicist, not an historian, and there is much talk
in these redatings (which are accepted by virtually no Western
Sinologists) of computer analyses of eclipse data and the like.
Sound familiar?

For the view of respected Western researchers like Stanford's
David Nivison of these redatings, see:

http://www.nytimes.com/2000/11/10/world/10CHIN.html

Nivison concludes that the new Chinese redatings "may poison
scholarship for generations." Nivison's words are especially
ominous since he is normally rather conservative in dating
ancient Chinese sources -- e.g., accepting much earlier dates
than many specialists for Zhou documents.

For the official view of the Chinese government -- who see these
redatings as a boost to "national pride" -- see the following
link from China Daily:

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/cndy/cd_cate5.html

The point here is that the war between historical mythologizers
and mainstream researchers isn't limited to India. There are some
differences, however. In China, the mythologizers unfortunately
already have the undivided support of the government. In India,
where the proposed redatings are even more extreme (and even less
well-founded) than in China, moves are well underway to get this
support. See the disturbing data collected in a recent article by
Nalini Taneja, of Dehli University, of the BJP's attempts to
introduce Hindutva "revisions" of history into the educational curriculum:

http://wzw.xitami.net/indowindow/sad/godown/edu/edupamph.htm

I add as well a new link mentioned briefly by M. Witzel on one
aspect of this kind of mythologizing -- involving K. N. Sethna's
widely repeated claims that chariots are supposedly depicted on
Harappan inscriptions ("Is Sethna's Chariot Pulled by Rajaram's
Horse?"). There is obvious a partly humourous intent to the
webpage, which was composed to counter S. Kalyanaraman's defense
of "Rajaram Horse II," but it introduces new evidence as well.

See: http://www.safarmer.com/sethna/pseudochariot.html

Steve Farmer.