Is China one of the four ancient civilizations?

Please see below to know why the landlord asked. It is an ironclad fact that China must be one of the four ancient civilizations. You can visit the websites of other countries.

-

Uncover the cover of the article "Exposing China as one of the so-called four ancient civilizations"

I saw an insightful article on the forum of blood and iron. The article refuted by this article was also posted on green tea, which caused great controversy, so I posted this article here to share with you.

Statement: The Chinese nation is a big family of 56 ethnic groups, and we oppose ethnic separatists. However, if we are angry at the post "Exposing China as one of the four ancient civilizations", it will not be enough to expand from denouncing separatists to ethnic minorities. Isn't it provoking ethnic opposition and playing to the hearts of Nalan people? —————————— Please read the article and think deeply.

_____________________________________________________________________________

The article "Exposing China as one of the so-called four ancient civilizations" is widely circulated on the Internet. Many netizens clearly know that their views are wrong, but they can't argue, so they can only use harsh words. In fact, there are real knowledge and gunmen on the Internet. This is the cover of his article.

Everyone knows that today's West is indeed better than China, but there is no need for the real strong to vilify and hate China culture. Reflecting on history is not like that ridiculous scam to reveal that China is one of the so-called four ancient civilizations. It is "historical nothingness" and "national nothingness", but some people have the need to vilify and attack China culture. Knowing this, we can understand why some people who speak Chinese and use Chinese characters hate China culture so much.

Although I advocate necessary reflection and oppose the pan-politicization of academic research, I have to refute and refute the remarks of people with ulterior motives!

The author of "Exposing China as One of the Four Ancient Civilizations" is Mongolian Nalan Xingde, who once used the famous Yinshan Tieqi, Sarenhu and the heavy metal band. Over the years, he has written no less than 500,000 words under different names and different nationalities, which have been widely circulated on the Internet, specifically defaming China and China culture. This person is quite knowledgeable, and has a good knowledge of history and China culture.

This man published a series of articles, such as Nonsense of Four Great Inventions, Comparison of Eastern and Western Civilizations, which seemed to be rational reflection, but its purpose was to fundamentally deny the ancient achievements of the Han nationality, and his writing was full of disdain for the Han nationality. He once wrote Whose Hand is Twenty-four History and Chinese Characters, Art and Dyeing Tanks under the pseudonym of Sarenhu, and the contents were very vulgar and boring.

On Nalan Xingde on Mongolian website. For the convenience of induction, let's call it theory. What's his theory?

First, the life of Han people is cheap, why not slaughter them?

Second, not killing so many Han people, you Han people exaggerate.

Third, it is said that the Han people today are not pure Han people. Because the Mongolian army raped a large number of Han women after going south, most of the Han people today are mixed-race Mongolians and Hans. (This bloodline theory is also reflected in the article "The Absurd Deception of China as One of the Four Ancient Civilizations", such as "The North is a pure Mongolian race" and "The real ancient civilization of China died after the Song Dynasty". , everyone will appreciate it carefully, hehe)

Mr. Feng Nian, who has tracked Nalan Xingde's whereabouts very clearly, pointed out that Nalan Xingde's remarks mainly insulted the Han nationality on the forums with the Han nationality as the main netizen, while on the Mongolian websites, he directly advocated the superiority theory of the Mongols. This is the real purpose of Nalan Xingde!

Reflection is necessary, but in the name of reflection, we must be alert to the confidence of China people!

There are many mistakes in this article. Look at the first paragraph of this article:

"For a long time, China officials declared in domestic propaganda that China is one of the so-called' four ancient civilizations' and that we are an ancient country with a civilization history of 5,000 years, which is an important content of education for fools. These ridiculous arguments are still widely circulated and deeply rooted in the hearts of the people. In fact, anyone with a little common sense in world history knows that this is just a joke. " (original)

First, after reading this article, we may have a wrong impression that "Westerners" have made a conclusion about whether China culture belongs to the four major civilizations, or whether it is the longest culture in the world today. "Presumably, the author is proficient in English, French, German, Russian, Italian, Spanish, Latin, Hebrew and so on, ha ha!

In fact, the four ancient civilizations were first put forward by western historians, not by China officials. Anyone with a little knowledge of world history knows this. For example, I have a book "World History" written by westerners, which deals with China, the second oldest civilization. The order is: ancient Egypt, China, India, ancient Greece (including later Rome). The original name of this book is: World History, edited by Peter N. stearns, Harper &; New york Publishers Street 1987.

There are many such English history books. You can find dozens of kinds in the library! Chinese civilization is one of the four great civilizations, and Chinese culture is the longest-lived civilization, which is a very common sentence in English history books.

Second, the formulation of 5000 years is that of China historians during the May 4th Movement, not the official formulation of China. In the past, some scholars only paid attention to the 3500-year history of China, because the 3500-year history was brilliant and the evidence was conclusive, instead of saying that the history of Chinese civilization was only 3500 years. (The Central Plains civilization outside Sanxingdui seems to be in 6500 BC or 6300 BC. I can't remember the specific time of crossing the river, but I saw it through exploration and discovery:)

Third, some civilizations are very old, such as Babylonian civilization. But "big" is not enough. The "four ancient civilizations" emphasize two aspects: greatness and antiquity. This is the basis for westerners to put forward the four ancient civilizations at first.

For another example, look at the absurdity of this article.

Once I listened to a lecture on the dating project of Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties, and the lecturer "Archaeologist" showed us the restoration map of the so-called "Capital Ruins" in Xia Dynasty. When I took a closer look, it turned out to be a few rotten grass huts, a standard primitive village. They call it the "big" and "capital" of the Xia Dynasty? What else is there? A few mud piles at the archaeological site, what is that-rammed earth remains, what is rammed earth? It is the most primitive technology used by primitive tribes to build shacks, commonly known as "dry paving". They call it the "great" and "capital" of the Xia Dynasty? There are also some copper slag, a lot of stone tools and bones! Isn't this question very clear? It's just the remains of the Neolithic clan and tribe. The so-called "capital of Xia Dynasty" is pure nonsense! "(original)

The author thinks that the ruins of Xia Dynasty are "rammed earth relics" or "Neolithic clan and tribe relics". In fact, it remains to be verified whether Erlitou site in Henan is a summer capital, but from the perspective of the unearthed scale, the total area is 3 million square meters, including the city, palace area and tomb area. The largest palace is 654.38+0000 square meters, and there are two directions outside the palace area. Among them, the length of the north-south avenue is nearly 700 meters, and the length of the two east-west avenues exceeds 300 meters. There are dense groups of rammed earth buildings between the three avenues. This is obviously not the scale of a "primitive village". It is undoubtedly a city, even if it is not the summer capital, it must be the city site of the same period as summer. Unearthed cultural relics include bronzes, jades and pottery. There are still some artifacts depicting quasi-literal symbols that have not been deciphered. Unearthed bronzes have a complete layout.

Is this what the author calls "the remains of clans and tribes in the Neolithic Age"? The so-called "copper slag"? He sneered at Erlitou cultural site. Does he think that all the so-called civilized sites abroad have the scale of modern cities? I am afraid this can only prove the author's own prejudice. In addition, rammed earth is not a unique technology of primitive tribes. Even the bases of Epang Palace in Qin Dynasty and Hanyuan Hall in Daming Palace in Tang Dynasty were all built with rammed earth. It's a pity that the author ignored the common sense of archaeology in order to attack.

Without Oracle Bone Inscriptions, he would say that the Shang Dynasty did not exist. But the discovery of Yin Ruins shut him up and he had to have surgery on Xia Dynasty. Maybe one day, we will also find the remains of summer. The Shang Dynasty already had weights and measures, codes and systems, and possessed all the characteristics of modern human society. So, were all these things formed overnight? I believe everyone has an answer.

In fact, the biggest difference between China archaeology and western archaeology is that China archaeology is confirming history. Our history can be traced back to 4000 years ago, and many archaeological discoveries are confirming the records in the history books. Can you dig the land as big as China again and again? Can you make a detailed survey of every inch of land? Before the discovery of Yin Ruins, even the Shang Dynasty in the west thought it was legendary in the early 20th century. China archaeology, basically won't appear to dig out the tomb, but don't know who is the owner of the tomb. But in the west, there are too many such things. A major archaeological discovery can help people find a story of lost history, which often happens. Many western historians and archaeologists envy their counterparts in China, saying that China is a paradise for historians.

There are some things in Historical Records that we can't understand now, but who can deny the historical value of Historical Records? If "Historical Records are Novels" is degraded by the original author, aren't Homer's epic and Bible fairy tales? 187 1 year, German Hein Li Xi Sheriman discovered the site of Troy in Ottoman Turkey, which caused a sensation in the world and became the beginning of modern archaeology. In addition to his love of Greek history since childhood, Sheriman can only find the information recorded in ancient Greek myths and stories. Without the cloak of biblical mythology, what we see is the life picture of ancient Jews in the Middle East! Why is the author's trust in China's history books not as good as an unrecognizable epic that has been orally revised?

You can't deny the historical value of these materials just because they record some incredible things now. This is a blasphemy against the ancients and a crime against future generations! Historians used to be puzzled by Ying Zheng's long sword when Jing Ke stabbed Qin recorded in Historical Records. According to the technology at that time, such a long sword was broken long ago, until such a weapon was unearthed in the Terracotta Warriors.

The text behind the original post is even more boring, which forcibly links several major civilizations that have disappeared, Sumerian civilization, Indus civilization and ancient Egyptian civilization, with the Middle East, India and Egypt. Sumerians have actually become Amits, and the Aryan civilization in Ganges has actually become the result of the integration of Indus civilization. Today, ancient Egyptian civilization can only be traced back to legends and historical sites, and it is said that it has been well inherited by modern Egyptians.

The rise of modern thoughts of doubting the ancient times originated from the late Qing Dynasty, and its emergence and development were backed by the historical background at that time, among which Liang Qichao, the leader of the Reform Movement of 1898, was the master. Today, this suspicion of the past seems to be expanding, doubting everything, and it is directly linked to the West. Westerners say no, and there are voices in China that follow the wind. Is this ancient western history or ancient China history?

It is against the academic tradition that the original author has opinions before giving evidence to Luo Zhi. And the author's mastery of many historical materials is still a big problem. Whether Chinese civilization is the first development in the world is obviously negative. But if we study deeply, we will know that in fact, the different stages of development of any civilization cannot be an important yardstick to judge the advanced degree of this civilization, because in my opinion, any civilization is a creative combination of "people" and the local environment.

For example, the west has always regarded bronzes and characters as important symbols of civilization, but who knows where the earliest rice planting and silk products appeared in the world? It is in China that the earliest rice cultivation has been over 65,438+0-0.9 million years. China had silk products in Hemudu 8,000 years ago, but China didn't monopolize silk until the Southern and Northern Dynasties, and the West got the secret of China's silk weaving. It is about 7,000 years later than China-but I don't think these two achievements can prove that China's civilization can be many times more advanced than that of the West (in fact, this formulation itself reflects ignorance)-but I want to point out that due to the special climate and geographical conditions of Chinese civilization, China civilization has its leading characteristics in some fields.

According to the same principle, suppose (because I haven't studied it) that in other civilized areas, if they have their own characteristics, such as rich copper deposits, which are convenient for mining and smelting, then suppose that these civilizations can enter the Bronze Age earlier, should we think that these civilizations are much more advanced accordingly? -or should we give a more appropriate evaluation on the basis of analyzing the geographical and climatic conditions where these civilizations are located?

But the author basically turns a blind eye to these, instead, he tries his best to belittle the continuity of China civilization and mentions foreign historical sites as magnificent adjectives. It seems that he personally went to those sites and saw what he called the "Knossos Palace" on Crete, which is more magnificent than most palaces in China after 4000 years (this palace covers an area of 3 mu, which seems to be not very big). I really feel speechless after reading it.

In the world-centered theory, all countries were self-centered a long time ago, at least the western geocentric theory was not put forward by China, so it is absurd for the author to accuse ancient China of being self-centered. In The Four Great Inventions Are Lies, the author talks about the use of Egyptian papyrus, which is similar to weaving bamboo mats. Is this an invention? Then, China's black powder clearly shows that the raw materials, preparation methods and proportions have not been invented. In the west, it is very sloppy; When it comes to China, it is extremely harsh. In fact, the Egyptians used papyrus to simply deal with natural objects, while China created things that did not exist in nature at all. However, the author thinks that papyrus is the earliest invention. But when it comes to gunpowder, it is not considered as a modern explosive. Logical confusion! With such a double standard between China and the West, how can we talk about rational spirit! ! !

The biggest problem with this article is the author's position. The author uses words to make sentences, is cynical, tries to belittle Chinese civilization and adopts double standards for Chinese civilization and western civilization. He not only made Chinese civilization worthless, but also made some indiscriminate personal attacks. Its tone is the same as or even better than what he called "rogue scholar" and "ruffian rogue"! -Look at the purpose of the original author, hehe, not surprising!

I think normal discussion and debate is to seek the blending of ideas, promote each other and draw the most real conclusion. However, this article makes people feel that it is not published for the above purpose, but purely to completely deny Chinese civilization. Arguing with such an article:

1. No matter what you say, the author and his colleagues will not be persuaded by you, because they are not here for academics. What he hopes is that the water is mixed better;

2. Even if you don't say it, most people can still tell the fallacy, and the eyes of the masses are discerning, which is true;

3. The author quoted a lot of specious historical materials, and then came to an inexplicable argument, or logical confusion, and some words were wrangling with everyone. If you want to refute him, you must spend a lot of time and energy (each one will be a magnificent masterpiece when you argue). For example, the author mentioned that Gu Jiegang, a former master of Chinese studies, wrote a book "Debate on Ancient History", thinking that there was no Xia Dynasty, so it would be a great masterpiece. However, the original author castrated the fact that with the achievements of archaeological excavations, Mr. Gu also admitted the existence of Xia Dynasty when talking with students.

Ordinary people don't have the time and energy, and professionals laugh at the first two reasons. —————————— This is the reason why the majority of netizens argue weakly when they know that it is wrong.

We should all have an objective mind. You can neither be blind and arrogant, nor do you have to sell yourself short. China is one of the cradles of civilization, and cannot be attracted to be the capital that we are proud of today, but history tells the truth. We can't say that "father is rich and son is glorious", but we can't say that even father is nothing because son has no money!