Newsletter

It is a bronze decoration excavated from Èr lǐtóu, designed with the face of an animal. (Credit: Kim In-hee)

Xià Dynasty on the Border between Legend and History

Numerous figures appear in ancient Chinese literature. 'Pángǔ(盤古)' the first human born after the creation of the world, 'Nǚ wā(女媧)' creates Man by making mud, 'Shénnóng(神農) or Yándì' God of Farming, 'Huángdì(黃帝)' king who organized civilization and institutions, 'Shun(舜)' the symbol of filial duty, ‘Yǔ(禹)’ who succeeded in controlling water and founded the Xià Dynasty, ‘Chéng tāng(成湯)’ who destroyed Xià and founded the Shāng(商) Dynasty, 'Wénwáng(文王)' and 'Wénwáng(文王)' who destroyed the Shāng Dynasty and founded the Zhōu(周) Dynasty. These characters constitute myths, legends, and history in ancient Chinese literature. However, due to the vague boundaries, there was a voice to question the credibility. The representative is 'Yí gǔ(疑古, suspicious of ancient times)' that appeared in Chinese academia since the 1920s. Húshì(胡適, 1891~1961) and Gùxiégāng(顧頡剛, 1893~1980) were scholars who led the Yí gǔ trend. They revealed the extreme perception that "we cannot believe the history before Dōngzhōu(東周, 770 BC to 221 BC)" and halved the 5,000 years of Chinese history.

So how will China recover this history? People noted archaeology at the time. Lǐ jì(李濟) received her Ph.D. in anthropology from Harvard University in the mid-1920s. He introduced Western archaeological research methodology to China and began excavation in a modern way. A typical example is the excavation of yīnxū(殷墟) in ānyáng shì(安陽市), Hénán shěng(河南省), which started in the late 1920s. Through this, the existence of the Shang Dynasty was internationally recognized as the numerous inscriptions on bones and tortoise carapaces and the tomb of the king were discovered. And the temporal range of Chinese history, which had been cut in half, recovered for almost 10 centuries. In this atmosphere, the voice of hope rose "Xià that existed before Shāng can also be proved by archaeology."

Xià Dynasty and Yü

It is said that Xià Dynasty is a country founded by Yü. Legend has it that Yü was responsible for controlling the water of the world by inheriting his father Gǔn(鯀). Gǔn tried to control the water by constructing an embankment with a soil called Xī rǎng(息壤). But eventually the embankment collapsed and failed to control the water. So Shùn appoint Gǔn's son Yü and gave him the task of controlling the water. Yü began to find the cause of his father's failure. He controlled water not by building embankment, but by making waterways. Yü was recognized for his ability, and inherited the throne of Shùn. He became a king and set Yáng chéng(陽城) as the capital, which is Xià Dynasty.

But when you look at the process in which this legend was formed, the story of Yü and the story of Xià Dynasty seems to have gone through different transmissions. Let's look at the time when each document was recorded. Then, both Yü and Xià Dynasty can be seen from the Xī Zhōu period(From the 11th century BC to 771 BC). However, there is no connection between these two. In other words, we can not find a relationship that can explain the 'Yü who founded Xià Dynasty'. But through the Dōng Zhōu period, Yü became the founder of Xià Dynasty. Why? I think it is the result of combining the heroism of 'Yü' which completely controlled water and the symbolism of 'Xià' which was set as the first dynasty in China. Rújiā(儒家) and Mòjiā(墨家) made Yü the last king of the Shànràng era. Originally, the Yü handed over the throne to a person named Yì(益). However, the people did not follow Yì and followed Yü's son Qǐ(啓). This is set as 'the first dynasty in China established through hereditary succession', which emphasizes the heroism of Yü.

However, this is only a legend recorded by later generations. If we discover the characters of the same age and do not prove contemporaneous through it, the existence of Yü as well as Xià Dynasty is historically unproven. However, as the Shāng Dynasty has historically accredited through the excavation of yīnxū, scholars believe Xià Dynasty can be proved archaeological.

‘Wángchéng gǎng’ in Dēng fēng and ‘Èr lǐtóu’ in Yǎn shī: Is it an archaeological culture of Xià Dynasty?

A representative scholar who believes so is Xúxùshēng(徐旭生, 1888–1976). He compiled records of the literature to discover traces of Xià Dynasty. Then he did a survey in the area of ​​Luòyáng píngyuán(洛陽平原) in central Henan Province. That was in 1959. The remains that were investigated at that time are the remains of the Wángchéng gǎng(王城崗) in Dēng fēng(登峰) and the remains of Èr lǐtóu(二里頭) in Yǎn shī(偃師). But Xúxùshēng did not reveal that these remains were traces of Xià Dynasty.

The excavation continued afterward. Through this, many scholars recognized the Wángchéng gǎng as Yáng chéng, which Yü set as the capital at the beginning of Xià Dynasty. And they began to recognize the remains of Èr lǐtóu as the capital in the middle and late years of Xià Dynasty. Meanwhile, China promoted the period of the Xià–Shāng-Zhōu Chronology Project(夏商周斷代工程, 1996-2000) to determine with accuracy the location and time frame of Xià, Shang and Zhu. While doing this project, they added the remains of Xinzhai(新砦) in Xinmi(新密) between Wángchéng gǎng and Èr lǐtóu. As a result, they established the archaeological genealogy of Xià Dynasty. However, there is no characters of the same age to prove this. Therefore, there is a growing rational doubt about this in China as well as in non-Chinese academia.

Is There a Reason China's First Dynamic Should be Xià?

Among the three remains mentioned above, traces of the planned city were found in the remains of Èr lǐtóu. The traces are a road network in the form of Chinese characters, which means ‘well’, and large construction. In addition, bronze tool, turquoise and remains related to ritual revealed the existence of a professional occupational group that is not engaged in agricultural production. This shows that the society of Èr lǐtóu has already reached the complex society stage. And it is easy to infer the existence of public power that has dominated the economy and religion. This makes Chinese scholars who have not yet given up the literature recognize Xià as the first dynasty of China. So why should 'first' be 'Xià'? The remains of Èr lǐtóu are earliest of the complex society remains of China during the Bronze Age. Some people recognize this as 'Earliest China' and some understand it as 'Cultural hegemony'. Cultural hegemony refers to the culture of people in a leadership position in the society of Èr lǐtóu, which has influenced the surroundings and has become an example of 'high-end culture'. This means that archaeological research methodology alone is enough to derive cultural value. So, the remains of the Èr lǐtóu do not necessarily have to be traces of Xià Dynasty. The Chinese academic community is under the unfavorable gaze of "They regard archaeology as an accessory to history." Therefore, connecting the Èr lǐtóu with the Xià Dynasty may damage the archaeological value of the Èr lǐtóu remains.