Ancient Chinese Warfare (72 page)

47
Wei Ch’ung-wen, HCCHS 1991:6, 29-31. Calculating Yao’s era as 2300 to 2200 and the site as 2600 to 2100 BCE, Li Hsüeh-ch’in has suggested that many aspects of the site indicate it might have been Yao’s capital of P’ing-yang. (See HCCHS 2005:5, 3-7.) However, P’an Chi-an, KKWW 2007:1, 56-61, who dates Yao and Shun to the twenty-second century BCE, though concurring in P’ing-yang’s identification, ascribes it to the era of the Yellow Emperor and Ku.

48
Tu Cheng-sheng, KK 1991:1, 43-56; Shan-hsi-sheng Lin-fen Hsing-shu Wen-hua-chü, KKHP 1999:4, 459-486.

49
Chang Chih-heng, HYCLC, 1996, 109-112.

50
Feng Shih, KKHP 2008:3, 279-283. Feng holds the unusual view that powerful rulers didn’t require walls, explaining the failure to refurbish them at Hsiang-fen and their absence at Anyang.

51
For the inner citadel see Ho-nan-sheng WW YCS, WW 1983:3, 8-20. Subsequent reports include Fang Yu-sheng, KK 1995:2, 160-169, and KKWW 2001:4, 29-35; Pei-ching Ta-hsüeh K’ao-ku Wen-po Hsüeh-yüan, KK 2006:9, 3-15; and P’ei Ming-hsiang, HYCLC, 1996, 60-65.

52
From the eastern section only 30 meters of the southern part of the common wall and 65 meters in the western part of the south wall remain. The western section, which is marked by a slight tilt of 5 degrees, is defined by foundation remnants of 92 and 82.4 meters on the western and southern sides respectively and 29 meters of wall on the north.

53
An Chin-huai, “The Shang City at Cheng-chou and Related Problems,” 30, cites a date of 4010 ± 85 BP or 4415 ± 140 BP after calibration, which he concludes places it within the Hsia dynasty. However, 2415 BCE—at the extreme limit—would have to be considered pre-Hsia at best if the Hsia is dated as 2100 to 1600 BCE. Chang Chih-heng, HYCLC, 1996, 109-112, asserts it clearly postdates T’ao-ssu.

54
For an overview see Fang Yen-ming, KK 2006:9, 16-23. Fang Yu-sheng, KK 1995:2, 164, and KKWW 2001:4, 29-35, is among those identifying the site as Yü’s capital of Yang-ch’eng. (See also Wei Ch’ung-wen, HCCHS 1991:6, 29-31. Prior to the discovery of the outer walls, scholars such as Tu Cheng-sheng, KK 1991:1, 43-56, had felt that Wang-ch’eng-kang was too small for a great chief such as Yü.)

55
Based on its size, location, dating, and a reference in the
Mu T’ien-tzu Ch’uan
, it has been proposed as a good candidate for Ch’i’s capital. (For site reports see Hsü Shun-chan, HCCHS 2004:6, 13-17; Ma Shih-chih, KKWW 2007:3, 54-58; Ch’eng P’ing-shan, KKWW 2007:3, 59- 63; SHYCS Ho-nan Hsin-chai-tui, KK 2009:2, 3-15, and KK 2009:2, 16-31.)

56
Chang Hsüeh-lien et al., KK 2007:8, 74-89; Chao Chih-ch’üan, KKHP 2003:4, 459-482; and SHYCS Ho-nan Hsin-chai-tui, KK 2009:2, especially 15.

57
Although recent reports are increasingly detailed, they cover only small, scientifically excavated sections, making it difficult to accurately estimate the remaining dimensions.

58
See Cheng-chou-shih WWKK YCS, KK 2005:6, 3-6.

59
Ch’en Hsü, HSLWC, 8-15. Useful site analyses include T’ung Chu-ch’en, WW 1975:6, 29-33, 84; Fang Yu-sheng, KK 1995:2, 160-169, 185; Hsü Hung, KK 2004:11, 32-38; and Fang Yu-sheng, HYCLC, 1996, 81-91. (See also Robert L. Thorp, EC 16 [1991]: 1-38.)

60
See, for example, Li Po-ch’ien, HCCHS 2003:3, 2023, and Li Liu and Hung Xu,
Antiquity
81 (2007): 886-901, or WW 2008:1, 43-52.

61
The foundations for the large, palatial structures discovered in the royal quarters average one to three meters thick and consist of highly uniform layers of four to six cm. reinforced by interspersed pebbles.

62
For summaries of recent discoveries, including the second wall described in the next paragraph, see SHYCS Erh-li-t’ou Kung-tso-tui, KK 2004:11, 3-13, and KK 2005:7, 15—20.

63
Tu Cheng-sheng, KK 1991:1, 43-56, for example, has concluded it was not the Hsia capital. Similarly, based on a brief reference in
Mo-tzu
to King T’ang having destroyed the walls, Chang K’ai-sheng, HYCLC, 92-102, believes that Erh-li-t’ou could not have been the last royal city and opts for Yen-shih instead.

64
Important site reports and assessments include Cheng-chou-shih WWKK YCS, WW 2004:11, 4-18; Wang Wen-hua et al., WW 2004:11, 61-64; Li Feng, 2006:2, 67-72, and KKWW 2007:1, 62-66; and Hsü Chao-feng and Yang Yüan, KKWW 2008:5, 26-30.

65
Wang Wen-hua et al., WW 2004:11, 64.

66
Their exact locations are a matter of ongoing disagreement, with Ta-shih-ku itself sometimes being suggested as having been either the satellite state of Ku or Wei. (Based on the site’s date and degree of destruction, Li Feng, 2006:2, believes it may have been the fabled Shang capital of Po.)

67
Cheng-chou-shih WWKK YCS, WW 2004:11, 14—15.

68
For example, see Li Liu and Chen Xingcan’s
State Formation in Early China
.

69
For a discussion, see Liu and Chen,
State Formation
, 69-73. Erh-li-t’ou’s remains have been dated to between 1900 and 1600 BCE.

70
Ch’in Hsiao-li, KKWW 2000:4, 46-57, especially 55-56.

1
The
Bamboo Annals
state that in his eighth year, when Yü assembled the feudal lords at Kuai-chi, he killed the clan leader of the Fang-feng, an act that commentators try to justify by claiming he had arrived late. Some analysts date the Hsia’s inception to Yü’s conquest of the San Miao. (See, for example, Han Chien-yeh, HCCHS 1998:1, 44-49.)

2
In contrast to the Chinese approach that early on stressed molding and quickly developed multiple-cavity molds for the efficient production of small items such as axes, knives, and arrowheads that would emerge late in the period, hammering was the fundamental Western technique.

3
Our account basically follows Yang Hsin-kai and Han Chien-yeh, CKKTS 1995:8, 32-41, and HCCHS 1997:2, 25-30.

4
See Yang and Han, CKKTS 1995:8, 32-41. The San Miao had bird totems.

5
For example, in the area that would become Ching/Ch’u.

6
The
Chan-kuo Ts’e
(“Wei Ts’e, 2”) states that when Yü attacked the San Miao, the Tung Yi didn’t move.

7
Kung Wei-ying, HCCHS 1988:9, 40-41.

8
An unusual view of the conflict has been offered by Chao Kuang-hsien (LSYC 1989:5, 24- 34), who believes it arose in the Yellow river area rather than the south and that the San Miao remnants, despite having been pushed out of the Yellow River valley, remained defiant, provoking further clashes.

9
Appearing among the so-called
Ku-wen
chapters of the
Shang Shu
that are generally acknowledged as having been fabricated centuries later than the Spring and Autumn and Warring States portions, such passages reflect post-Han Confucian concepts more than historical events. (The concepts of a “campaign of rectification” and “five phases” postdate the early Hsia by more than a millennium.) However, scholars have traditionally cited the appearance of common passages and other references in
Mencius
and
Mo-tzu
, both Warring States works, as evidence of the chapter’s early origins and presumed authenticity. (In actuality, the
Shang Shu
chapter was presumably created on the basis of these earlier passages, perhaps on the basis of some common text, and simply incorporated them for authenticity. Nevertheless, its authoritativeness remained unquestioned until well into the Ch’ing dynasty.)

10
And having enormous difficulty with his parents, who reputedly even tried to kill him. (The travails that Shun underwent to prove his filiality became a defining characteristic for Mencius and subsequent Confucians.)

11
Although the concept of “returning the army” seems inappropriate here, this is the understanding offered by the traditional commentators for the well-known term
chen lü
.

12
“Fei-kung, Hsia,”
Mo-tzu.

13
“Chao Lei,”
Lü-shih Ch’un-ch’iu.
See also Luo K’un, HYCLC, 1996, 197-204.

14
“Yao Tien,”
Shang Shu
, also found in “Hsiu-wu” in the
Huai-nan Tzu
.

15
Bamboo Annals
.

16
See Fan Li, KKWW 1999:4, 50-61; Liu Yü-t’ang, HCCHS 2001:4, 53-55; and Yang Hsin-kai and Han Chien-yeh, CKKTS 1995:8, 32-40.

17
Liu Hsü, HCCHS 1989:7, 21.

18
The battle reportedly unfolded on the bank of the Kan River, but other places, such as southwest of Loyang, have also been suggested. (The
Bamboo Annals
record the clash under Ch’i’s second year, but other accounts place it in his third year.) The much-quoted oath is certainly a Warring States fabrication, but many contemporary scholars still believe the “Kan Shih” preserves authentic material, including Chin Ching-fang and Lü Shao-kang, HCCHS 1993:5, 13- 17; Li Min, CKSYC 1980:2, 157-161; and even Yang Sheng-nan, CKSYC 1980:2, 161-163.

19
Variously interpreted as calendrical referents or Heaven, Earth, and Man. (References to the “five elements” and seeking Heavenly justification indicate the oath’s anachronistic nature.)

20
That is, his mandate to rule, but also his life. (The concept of the mandate of Heaven does not appear until the late Shang or early Chou.)

21
“Obligations of the Son of Heaven,”
Seven Military Classics
, selected from pages 130 to 132.

22
Yang Sheng-nan, HCCHS 1991:9, 46, is basically inclined to recognize the existence of chariots in the Hsia despite, as he acknowledges, the lack of evidence.

23
Bamboo Annals
, Emperor Ch’i, eleventh and fifteenth years. Wu Kuan’s fate is not specified.

24
Yang Po-chün, 1990, 936, locates it south of Loyang.

25
Reading
chung
as troops rather than simply laborers or retainers.

26
Also pronounced “
chiao
.”

27
Tso Chuan
, Duke Hsiang, fourth year.

28
Tso Chuan
, Duke Ai, first year. A virtually identical passage is preserved in the
Shih Chi
’s “Wu T’ai-po Shih-chia.” Vanquishing Yi was no mean feat, as he was said to have such great strength that he could push a boat on land (“Hsia Pen-chi,”
Shih Chi
).

29
Note the presence of the
Ch’üan
or Dog people, who will become important in subsequent periods. (Their name is written with the radical for field next to “dog.”)

30
The Hsia campaign (seen in the “Yin Cheng” and also the
Shih Chi
’s “Hsia Pen-chi”) has traditionally been assigned to Chung-k’ang’s reign but more recently demythologized as probably dating to Shao-k’ang’s restoration. (See Hsü Chao-ch’ang, HCCHS 2004:4, 22-27.)

31
“Chieh-ts’ang, Hsia.” Some of these myths are obviously conflated because Shun is also said to have perished in a conflict with the Tung Yi.

32
These and other conflicts with the Yi listed in the
Bamboo Annals
suggest that their submission was nominal rather than total.

33
According to the
Shih Chi
’s “Hsia Pen-chi”: “Chieh did not concentrate upon Virtue but on the martial, thereby harming the hundred surnames who no longer sustained him.”

34
Although the Hsia populace seems to have primarily dispersed via the upper Yellow River to Shaanxi, Gansu, Ching, and the northwest, scattered Hsia elements have been found in Shandong, Jiangsu, and Anhui, especially in the ancient areas of Wu and Yüeh, as well as Ching/ Ch’u. (See Wang K’e-lin, KKWW 2001:2, 48-53.) It is commonly thought that they were the ancestors of numerous steppe peoples, including the T’u-fang, Chiang, and Hsiung-nu. (For a contrary argument see Ch’en Li-chu, LSYC 1997:4, 18-35.)

35
The plan is enunciated in the
Shang Shu
and incorporated in the
Shih Chi
’s “Hsia Pen-chi.” The theory of administrative domains known as the “
wu fu
” received its paradigm expression in the late
Chou Li
, but the concept evolved during the Chou. Although a creative idealization (if not absolute nonsense), it has been interpreted as providing a possible framework for understanding the Hsia’s relationship with Lungshan and other cultural groups. (See Chao Ch’un-ch’ing, HCCHS 2007:1, 9-19. Other important discussions include T’ien Chi-chou, HCCHS 1985:9, 25-32, and Ch’en Lien-ch’ing, 1991, 863-891. For a general discussion of the utility of these classical texts, see Ts’ui Ta-hua, CKCHS 1995:1, 55-63.)

36
The character
tien
has long been understood as designating the “imperial domain,” with
tien
basically encompassing all the territory within 500
li
.

37
Contemporary enunciations even occasionally appear in PRC theoretical publications, embedded in articles advocating a new world order based on revitalizing this ancient outline.

38
Unfortunately, every characterization of specialized assignments and identification of correlative titles is invariably based on statements in the
Shang Shu
and later works, at best Western Chou and Warring States writings. Even allowing for the possibility of institutional continuity and accepting the presumptuousness of categorically denying that these historical vestiges could accurately depict early practices, even the broadest claims lack substantiation.

39
For analyses that envision a complex structure already in existence, see Ko Sheng-hua, HCCHS 1992:11, 13-18, or Ch’ao Fu-lin, HYCLC, 1996, 136-142.

40
Yang Sheng-nan, HCCHS 1991:9, 45.

41
Analysts such as Ch’ao Fu-lin envision a key transition from a simple chiefdom style—rule by one man, through personal charisma—to the recognition that a certain clan or even family has the right to rule. (See HCCHS 1996:6, 23-32.)