Talk:Xia dynasty

China: History High‑importance

	China portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject China, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of China related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChinaWikipedia:WikiProject ChinaTemplate:WikiProject ChinaChina-related articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Chinese history (assessed as High-importance).

East Asia (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject East Asia, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.East AsiaWikipedia:WikiProject East AsiaTemplate:WikiProject East AsiaEast Asia articles

Former countries

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Former countries, a collaborative effort to improve Wikipedia's coverage of defunct states and territories (and their subdivisions). If you would like to participate, please join the project.Former countriesWikipedia:WikiProject Former countriesTemplate:WikiProject Former countriesformer country articles

view · edit

Frequently asked questions

Q:Are the Xia legendary or real?

A:Based on current scholarship, probably a bit of both. Even the earliest classical historians wrote of the Xia more than 1500 years after the dynasty supposedly fell, and no evidence has been found of written records from the Xia period. Consequently, the historians would need to rely heavily on oral tradition, and details from some of the accounts are also clearly mythical. However, modern archaeological discoveries, particularly of the Erlitou culture, have confirmed that a complex, urban culture did exist in the same time and area ascribed to the Xia.

Q:So the Erlitou culture was the Xia kingdom?

A:Not necessarily; there is still no direct evidence linking the society of the Erlitou sites to the Xia dynasty of traditional Chinese history. However, if the Xia did exist, the Erlitou culture is the strongest candidate for the actual remnants of their society.

Q:If so little is still known about the Xia, how was the map drawn?

A:Some traditional accounts describe the borders of Xia territory, and these descriptions actually have significant overlap with known archaeological sites of the Erlitou culture. The map doesn't presume to mark exact borders, but conservatively draws a line around those sites, centered on the main site at Erlitou.

Q:Do scholars' views on the Xia split along Eastern vs. Western lines?

A:For the most part, no. On average, Western scholars may emphasize archaeological evidence and downplay written records slightly more than their Eastern colleagues, but this is only slight and in the aggregrate. The leading, reputable scholars on Ancient China will rely on all types of evidence to reach their conclusions.

Q:So politics have no influence on Xia scholarship?

A:As the saying goes, history is always political, and political motives can certainly color both scholarly and layman views on the Xia. For example, very West-centric views can show total skepticism of all traditional accounts and fixate on later dates of establisment, or even that the Xia never existed. Those of a strong, Chinese-nationalist persuasion tend to make sweeping statements in the opposite direction. However, most Xia historians of all stripes have made a good-faith attempt to reach their conclusions from evidence, not their own biases, and this shows in the scholarly consensus.

Archives

Archive 1

The Xia and Irrigation[edit]

I just finished archiving all of the old threads here (followed the same procedure I used several years back on the Shang dynasty talkpage), and I plan on doing some simple rewrites on the article soon. While I have access to a decent library right now, I don't think I have the free time to do deep research for wikipedia articles.

But after reading this article and some of the related ones, I've noticed that flood-control and irrigation seem to be a central part of the traditional story of the Xia. That got me wondering, does anyone know of sources that analyze that in detail, through kind of a philological approach? And is there any archaeological evidence for those kind of engineering works at the Erlitou sites, or in the nearby area? It's just the section on traditional accounts gives the impression the classical historians saw that as one of the Xia's defining achievements, but the rest of the article (and related ones) make no mention of waterworks. Zar2gar1 (talk) 20:27, 11 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

New evidence for existence of Xia Dynasty and the Great Flood[edit]

Just recently there was an article published in the Science magazine detailing a discovery of evidence for the Great Flood, and consequently for the existence of the Xia Dynasty. The link to the article is here if anyone would like to review. I think is worth mentioning on, if not this page, then the page concerning Yu the Great and the Great Flood. Frozenfire71 (talk) 02:21, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Overthrow[edit]

Obviously, it's all legendary as recorded but the page and infobox should mention Houyi and Han Zhuo's usurpation of the entire state of Xia during the minority of Shaokang. — $Llywelyn II$ 05:18, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Worship[edit]

There should be a section of all the figures from this era that continue to be revered in Chinese folk religion as gods. Yu the Great is the head of the Shuixian Zunwang on Taiwan and is joined by Han Zhuo's kid Ao. I'm sure there are others. — $Llywelyn II$ 05:20, 7 December 2016 (UTC)[reply]

State of Qi[edit]

I have again reverted the addition of a paragraph on the state of Qi as evidence for Xia. The traditional account that the defeated Xia were given Qi as a fief is mentioned in the Overthrow section. The claim "The Qi state was well recorded in the Oracle script as the one major supporter of the Xia dynasty." is spurious: the cited source concedes that the oracle bones do not mention the Xia, and the state of Qi did not exist at that time. Kanguole 17:27, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I recite the reference which states the author's opinion.Please don't judge it from ur personal opinion Ksyrie(Talkie talkie)

I have shown that the text you have added is nonsense, and indeed contradicted by the author. Kanguole 17:53, 6 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

because u didnt bother to read it,wikipedia is not of place for asserting your personal POV Ksyrie(Talkie talkie)

As I said, Shen acknowledges that the oracle bone inscriptions do not mention Xia at all, so the above sentence is inaccurate. I have tried to summarize his argument about Qi more precisely. Kanguole 17:40, 7 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

maybe they mentions it in another name. Do u find all the egyptian old history books mentions every dynasty? if not, some early egyptian dynasties are pure fabrication,because some egpytian rulers need to invent histories to justify their reigns? Ksyrie(Talkie talkie)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Xia Dynasty pottery jue.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 10:43, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Request for Clarification[edit]

The following sentence makes zero sense to me. Shun seemed to approve of Gun's work and apointed Gun's son to continue (see following paragraph). So why was Shun imprisoning Gun? Was the order given while Shun was at Yushan, or is that where Gun was imprisoned? And how did the imprisonment meant to reform the barbarians? I suppose part of the problem is the passive voice which I could correct, but I'd be embarrassed to fix one aspect of this sentence while leaving the rest so confusing. " Gun was ordered to be imprisoned for life to reform the Eastern Barbarians by Shun at Yushan." Swiss Frank (talk) 16:21, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Hsia"[edit]

It would be helpful to indicate the old Romanization of the dynasty name, but what's the best place to insert this information? Ishboyfay (talk) 17:41, 13 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The information is actually already available, but you need open "Transcriptions" in the second infobox to see it. I can agree that it could be helpful to make it more visible since even not so old books still sometimes write Hsia. How about change the first sentence to:

The Xia dynasty (Chinese: 夏朝; pinyin: Xiàcháo), older romanization Hsia dynasty, is the first dynasty [...]

Another option, but not so clear, is to just also add Wade–Giles to the language template:

The Xia dynasty (Chinese: 夏朝; pinyin: Xiàcháo; Wade–Giles: Hsia⁴) is the first dynasty [...]

If it should be clarified, I prefer the first proposal. BR/--Bairuilong (talk) 05:17, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]