The Awakening of ChinaMartin, W. A. P. (William Alexander Parsons)
History
The Awakening of China
Martin, W. A. P. (William Alexander Parsons)
China; China -- History; Eastern question (Far East)
The earliest book of history opens with conflicts with aborigines.
There can be no question that the slow progress made by the invaders
in following the course of those streams on which the most ancient
capitals of the Chinese were subsequently located was owing to the
necessity of fighting their way. Shun, the second sovereign of
whose reign there is record (2200 B. c.), is said to have waged
war with San Miao, three tribes of _miaotze_ or aborigines,
a term still applied to the independent tribes of the southwest.
Beaten in the field, or at least suffering a temporary check, he
betook himself to the rites of religion, making offerings and praying
to Shang-ti, the supreme ruler. "After forty days," it is stated,
"the natives submitted."
In the absence of any explanation it may be concluded that during
the suspension of hostilities negotiations were proceeding which
resulted not in the destruction of the natives, but in their
incorporation with their more civilised neighbours. This first
recorded amalgamation of the kind was doubtless an instance of
a process of growth that continued for many centuries, resulting
in the absorption of all the native tribes on the north of the
Yang-tse and of most of those on the south. The expanding state
was eventually composed of a vast body of natives who submitted
[Page 69]
to their civilised conquerors, much as the people of Mexico and
Peru consented to be ruled by a handful of Spaniards.[*]
[Footnote *: To this day, the bulk of the people in those countries
show but small traces of Spanish blood. Juarez, the famous dictator,
was a pure Indian.]
As late as the Christian era any authentic account of permanent
conquests in China to the south of the "Great River" is still wanting,
though warlike expeditions in that direction were not infrequent. The
people of the northern provinces called themselves _Han-jin_,
"men of Han" or "sons of Han," while those of the south styled
themselves _T'ang-jin_, "men of T'ang." Does not this indicate
that, while the former were moulded into unity by the great dynasty
which took its name from the river Han (206 B. c.), the latter
did not become Chinese until the brilliant period of the T'angs,
nearly a thousand years later? Further confirmation need not be
adduced to show that the empire of the Far East contemporary with,
and superior in civilisation to, ancient Rome, embraced less than
the eighteen provinces of China Proper. Of the nine districts into
which it was divided by Ta-yü, 2100 B. C. not one was south of
the "Great River."
[Page 70]
CHAPTER XIV
THE MYTHICAL PERIOD
_Account of Creation--P'an-ku, the Ancient Founder--The Three
Sovereigns--The Five Rulers, the Beginnings of Human Civilisation--The
Golden Age--Yau, the Unselfish Monarch--Shun, the Paragon of Domestic
Virtues--Story of Ta-yü--Rise of Hereditary Monarchy_
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account