Themiclesian Antiquity: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
==History== | ==History== | ||
=== | ===Archaic Period=== | ||
The beginning of Antiquity is defined by the opening of the ''Springs and Autumns of Six States'' in 385 BCE, which was a list of cultic sacrifices preserved on oracular inscription collated in between 260 and 280 CE. This is a somewhat arbitrary definition as it does not correspond to any significant political or social change in Themiclesia, and many features of the Dark Ages persist through the Archaic Period. In particular, only the oracular records of one state—Sjin—extend to 385 BCE; other major states remained "dark" until as late as 122 BCE. Some scholars argue that the Dark Ages should be extended to end at 295 BCE, or the ascension of P.rjang the Sixth in Tsjinh, which signified the beginning of a period of colonization, interstate warfare, and roughly co-incided with the appearance of iron metallurgy; however, others believe that because the ''Six States'' provide credible records up to 385, that should be the end of the "dark" ages. | |||
=== | Compared to the later Classical Period, relatively little is known about the Archaic Period. The contemporary sources of information about the period, other than the ''Six States'', are the ''[[Book of Charges]]'' (命, ''m.ringh'') and the ''Book of Documents'' (書). In later works, mythical or heroic figures frequently appear with the Archaic backdrop, though most authorities consider these stories unreliable as history. In addition to these, bronze epigraphy became more common and elaborate, recording some political and military events. The abundance of ostraca, which appeared during the Dark Ages, appears to suggest that literacy had spread beyond a priestly or mercantile caste. However, on the whole, there are few historical documents ''per se'', and the sources available provide only a microscopic view of Archaic history, which is only subject to rigorous reconstruction after the Historical Revolution of the late 18th century. | ||
The Archaic Period was described as an "age of heroes" by the 17th-century historian Lord Prjêng, characterized by interactions between heroes, legendary kings, and "glorious fighting". However, Prjêng also notes that these stories were written down centuries after they were purported to have happened, and many tales were contradictory or illogical when compared to each other. In the 1700s, the Archaic Hero was often dismissed as figments of later writers' imagination. In the 19th century, the archetype of the Archaic Hero was identified as leaders of colonial parties that founded new settlements, often in hostile regions, recorded in the ''Book of Charges''. In such new settlements, warriors providing protection were sometimes mythologized in later generations as heroes. After identification with the archaeologically-attested Colonial movement, which began in earnest after the introduction of iron around the turn of the 3rd c. BCE, the Archaic Hero was resurrected from imaginary figures to heavily mythologized but semi-historical figures based on unrecorded real events. The 20th-century historian A. Gro said that the heroic age, while only some 400 years apart from the end of the Classical period, was already considered the "distant antiquity", attesting to the poverty of written history from this era; he makes the conclusion that Themiclesian history "begins around 100 CE". | |||
===Classical Period=== | |||
At the beginning of the Hexarchy, Meng settlements were far outnumbered by native societies. Estimates for the relative population range from 1:5 to 1:50, and the total population of Mengs in Themiclesia in the 3rd c. BCE was certainly not higher than 500,000, and they were quite diffusely distributed, since they originated as ore pursuers and animal herders. | At the beginning of the Hexarchy, Meng settlements were far outnumbered by native societies. Estimates for the relative population range from 1:5 to 1:50, and the total population of Mengs in Themiclesia in the 3rd c. BCE was certainly not higher than 500,000, and they were quite diffusely distributed, since they originated as ore pursuers and animal herders. | ||
Revision as of 22:00, 2 March 2021
Themiclesian Antiquity (古代, ka′-legh) was a period in Themiclesian history following the Dark Ages and followed by the Tsjinh period, precise dates bound by the opening of the Springs and Autumns of Six States in 385 BCE and the establishment of Tsjinh hegemony in 256 CE. This era saw the earliest centralization of political power in Themiclesia, and, borrowing extensively from Menghe, the introduction of many later institutions; it is often thought of as an experimental and formative period of Themiclesian politics. Internally, it is subdivided into the Archaic and Classical periods; the latter starting with the Stories of States around 100 CE.
Etymology
(六邦之治, rjuk-prong-tje-lrjegh)
History
Archaic Period
The beginning of Antiquity is defined by the opening of the Springs and Autumns of Six States in 385 BCE, which was a list of cultic sacrifices preserved on oracular inscription collated in between 260 and 280 CE. This is a somewhat arbitrary definition as it does not correspond to any significant political or social change in Themiclesia, and many features of the Dark Ages persist through the Archaic Period. In particular, only the oracular records of one state—Sjin—extend to 385 BCE; other major states remained "dark" until as late as 122 BCE. Some scholars argue that the Dark Ages should be extended to end at 295 BCE, or the ascension of P.rjang the Sixth in Tsjinh, which signified the beginning of a period of colonization, interstate warfare, and roughly co-incided with the appearance of iron metallurgy; however, others believe that because the Six States provide credible records up to 385, that should be the end of the "dark" ages.
Compared to the later Classical Period, relatively little is known about the Archaic Period. The contemporary sources of information about the period, other than the Six States, are the Book of Charges (命, m.ringh) and the Book of Documents (書). In later works, mythical or heroic figures frequently appear with the Archaic backdrop, though most authorities consider these stories unreliable as history. In addition to these, bronze epigraphy became more common and elaborate, recording some political and military events. The abundance of ostraca, which appeared during the Dark Ages, appears to suggest that literacy had spread beyond a priestly or mercantile caste. However, on the whole, there are few historical documents per se, and the sources available provide only a microscopic view of Archaic history, which is only subject to rigorous reconstruction after the Historical Revolution of the late 18th century.
The Archaic Period was described as an "age of heroes" by the 17th-century historian Lord Prjêng, characterized by interactions between heroes, legendary kings, and "glorious fighting". However, Prjêng also notes that these stories were written down centuries after they were purported to have happened, and many tales were contradictory or illogical when compared to each other. In the 1700s, the Archaic Hero was often dismissed as figments of later writers' imagination. In the 19th century, the archetype of the Archaic Hero was identified as leaders of colonial parties that founded new settlements, often in hostile regions, recorded in the Book of Charges. In such new settlements, warriors providing protection were sometimes mythologized in later generations as heroes. After identification with the archaeologically-attested Colonial movement, which began in earnest after the introduction of iron around the turn of the 3rd c. BCE, the Archaic Hero was resurrected from imaginary figures to heavily mythologized but semi-historical figures based on unrecorded real events. The 20th-century historian A. Gro said that the heroic age, while only some 400 years apart from the end of the Classical period, was already considered the "distant antiquity", attesting to the poverty of written history from this era; he makes the conclusion that Themiclesian history "begins around 100 CE".
Classical Period
At the beginning of the Hexarchy, Meng settlements were far outnumbered by native societies. Estimates for the relative population range from 1:5 to 1:50, and the total population of Mengs in Themiclesia in the 3rd c. BCE was certainly not higher than 500,000, and they were quite diffusely distributed, since they originated as ore pursuers and animal herders.