History BS

Longevity of the revitalization movement

Anthony Wallace wrote in his famous essay almost 60 years ago:

That regularity of patterned behavior which we call culture depends relatively more on the ability of constituent units autonomously to perceive the system of which they are a part… It is therefore functionally necessary for every person in society to maintain a mental image of the society and its culture…

Whenever an individual who is under chronic, physiologically measurable stress, receives repeated information which indicates that his mazeway does not lead to action which reduces the level of stress, he must choose between maintaining his present mazeway and tolerating the stress, or changing the mazeway in an attempt to reduce the stress.

The main contention is that most cultures were built to withstand certain level of “pressure”, either an outbreak of epidemic, an unassailable foreign invasion, or a heated irreconcilable internal societal strife. While most of the time cultures are able to maintain the homeostasis through digesting waves of “stress” and evolve gradually, a total breakaway from the old culture is not rare in the history of mankind. Wallace called this social phenomenon The Revitalization Movement, wherein new cultures (either newly created ones, existing minor ones, or existing foreign ones) are embraced by the populace over the old ones, in response to the out-of-range societal “stress”.

He was talking about how culture/religion responds to unexpected societal crises, with the claim that all religions arise in response to the crisis, from the origin of Judaism and Christianity in Levant, the Reformation in Western Christendoms, to the rise of Taiping Rebellion in late Qing China. This is where things get interesting. Within a first glimpse, his view seem a bit extreme. But to think further in his thesis, it starts to make a lot of sense. The introduction of monotheistic Judaism with the replacement of Aramaic-influenced Hebrew from Phoenician-related Paleo-Hebrew alphabet coincided when returned Israelites were puzzled why their holy temple was destroyed and their people subjugated into alien dominion. Christianity emerged as a formidable urban religion within the Roman Empire when people in the Roman cities were baffled by the devastation of the two deadly plagues in the 2nd and 3rd century. Reformation came into history after the infamous bubonic plague and years of harsh exploitation from the papal hierarchy. Taiping Rebellion erupted soon after the humiliating defeat of Qing to the British in the First Opium War. All of those changes of religions/cultures could be simplified as a change of belief. And in his assertion, all beliefs are blind, and all beliefs are constructed on some sort of “dream”.

One can ask whether a large proportion of religious phenomena have not originated in personality transformation dreams… The circumstances of whose origin have been distorted and forgotten, and whose connection with dream state is now ignored…It is tempting to suggest that myths and often, even legends, read like dreams because they were dreams when they were first told…

It is known that the spread of a religion/culture has little to do with individual enlightenment but rather its societal background and the influence of personal networking. In Wallace’s theory the emergence of dominant culture/religion only happened at those critical points when the old cultural structure can no longer relieve the exploding societal stress. According to this theory, all existing religions/cultures nowadays are the evidences of those old revitalization movements. This is such an eye-opening contention to me as I immediately try to apply it to interpret the rise of modern nationalism and more recently, the hegemony of leftism/liberalism in the contemporary world.

Modern leftism got everything it takes to be counted as a religion. It has a central belief exclusively consisting of emotional dreams like human rights, absolute democracy, freedom and egalitarianism. Those beliefs has been reinforced stronger than ever with the invention of mass media over the populace. One could even trace back the emergence of leftism in the era of Enlightenment as a revitalization movement in response to the decadence of social order and ethics with the rise of capitalism and industrial revolution in Western Europe.  This notion would further be propelled into a dominant position over its main competitor nationalism/patriotism that arise from the same societal stress, thanks to the two disastrous global wars and their final victory of both. However, when talking about modern leftism, I think “the inclusion of the savageland, and the escalating deterioration of the traditional societal structure in post-industrialism” deserves particular attention as the kind of societal stress that significantly facilitated the upgrade of modern leftism since the 20th century. The bafflement over the biological diversity, disparity of civilizations, the hollowness of modern lifestyle, serves as a major hit that struck modern leftism to forcibly (and painfully) evolve but have not yet mounted to a critical level to blow up the whole belief system.

In reality, the final blow to this old religion is on the way. The insurmountable pressure is accumulating from the discrepancy between reality and leftist dreams. The upcoming collapse of welfare economy, the foreseeable failure of multiculturalism, the growing frustration of the show business of democracy, and the increasing hostility against the equilibrium among corporate-bank-politician, would only grow bigger. This new window of opportunity will inspire various currently humble cults into the center of attention. Eventually there will be one that would supplant the old and prevail. We dissidents are the pioneers in this upcoming wave of revitalization movement. We appear, for the current religion can not handle the newly encountered stress fundamentally. Hopefully we would also be able to nurture and witness the arrival of the next revitalization movement.

Tang’s hegemony in Central Asia: Episode 3, The maneuver of the empire

In the previous two episodes (episode one and episode two) I have mainly covered Tang’s military and political advancement in the central Asia and the consequential Tang’s governance in the region. In this episode I will specifically focus on Tang’s foreign relations with the strong power that Tang had to deal with in Central Asia.

Central Asia was never an easy place to maintain stable power until the Tsar Russia came in kick all the nomadic tribes’ off their horses with rifles. The place is literally accessible from every corner of the old continent (comparably Chinese access to central Asia being the narrowest through only Hexi corridor and Gobi desert). During Tang’s control over central Asia in the 7th and mid-8th century, China had direct access to almost every great civilization in the world. At that time major foreign power that came into direct contact with Tang in the central Asia were Tufan from the Tibetan Plateau southeast of central Asia; Indian kingdoms southeast of central Asia, Sassanid Empire of Persia southwest of central Asia (later the Arab Caliphate), and even Byzantine Empire from the far west of central Asia.

Transoxiana region, Central Asia

In Episode 2, I have already mentioned that Tang adopted a semi-military administrative system in central Asia, while at the same time maintaining a number of tributary nomadic tribes and oasis city states to be in charge of themselves. Tang garrisoned its central Asian troops in only several main cities, and made those cities the administrative locations for solving tribal disputes and taxing merchants on the silk road. Tang’s direct military force was always kept in the Transoxiana region (河中 the fertile valley in between Amu Darya River and Syr Darya River) in central Asia. Most of the Turkic tribes in vast central Asia were under their own autonomy and all submit to Tang as the leader of all tribes. All Turkics in central Asia were fighting under the name of Tang Empire at the time; and Tang’s picked veteran Anxi army always made sure that those who disobey Tang’s order would be ruthless punished and other power influence would not be able to challenge Tang’s hegemony in the region. In this article I will emphasize on Tang’s relations with the two main power during its hegemony period in Central Asia (630AD – 755AD), namely Persians and the Arabs, with a brief scanning on Tibetans.

Sino-Persian alliance (Sassanid Perisa)

Even before Tang got in touch with Sassanid Persia (波斯 in Chinese), the last pre-Islamic Persian dynasty, the old Zoroastrian empire, has already been on the downhill track out of tiresome wars with the Turks and Byzantine and endless domestic political chaos (they even had a proto-commie named Mazdak trying to start off a revolution within the empire). When Tang first had direct contact with its Persian counterpart, presumably no later than 630AD when Western Gokturks submitted and recognized Tang Emperor Taizong as the Celestial Khagan, both courts were aware of the need for mutual assistance in maintaining the order in Central Asia and formed extensive military alliance against the common foes in the region, the Turkics and possibly the Hephthalites. The tight connection between the two courts were also strengthened by the rapid expansion of economic ties between the two countries along the newly re-opened silk road. Chinese silk, tea, and porcelain were highly valued by the nobles in Ctesiphon and Chang’an started to hold a considerable size of Persian community composed of Persian traders and travelers. Nestorian churches and Zoroastrian temples were allowed to be built in Chang’an. In fact people were so amazed at the exotic travelers at the time that the whole Chang’an started a Persian fashion fad. Women scrambled to dress like Persians and men flocked to brothels for the Persian dancer. Lots of folklore of the Persians at that time even survived up to nowadays in China.

Yazdherd III, last king of Sassanid Persia

There was not even a single military conflicts recorded between the two empires in Central Asia. Both courts had always considered each other dependable military ally and close economic partner. Of course this alliance was not simply because of the economic trade and the friendliness of both courts. At that time, Persia was swamped withstanding the ferocious Arab invasion from the West and hoped to secure its eastern borders, which was often harassed by the Turkics from the Northeast. The alliance with Tang, an emerging power which could have the potential to tame the Turkics in its eastern border, was deemed important for the Persians. The Chinese, on the other side of the silk road, was also not quite relaxed in maintaining its dominion in the central Asia due to frequent Turkic rebellions. Realizing the long geographical distance between Persia and China, Tang court would also be in favor of an alliance with the remote occidental empire so that the Anxi troops could concentrate on crushing Turkic rebels only. Coincidentally, when the cruel Arab horsemen galloped across the whole Iranian lowland and highland in 651AD, the Chinese managed to smash the last resisting force of the Western Turkic Khanate only 8 years later (see episode 1). Would there be an outbreak of the Sino-Persian conflict after Tang’s hegemony being established, if Persia had also manged to deter the Arab nomads like the Byzantine or the Carolingian Francia? Probably, but we would never know anyway. Nobody expected that the Arabs would sweep off the Persians in a blizzard manner. The Sassanid court must be extremely frightened at the time. The last emperor, Yazdgerd III, sent his son, Peroz III to the Tang-controlled Central Asia (possibly arrived in Suyab), in the hope of getting military assistance from the Chinese against Arab invasion at the last moment (He arrived in Chang’an in 661AD). Tang court deemed the call for assistance as a perfect chance to expand its Anxi Protectorate to the land of Persia, therefore gladly accepted the request and sent a general to escort the last Persian prince to restore the Sassinid order. For some unknown reasons the troops didn’t advance further westward from Suyab and the Persian prince stayed there for over 20 years. I reckon the Chinese generals in Suyab must hesitate with direct large scale confrontation with the Arabs at the time and be busy with the increasing Tibetan harassment from the Southeast. Either way, Tang army never escorted Persian prince to Persia and Arabs did not continue their further expansion eastward either. The Persian royal blood from Peroz III survived in Tang China and was granted as nobility in southern city Guangzhou and gradually assimilated into the local population.

Sino-Arab conflict

When Persians surrendered to the Arabs (大食 in Classic Chinese) in 651AD, they also told them about the legends of another group of fierce horse fighters (the Turkics) from the northeast. Al-Ahnaf Ibn Qays, the conqueror of Persia for the Umayyad Caliphate, decided to cease the campaign further eastward and maintained a status-quo with the Turkic nomads in Central Asia (their attempt to expand eastwards was met with fierce resistance of the Turgesh tribes 突厥施). Likewise, the head of all Turkic nomads at the time, the Tang emperor did not plan to expand further westward either, probably shocked by the speedy conquest of Persia at the time.

Interestingly, way before Arab horsemen knocked at the doorsteps of Tang’s Central Asian protectorate, we are talking about the time when Mohammed started to preach Islam in late 6th century AD, the Islamic prophet sent various envoys to different leaders in the world in the hope of converting them to Islam. China was one of those destinations. The envoy of Mohammed, Saad ibn Abī Waqqās, arrived in China twice in 616AD and 651AD. Of course Tang royal family did not convert to Islam in the end, nor did the Chinese. But the practice of Islam among Arab merchants in southern seaport like Guangzhou was largely tolerant by the imperial court. The Arabs were at that time at the dawn of a massive wave of expansion in all dimensions. It didn’t take long for the them to finally meet the Chinese in Central Asia. Simultaneously, by the time Arabs engulfed Persia, Tang was also on the rise of military supremacy in the adjacent region. With the subordination of local fierce Turkic fighters and the presence of powerful Anxi troops, Arabs chose not to advance eastwards immediately after taking over Persia. Instead, Uthman ibn Affan, the third Caliph of the Umayyad Caliphate, sent an embassy to Chang’an right after the capture of Persia around 650sAD. The friendly gesture of the new Arab lords in Persia probably was another reason why the imperial court in Chang’an did not really enforce the restoration of the Persian court at the same time. This de facto peace between the two emerging power in the mid 7th century in Central Asia enabled both parties to have enough energy to deal with other hassles (Arabs were stuck in Anatolia and later started internal political conflicts; Chinese were busy with the Tibetans after 670AD and stabilized the dominion in Central Asia by 692AD).

Rashidun Caliphate 654AD

After decades of peace, the friction between the two mighty power finally broke out in 715AD. In that year, Arabs collaborated with the Tibetans to support a Sogdian named Aliaoda (阿了達) as the new king of Ferghana (拔汗那, around nowadays Fergana, Uzbekistan) to revolt against Tang’s suzerainty. The old king rushed to Anxi garrisons for Tang’s help. Immediately Tang mobilized a rapid campaign with various Turkic tributaries and defeated the Arab-Tibetan alliance and restored the old king in Ferghana. This was the first attempt for the Arabs to challenge Tang’s hegemony in Central Asia. The Arabs would now seek any opportunities to advance to China, a fertile rich land that has been longed by Arab generals for decades. Soon after the defeat, in 717AD Arabs organized another wave of attack. This time they even lured the Turgesh tribes, who once fiercely resisted Arab influence and allied with Tang, to fight against the Tang army together with Arabs and Tibetans. Their aim was to take over the four important Tang’s Anixi garrisons in Central Asia and eliminate Tang’s military projection in the region. However, they underestimated the prowess of Tang’s fearsome Anxi troops and were once again defeated very quickly. Turgesh tribes after the war immediately submitted with Tang and besieged the Arabs in Northern Transoxiana region in 718AD, who already cleared Tang’s army there and prepared for a long match directly into China proper (Tang rewarded Turgesh with the city of Suyab in 719AD for their loyalty). Tang soon recovered the Northern Transoxiana and Arabs had to pay a large amount of gold as ransom for the return of their defeating army. Arabs were clearly frustrated with the warfare with Tang in Central Asia after series of defeat. By the time of 723AD, they changed the general for the Chinese campaign and started another wave of aggression against Ferghana (this time alone). Tang court did not use a single rider in the Anxi garrisons to counterattack Arab’s invasion. Instead, the Emperor Xuanzong issued an imperial edict to order the Turgesh riders, who were once again subordinated to Tang, to smash Arab’s attack in Ferghana. Being the nemesis of the Arabs, Turgesh easily crush Arab troops and freed Ferghana once again from Arab invasion. One year later, Arabs reorganized another large scale campaign on Ferghana, with the help of their new tributary Turkic and Sogdian tribes. They managed to besieged the Capitol city of Ferghana for days. In the end, Turgesh fighters, delegated by their Tang lord, arrived in time and nearly wiped out the whole Arab army. After this battle, those Turkic and Sogdian tribes, including the Sogdian tribes Shiguo (石國) and Kangguo (康國) who played important roles in the demise of Tang’s glory decades later, immediately back-stabbed the Arabs and re-embraced Tang’s suzerainty. By 724AD, Arabs suffered severe casualty and lost the control over the few remaining central Asian tribes in a series of defeat. On the other side, Turgesh were dispatched as Tang’s proxy in the defense of areas west of Pamirs against possible Arab aggression in the future (Anxi army withdrew back to the Pamirs). This status-quo maintained for nearly 20 years, until the famous Battle of Talas broke out in 751AD.

Tang Anxi Army

In 751AD, According to Chinese record, Sogdian tribe Shiguo failed to pay tribute to the Tang court in proper etiquette (Sogdians probably were plotting another revolt against Tang at the time). The court ordered the then Anxi Protectorate General, Gao Xianzhi (高仙芝), to match towards Shiguo (around today’s Tashkent, Uzbekistan) with Anxi troops to “exert” the imperial might to the ill-mannered barbarians. This was when the drama started. The king of Shiguo immediately pleaded to surrender when Gao Xianzhi showed up in front of the capital with numerous iron riders. Gao Xianzhi first appeared to accept the surrender. But as soon as Sogdians dropped the weapons he immediately ordered the riders to start a horrible pillage and massacre in the capital. Somehow the prince of Shiguo was lucky enough to escape the town just in time and rushed to the Arabs for assistance. When Tang heard the news that Shiguo is going to get Arabs on the back again soon, Gao Xianzhi decided to lead his 10,000 Tang’s Anxi army, along with 20,000 Karluk (葛邏祿, a Turkic tribe around Ferghana) mercenaries to go deep into Arab’s dominion and attack the Arabs by surprise. It was indeed a big surprise, but to the surprise of Gao Xianzhi, the Karluk had already made a deal with the Arabs to back-stab Tang right on the battlefield. It was a set-up all along. Karluk wanted to use the Arabs to get rid of the Chinese, and the Arabs would love to ally with anyone who would go against Tang at the time in order to fully conquer central Asia. The Anxi army was all of sudden under tremendous pressure from both the outnumbering Arab troops in the front (aprox 200,000) and the back-stabbing Turkics in the back (20,000). However, Anxi army still managed to magically retreat with a small remaining troop back to garrisons, and Arabs still suffered a heavy loss despite a decisive victory. This battle was very significant in history. The Arabs gave up their Chinese campaign as they realized Anxi troops were too tough to swallow despite their victory. Some of Chinese solider were captured and helped the Arabs set up the first paper mill in Samarkand right after this battle. Papermaking was then gradually spread all over the Arab world and finally to Europe. The Chinese, despite the defeat, didn’t lose their military supremacy in Central Asia after this battle. Anxi army still managed to repress the rebellions from various tributaries west of Pamirs right after the battle. Tang’s hegemony continued until 755AD when the rebellion took place within the China proper (Anxi army were order to return to China proper to repress the rebellion). Karluk was the ultimate winner. They gained independence from Tang, and gained permission from the Arabs to establish their polity in the region. As an exchange, the Turkics agreed to convert to Islam. For the first time Islam infiltrated among the Turkics in the Central Asia, once a land of Buddhism, with the help of this Arab-Turkic alliance.

Papermaking process

Even though Tang experienced a drastic downfall after 755AD’s internal rebellion, the Arabs had never advanced further to Tang’s central Asian garrisons. The Chinese fortifications withstood numerous waves of aggression from the Tibetans and the New Turkic power, the Uighur, even 50 years later after the withdrawal of major force back into China proper. Tibetans and Uighur became the new lords of central Asians instead of the Arabs. Meanwhile, Islam was gradually spreading with the resurgence of the Turkic nomads in the region.

Tufan (Tibet)

Tibetans in the first era of Tang’s hegemony (up to 670AD) did not cause a single problem to the Chinese because of the successful political marriage arranged by Taizong in 641AD. However, the friendly attitude changed completely after the death of Songtsän Gampo. The new Tufan king had longed for the rich trade route of the silk road and started the first attack in 670AD. They had made some temporary progress in capturing some of the Chinese garrisons in the region, but were soon expelled away. The Anxi troops finally thwarted Tufan’s Central Asian campaign in 692AD when General Wang Xiaojie (王孝傑) fatally crushed Tibetan troops around the four Anxi Garrisons. Since then Tibetans were no longer able to pose any significant threat against Tang’s reign over central Asia, even if they allied with the Arabs. The opportunity for Tufan came finally when the main Anxi army returned to China to clear the An Lushan Rebellion in 755AD. Tibetans from the south along with the emerging Uighur from the north gradually nibbled Tang’s western protectorate in the following 50 years.

History is a stage full of drama. After Tang’s iron Anxi army was sweeping across the steppe and deterring the Arabs for decades, a domestic revolt led by a Sogdian general drastically dragged Tang down from the top of power in central Asia to completely being defenseless in only 50 years. Ironically, Tibetans soon followed Tang’s path and never recovered even since its internal conflict in the 800s AD. The land of steppe once again fell into the hands of Turkic nomads. The downfall of the once-invincible Tang Empire in the central Asia will be further discussed in the next episode (also the last one): The Demise of the Empire.

The name of each month

The other day I was reading something about the history of Roman Empire some interesting facts came across the content about the Romans naming the eighth month of the year “Augustus” (August in English) in honor of the glory of Octavian (his honorific name Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus), the first emperor of the Roman Empire. That prompted my interest in taking a further glimpse into the allusions beyond the odd names of those 12 months in the Gregorian Calendar.

March / Martius

We all know that the English names for the 12 months are of Roman origin. As everything with a Latin origin, those Roman names indeed have a very long history. The Old Roman Calendar, initially set only for 10 months by the legendary creator of Rome - Romulus, dating back in circa 8th century BC, is the origin of the modern Gregorian Calendar system. Over 2500 years ago, winter was considered to be a timeless period for the Romans; and time will only start when spring arrives. Hence, March, the month when spring first touched the ground of Latium, was set to be the very first month of the year. Interestingly, when most civilizations are embracing the arrival of spring with rapturous praise of life and joyful hope of prosperity, Romans would dedicate the name of the “first month” of the year to their god of wars, “Mars“, hoping their god could navigate them towards victory in the new year. This is because for the Romans, the arrival of spring means the beginning of another year of military campaigns against foreigners, an aggressive military tradition that lead to the eminence of Roman power over the Mediterranean (however, Mars is also the god of Roman agriculture). While the glory of Rome was buried beneath the dust of history, the name of that month survives up to-day. Ironically people’s attitude towards wars is completely different nowadays compared to the old-time’s.

April / Aprilis

The etymology of the name of the second month in the Old Roman Calendar is a bit uncertain. Traditionally it is thought that “Aprilis” was derived from a Latin word “aperire“, which literally means “to open”. This is claimed to match with the traditional name of spring in Greek (which also means literally “opening”). In this theory, April would be the month when the Romans actually started to sit down and appreciate the transcending power of spring. Well, we don’t know why exactly Romans would dedicate the grace of spring to the second month of the year. Such speculation does not really match the naming preferences of the Romans, who would usually dedicate the name of the month to the corresponding god they prayed to in the beginning of that month. Alternatively, others followed this clue and claimed that “Aprilis” in fact originates from Roman’s devotion to the goddess of love, beauty and fertility – Venus, to whom Roman would hold yearly festival on the first day of this month. The evidence: the name for the equivalent goddess in Greek mythology, by which Roman mythology was heavily influenced, “Aphrodite“, might be the origin of “Aprilis“. While it does sound logic to dedicate the month of Venus after the month of Mars, the assumption of the connection between a Roman name and a Greek name of the equivalent goddess leaves a lot of question marks for this theory still.

May / Maius

Like the story of April, the origin of May is also disputed by two main theories. The first one points out that Latin name “Maius” might be derived from a Greek divinity, “Maia” the goddess of chastity and fertility, upon which the Roman deity “Bona Dea” was built. This is supported by the fact that Romans would hold religious rites for Bona Dea on the first day of May. It is likely that the Romans named this month in honor of this specific divinity, as what they did to Mars and Venus (the second theory) in previous months. The second theory speculates that the origin of Maius comes from the Latin word for the elders, “maiores“, in line with the origin of the name of the following month, “iuniores“, which is the word for youths in Latin (second theory for June).

June / Iunius

Same dichotomy applies for the name of June. The first version refers to another Roman goddess Juno, the wife of Jupiter, as the root of the Latin word for June “Iunius“. However, unlike previous months, the Romans didn’t really hold the festivals for Juno in June. It is questionable why Romans would dedicate a month to a deity whom they prayed for in another time. The second version followed the speculation of the previous month May. It is possible that Iunius was derived from the Latin word for youths “iuniores“, in line with the theory that the origin of May came from the Latin word “elders”. However, little clues are given why Romans would name two consecutive months in honor of the elders and the youths.

July / Iulius

It looks like since July Ancient Romans stop devoting the name of the month to their deity, though the rites of many gods continued all through the year. In the Old Roman Calendar, July was named as “Quintilis“, literally means the fifth month of the year in Latin. However, Romans’ passion for their gods did not really stop after their devotion of June to Juno (if the first theory stands). In 44BC, in honor of the great Gaius Julius Caesar, who was the first historical Roman to be deified immediately after his death, Octavian, the first emperor of the Roman Empire, adopted Caesar’s name (Julius) for July in honor of the glory of this newly deified god. Until this day, both the legend of Caesar and the honorable month name of Caesar persist, even after over 2000 years.

August / Augustus

Similar to the story of July, August was originally named as “Sextilis“, which means the sixth month of the year in Latin. The current Latin name “Augustus” was adopted in 8BC in honor of the second historical Roman to be deified, Octavian. The change was made actually during his reign in Rome by the senatus. Romans dedicated this month to their first emperor who later also became a divine god. Together with his uncle, the great deeds of Octavian and the name of Augustus was forever remembered ever since.

September / September ; October / October ; November / November ; December / December

After the renaming of August, Romans had no longer continued to change the name of month in honor of any other individual. The Roman Empire after Octavian was a quite messy and few could reach the glory of Caesar and Octavian. By the time there appeared to be some extraordinary figures like Constantine the Great and Justinian the Great, christianity had already eroded the ancient Roman tradition. The name of the months remained and those Christianized figures were beautified instead of getting deified by the church. Hence, the name of September retained its origin name, “September“, which is associated with the meaning of the seventh month in Latin (in accordance with the fact that September was the seventh month in the Old Roman Calendar).

Similar to September, the name October, November, December remained untouched since their first creation. “Octo” is the latin word for eight, implying that October is the eighth month of the year in the Old Roman Calendar. The same goes with “Novem” (Nine) and “Decem” (Ten) as the ninth and the tenth month of the year, respectively.

January / Ianuarius

January and February did not really exist until late 8th century BC, when Numa Pompilius, the second king of the Roman Kingdom added those two to ensure the calendar to cover a full lunar year (365 days). It wasn’t until early Republic Era in mid-5th century BC (Decemviri Era) that January supplanted March as the official first month of the year. The Latin name for this newly added month, Ianuarius, was derived from the Latin word for the Roman god Janus, the two-faced god that guards the gate between the future and the past (later even evolved into a four-faced description). Interestingly, unlike most Hellenized gods in Rome, Janus was a local Roman god. He was seen as the gaurdian of Rome. Since Republic Era, Romans built the statue of Janus on the arch and Roman troops would always come across such arch before every military campaign to get the blessing from Janus. This tradition has widely spread and passed down in Europe. One of the most renowned triumphal Arch examples is the Arc de Triomphe in Paris. It is possible that when January was made the first month of year, it also replaced March as the month when Rome began another year of campaign, therefore honoring Janus as the god of this month.

Feburary / Februarius

Like January, February was added later than the rest 10 months in Rome. The name of this month was probably after the ancient Roman ritual of Februa, a festival for ritual purification. The festival was held on the 15th day of every February, when the full moon emerges. It is generally agreed that Februa, possibly of Sabine origin, evolved to the Roman god of purification, Februus, whose name was adopted for this month by the Romans. No idea why Romans chose the chilly February as the month of purification though.

Fourth general speculations from those stories about the Roman month names:

1. In the original Old Roman Calendar, it is possible that all name simply reflected the numerical sequence of its month in the year. In this theory, there might be some lost names or stories for the month of March, April, May, and June (before those months were re-named in honor of the gods).

2. Ancient Romans really dug into their different gods. 7 out of 12 months were named/renamed after different deity. It required a great passion to name a month in honor a god, something that even the Christians didn’t manage (there’s only Christmas day, no Christmas month).

3. It is interesting to see the coincidence that lots of ancient civilizations marked March, the arrival of spring as the first time of the year. This is seen in both Old Roman Calendar and the Chinese Lunar Calendar, in which the Lunar New Year (a.k.a Spring Festival) was widely celebrated in the Sinosphere (the first month in Chinese Lunar Calendar equals to January or February of modern Gregorian Calendar. To me, it does make a lot of sense setting the day when snow recedes and trees bud as the very first day of the year. The arrival of spring is the exciting sign of a new year rather than the still-freezing 1st January in Northern Hemisphere.

4. Before I was researching about those stories, I assumed that the allusions must have lots of connections to the agricultural activities in Rome, as it was the purpose of the calendar in many other advanced agricultural civilizations. To my surprise, Roman civilization did not seem to place agriculture as the most important sector in the society, as little agricultural activities are reflected in those stories in the Roman Calendar. Comparatively, the Charlemagne’s Old Germanic Calendar created by Charlemagne himself around late 800 AD was explicitly revolved around various agricultural activities.

Now that I was digging the facts about the origin of those names, those hard-time English-learning memories all flashed back. It was indeed a tough time for me to learn those 12 names for each month in English back in the days in China. In Chinese, we just take the numerical naming system for the Chinese Lunar Calendar for the western Gregorian Calendar. So basically in Chinese we literally refer the first month (一月) as the first month, …, twelfth month (十二月) as the twelfth month. Learning to memorize those 12 obscurely irregular names for the month in English was one of the hardest thing for me in the high school. I hope those interesting stories beyond the name of each month would at least help someone understand where those names come from.

Paris as it was

Paris is a city that has been heavily abused by the mass media. Somehow to most people in the world, two shallow impressions have been framed for them about the French capital: a city that is full of love and romance; and a city for shopping.

Don’t really get why only those two ideas were chosen to brainwash the mass about Paris. In Paris, the city center is overloaded with endless tourists everywhere to the point that it is not even funny; the suburbia around is full of Muslims and blacks to the point it is also not even funny to go there, at all (remember where the nationwide riot started a few years ago in France?). I don’t see how Paris in reality would be seen as submerged with love. I guess people just see too many those postcards and cliche movie clips. Likewise, Paris is too good to be labelled as a shopping paradise. Why? Only cities with no great history and culture would promote its as the sheer shopping paradise. Look at Dubai, an artificial castle built with oil money, and Hong Kong, a sheer port for the merchants where people take shopping as the first leisure activity off the work, if they ever have some free time.

Truth is I just feel it’s a pity that no one would care about the glorious culture and great history Paris has. For hundreds of years, it was the center for Europe: the magnificence of the Bourbon Dynasty, the Enlightenment, even the French language… Those are somehow lost on the current name card of Paris. As a tourist myself in Paris, all I could do was to walk through those lonely memories scattering around the city, trying to resonate with the forgotten pride and glory of Paris as it was…

Louis XIV

Pantheon

Foch, the great general of WWI

Fleur-de-lis, the elegant symbol in The France Ancien and The France Moderne

Charlemagne, King of the Franks

Belgian Awkwardness: Historical Roots

I’ve always wanted to write an article about Belgium. Now that I just got back from Brussels, it is the perfect time to write something about this strange country.

The Belgian government has been vacant for quite some time. This is a well-known fact. A country without a national government for so long, yet the country is not in total anarchy. You can find it nowhere but Belgium. The country hasn’t had a formal government since last June in 2010, making the longest record for a country without a government, seconded by Iraq (only 249 days). Northern Dutch-speaking Flemish just can not resolve in peace with their Southern French-speaking Walloon buddies, albeit literally being the same nationality. That looks quite strange in a modern country like Belgium at first glance. But to look a step further, I’d say it’s rather pretty predictable that things would turn out to be not working in Belgium. This political complexity goes back centuries. We should had foreseen it coming long time ago.

Since the demise of Western Roman Empire in the 5th century AD, Low Countries (including the geographical region of current Belgium) was closely associated with theFranks, the Germanic people who invaded and ruled France after the Romans. To this day, Dutch language (including Flemish Dutch) is the closest living language to the long-gone Old Frankish, which perished in France as a result of cultural assimilation to the much higher Roman culture (read the development of French language for more details here). Dutch, as a living relative to the Old Frankish, survived in Flanders and the Netherlands. Historically this was often explained as one of the profound impact ofTreaty of Verdun in 843AD among the grandsons of Charlemagne, which demarcated the Scheldt River as the border between the West and Middle Francia, what later became the territory of France and Holy Roman Empire, respectively. One could speculate that under different political influence, Northern Belgium retained their Germanic trace within the Holy Roman Empire dominion in the Medieval age, which defined the modern Flanders; whereas the South held strong ties with France, who went through the gradual assimilation  process into the Latin culture, which the Romans have brough upon Gallia since the Caesar’s Gallic Conquest in 51BC.

Belgium, along with the rest of Low Countries, began to flourish in trade with the prominence of Hanseatic League in early Medieval age around 13-14th century (mostly feud states). Since 1405AD, Flanders and later roughly the whole Belgium have been annexed into the Duchy of Burgundy via the classic way in medieval Europe politics: royal marriage. Likewise, Duchy of Burgundy was partially annexed by the legendary House of Habsburg out of a marriage, in which Belgium was transferred to the dominion of Austrian Habsburg, Spanish Habsburg, and later Austrian Habsburg again (don’t even get me start how messy the European history is)…

Anyway, some pivotal information here from this ultra-twisting history: Soon after Philip II of Habsburg, King of Spain inherited the Low Countries (known as Seventeen Provinces) from his father  Charles V of Habsburg, Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire and King of Spain in 1556AD, protestants in Low Countries (then as sort of loose fiefdom confederation), also known as Spanish Netherlands, began to revolt against their Catholic Spanish lord in the north in 1568. This resulted in the consolidation of the loose linkage among seven northern provinces in the Low Countries, a.k.a the foundation of a new nation: The Netherlands (that’s why the nation’s name is a plural form). This was later known as the Eighty Years War (combined with the more infamous Thirty Years War in the end). After the war, Spanish Habsburg was able to maintain control in what was then called “Southern Netherlands”, which was roughly the geographical region of modern Belgium. Southern Netherlands were mostly Catholic (even in Flanders!) at the time and sided with the Catholic Spanish for such crazy wars among Protestant and Catholic. So Belgium in general parted with the Netherlands proper mainly because of the religious difference stemmed in the 16th century. As a result, Netherlands proper was able to consolidate their Germanic heritage from its own newly-established government; whereas Belgium was still under foreign dominion and susceptible to foreign influence, especially France. In 1581, the foundation of Ducth Republic in the North marked the separation of history of Belgium (Southern Netherlands) and Netherlands proper (Northern Netherlands). The term “the Netherlands” became the specific term for The Northern Seven Provinces ever since.

When the Dutch Republic in the north was swamped in defending their precious independence from Catholic powers all over Europe, Belgium (then Spanish Netherlands) was not a land of peace either. The French Bourbon, especially the great Louis XIV, had longed for the rich land of Spanish Netherlands. Consequentially the French in the 17th century had initiated several military campaigns in this region. That was a real messed-up time for Europe, constantly wars among every nation, especially in Low Countries. Wars after wars, years after years. War of DevolutionFranco-Dutch WarWar of the ReunionsNine-Years War… In 1713AD Belgium along with Luxembourg were transferred to Austrian Habsburg after the War of the Spanish Succession, marking the pause of French aggression in this region. Meanwhile, it was a great time for the French culture to spread handsomely in the Southern Netherlands. Nobles all over Europe were proud to speak French rather than their own language. Southern Netherlands, like other European regions, was no exception, especially in Wallonia.

Politically, the concept of Belgium as an independent sovereignty debuted briefly in 1790. The short-lived United States of Belgium was founded as a discontent to Austria’s political reform in Southern Netherlands. Belgian states wanted to maintain their decentralized political system, both the Dutch speaking Flanders and the French speaking Wallonia. It is noted that the concept of modern nationalism, that is one country one major ethnicity one major language, the basis of modern state, was not the fashion for the sovereignty in Europe until 19th century or even early 20th century. Medieval Europe was always about the kinship of the nobility. It has absolutely nothing to do with the ethnicity, the language the region possesses. In the case of Low Countries, the decentralized loose confederation of many fiefdoms had existed since early Medieval Age and they intended to keep it that way at the time. This is the basis why United States of Belgium could be created at the time, as both Flanders and Wallonia just wanted to get rid of Austrian centralization reform and remain the medieval political system. Though the independence was short-lived after a quick repression of the Austrian troops, the concept of a united Belgium remained, or rather the concept of the continuation of the loose decentralized confederation remained.

Later on the messy history continued. Right after the French Revolution in 1789AD, Southern Netherlands revolted against Austrian Habsburg again. As the same time the French started to hassle this important crossroad once again. The French army, under the First French Republic, invaded Austrian Netherlands and successfully annexed it into France. That was a time of constant upheaval and frequent change. On one hand France was going through a drastic period of enlightenment, when the idea of modern state, the concept of being French in France, started to emerge rapidly. This had greatly facilitated the penetration of French language in Belgium, which was then occupied by France. Nobles in Belgium at the time were mostly from the South and speaking French instead of Dutch at the time, which became the major force in the Belgium Revolution against the later Dutch governance in 1830AD. On the other hand, Belgium was inspired by the French Revolution and remained strongly of his own will of independence. All Belgians, regardless of the language they use, saw the hope to strive for a united sovereignty to protect themselves from foreign power. Any attempt from the outside that aims to alter the decentralized political tradition of the Southern Netherlands (Northern Netherlands broke the tradition themselves when fighting against the Spanish over 200 years ago) would meet with fierce resistance in Belgium. The French themselves, were no exception as the unfavorable foreign power in Belgium. The forcible suppression of the use of Dutch language over French (French nationalization process), particularly in Flanders, sparked the Peasants’ War in 1798AD. Though France managed to repress the revolt, the awareness of language identity, a key concept for modern nationalism, was spreading quickly at the time, particularly the modern Flemish movement for their Dutch-speaking identity.

Interestingly, after the downfall of Napoleon in Waterloo, Belgium in 1815AD, Belgium was engulfed by the United Kingdom of the Netherlands at the Congress of Vienna. This was actually the first time that all Low Countries (including Luxembourg) stood as a single independent sovereignty in history. However, after many years of resisting foreign power, Belgians no long saw themselves as part of Netherlands identity. Dutch was promoted as official and administrative language over French. The united kingdom was governed by a Protestant king at the time. These two facts very much touched the nerves of Belgian nobles, mostly French speaking from the south, and the Catholic clergy that remained influential in Belgium. So there began the Belgian Revolution in 1830AD against their “northern buddies”. It is noted that Flanders at the time was highly reluctant to side with the French-speakers and even the Catholic clergymen. The language identity for the first time overran their religious identity (Flanders being mostly Catholic) in the Belgian Revolution. However, it was again the French, who wanted Belgium so badly for so long, aided and supported the revolution against the Dutch and subdued the Flemish to subordinate in this revolution. At the same time, European powers were scared that France would annex Belgium again, which could impose profound threat to them (with the memory of Napoleon War still fresh). They soon found a German noble to be inaugurated as the king of Belgium in 1831. Nine years later, 1839AD, the Treaty of London was signed between Belgium and the Netherlands, which granted the independence of the Kingdom of Belgium.

The mistrust that snowballed over the years (Flanders to French influence and Walloon to Dutch influence) escalated even further after the establishment of the Kingdom of Belgium. Flanders, in particular, was repressed and persecuted for their Dutch-speaking heritage. The newly established Belgian government was mostly controlled by the French-speaking Walloons and intended to go through a radical modern nationalization process. Eradicating the Germanic trace of Flemish population and enforcing one language (French) for Belgium was one of the key objectives for the then Belgian government. French was set as the only official language in the newly founded kingdom. Investments were heavily favored over Wallonia. Flanders, once a prosperous region, was heavily repressed culturally, economically and politically. One obvious example is that the Dutch version of Belgian Constitution did not exist until 1967AD, over 130 year years after its French version! Such mistreatment against the Flemish have greatly facilitated the growth of Flemish nationalism over French-speaking Walloon’s governance (instead of smothering Flemish identity). The tension between Flemish and Walloon went all the way through 20th century up to now. It is no surprise that after so many years of mistreatment Flanders want out of the Walloon-dominating Belgian political realm, especially when Flanders is doing much much better than Wallonia economically.

Belgium, from being the southern part of Low Countries, went through a long period of foreign occupation until its own independence. However, its independence is rather an assurance of the continuation of their decentralized feud-state confederation system. Modern nationalism in Belgium, under the odd years of various foreign occupation, did not manage to evolve a unified “Belgian” identity over the years. With the failed attempt to enforce a single language in the former city state alliance, nationalism emerged separately: the identity of Dutch-speaking Flemish first under French occupation in late 18th century; and the identity of French-speaking Walloon exerted under the Belgian Revolution against the Dutch in early 19th century. The concern over religious difference, which separated them from the Netherlands in the first place, was submerged by the Dutch and French language/culture conflict which fermented a distinguishable cultural and political dichotomy domestically (especially after years of systematic suppression of Flemish culture in Belgium). This is very odd for the development of a modern state. With the “minority” culture/language being over 50% of the total population in Belgium and its total economical superiority over majority region in the past decades, it’s a miracle that Walloon-dominant Belgian government could retain power for so long. I would not be surprised to see the failure of current Belgian political system albeit its constant reforms. In the current situation, Flanders has the advantages of almost every parameter over Wallonia. The autonomy, a trick to tame the restless minority in a modern state, clearly would not fulfill Flanders’ growing confidence and appetite. Based on its historical roots, since there’s never a single identity in the first place plus there is years of language/cultural ongoing tension, the partition would not be a drastic move to foresee, especially from Flemish point of view. After all, the existence of Belgium is a total awkwardness of a failed attempt towards a modern state. This is, however, nothing unique only to Belgium. Such examples could also be found in the dissolution of former Czechoslovakia and former Yugoslavia.

Belgian Coat of Arms, see how complicated it is?

Chinese as a language

Chinese as a language, called 漢語 or 中文 in Chinese, is one of the four languages that successfully devised its own writing script independently (the rest being Ancient Egyptian, Sumerian and Mayan). Prompted by  a recent discussion about Chinese language, I decided to construct another amateur article to elaborate the concept beyond Chinese as a language over historical and geographical scales.

Chinese writing script

Small Seal Script

Like another other language, spoken Chinese was first developed and matured among the nomadic groups that settled down in mid-stream Yellow River (黃河) in early Neolithic Age. Those group of people, considered as common ancestors for all Chinese, developed a flourishing agricultural culture. Proto-writing was developed as a result no later than 6000BC (Jiahu symbol). Based on the archaeological evidence, the first systematic writing system for Chinese is the Oracle Bone Script (甲骨文) as early as ca. 1400BC in middle Shang dynasty (商朝 ca.1600BC-1046BC). As the Oracle Bone Script is highly systemic and it is largely speculated that a mature writing system had already come in place in China way before the era of Oracle Bone Script. In Chinese mythology we credited Cang Jie (倉頡 ca. 2500BC?) as the ultimate inventor of the Chinese writing system, the Chinese logogram character. Many believe that the writing system may at least exist in the Xia dynasty (夏朝 ca.2070BC-1600BC), albeit lack of strong archaeological support yet. Chinese writing system has uninterruptedly been developed based on the Oracle Bone Script. People started to engrave words on metal vessels such as Ding (鼎) since late Shang dynasty, later Bamboo and wooden slips in Zhou Dynasty (周朝 1046BC-256BC), followed by actual papers first invented by the Chinese since late Han Dynasty (漢朝 206BC-221AD). Variations of writing scripts among different regions reached a significant level in Spring and Autumn Period and later Warring States Period (春秋戰國 770BC-221BC), when the nobility emerged as strong individual polities with the decline of Zhou imperial military might. Many different fiefdoms started to develop their own version of the script based on the early imperial Zhou Chinese Bronze inscription (籀文). Luckily this trend was cut off as soon as Qin Shi Huang (秦始皇) unified the whole China proper and founded the Qin Dynasty (秦朝 221BC-206BC) in 221BC and standardized the writing script in China (書同文). The standardized script was named the Small Seal Script (小篆). At the same time the Clerical Script (隸書) was developed to be the widespread civilian writing script and later gained official recognition in the following Han Dynasty. From then on Chinese writing script has developed a couple of other variations: including Regular Script (楷書), Semi-Cursive Script (行書), and Cursive Script (草書) developed from later Jin Dynasty (晉朝 265Ad-420AD); the series of Song Typeface (宋體) that were developed based on the popularization of Printing in the Song Dynasty (宋朝 960AD-1279AD). The Regular Script was adopted as the official writing script since late Jin Dynasty and the Song Typeface was popularized with the emergence of printing books in China since Song dynasty. Modern Chinese writing script is mostly based on the Song Typeface, as they are the most standardized for the printing purpose nowadays (people rarely write these days and most of our “writing” is done by typing). Other writing scripts nowadays merely serve as different styles of Chinese calligraphy with artistic values.

In modern era, Simplified Chinese (簡體中文) was further split from the Traditional Chinese (正體中文) script which is based on the Song Typeface. Owing to the Chinese Communist Party, since the 1950s mainland China was enforced with such coarse and compelled artificial political modification of Chinese writing script that had been uninterruptedly developed since 4000 years ago. Luckily Taiwan, Hong Kong, Macau and most of oversea Chinese still stick to the Traditional Chinese. Just like the communist wanted to destroy Chinese culture (see cultural revolution), they forced to alter the Chinese language as well. In recent years there has been calls in mainland China to resume the use of Traditional Chinese and hopefully it would get more strides and momentum in the future. I personally have refused to use Simplified version since my early high school years (All Chinese characters here are Traditional Chinese).

Spoken Chinese

Spoken Chinese (口語), contrary to the popular myth, was never officially standardized until early 20th Century. Little is know about the phonology of spoken Chinese in Xia Dynasty and Shang Dynasty. It was understood that from ancient literature, as early as Zhou Dynasty Chinese nobles were using the spoken language used by the Zhou imperial court (capital dialect). Such spoken tone was only used for official diplomatic purpose among the nobles and states. In the time of Confucius (551BC-479BC) it was known that such spoken tone was called “Ya (雅)”. However, Ya as a spoken lingua franca in China was downplayed along with the demise of Zhou’s polity since Spring and Autumn Period, when different fiefdoms started to regulate their own official languages based on the Chinese dialects they spoke in the region. Such trend ceased when Qin managed to unify all states in 221BC, though Qin never intended to imply the standardization of spoken language all over China. Neither did any of following dynasties and emperors in China up to 1912 when the last dynasty Qing (清朝 1644AD-1912AD) exited the stage of Chinese history. Since Qin Dynasty, the official spoken tone used by officials all over China and the imperial court (官話) in each dynasty was always associated to the spoken dialect of responding capitals (with some exceptions when dynasty preserved former capital dialect after moving to a new one, e.g. Nanjing tone in Ming Dynasty, 明朝1368AD-1644AD, and Chang’an tone in Song Dynasty). Meanwhile, various tones were developed all over China proper independently, especially in the mountainous Southern China. Historically spoken Chinese (official spoken tone used by the elites) went through four major phase: Old Chinese (上古漢語 ?-4th century), spoken from Xia dynasty until late Han and Jin dynasty; Middle Chinese (中古漢語 4th century-12th century), spoken from Jin dynasty to Song dynasty; Proto-Modern Chinese (近代漢語 12th century-early 20th century) from Song Dynasty to early Republic era; Modern Chinese (現代漢語 early 20th century – now). Geographically, at present there are generally seven major Chinese dialects in China proper. There are: Mandarin Chinese (官話), the official spoken tone that is widely shared by virtually all Northern China in addition to Sichuan, Guizhou, Yunnan, and Hubei (though accents vary from region to region); Wu Chinese (吳語) mainly spoken in southern Jiangsu, Zhejiang, Shanghai; Hakka Chinese (客語) mostly used by Hakka Chinese in southern Jiangxi, eastern Guangdong, western Fujian, and Taiwan; Min Chinese (閩語) that is mostly heard in Fujiang, Taiwan, and Hainan; Cantonese Chinese (粵語) used mostly in Guangdong, Guangxi, Hong Kong and Macau; Xiang Chinese (湘語), my mother tongue, spoken mostly in Hunan; Gan Chinese (贛語) used in Jiangxi. Even as late as early 20th century it is impossible to directly communicate between a Northern Chinese from Beijing and a Southern Chinese from Guangdong. Moreover, different sub-dialects under one major dialect region may also be mutually intelligible, e.g. the case with Min Bei Dialect (閩北方言) and Min Nan Dialect (閩南方言) in Min Chinese. In general spoken Chinese is a total mess and the only reason that all different parts of China proper did not split into different “languages” is because the consistency of written Chinese, and the logogram nature of Chinese writing (spelling independent of different pronunciations). Nevertheless, since early 20th century Chinese polity in China proper (including Taiwan as well) started to artificially regulate and promote Mandarin as the official tone. Mandarin thus now becomes the standard Chinese that is widely spoken and shared all over China Proper, and is the Chinese that you are learning from all those language learning courses all over the world.

Written Chinese

Thousand Character Classic

Written Chinese (書面語), different from spoken Chinese, has always been consistent since late Zhou dynasty. Written Chinese has evolved to a stable format in late Zhou dynasty (770BC to 256BC) from simpler styles in Shang dynasty and early Zhou dynasty. Such written format is called Classic Chinese (文言文), which is mostly based on the then vernacular spoken Chinese in Spring and Autumn and Warring States Period (770BC-221BC). Even though the official spoken tone for the regime altered from time to time, the written Chinese remain highly consistent and unaffected from the change of way of speaking historically and geographically in China. Classic Chinese was adopted as the widespread only standard written Chinese in China and even other countries in sinosphere for thousands of years. In some sense, written Chinese was independent of the everyday spoken language in China after the disappearance of Old Chinese since the 4th century (though still somewhat related). The secret that written Chinese could stay intact from the colloquial erosion lies in the core of the consistent Chinese culture and education system (unfortunately discontinued in early 20th century). The emphasis on Confucianism requires all Chinese elites to directly read and well comprehend those Chinese classics (典籍), which were mostly written before 2th century BC. Since those books were written in the then vernacular format, which is based on the Old Chinese, elites were encouraged to follow their style in Chinese writing in their time as a sign of classicism. This trend was further reinforced by the centralized polity that China always experienced in history, which enforced the Imperial Exam system (科舉) based on the Classic Chinese learning and writing all over China. It is therefore easy to understand why written Chinese stood the test of time and the change of spoken tones over thousands of years. Only until very recently in the early 20th century that Vernacular Chinese (白話文), devised from modern vernacular Mandarin Chinese, was adopted and replacing Classic Chinese as the current standard format of written Chinese. As a result, nowadays there has been a convergent trend towards the spoken Chinese language, as it is witnessed in many other languages such as English, French etc. It is a pity that a normal educated Chinese now may quote more from Shakespeare or Hugo but couldn’t well understand the ancient Chinese literature written in Classic Chinese. In general, vernacular Chinese is the official standard written form along with Mandarin as the spoken tone. In between those two written format, though Classic Chinese could no longer serve our daily use, its beauty and concision are simply beyond any other written language. Classic Chinese IS always the written Chinese for me.

This character "徐" is in Small Seal Script, as displayed in my profile page

The Best part of this unique Chinese language system is, as the writing scripts have been standardized with little variation and we have preserved well (and I studied well) the Classic Chinese which was used literally for over 3000 years, I have the privilege for direct access to the original sources people wrote 1000 years ago, 2000 years ago, or even 3000 years ago in China. Most of my articles regarding Chinese history are mostly based on my original source study. This is something that other amateur dabblers couldn’t do in studying the history of other great civilizations such as Greek history, Egyptian history, and Mesopotamian history etc. (provided that English is the only working language for your study).

In the end, I have written another verbose article. I don’t know how many of you have the patience to read up to this point. If you do, here I provide you with some very useful tools in studying Chinese and Chinese culture:

Database of etymology of major languages (including Chinese character) ; “Chinese Text Project” for Classic Chinese philosophy literature (both English and Chinese version) ; “漢典” Online Chinese character dictionary (in Chinese, but with Chinese-English interpretation)