They were called Man and called themselves Man, a word that scholars have tried to link with the Miao-Yao speakers of today.
By the late Warring States period, they were already speaking a Sinitic language. The question is did they adopt it or was it their original speech? Even though the Central Plains people thought of them as non-"Chinese" and called them Man, I tend to lean to the theory that they were a Sinitic people who never got on the "Chinese" bandwagon. The Central Plains people weren't linguists so anyone who spoke something different, had a deviant culture, outside of their region were barbarians.
It seems to be that it's hard to adopt a foreign language back then, unless there was government funding and universal primary education, which seems unlikely. The fact that Chinese characters is not phonetic also supports the theory that Chu spoke a Sinitic tongue. Also, the Chu could've been a fusion population with Central Plains settlers mixing with various tribes.
Full Version: Who were the Chu peoples?
China History Forum, Chinese History Forum > Chinese History Topics > Chinese Ethnic Groups and Peoples
The people who founded the state of Chu during the Spring and Autumn period? From a wikipedia map, it looks like the Chu are right in the middle of central China (then considered southern China). So are they related to the Yue people to their east?
http://www.daoiststudies.org/review.cook.php
DEFINING CHU: IMAGE AND REALITY IN ANCIENT CHINA. Edited by Constance A. Cook and John S. Major. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1999. Pp. ix + 254; maps; plates; illustrations; appendix; index. Cloth, $59.00, ISBN 0-8248-1885-7.
This edited volume is the first Western language book-length study to focus on a single ancient Chinese state. Tracing the evolution of Chu from a vassal state in the Spring and Autumn period (770-476 B.C.E.), through its rise and fall as a leading political power in the Warring States (475-221 B.C.E.), to its subsequent resurgence in the early Han (206 B.C.E.-8 C.E.), Defining Chu addresses the historical geography, archaeological history, artistic achievements, and socio-political characteristics of Chu.
In the process, the book's contributors focus on two related theoretical issues in particular: (1) the complexity and distinctiveness of "Chu culture," and (2) the competing "images" of Chu in the history and study of China. "Eventually, over the course of the book, we see the emergence of the constructed Chu image from historical reality-a reality argued according to each author's interpretation of archaeological or historical materials that they accept as defining Chu" (viii; emphasis in original; also 5, 167-69). Throughout the various articles, contributors argue for the need to revise the received view of Chu, which centers on the "Northern Bias" (1-2, 51-52) of traditional Chinese historiography and Western Sinology's indebtedness to that construction. The authors in turn attempt to separate the mythologized Chu, revolving principally around the image of Chu as an alternative, slightly barbarous (shamanic) culture, from a "historically real" Chu especially evident in recent archaeological discoveries.
In addition to a preface, introduction and conclusion, the book contains nine chapters in three parts. Part I: Perspectives in Defining Chu Culture has three chapters: (1) "The Geography of Chu" (9-20) by Barry B. Blakeley, (2) "Chu Culture: An Archaeological Overview" (21-32) by Xu Shaohua, and (3) "Chu Art: Link between the Old and New" (33-47) by Jenny F. So. Part II: State and Society consists of four chapters: (4) "Chu Society and State: Image versus Reality" (51-66) by Barry B. Blakeley, (5) "The Ideology of the Chu Ruling Class: Ritual Rhetoric and Bronze Inscriptions" (67-76) by Constance A. Cook, (6) "Chu Law in Action: Legal Documents from Tomb 2 at Baoshan" (77-97) by Susan Weld, and (7) "Towns and Trade: Cultural Diversity and Chu Daily Life" (99-117) by Heather A. Peters. The final section, Part III: The Spirit of Chu, contains (8) "Characteristics of Late Chu Religion" (121-43) by John S. Major and (9) "Monkeys, Shamans, Emperors, and Poets: The Chuci and Images of Chu during the Han Dynasty" (145-65) by Gopal Sukhu. The book concludes with an appendix, which is Li Ling and Constance A. Cook's translation of the so-called "Chu Silk Manuscript," an astronomical and calendrical treatise from Zidanku (Hunan) datable to circa 300 B.C.E.
These various articles attempt to "define Chu"-to delineate a picture of Chu history and culture that mirrors the long and complex history of the state of Chu itself (for a summary see 167-69). Those researching Chinese religion will find John S. Major's article on later Chu religion especially worthy of attention. Here Major discusses issues of regionalism, spatial orientation and religious cosmography, monsters and gods, snakes and animal motifs, hunting motifs, shamanism and spirit-possession, "farflight" or spirit journeys, Huang-Lao Daoism and Chu influence on Han culture, and four specific cases of Chu cultural influence (cosmographs, calendars, mirrors, and the mother goddess). With so much academic conjecture centering on the connection between the state of Chu (China's "shamanic substratum") and Warring States "Daoism," specifically the possible Chu origins of classical Daoism, one would have appreciated greater attention to this issue, either in some of the volume's contributions or as a separate article. The book also lacks a glossary of Chinese characters. Defining Chu is for scholars of early China, especially those focusing on the Warring States period, as well as for anyone thinking through issues of mythologization (essentialist definitions of culture based on a constructed past). Recommended for research libraries and historians of early China.
An exhibition of Chu relics in Hong Kong last year:
http://www.hketo.ca/abouthk/explore/Relics_May-10-2005.html
DEFINING CHU: IMAGE AND REALITY IN ANCIENT CHINA. Edited by Constance A. Cook and John S. Major. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, 1999. Pp. ix + 254; maps; plates; illustrations; appendix; index. Cloth, $59.00, ISBN 0-8248-1885-7.
This edited volume is the first Western language book-length study to focus on a single ancient Chinese state. Tracing the evolution of Chu from a vassal state in the Spring and Autumn period (770-476 B.C.E.), through its rise and fall as a leading political power in the Warring States (475-221 B.C.E.), to its subsequent resurgence in the early Han (206 B.C.E.-8 C.E.), Defining Chu addresses the historical geography, archaeological history, artistic achievements, and socio-political characteristics of Chu.
In the process, the book's contributors focus on two related theoretical issues in particular: (1) the complexity and distinctiveness of "Chu culture," and (2) the competing "images" of Chu in the history and study of China. "Eventually, over the course of the book, we see the emergence of the constructed Chu image from historical reality-a reality argued according to each author's interpretation of archaeological or historical materials that they accept as defining Chu" (viii; emphasis in original; also 5, 167-69). Throughout the various articles, contributors argue for the need to revise the received view of Chu, which centers on the "Northern Bias" (1-2, 51-52) of traditional Chinese historiography and Western Sinology's indebtedness to that construction. The authors in turn attempt to separate the mythologized Chu, revolving principally around the image of Chu as an alternative, slightly barbarous (shamanic) culture, from a "historically real" Chu especially evident in recent archaeological discoveries.
In addition to a preface, introduction and conclusion, the book contains nine chapters in three parts. Part I: Perspectives in Defining Chu Culture has three chapters: (1) "The Geography of Chu" (9-20) by Barry B. Blakeley, (2) "Chu Culture: An Archaeological Overview" (21-32) by Xu Shaohua, and (3) "Chu Art: Link between the Old and New" (33-47) by Jenny F. So. Part II: State and Society consists of four chapters: (4) "Chu Society and State: Image versus Reality" (51-66) by Barry B. Blakeley, (5) "The Ideology of the Chu Ruling Class: Ritual Rhetoric and Bronze Inscriptions" (67-76) by Constance A. Cook, (6) "Chu Law in Action: Legal Documents from Tomb 2 at Baoshan" (77-97) by Susan Weld, and (7) "Towns and Trade: Cultural Diversity and Chu Daily Life" (99-117) by Heather A. Peters. The final section, Part III: The Spirit of Chu, contains (8) "Characteristics of Late Chu Religion" (121-43) by John S. Major and (9) "Monkeys, Shamans, Emperors, and Poets: The Chuci and Images of Chu during the Han Dynasty" (145-65) by Gopal Sukhu. The book concludes with an appendix, which is Li Ling and Constance A. Cook's translation of the so-called "Chu Silk Manuscript," an astronomical and calendrical treatise from Zidanku (Hunan) datable to circa 300 B.C.E.
These various articles attempt to "define Chu"-to delineate a picture of Chu history and culture that mirrors the long and complex history of the state of Chu itself (for a summary see 167-69). Those researching Chinese religion will find John S. Major's article on later Chu religion especially worthy of attention. Here Major discusses issues of regionalism, spatial orientation and religious cosmography, monsters and gods, snakes and animal motifs, hunting motifs, shamanism and spirit-possession, "farflight" or spirit journeys, Huang-Lao Daoism and Chu influence on Han culture, and four specific cases of Chu cultural influence (cosmographs, calendars, mirrors, and the mother goddess). With so much academic conjecture centering on the connection between the state of Chu (China's "shamanic substratum") and Warring States "Daoism," specifically the possible Chu origins of classical Daoism, one would have appreciated greater attention to this issue, either in some of the volume's contributions or as a separate article. The book also lacks a glossary of Chinese characters. Defining Chu is for scholars of early China, especially those focusing on the Warring States period, as well as for anyone thinking through issues of mythologization (essentialist definitions of culture based on a constructed past). Recommended for research libraries and historians of early China.
An exhibition of Chu relics in Hong Kong last year:
http://www.hketo.ca/abouthk/explore/Relics_May-10-2005.html
Lifezard has been writing a very good article on Chu here: http://www.chinahistoryforum.com/index.php...topic=11183&hl=
I strongly recommend all interested in this topic to go and have a look.
I strongly recommend all interested in this topic to go and have a look.
they were probably tai-kadai, most of the southern kingdoms for example, wu, are thought by some scholars to be tai-kadai.
QUOTE(pi_nong_tai_lao @ Jun 2 2006, 04:47 AM) [snapback]4815644[/snapback]
they were probably tai-kadai, most of the southern kingdoms for example, wu, are thought by some scholars to be tai-kadai.
please explain why they were tai-kadai? like costumes,culture,language, etc.
according to this,they were han chinese
Culture
State of Chu
(bronzeware script, ca. 800 BC)Based on archaeological finds, Chu's culture was initially quite similar to that of other Zhou states. Later on, Chu culture absorbed indigenous elements as the state expanded to the south and east, developing a distinct culture from the traditional Northern Zhou states.
Early Chu burial offerings consisted primarily of bronze vessels in the Zhou style. Later Chu burials, especially during the Warring States Period, featured distinct Chu burial objects, such as colorful lacquerware, iron and silk, accompanied by a reduction in bronze vessel offerings.
A common Chu motif was the depiction of snakes, dragons and serpent-like beings. Some archaeologists speculate that Chu may have had cultural connections to the vanished Shang dynasty, since many motifs used by Chu appeared earlier at Shang sites, such as motifs depicting serpent-tailed gods.
Later Chu culture was known for its affinity for employing shamanistic rituals. Chu was also known for its distinct music; archaeological evidence shows that Chu music was annotated differently from Zhou music; Chu music also showed an inclination for using different performance ensembles, as well as unique instruments; In Chu, the se was preferred over the qin, while both instruments were equally preferred in the northern Zhou states.
Chu came into frequent contact with other people in the south, most notably the Ba, Yue and the Hundred Yue. Numerous burials and burial objects in the Ba and Yue styles were discovered throughout the territory of Chu, co-existing with Chu-style burials and burial objects.
The early rulers of the Han Dynasty romanticized the culture of Chu, sparking a renewed interest in Chu cultural elements such as the Chu Ci. After the Han dynasty, Chu developed an undeserved reputation for being a barbarian state; Confucian scholars considered Chu culture with distaste, criticizing the "lewd" music and shamanistic rituals associated with Chu culture.
QUOTE(DearCoolZ @ Jun 2 2006, 07:01 PM) [snapback]4815736[/snapback]
please explain why they were tai-kadai? like costumes,culture,language, etc.
according to this,they were han chinese
according to this,they were han chinese
Chu culture like the other cultures of southern China form a smooth transition with Southeast Asia. Many of the mosaic of peoples in Thailand, Vietnam, Laos, and Burma have relatives in southern China. For example, the Zhuang peoples of Guangxi are in the Tai family with the Thais, Laos, and Shans of Burma.
Chu culture was probably not Tai-Kadai, but Miao (or Hmong). This is Fu Sinian's theory.
Han culture is a product of Chin Shihuang and his downfall, and the reunification under Han, which all postdates the Chu culture.
hi everyone,
as you can see from my name....I am hmong, or miao as many of you know.
i was born in laos and immigrated to America at a very young age.
this is my first time at this site and i find it very interesting and educational.
i am facinated with many aspects of china........history, literature, business, philosophy, religion, etc.
i am not alone when i say that china considered one of the premier civilizations in the world, if not the
most civilized society in the history of all people.
To me, china is not about being chinese.........but about its great history as a civilization, many cultures, religions, arts, literature,..........these are the things that will make the new china even better than in the past. I hope to learn as much about china as well as learn about my own people's history and heritage......the hmong/miao. I may not be an expert at hmong/miao culture or history........but from my own personal experience and the extensive scholarly readings that i have done.......i hope that i can shed some light on some misconceptions about modern hmong/miao experiences. if there is anything i can answer, please ask. it might take time for me to answer, but i will try my best.
as you can see from my name....I am hmong, or miao as many of you know.
i was born in laos and immigrated to America at a very young age.
this is my first time at this site and i find it very interesting and educational.
i am facinated with many aspects of china........history, literature, business, philosophy, religion, etc.
i am not alone when i say that china considered one of the premier civilizations in the world, if not the
most civilized society in the history of all people.
To me, china is not about being chinese.........but about its great history as a civilization, many cultures, religions, arts, literature,..........these are the things that will make the new china even better than in the past. I hope to learn as much about china as well as learn about my own people's history and heritage......the hmong/miao. I may not be an expert at hmong/miao culture or history........but from my own personal experience and the extensive scholarly readings that i have done.......i hope that i can shed some light on some misconceptions about modern hmong/miao experiences. if there is anything i can answer, please ask. it might take time for me to answer, but i will try my best.
with regards to the chu civilization, i have heard from several sources that the miao/hmong made up the chu kingdom along with several other groups. is that true.......can anyone confirm that?
Ancient China was not an isolated place, the northern cultures and southern cultures were not isolated from each other, cultural interchanges were frequent.
In a book about Chinese genetics I read, in recent genetic studies of Dr. Jin Li (金力, try to find him in the web), the result concluded that the modern Chinese people and other people in east and southeast Asia (like tibetans) originated in south China, more precisely, in te region where today is Yun Nan province of China and Camboja. Later on, these “proto-Sino-tibetan" (I couldn't find a better word to name them) began to expande, one group went to tibet, others went to east and north-east, forming various people and culture along the way. The later people descendant of those "proto-sino-tibetan" spoke the same family of language, which was sino-tibetan, and though they developed diferent cultures, they probably understood each other at the time. The Chu people, or the majority of Chu people, I'm not sure if they were Miao, but most certainly they spoke Sino-tibetan group of language, and had no difficulty accepting the culture of their northern neighbours.
In a book about Chinese genetics I read, in recent genetic studies of Dr. Jin Li (金力, try to find him in the web), the result concluded that the modern Chinese people and other people in east and southeast Asia (like tibetans) originated in south China, more precisely, in te region where today is Yun Nan province of China and Camboja. Later on, these “proto-Sino-tibetan" (I couldn't find a better word to name them) began to expande, one group went to tibet, others went to east and north-east, forming various people and culture along the way. The later people descendant of those "proto-sino-tibetan" spoke the same family of language, which was sino-tibetan, and though they developed diferent cultures, they probably understood each other at the time. The Chu people, or the majority of Chu people, I'm not sure if they were Miao, but most certainly they spoke Sino-tibetan group of language, and had no difficulty accepting the culture of their northern neighbours.
There is no source that tells where the last prince of Chu went.
One website said that he went to YunNan, and then to Vietnam,
where he built the first Vietnam nation.
It was few months ago, and I cannot find the webiste again.
In old Vietnam history script, it said that the king of Chu came
to Vietnam and defeat Vietnam king, and made himself Vietnam King.
I did not buy this theory, but I bring it here for us as a reference.
In Vietnam history, he is referred as AnYangWang (An Duong Vuong).
One website said that he went to YunNan, and then to Vietnam,
where he built the first Vietnam nation.
It was few months ago, and I cannot find the webiste again.
In old Vietnam history script, it said that the king of Chu came
to Vietnam and defeat Vietnam king, and made himself Vietnam King.
I did not buy this theory, but I bring it here for us as a reference.
In Vietnam history, he is referred as AnYangWang (An Duong Vuong).
QUOTE (TrueViet @ Nov 17 2006, 11:00 AM) 
There is no source that tells where the last prince of Chu went.
One website said that he went to YunNan, and then to Vietnam,
where he built the first Vietnam nation.
It was few months ago, and I cannot find the webiste again.
In old Vietnam history script, it said that the king of Chu came
to Vietnam and defeat Vietnam king, and made himself Vietnam King.
I did not buy this theory, but I bring it here for us as a reference.
In Vietnam history, he is referred as AnYangWang (An Duong Vuong).
One website said that he went to YunNan, and then to Vietnam,
where he built the first Vietnam nation.
It was few months ago, and I cannot find the webiste again.
In old Vietnam history script, it said that the king of Chu came
to Vietnam and defeat Vietnam king, and made himself Vietnam King.
I did not buy this theory, but I bring it here for us as a reference.
In Vietnam history, he is referred as AnYangWang (An Duong Vuong).
Just a thought: The last name Vang spell in hmong and Wang spell in chinese and Vuong spell in vietnamese belongs to one of the major hmong surname as well as han chinese. If the story about the king of Chu in old vietnam history is true then the king must be miao for the chu kingdom is miao. When the king of chu came to vietnam, he must have brought many people from the kingdom of chu with him, which could possibly explain the similiarity in physical looks when compare vietnamese to hmong, although hmong have many looks( some look like mongol, han, korean, vietnamese, thai, laos, japanese, etc...)
Actually, TrueViet was wrong. An Duong Vuong was said to be a prince of Shu, not Chu, and the Shu and Chu peoples were not ethnically related. Furthermore, Vuong/Wang is not a surname in this case, but just a title meaning 'prince' or 'king'.
QUOTE (Yun @ Mar 5 2008, 01:26 PM)
Actually, TrueViet was wrong. An Duong Vuong was said to be a prince of Shu, not Chu, and the Shu and Chu peoples were not ethnically related. Furthermore, Vuong/Wang is not a surname in this case, but just a title meaning 'prince' or 'king'.
Note: Miao and Han share the same last names or surnames.
below are some websites to chinese surnames and Wang is one of the more popular one as well as Li and Zhang
http://www.geocities.com/Tokyo/3919/hundred.html
http://www.yutopian.com/names/nametree.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wang_(surname)
QUOTE (Yun @ Mar 5 2008, 02:26 PM)
Actually, TrueViet was wrong. An Duong Vuong was said to be a prince of Shu, not Chu, and the Shu and Chu peoples were not ethnically related. Furthermore, Vuong/Wang is not a surname in this case, but just a title meaning 'prince' or 'king'.
A title in Mandarin or Vietnamese? Both? Interesting. Vang is also a title in Hmong with a meaning closer to president or lord but it's more accurately pronounced as "Va".
QUOTE (khwarazm @ Sep 28 2006, 05:37 AM)
Chu culture like the other cultures of southern China form a smooth transition with Southeast Asia. Many of the mosaic of peoples in Thailand, Vietnam, Laos, and Burma have relatives in southern China. For example, the Zhuang peoples of Guangxi are in the Tai family with the Thais, Laos, and Shans of Burma.
Chu culture was probably not Tai-Kadai, but Miao (or Hmong). This is Fu Sinian's theory.
Han culture is a product of Chin Shihuang and his downfall, and the reunification under Han, which all postdates the Chu culture.
Chu culture was probably not Tai-Kadai, but Miao (or Hmong). This is Fu Sinian's theory.
Han culture is a product of Chin Shihuang and his downfall, and the reunification under Han, which all postdates the Chu culture.
How can I get in touch with Fu Sinian? I would like to ask him how he came up with that theory.
QUOTE (Beta Historian @ May 17 2008, 11:06 PM)
A title in Mandarin or Vietnamese? Both? Interesting. Vang is also a title in Hmong with a meaning closer to president or lord but it's more accurately pronounced as "Va".
How can I get in touch with Fu Sinian? I would like to ask him how he came up with that theory.
How can I get in touch with Fu Sinian? I would like to ask him how he came up with that theory.
In Vietnamese, Vua=king. Vuong is a Han-Viet term, also a last name.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.