Download Seeing Stars in the Han Sky

Seeing Stars in the Han Sky*
David W. Pankenier
In 1995 archaeologists excavated an extraordinarily well-preserved
Eastern Han tomb in the ancient Xinjiang oasis settlement of Niya 尼
雅.1 Buried by drifting sands since at least the third century, in Han
times the silk route town of Niya was one of the most remote outposts of
Chinese civilization. The clothing and accessories of the tomb occupant,
who was Europoid, were in perfect condition. From the standpoint of
Han astral beliefs, the most notable item is a multicolored silk brocade
armguard on which the epigram wu xing chu dong fang li zhong guo 五
星出東方利中國 (“When the Five Planets appear in the east it is beneficial for China”) is woven into the fabric along with images of sun and
moon, tiger, dragon, crane, peacock, and unicorn. One could hardly
ask for more vivid proof of the pervasiveness of astrological thinking in
Han times than this fashion statement from the period. The astral motif
not only confirms that rare gatherings of the five visible planets held
great significance in the popular mind, but also shows that such conceptions permeated all levels of society and reached the most far-flung
outposts of the Han empire.2 This epigram itself recalls a statement in
* A review of the following works: Christopher Cullen, Astronomy and ­Mathematics
in Ancient China: The Zhou bi suan jing (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996),
xiv + 241 pp.; and Sun Xiaochun and Jacob Kistemaker, The Chinese Sky during the Han:
Constellating Stars and Society (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1997), xx + 240 pp.
1. The artifact is beautifully illustrated in Silu kaogu zhenpin 絲路考古珍品 (Shang­
hai: Shanghai yiwen, 1998), 115, 258–59. See also Sun Yu’an 孫遇安, “Niya ‘wu xing
jin’ xiao shi” 尼雅五星錦小識, Wenwu tiandi 文物天地 1997.2, 10–11, and facing p.
49; and Yu Zhiyong 于志勇, “Xinjiang Niya chutu ‘wu xing chu dong fang li zhong
guo’ cai jin qian xi” 新疆尼雅出土五星出東方利中國彩錦淺析, in Xi yu kaocha yu
yanjiu xu bian 西域考察與研究續編, ed. Ma Dazheng 馬大正 and Yang Qian 楊兼
(Urumchi: Xinjiang renmin, 1998), 187–95. (My thanks to Victor Mair for the latter
reference.)
2. The veneer of Han imperial culture in this region may otherwise have been
rather thin—note the unconventional si xiang 四象”four images” motif on the armguard in lieu of the azure dragon, somber warrior (entwined turtle/snake), white
Early China 25, 2000
186
S e e i n g S ta r s i n t h e H a n S k y
the Shiji 史記, “Tian guan shu” 天官書 (Treatise on the heavenly offices),3
where the same general principal is enunciated. But it resonates even
more strongly with a statement by Emperor Xuan 宣帝 (r. 74–49 b.c.) in
connection with a campaign in the far northwest against the rebellious
Western Qiang 西羌 in the late summer of 61 b.c.:
今五星出東方中國大利蠻夷大敗.
Now, the Five Planets appear in the east, [signifying that] China
will benefit greatly, while the Man and Yi barbarians will be ­utterly
vanquished.4
The Emperor’s precise knowledge of the location of the planets is perhaps
less surprising than his reprimand of veteran General Zhao Chong­guo
趙充國 for not immediately pressing his advantage against the rebels,
despite the favorable astrological circumstances. With the possible
exception of Wang Mang’s 王莽 reign, conventional portrayals of Han
political and military thinking do not generally lead one to expect the
positions of the planets to have played such a direct role in military
strategy.
Somewhat different in character are the manuscripts excavated in 1976
at Mawangdui 馬王堆 relating to astrology and celestial phenom­ena. The
texts on the manuscripts include catalogues that describe or ­illustrate
in precise detail planetary behavior, clouds (or auroras), and comets,
along with their associated prognostications.5 Virtually all of the ­comets
are interpreted as portents of large-scale military action. In the received
historical sources, a spectacular comet so impressed Emperor Wu 武帝
(r. 141–87 b.c.) that a new era called Primal Light (yuan­guang 元光) was
inaugurated in 134 b.c. to commemorate the appearance of this “long
star” (chang xing 長星).6 The comet was observed twice during Emperor
tiger, and vermilion bird typically associated with the cardinal directions in such
cosmological contexts.
3. Shiji (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1959), 27.1328.
4. Han shu 漢書 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 1962), 69.2981. For a discussion of this episode and the Niya brocade armguard, see David W. Pankenier, “Applied Astrology,
Archaeology, and the Northwest Frontier in mid-Han Dynasty,” Sino-Platonic Papers
104 (July, 2000), 1–19.
5. See Xi Zezong 席澤宗, “Mawangdui Han mu boshu zhong de huixing tu” 馬王
堆漢墓帛書中的彗星圖, in Zhongguo gudai tianwen wenwu lunji 中國古代天文文物論
集 (Beijing: Kexue, 1989), 29–34; Gu Tiefu 顧鐵符, “Mawangdui boshu ‘Yun qi hui xing
tu’ yanjiu” 馬王堆帛書雲氣彗星圖研究, in Zhongguo gudai tianwen wenwu lunji, 35–45;
Xi Zezong, “Mawangdui Han mu boshu zhong de ‘Wu xing zhan’” 馬王堆漢墓帛書
中的五星占, in Zhongguo gudai tianwen wenwu lunji, 46–58.
6. Use of the term chang xing rather than a conventional term such as hui xing 彗星
“broom star” may indicate that the comet tail was exceptionally long in this instance.
D avid W . Pankenie r
187
Wu’s reign (in 134 and 121 b.c.), and was dubbed Chi You’s Banner
蚩尤之旗 in commemoration of the primordial battle at the dawn of
­Chinese civilization between that cosmic miscreant Chi You and the
Yellow Thearch 黃帝; notably, Chi You’s Banner is among the comets
­illustrated in the Mawangdui comet atlas.7 Yet another striking illustration in the Mawangdui comet atlas suggests that the ubiqui­tous, ancient
symbol of the swastika probably began as a depiction of the unique and
unforgettable appearance of a large comet approaching the earth headon, streamers of glowing dust and gas trailing off pinwheel-fashion from
the head of the comet as it slowly rotated.
With the exception of fragmentary accounts of ritualized combat such
as the performances of “horn butting” and “cosmic kickball” associated
with the New Year’s festivities,8 examples from the earliest period of
reenactments of cosmogonic myths and astrological omens have ­seldom
been preserved in China. Most of the artifacts and textual evidence that
have survived, such as shi 式 “cosmographs” used in astral divination,9
the Mawangdui documents, inscribed weapons,10 star catalogues attrib­
See Michael Loewe, “The Han View of Comets,” in his Divination, Mythology and Monarchy in Han China (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994), 77–79; see also Derk
Bodde, Festivals in Classical China: New Year and Other Annual Observances during the Han
Dynasty (206 b.c.–a.d. 220) (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1975), 121.
7. Chi You’s Banner may actually have been a giant comet whose fearsome close
approaches to the earth (and possible fragmentation, like Comet Shoemaker-Levi 9,
into multiple “sun-like” pieces) were preserved in cultural memory, ultimately to be
commemorated in popular Han time reenactments of the primordial cosmic combat.
For a discussion of Chi You’s cometary connections and Chinese myths of cosmic conflict, see D.W. Pankenier, “Heaven-sent: Understanding Cosmic Disaster in ­Chinese
Myth and History,” Natural Catastrophes During Bronze Age Civilisations: Archaeological,
Geological, Astronomical, and Cultural Perspectives, BAR International Series 728 (Oxford:
Archaeopress, 1998), 187–97.
8. See Michael Loewe, “The chüeh-ti Games: A Re-enactment of the Battle between
Chih-yu and Hsüan-yüan?” Divination, Mythology and Monarchy, 141–53; Mark ­Edward
Lewis, Sanctioned Violence in Early China (Albany: State University of New York Press,
1990), 148–50. For Mesoamerican cosmic kickball parallels, see Benny J. Peiser, ­“Cosmic
Catastrophes and the Ballgame of the Sky Gods in Mesoamerican Mythology,” Chronology and Catastrophism Review 17 (1995), 29–35.
9. See Li Ling 李零, “Shi tu yu Zhongguo gudai de yuzhou moshi (shang)” 式圖與
中國古代的宇宙模式 (上), Jiuzhou xuekan 九州學刊 4.1 (April 1991), 5–52; and “Shi tu
yu Zhongguo gudai de yuzhou moshi (xia)” 下, Jiuzhou xuekan 4.2 (July 1991), 49–76.
See also, John S. Major, Heaven and Earth in Early Han Thought: Chapters Three, Four
and Five of the Huainanzi (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1993), 39–43;
and ­Christopher Cullen, Astronomy and Mathematics in Ancient China, 43–49, and n. 30
below.
10. Li Ling, “An Archaeological Study of Taiyi 太一 (Grand One) Worship,”
Early Medieval China 2 (1995–96), 1–39. See also Li Jianmin 李建民, “Taiyi xinzheng: yi
188
S e e i n g S ta r s i n t h e H a n S k y
uted to the Warring States astrologers Shi Shen 石申 and Gan De 甘
德, astrological portents,11 calendrical systems,12 and the like, probably
represent only a fraction of the knowledge and popular belief about the
cosmos that existed in late Warring States and Han times. In part ­because
of its technical nature, analysis and interpretation of this ­material has
been sporadic, so that the influence of astrological ideas on the cultural
and intellectual life of the period has received less attention than it
­deserves.
One milestone was the publication in 1993 of John S. Major’s Heaven
and Earth in Early Han Thought: Chapters Three, Four, and Five of the Huai­
nanzi (Albany: State University of New York Press). Major’s magisterial
translations of the chapters from Huainanzi dealing with astronomy
and cosmology for the first time made this aspect of Han intellectual
history accessible to a wider readership. This comprehensive compendium of second century b.c. thought comprises by far the best single
volume introduction to the whole spectrum of early Han astronomical
and cosmological thinking. In his “General Introduction to Early Han
Cosmology” (pp. 23–53) which precedes the translations Major provides
a remarkably concise and thorough overview of the basic concepts as
well as of the intellectual milieu that produced the texts themselves, in
which comprehensive knowledge of the natural world is set forth as an
essential qualification for rulership. As Major notes:
The Huainanzi is of interest in part because of the lively picture it
provides for us of the intellectual atmosphere at the court of an
up-to-date Chinese ruler of the second century b.c.e. . . . On the
evidence of the cosmological chapters of the Huainanzi, his court
scholars would have included astronomers, calendrical specialists, astrologers versed in the manipulation of the cosmograph . . .
Guodian Chujian wei xiansuo” 太一新證: 以郭店楚簡為線索, Chūgoku shutsudo shiryō
kenkyū 中國出土資料研究 3 (1999), 46–62.
11. See Wolfram Eberhard, “The Political Function of Astronomy and Astronomers
in Han China,” in Chinese Thought and Institutions, ed. John K. Fairbank (Chicago:
University of Chicago Press, 1957), 33–70; and Hans Bielenstein, “An Interpretation
of the Portents in the Ts’ien Han-shu,” Bulletin of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities
22 (1950), 127–43.
12. See Nathan Sivin, “Cosmos and Computation in Early Chinese Mathematical
Astronomy,” T’oung Pao 55 (1969), 1–73; Zhang Peiyu 張培瑜, “Xin chutu Qin Han
jiandie zhong guanyu Taichu qian lifa de yanjiu” 新出土秦漢簡牒中關于太初前曆
法的研究, in Zhongguo gudai tianwen wenwu lunji, 69–82; and Chen Jiujin 陳久金 and
Chen Meidong 陳美東, “Cong Yuanguang lipu ji Mawangdui tianwen ziliao shitan
Zhuanxu li wenti” 從元光曆譜及馬王堆天文資料試探顓頊曆問題, in Zhongguo gudai
tianwen wenwu lunji, 83–103.
D avid W . Pankenie r
189
geographers, cartographers, and specialists in the natural sciences.
The King of Huainan’s meticulous attention to the phenomena of the
natural world was to be emulated by Chinese emperors throughout
the history of the empire. (p. 52)
At the same time, as John Major also points out, the Huainanzi is ­located
precisely at the cusp of a transition from the old order to a new order
still in the process of formation. As a result, the cosmological synthesis
represented by the Huainanzi chapters on the patterns of Heaven, topography, and the seasons provides a treasure trove of ideas ranging from
archaic cosmogonic myths and correlative cosmology to contemporary
speculation on the art of rulership. Thanks to the exceptional quality
of the translations, lucid annotations, and ample scholarly appa­ratus
accom­panying the text, immediately upon publication Heaven and Earth
in Early Han Thought became an indispensable sourcebook and ready
reference for the cosmological thought of the Han period.
More recently, new research and translations have been published that
considerably advance our understanding of the prevailing cosmological paradigms and observational sophistication of astronomers ­during
the Han period. This research establishes new benchmarks in terms of
acces­sibility and methodological sophistication, in some cases clarifying
concepts that were previously opaque, in others offering much needed
guidance to the uninitiated, while at the same time providing basic reference materials essential for future research on the history of astronomy
and cosmology in early China. Two of these recently published books
are the focus of this review article.
Astronomy and Mathematics in Ancient China:
The Zhou bi suan jing
by Christopher Cullen
This is the first volume in a monograph series published by the
­ eedham Research Institute featuring work on East Asian science and
N
culture that develops or links up with the encyclopedic Science and Civilisation in China series. Christopher Cullen is Senior Lecturer in the History
of Chinese Science and Medicine at the School of Oriental and African
Studies, University of London, and Deputy-Director of the Needham
Research Institute in Cambridge.
The Zhou bi suan jing 周髀算經 (a.k.a. Zhou bei suan jing) is a ­collection
of ancient Chinese texts on astronomy and mathematics traditionally
attributed to the early years of the Zhou dynasty, hence the title “Gnomon of the Zhou” (Zhou bi). As the author shows in his detailed ­analysis
190
S e e i n g S ta r s i n t h e H a n S k y
of the contents, however, the work was most likely compiled in the
first century b.c. during the Former Han Dynasty “by an individual or
by a group with some common interest” (p. 140), hence the text “cannot be understood as a single unified book” (p. 101). Most of the Zhou
bi is taken up by calculations of the dimensions of the cosmos using
observa­tions of the shadow cast by a vertical pole gnomon. Analysis
of the text shows that its author(s) was an adherent of the gaitian 蓋天
cosmography in which the parasol-shaped heavens were thought to
rotate about a vertical axis above an essentially flat earth. In addition
to being, in the view of A.C. Graham, the principal surviving document of early ­Chinese science, the text is unique according to Cullen, in
­being “the only rationally based and fully mathematised account of a
flat earth cosmos” (p. xi). Scholarly opinions as to the value of the Zhou
bi have diverged considerably. So that readers may judge its value for
themselves, Cullen’s aim is to locate the text in its historical and scientific
context and make it accessible to anyone with an interest in the history
of Chinese science and culture. In this he succeeds admirably. This is a
broadly informative study of a unique document in the history of Chinese
science.
As clear and precise as Cullen’s translation of the text of the Zhou bi
is, it occupies barely fifteen percent of the volume. The preceding four
chapters (pp. 1–170), “The Background of the Zhou bi,” “The Zhou bi and
its Contents,” “The Origins of the Work,” and “The Later History of the
Zhou bi,” are equally indispensable. Following the translation are three
appendices dealing with substantive aspects of the main commentary to
the text, that of Zhao Shuang 趙爽 (fl. third century a.d.): “Zhao Shuang
and Pythagoras’ Theorem,” “Zhao Shuang and the Height of the Sun,”
and “Zhao Shuang and the Diagram of the Seven heng.” Taken together,
this supporting material provides a comprehensive account of the intellectual, institutional, scientific, and political milieu that produced the text.
In the process of elucidating the context of the Zhou bi and helping the
reader make sense of the concepts and methods ­invoked by its author(s),
Cullen provides a lucid and highly readable survey of the development
of Chinese cosmography, the cultural and ideological importance of
calendrical astronomy in ancient China, the main ­methods of observation
of astronomical phenomena, the problem of the calendar and successive
early Chinese solutions to it, Chinese computational procedures, and a
capsule history of the development of early Chinese astronomical theory
and practice. All this and more is set forth in a jargon-free style accessible
to the general reader, while at the same time satisfying the demands of
the specialist for comprehensive and informative references and Chinese
characters.
D avid W . Pankenie r
191
To illustrate the kind of valuable insights Cullen derives from his
analysis of the methodology of the Zhou bi, consider his discussion (pp.
80, 92) of how not to impose Western categories on early Chinese thought
processes (the presentist fallacy), as when application of the method of
similar triangles, and especially angular measure, would seem intuitively
obvious in certain contexts, but are shown not to have figured at all in
the conceptual apparatus of the time:
[I] suggest that we need to tread very carefully to avoid interpreting the thought-patterns of ancient authors in terms of our modern
preconceptions. I use the term ‘angular-measure’ here for want of
a better, but from the outset I must state my conviction that the
concept of angle as found (say) in Euclid is wholly absent from
early Chinese mathematics. . . . The du, then, is wholly confined to
the heavens in ancient China. As we have seen, it certainly had its
origin there, either as a unit of the sun’s daily motion or possibly
as a measure of the interval in days between the dusk transits of
successive celestial bodies. The same could of course be said of the
Western degree: why this measure soon descended to earth while
its cousin remained in orbit must remain a matter for speculation.
(p. 92)
To this can also be added Cullen’s corollary observation (pp. 53, 128)
that, contrary to assumptions which Western readers and students of the
history of science might bring to the text, Chinese astronomers of the
second century b.c. “as yet without the concept of the celestial sphere
and following the paradigm of meridian transit observation, naturally
saw themselves as primarily involved in measurements of time intervals rather than of spatial intervals on the heavens.” This situation was
to change decisively within less than a century with the introduction
of new observational techniques, armillary instruments, and the use of
the unit du 度 as a generalized angular measure for the separation of
points in the sky, as for example in the polar distances assigned to the
determinative stars of the twenty-eight lunar lodges given in Shi Shen’s
Xing jing 星經 (on Shi Shen’s Astral Canon, see below). Taken together,
these innovations provide a clear indication of the emergence of the more
sophisticated hun tian 渾天 cosmography.
Astronomy and Mathematics in Ancient China is handsomely produced,
and much care has been lavished on appearance and presentation. There
are a few typographical errors13 and other minor blemishes, but they
13. For example, “Tiao lu li” (p. 30) for “Tiao lü li”; “tYellow Road” (p. 58) for “Yellow Road”; “Zhao’s” (p. 88) for “Zhao”; “figure ar” (pp. 104, 106) for “figure 10”; “at he
192
S e e i n g S ta r s i n t h e H a n S k y
do not significantly detract from what is otherwise an exemplary work
of interpretation and historical scholarship and an auspicious beginning
for the Needham Research Institute series.
The Chinese Sky during the Han: Constellating Stars and Society
by Sun Xiaochun and Jacob Kistemaker
This, the thirty-eighth volume in the Sinica Leidensia series, ­represents
another important contribution to the study of cosmological and astrological conceptions in the early imperial period. Sun Xiaochun 孫小淳 is
Associate Professor of the History of Chinese Astronomy at the Institute
for the History of Natural Sciences, Chinese Academy of Sciences. Jacob
Kistemaker is Professor Emeritus of Physics at Leiden University and has
a long-standing interest in ancient Chinese astronomy. Their collaboration on this project stems from a fortuitous convergence of interests and
scholarly exchange between the Chinese Academy of ­Sciences in Beijing
and the University of Leiden, which allowed Sun to pursue dissertation
research there on the history of Han astronomy.
Sun and Kistemaker set out to answer two questions: What did the
Chinese sky look like during the Han?; and What is the meaning of the
Chinese sky and the philosophy behind it? The Chinese Sky during the
Han succeeds admirably in answering the first question by painstakingly
reconstructing the appearance of the heavens in Han times. The authors
identify some 283 constellations and asterisms (1,464 individual stars)
whose names and general descriptions are preserved in three crucially
important “canons of stars” (xing jing 星經) traditionally ­attributed to
Warring States period astrologers Shi Shen and Gan De, as well as to the
shadowy “Shang Dynasty” figure Wu Xian 巫咸.
In the Introduction the authors survey previous work on Chinese
constellations and astral nomenclature and discuss the rationale for
the study, their sources, objectives, and method. They then present the
substance of their research in five chapters: “A Brief History of Chinese
Constellations,” “Constellations of Shi Shi,” “Development by Gan
Shi and Wu Xian Shi,” “Philosophy of the Chinese Sky,” and “Main
Structures in the Sky and their Meanings.” In the three appendices
devoted to each of the stellar canons, the constellations, asterisms, and
individual stars whose names have been preserved are identified using
the conventional Western designations along with brief annotations by
pole” (p. 130) for “at the pole.” Errors of a different sort include “have lead” (p. 139)
for “have led”; Zhang Heng’s Ling xian dated to both a.d. 100 and a.d. 120 (pp. 112,
140).
D avid W . Pankenie r
193
the authors. Six star charts showing the reconstructed Han dynasty sky
conclude the work, two for the polar-regions and the remaining four
showing 8h by 110° segments of the sky centered on the equator. These
fold-out star charts are deceptively plain. Their graphic parsimony
­belies the arduous comparative study of original sources that went into
producing them, which of necessity spanned the entire history of celestial cartography in China, a subject surveyed by the authors in Chapter
Two.
Precisely because Sun and Kistemaker are astronomers and ­historians
of science it is perhaps to be expected that their investigation of the first
question—What did the Chinese sky look like during the Han?— is both
rigorously pursued and persuasively presented. The authors ­report new
results concerning the history of the three early star catalogues which
provide definitive answers to lingering questions about the ­epoch of
the positional observations uniquely preserved in Shi Shi’s Astral Canon
(Shishi xingjing), and establish the chronological relationship among
the three star lists. Perhaps equally understandably, Chapters Five and
Six devoted to the cultural significance of the ancient Chinese constellations are less successful, and will likely cause some raised eyebrows
among knowledgeable readers. Though the authors offer a disclaimer in
the Introduction with regard to valuable recent Sinological scholarship
which they did not consult (which a cursory examination of the bibliography certainly confirms), this deficiency has not deterred them from
deep forays into terrain which they have not adequately researched.14
The result is an analysis of the cultural and seasonal signifi­cance of
the Han dynasty sky that lurches from insightful, to superficial, to
dubious and back again. The book’s deficiencies in this regard are the
more worrisome because this aspect of the authors’ research is billed as
merely the first installment in an ambitious ongoing project slated to
produce an “‘astro-mythological’ explanation and understanding of the
­Chinese sky against the “climatological and social background of ­Asiatic
14. The consequences of this inadequate grounding in the literature are apparent,
for example, on p. 50n.1, where the discredited interpretation of the Yuheng as the
“Jade Observation Tube used to observe the position of stars” is repeated without
qualification (see Christopher Cullen and Anne S. L. Farrer, “On the Term Hsuan
Chi and the Flanged Trilobate Jade Discs,” Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African
Studies 46 [1983], 52–76). Still another example (p. 176n.48) is the characterization of
the Zhouli as a forgery perpetrated by Liu Xin (d. a.d. 23). Howlers include the references (pp. 125, 127) to the “orthodox neo-Confucianism of Dong Zhongshu” and the
“typical Neo-Confucian symbolism” of the Mingtang of Emperor Wu’s time. Mistakes
of this kind could easily have been avoided if the manuscript had been reviewed by
knowledgeable readers prior to publication.
194
S e e i n g S ta r s i n t h e H a n S k y
culture” (p.12). Because of its usefulness as a basic resource, The Chinese
Sky during the Han is likely to gain recognition as an essential reference
work, so it is worthwhile to spend some effort describing the book’s main
contributions and perhaps less obvious shortcomings.
As noted above, Sun Xiaochun is an astronomer and historian of
Chinese science, while Jacob Kistemaker is a professor of atomic and
molecular physics. Hence, the most valuable chapters in The Chinese Sky
During the Han are those that draw most directly on the authors’ areas
of expertise. Chapter Two, “Brief History of Chinese Constell­ations,”
traces the development of positional astronomy and cartography in
China beginning with the famous seasonal “culminating stars” (zhong
xing 中星) passage from the Yao dian 堯典 and concluding with the
­Yi­xiang kaocheng 儀象考成 published circa 1757 under the auspices of the
­Imperial Astronomical Bureau with Ignatius Kögler (Dai Jinxian 戴進賢)
as editor-in-chief. The authors’ historical account breaks no new ground,15
but is very useful as a capsule history of Chinese celestial cartography,
and it shows how previous efforts to identify stars and asterisms in
Han and earlier sources frequently made use of Tang, Song, and even
later star maps, created many centuries after the epoch in question. The
importance of an analysis of the Han sky that does not rely heavily on
later stellar identifications (to the extent that Yi Shitong’s 伊世同 1981
star catalogue,16 for example, relies on the eighteenth century Yixiang
kaocheng) was already emphasized in the methodological Introduction
(pp. 7–9), where Gustav Schlegel’s Uranographie Chinoise,17 Edouard
Chavannes’s translation of the “Tian guan shu” from the Shiji,18 and Ho
Peng Yoke’s translation of the astronomical chapters of the Jin shu19 are
critically reviewed. Here Sun and Kistemaker mainly wish to demonstrate
that the requisite historical data and technical expertise are available to
reconstruct the Han Chinese sky on its own terms.
The core of the book and the authors’ most important scholarly contribution is Chapter Three, “Constellations of Shi Shi,” in which they
15. Where the authors do provide an original analysis of the cosmology of an ancient source, the Zhoubi suanjing, their reconstruction of the “seven orbits and six belts”
diagram (p. 24, Fig. 2.2) suffers by comparison with Appendix Three in Christopher
Cullen’s Astronomy and Mathematics in Ancient China.
16. Yi Shitong, Zhongguo hengxing duizhao tubiao 中國恆星對照圖表 (Beijing: Kexue,
1981).
17. Schlegel, Uranographie Chinoise (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1875).
18. Chavannes, Les Memoires Historiques de Se-Ma Ts’ien, vol. 3 (Paris: Ernest Leroux,
1898; repr., Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1967).
19. Ho Peng Yoke,The Astronomical Chapters of Jin Shu (Paris and The Hague: Mouton
and Co., 1966).
D avid W . Pankenie r
195
examine in depth the primary source for positional astronomy in early
imperial times, the Shishi xingjing or Shi Shen’s Astral Canon. This stellar
catalogue, which is frequently cited in the sources from the Shiji on, has
been preserved virtually in its entirety together with precise positional
observations for some 120 constellations (including the twenty-eight
lunar lodges) in an early Tang astrological compendium, the Kaiyuan
zhan­jing 開元占經 (ca. 720). Although traditionally attributed to the
fourth century b.c. astrologer Shi Shen, the actual epoch of observation
of the reported positions has been much studied and vigorously debated,
with conclusions ranging from 450 b.c. to about a.d. 200. Previous ­studies,
notably those of Yabuuchi Kiyoshi 藪內清,20 Qian Baocong 錢寶琮,21
and Yasukatsu Maeyama,22 have persuasively argued in favor of a date
around 70 b.c. Sun and Kistemaker critically review these studies and
the relevant methodological issues.
Since the recorded stellar positions, in particular the polar distances
of the determinative stars of the twenty-eight lunar lodges, required
the use of an early armillary type instrument whose invention was
­contemporaneous with the emergence of the huntian cosmology, the
scholarly consensus has been that the positional observations must date
from the mid to late Former Han period. Sun and Kistemaker’s major
accom­plishment is to have devised a mathematical analysis that confirms
80–70 b.c. as the epoch of observation of the catalogue of stars in the
Shishi xing­jing,23 thereby permitting them to reconstruct the appearance
of the Han sky based on the stars described in Shi Shen’s Astral Canon,
supplemented by those of Gan De and Wu Xian. Their reconstruction ­provides the authors with evidence to conclude that the ­system
described in the Shishi xingjing is essentially the same as that found in
the “Tian guan shu” in the Shiji as well as in the “Tianwen zhi” 天文志
(Monograph on astrology) in the Han shu 漢書. Therefore, despite the
Tang date of the transmitted version of Shi Shen’s Astral Canon, we can
be confident that the maps drawn in The Chinese Sky during the Han accu­
rately depict the sky as it was seen in Han times. Moreover, as Sun and
Kistemaker point out, the existence of a “canonical” stellar catalogue as
20. Yabuuchi, “Tō Kaigen seikyō chū no seikyō” 唐開元占經中の星經, Tōhō gakuhō
東方學報 8 (1937), 56–74.
21. Qian Baocong, “Ganshi xingjing yuanliu kao” 甘氏星經源流考, Guoli Zhejiang
daxue jikan 國立浙江大學季刊 6 (1937).
22. Maeyama Yasukatsu, “The Oldest Star Catalogue in China, Shih Shen’s Hsing
­Ching,” in Prismata: Naturwissenschaftliche Studien—Festschrift für Willy Hartner
­(Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1977), 211–45.
23. In the process reaffirming Maeyama’s contention that the polar alignment of the
instrument used in making the stellar measurements was off by about one degree.
196
S e e i n g S ta r s i n t h e H a n S k y
early as mid-Han ensured that the stellar configurations and nomenclature would change little thereafter, much as Western tradition was
definitively shaped by Ptolemy’s Almagest and Tetrabiblos compiled in
the second century a.d.
In view of their repeated assertions that the “school” or “complete
system” or “catalogue” of Shi Shen dates from late in the Former Han
dynasty, however, it is important to note that what Sun and Kistemaker
have actually demonstrated is that the positional observations recorded
in the Kaiyuan zhanjing date from ca. 70 b.c. This does not mean that Shi
Shen’s Astral Canon did not exist prior to this—it certainly did. The “Tian
guan shu” in the Shiji (ca. 110 b.c.) predates the recorded observations
by roughly half a century, and in it Sima Qian explicitly cites Shi Shen as
the source of many of his stellar identifications. Given the existence of a
depiction of the complete lunar lodge system from the late fifth century
b.c. tomb of Marquis Yi of Zeng 曾侯乙,24 it is hardly a stretch to imagine
that other constellations also were recognized in astral lore before the
functional systematization of the lunar lodges. Warring States and Zhou
period texts like the Shijing 詩經, Zuo zhuan 左傳, Guo yu 國語, and Xia
xiao zheng 夏小正 make reference to some of them. A ­similar pattern of
development was followed in Mesopotamia, where the zodiac, more or
less as we know it, emerged during the early first millen­nium b.c., many
centuries after astrological prognostication began and the first asterisms were identified. As the authors themselves note (p. 96), we know
the names of some seventy Sumerian constellations ­dating from about
2300 b.c.
Although they rely heavily on the descriptions and positional data
of some ninety asterisms and 412 stars found in the “Tian guan shu,”
where one finds clear evidence of regional variation dating at least from
the Warring States period,25 the authors place heaviest emphasis on the
Han, claiming that “the complete system was formed during the Han;
the Han ideology is obviously recognizable in the structure of the sky”
(p. 13). As a broad generalization this may be true, especially as regards
the additional asterisms and stars attributed to Gan De and Wu Xian,
24. Wang Jianmin 王健民 et al., “Zeng Hou Yi mu chutu de ershiba xiu qinglong
baihu tuxiang” 曾侯乙墓出土的二十八宿青龍白虎圖象, Wenwu 文物 1979.7, 40–45. The
hamper lid bearing the depiction is illustrated and interpreted by Sun and ­Kistemaker
on p. 20.
25. A point emphasized in the Foreword (p. xiv), where Bo Shuren 薄樹人 refers
to pre-Han stars and asterisms: “Because Chinese asterisms primarily came into being
during the Warring States period, astronomers who served different masters built up
rather different systems. . . . Due to many reasons, some systems of asterisms have
been buried in oblivion.”
D avid W . Pankenie r
197
which in many cases can be shown to derive from the “Tian guan shu”
(p. 26). And, as the authors note:
[I]n the Tian guan shu typical ideas reflecting the political system
were presented, like a central imperial court controlling the provinces. . . . [W]e see clearly the idea of constructing the sky as a
celestial counterpart of the terrestrial imperial state . . . hence the
book’s title Celestial Officials. (p. 22)
Nevertheless, in their zeal to depict the Han sky as inspired by the centralized and hierarchical imperial system, Sun and Kistemaker have a
tendency to overstate the case, since much of the material in “Tian guan
shu” predates the Qin and Han dynasties.26 Given the heavenward orientation of ancient Chinese cosmo-political ideology from the earliest
times, whether, and to what degree, terrestrial institutions were in fact
modeled on the centralized and hierarchical organization of the heavens,
rather than the other way round, is an important question and deserving of consideration. Such a possibility seems not to have occurred to
the authors.
Chapter Four, “Development by Gan Shi and Wu Xian Shi,” is ­devoted
to documenting the authors’ argument that, on the whole, the lists of con­
stellations attributed to Gan De and Wu Xian represent mid-Han ampli­
fications of the system documented in the “Tian guan shu” in the Shiji.
Gan De, who is mentioned in the Shiji only in connection with plane­tary
motions, is thought to have lived through the end of the Qin dynasty.
The evidence for Wu Xian (Shaman Xian) is even sketchier, though he
was a well-known semi-divine figure in late Zhou and Han times.27 Wu
Xian is mentioned in the Shiji, “Yin benji” 殷本紀 (Basic annals of the Yin
dynasty), as a Shang official, but this quasi-legendary figure’s connection
with astronomical observation is impossible to confirm.
26. Although Sun and Kistemaker note in passing pre-Han references to stars and
constellations (p. 18), they take no account of the textual and archaeological evidence
for the “old degree” systems of determinative stars of the lunar lodges, which predate
the Han dynasty and the positional measurements in Shi Shen’s Astral Canon. This
lapse is the more surprising in that the analysis of the locations of the determinative
stars plays a crucial role in their reconstruction of the Han sky, and studies have shown
that the older systems chose different determinative stars in many instances. On the
“old degree” systems, see, Wang Jianmin and Liu Jinyi 劉金沂, “Xi Han Ruyin hou mu
chutu yuanpan shang ershi ba xiu gu ju du de yanjiu” 西漢汝陰侯墓出土圓盤上二十
八宿古距度的研究, in Zhongguo gudai tianwen wenwu lunji, 59–68; and especially Song
Huiqun 宋會群 and Miao Xuelan 苗雪回, “Lun ershi ba xiu gu ju du zai xian Qin shiqi
de yingyong ji qi yiyi” 論二十八宿古距度在先秦時期的應用及其意義, Ziran kexue shi
yanjiu 自然科學史研究 14.2 (1995), 140–53.
27. See Major, Heaven and Earth in Early Han Thought, 199.
198
S e e i n g S ta r s i n t h e H a n S k y
As in the case of Shi Shen, attributions to Gan De and Wu Xian of star
names and astrological opinions accumulated during the Later Han,
culminating in the conflation of the three xing jing or catalogues of 283
constellations and 1,464 individual stars attributed to the three “schools”
by Chen Zhuo 陳卓 in the late third century. A Tang dynasty star chart
from Dunhuang 敦煌 showing the stars identified by each catalogue in
different colors (The Chinese Sky during the Han, facing p. 28) probably
reproduces Chen Zhuo’s handiwork. By analyzing the extent to which
the three lists of stars are derivative from or comment on one another,
and by dating one Xi Meng 郗萌, a commentator on Wu Xian’s Astral
Canon (the latest of the three), Sun and Kistemaker are able to establish
a terminus ante quem of a.d. 74 for Wu Xian’s list of forty-four constella­
tions. Thus, the complete scheme of stars and constellations mapped by
the authors is securely dated to the first century b.c. (that is, from about
70 b.c. to a.d. 74).
The remainder of the chapter is devoted to discussion of the method­
ology used by the authors to identify the constellations named by Gan
De and Wu Xian, and to an analysis of the innovations these “additions
to the framework of Shi Shen’s school” represent. Here again, a principal
focus is the extent to which the ideological content of Gan De’s and Wu
Xian’s stellar nomenclature reflects the Han institutional and cultural
milieu. The authors note only in passing (p. 80, n. 13) evidence in the
Shiji of distinctly different regional schemes of the twenty-eight lunar
lodges, which are said to have been separately “adopted” by the schools
of Shi Shen and Gan De. So committed are the authors to the thesis that
the three catalogues are essentially creations of the late Former Han
that the possibility that the persistence of distinct traditions through
the Han might reflect deeply rooted regionalism is never seriously
considered.
Another problem with the presentation is an unevenness of ­narrative
that occurs so frequently one wonders which of the book’s misstatements and inconsistencies are the result of carelessness, mistransla­tion,
indifferent editing, or a combination of all three. The reader is repeatedly put in the position of having to guess at the authors’ actual meaning, which is sometimes at odds with what the text plainly says. For
example, on p. 124 the authors attribute the “establishment” of three
major constellations—the celestial courts of Taiwei 太微, Dajiao 大角,
and Tianshi 天市—to the three “schools” in mid-Han times, despite the
fact that all three are mentioned in the Shiji, “Tian guan shu.” At the
same time, they note without further comment Lü Zifang’s 呂子方 study
identifying the three constellations as representative of ancient regional
cultures (p. 124, n.16). From the ensuing discussion (p. 124) it is apparent
D avid W . Pankenie r
199
that their intent was probably to say something like “Our interest here
is to show how these courts were expanded [not ‘established’ as written]
by the three schools, and how their construction and naming of constellations reflects the cultural background.”
Not until Chapter Five, “Philosophy of the Chinese Sky,” do the
authors take pains to distinguish Han innovation from ancient tradition, while at the same time elaborating on the theme that the sky was a
reflection of the terrestrial world:
All astrological descriptions about the sky from the middle of the
Former Han onward were aimed at the construction of a correlating frame between the celestial background and the terrestrial
society. . . . This does not mean that the astrological meanings of
constellations have all been invented by Han astrologers. Ancient
knowledge about the sky was certainly inherited and new astrological denotations were based on ancient traditions, otherwise they
would not have been accepted. (p. 107)
It is in this context that the authors’ assertion that the completion and
mapping of the whole sky was accomplished during the Han should
be understood. Just as cosmology, portentology, and calendar reform
­became important concerns of the imperial state, so too did an expansionist impulse and the prevailing yin/yang and five phases correlative
cosmology leave their mark on the heavens.28 By the mid-first century
the process of populating the heavens with constellations was completed.
Tellingly, the entire sky is given over to the Chinese world, leaving the
non-Chinese periphery virtually un-represented in the sky and astrologically significant only as a reflex of Chinese concerns, principally in
military affairs.
Constellations could hardly be invented and placed willy-nilly in
the heavens. How they were identified—by shape, position, legendary
association, etc.—and how they fitted into the scheme of the whole sky
are, according to Sun and Kistemaker, all susceptible to analysis and
interpretation. The authors cover both new and familiar ground, showing how the names and locations of the constellations derive from the
actual or perceived structure of the sky, from the activities identified
with the particular seasons of the year when certain stars were promi­
28. A particularly illuminating study of the influence of cosmology and religion on
the professional activities of Han dynasty Chinese astronomers is Christopher Cullen’s
“Motivations for Scientific Change in Ancient China: Emperor Wu and the Grand
Inception Astronomical Reforms of 104 b.c.,” Journal for the History of Astronomy, 24,
pt. 3 (August 1993), 185–203.
200
S e e i n g S ta r s i n t h e H a n S k y
nent , and from their functional relationship to the movements of the
sun and moon.29 The general interpretive scheme as set forth here also
informs the glosses accompanying the individual stellar identifications
in the three appendices. As the authors point out, most descriptions of
constellations were in the form of astrological protases, so that the identity of a particular stellar configuration usually connotes its astrological
function and sphere of influence. Given the association of a particular
asterism with a particular context—for example, the military—changes
or irregularity connected with that asterism (even the fixed stars were
thought capable of changing their orientation!) will be interpreted astro­
logically as having consequences within that context. This relationship
underlies an interesting passage from Zhang Heng’s 張衡 Ling xian 靈
憲 (quoted on p. 97):
Stars materially originated from the earth below; but their essence
was perfected above. They are randomly scattered in the sky, but
every one of them has its own distant connections. In the wilderness stars denote articles and objects; at court they denote officials;
among people they denote human actions.
Zhang’s comment is in keeping with ideas of sympathetic resonance
(gan ying 感應) between the celestial and terrestrial realms so fundamen­
tal to cosmological thinking during the Han, most notably that of Dong
Zhongshu 董仲舒. Perhaps it also reflects sensitivity to the protean role of
the stars in astrology at different levels of society and at different times in
the past. (To take one obvious example, the legendary romance between
the Oxherd [Altair] and Spinning Maiden [Vega], had little if anything
to do with affairs of state.) Inexplicably, however, the authors attribute
to Liu Xin 劉歆 (d. a.d. 23) the development of the Field Allocation ( fen
ye 分野) system of astral-terrestrial correspondences (p. 106), despite
the fact that such correspondences figure prominently in Warring States
and Former Han astrological texts, including the Zuozhuan, Guoyu, and
Shiji.30
29. Although Sun and Kistemaker briefly review the different observational ­methods
used to locate the sun and moon against the stellar background, and note that the constellations in different parts of the sky relate differently to the paths of the sun and moon,
no account of the origins of this phenomenon is offered. Here again, an opportunity to
explore the evidence of the accretional process by which the sky was populated with
imaginative constructs is overlooked in favor of a “slice in time” ­account that privileges
the fully developed scheme of mid-Han times.
30. See, for example, David W. Pankenier, “Applied Field Allocation Astrology
in Zhou China: Duke Wen of Jin and the Battle of Chengpu (632 b.c.),” Journal of the
American Oriental Society 119.2 (1999), 261–79. For discussion of the theory and prac-
D avid W . Pankenie r
201
Chapter Six, “Main Structures in the Sky and their Meanings,” returns
to a theme adumbrated by the authors in the Introduction:
The Chinese sky has been developed and modified by Han astronomical schools to fit into the Chinese tradition, history and way of
thinking. But originally, in its primitive mythological sense, it ­reflects
the lore and tales of the Eurasian people. For a real understanding of
the original meaning of the names of the older constellations of Shi
Shen’s school and the 28 xiu, a comparison with classical Chinese,
Indian and Middle Eastern mythology will be necessary. (p. 11)31
Here one encounters a particularly problematical aspect of the book: a
penchant for discerning non-Chinese influences on the earliest “astromythological” strata of Chinese stellar lore and astrology. Thus, the
authors claim:
The existence of analogous lunar lodge systems, probably all originating from the last millennium b.c., indicates a lively communication between these widespread peoples. The pre-Han Chinese sky,
visible in the constellations of Shi Shen’s school, reflects the same
stories as one can find in the Hindu-Vedic or in the Sumerian sky.
We are not ready to draw conclusions based on these analogies in
this book, but we want to emphasize that it is sometimes helpful to
know them when trying to explain shapes and positions of constellations in the Han sky and to understand the mysterious names of
some xiu constellations. (p. 12)
In fact, however, Sun and Kistemaker do draw conclusions based on
such analogies, without adducing any evidence to substantiate their
diffusionist theory. As a result, it is impossible to judge whether such
analogizing is a relic of the “pan-Babylonism” of an earlier generation,
or whether there is any real basis for the authors’ interpretations. For
example, some readers will be taken aback by the assertion on p. 113
that consensus has already been reached regarding the question of a
common origin of the Chinese, Indian, and Arabic lunar lodge systems.
Although scholars like Zhu Kezhen 竺可楨, Xia Nai 夏鼐, and Joseph
tice of field application astrology, including the use of shi cosmographs, see Li Yong
李勇, “Dui Zhongguo gudai hengxing fenye he fenye shipan yanjiu” 對中國古代恆星
分野和分野式盤研究, Ziran kexueshi yanjiu 11.1 (1992), 22–31.
31. See also p. 19 where the authors contradict, in a single paragraph, their stated
conclusion that there is a consensus in favor of a common origin for the system of
twenty-eight lunar lodges (p. 113), and that not all lodges are situated near the ­ecliptic
(p. 111). In the latter case, this fact is even deemed “remarkable.”
202
S e e i n g S ta r s i n t h e H a n S k y
Needham all subscribed to this thesis, more recent dispassionate study
of the chronological and astronomical issues involved shows that the evidence is far from conclusive.32 For Sun and Kistemaker, however, simply
posing the question of cultural influence is apparently proof enough of
the hypothesis: “We do not intend to treat this problem in depth in this
book, but the question itself shows the manifold links of the Chinese
sky with ancient civilizations, not only Chinese, but also Asiatic” (p. 8).
An example of the facility with which the authors occasionally discern
cross-cultural parallels is found in the gloss attached to lunar lodge
Zhen 軫 “carriage rail” (LM #28) in Appendix 1 (p. 161). There we are
told that at this position in the Sumerian sky was a crow named UGA
that was “probably identical with the three-legged crow san zu wu 三
足烏, representing the sun in Chinese mythology.” Moreover, “UGA
became the Roman crow Corvus, which is now the western name for
the same constellation.” The rationale seems to be that since the Sumerian constellation antedated the Chinese, the presence of crows in both
traditions means the Chinese san zu wu must be the result of cultural
influence from Mesopotamia, much as Corvus descended from UGA.
Given examples like this, it goes without saying that the authors’ interpretations of the meaning of constellations in some cases should be used
with caution.
Besides the problems already mentioned, and in addition to an awkwardness of translation and tortured syntax that occasionally renders
the meaning opaque, the book is rife with typographical errors and misspellings, far too many to even begin to list here. Pinyin ­transcriptions
of Chinese names and terms, in particular, are frequently misspelled
and unreliable. All these annoyances could easily have been eliminated
with a modicum of effort; the numerous errors of this kind convey the
impression that no one bothered either to edit or proofread the manu­
32. Adding to the confusion in regard to this topic, in the gloss for the lunar lodge
Xing (Alphard; LM #25) in Appendix 1 (p. 161) one reads:
This equatorial position of the ju xing [determinative star] of xiu Xing, together
with the following ju xing of xiu Zhang and xiu Yi is a strong point to demonstrate the existence of an independent Chinese system of lunar lodges. The corresponding Indian and Arabic determinative “stars” follow the ecliptic, about
30 degrees more to the North.
As a result it is not at all clear what Sun and Kistemaker mean by asserting that “these
systems must have had the same origin.” For a balanced discussion of the history of
the debate about the Babylonian influences on Chinese civilization generally, and on
astronomy in particular, see Jiang Xiaoyuan 江曉原, Tianxue zhen yuan 天學真原 (Shen­
yang: Liaoning jiaoyu, 1991), 276–383 (esp. pp. 302–13 for the debate about the origin
of the twenty-eight lunar lodges).
D avid W . Pankenie r
203
script. This is truly unfortunate, as the volume is very expensive and, by
virtue of its usefulness as a ready reference, likely to become a ­fixture
on many reference shelves.
Though flawed in certain respects, the major shortcomings of The
­Chinese Sky during the Han are largely confined to the interpretive chapters, which are of comparatively minor importance. The core of the
study—​the reconstruction of the sky as it was seen in mid-Han times,
the studies of the three astral canons, their dates and relationship to
each other, and the identifications of the stars they name—represent a
significant scholarly achievement. On balance, therefore, it should be
emphasized that The Chinese Sky during the Han represents an important
contribution to scholarship and an essential reference for research on
Han astronomy and celestial cartography.
Given the usefulness and accessibility of these new sources for the
astronomy, astrology, and cosmology of early China, future studies of
the period will have little excuse for not lifting their gaze skyward on
occasion. They’ll have a much easier time of it than in the past.