Western Origins of Yijing?

[Cobie]

 

This paper basically states that Daoism and Yijing comes from Indo--Europeans. 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350522856_Indo-Europeans_in_the_Ancient_Yellow_River_Valley?_sg[1]=

 

 

[心神 ~]

1 minute ago, Cobie said:

 

This paper basically states that Daoism and Yijing comes from Indo--Europeans. 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350522856_Indo-Europeans_in_the_Ancient_Yellow_River_Valley?_sg[1]=

 

 

I'm unable to access the study. What does it say? What supports its claim?

 

[Cobie]

 

Try this link

 https://www.sino-platonic.org/complete/spp311_indo_europeans_china_zhou_dynasty.pdf 

 

 

 

Edited Sunday at 07:49 PM by Cobie

[心神 ~]

6 minutes ago, Cobie said:

 

Try this link

 https://www.sino-platonic.org/complete/spp311_indo_europeans_china_zhou_dynasty.pdf 

 

 

Ahh, thank you!

 

[Nungali]

7 hours ago, Cobie said:

 

 

This paper basically states that Daoism and Yijing comes from Indo--Europeans. 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350522856_Indo-Europeans_in_the_Ancient_Yellow_River_Valley?_sg[1]=

 

 

 

Juicy !   Have you read it ? 

 

( I'll tackle it later  )  

[Taomeow]

@Nungali Thanks for the summary.  I wouldn't read the article since the premise is ridiculous. 

 

My own explorations in  comparative mythology and history of religions back in the day convinced me that there's a direct unbroken lineage connecting indigenous Chinese proto-taoist shamanic practices and later taoist-proper developments that shaped Chinese civilization for millennia to come  -- 

whereas no such Indo-European lineage exists within those ancient systems, outside of some very limited  (and only speculative) opportunities to pick up some marginal non-indigenous ideas with trade.  The commonalities between all ancient cultures stem from the fact that their creators shared one common trait, to wit, they were humans.  Well, sort of...   I'm partial to the origins mythologies and legends that emphasize non-human or part-human "influencers..."  Fuxi is one of those, but in general early Chinese pantheon is choke-full of such characters -- as is Mesopotamian/Sumerian lore...  That's where one finds the most striking similarities in mythology.  But stuff like wheeled carts?  Burial of nobility with all their worldly possessions that may have included those?  Binary systems, in a species that is, well, anatomically mostly binary-symmetrical?  Bah humbug...  

Edited Tuesday at 06:52 AM by Taomeow

[bradley]

I dont think we should just take Shaun C R Ramsden's word for it and does it even matter. Indo-European is a proto-language not necessarily a culture or people. The fact that Mexican's speak Spanish does not make a spicy burrito any less tasty, nor imply that it came from madrid.  

 

[心神 ~]

 

13 hours ago, Cobie said:

 

This paper basically states that Daoism and Yijing comes from Indo--Europeans. 

 

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/350522856_Indo-Europeans_in_the_Ancient_Yellow_River_Valley?_sg[1]=

 

 

This was a fascinating read. I find the sky-father deities and twin progenitors to be the weakest part of the argument. Those patterns show up in too many cultures to carry much weight on their own. I've always been interested in the appearance of a threefold pattern in the Daodejing, so that catches my eye.

 

What intrigues me most, given my interests, is the proposed connection between Xi Wangmu, the Queen Mother of the West, and Kubala of Carchemish, Great Mother of the Mountains (and later as Cybele of Anatolia, Queen of Heaven and Earth.)

 

Spoiler

 

Notes about the Xi Wangmu / Great Mother connection

 

Kubaba was the main goddess of the Neo-Hittite city of Carchemish on the upper Euphrates. She was known as a city-protecting “queen” goddess, shown seated frontally on a high-backed throne, with a tall cylindrical crown (polos-type), holding symbols like a mirror and pomegranate, flanked by lions and birds. After the Hittite Empire collapsed, Kubaba’s cult spread west and north through the Neo-Hittite and Luwian states. She became the chief goddess in that regional pantheon, still tied to Carchemish but now more broadly a “Great Lady” figure.

 

Cybele/Kybele appears in later Greek and Phrygian contexts as mountain and earth mother, guardian of cities and walls, mistress of wild nature (especially lions, often enthroned with lions at her sides), wearing a tall crown. She was also known as civilization’s protector (city walls, crown, ruler-cults) connected to the raw force of the untamed land, with power over fertility, life, and death. 

Xi Wangmu is described as a western mountain spirit who later becomes the Queen Mother of the West. In very old descriptions, she has tiger’s teeth, a leopard’s tail, and a wild, shamanic character. Over time, she shifts into the high goddess of Kunlun, enthroned in a western paradise, surrounded by attendants, controlling life-span, death, and peaches of immortality.

 

Elfriede Knauer’s article (cited in the study) posits that when you look at Han-era images of Xi Wangmu, the resemblance to the Western Great Mother types is too close to be accidental. She tracks points to iconographic details, such as a goddess on a high throne or rock, flanked by felines, sometimes with a mural-like headdress or city-crown analog, placed in a paradisal but mountainous landscape. Those are the visual formulas used for Cybele and her Anatolian predecessors, centuries earlier, and they travel across the same general Central Asian / Silk Road corridor that carried other western motifs into China. 

 

 

I also think it's interesting that the Yijing trigram names may be Indo-European words, that the heavenly stems and earthly branches share a very old source with the Phoenician alphabet, and that Old Chinese itself may hold many Indo-European loanwords.

 

It is clear there was real contact, influence, and exchange between these worlds. My question is, if Indo-Europeans created the Yijing and the Daodejing as distinct systems, separate from early Chinese culture, where is that system now in their own traditions? China, despite repeated waves of loss and destruction, has held onto these texts and developed their philosophy for thousands of years. If the deeper origin really lay with Indo-Europeans, where is the parallel, continuous lineage on their side?

 

----------------

 

1. Mythological and Religious Parallels between Early China and Indo-Europeans

• Sky Father Deities
• Twin Progenitors and Sibling-Creators
• Tripartite Functions and the Three Sovereigns
• Western Paradise and the Queen Mother
• Kunlun Mountain and the Cosmic Pillar
• Jade, Immortality, and Steppe Connections
• Foreign Ancestry of Culture Heroes
 

Spoiler

Sky Father Deities: Indo-European cultures commonly worshipped a sky god (e.g. Dyaus Pita or Zeus/Jupiter), and the Zhou dynasty similarly revered Tian (天, the Sky) as the supreme deity. The Zhou kings claimed the “Mandate of Heaven (Sky)” as divine sanction, much like Indo-European kings who were seen as sons of the sky god. This parallel is cited as evidence that Zhou religious ideology (a core of later Daoist cosmology) may have Indo-European origins.

Twin Progenitors and Sibling-Creators: Many Indo-European myths feature twin progenitors of humankind (e.g. the Proto-Indo-European twin Yem-, reflected as Yama/Yami in Vedic tradition). Early Chinese legend likewise begins with a sibling-pair: Fuxi and Nüwa, often described as brother-sister or husband-wife, who created or re-founded humanity after a calamity. The study notes that Fuxi and Nüwa were considered not only mythic culture heroes but leaders of actual clans. In Chinese accounts, Nüwa existed in an earlier time when people “only knew their mothers” (suggesting a matriarchal society) until Fuxi introduced marriage, social order, and patrilineal norms. This is interpreted as an Indo-European patriarchal tribe (symbolized by Fuxi) encountering a native matriarchal society (symbolized by Nüwa). The sibling-marriage of Fuxi and Nüwa to propagate humanity mirrors Indo-European creation twin myths, supporting the idea of shared mythological themes.

Tripartite Functions and “Three Sovereigns”: Indo-European mythology exhibits a triadic social ideology (priests, warriors, farmers) often dramatized as a “war of functions” or triple sacrifice. The study finds echoes of this in Chinese legend: the so-called “Three Sovereigns” or three august rulers (Fuxi, Shennong, and a third such as Suiren or Zhurong) who each introduce different civilizational skills. For example, Fuxi institutes marriage and divination, Shennong teaches agriculture and healing herbs, and the Yellow Emperor (Huangdi) later brings metallurgy and statecraft. This progression parallels the Indo-European trifunctional roles (culture-founder, agrarian provider, warrior-king). The study even notes Indo-European myths of triple death sacrifices – offerings to three gods by hanging, drowning, and burning – as analogous to the multi-faceted powers of early Chinese sage-kings (though the Chinese legends themselves do not feature the same grisly motif).

Western Paradise and the Queen Mother: Daoist mythology highly venerates Xiwangmu, the Queen Mother of the West, who dwells in a mystic western paradise (on a Jade Mountain near Kunlun). The paper argues that Xiwangmu is essentially the Chinese transformation of an older Western (Central Asian or Near Eastern) goddess. Notably, art historian E. R. Knauer traced Xiwangmu’s iconography to the Anatolian mother-goddess Kubaba (Cybele) revered by Hittites, Phrygians, and others. Xiwangmu’s earliest depictions in China appear in the far west (Sichuan, near Central Asian trade routes) and in coastal Shandong (via early maritime routes). This geographic distribution aligns with foreign influence. Moreover, in Zhuangzi, it is stated that “Xiwangmu obtained the Dao”, implying that a western goddess figures into the origins of Daoist teachings. The study links this to the influx of Western religious ideas: indeed, both Buddhism and early Daoist religious movements took root in those same western and coastal regions during the Han era. Scholars like Victor Mair have argued that organized Daoist religion was essentially a Chinese response to foreign (Indian/Central Asian) influences. Thus, the prominence of a “Western Queen” in Daoism’s pantheon is presented as evidence of Indo-European (or broader Western) input.

Kunlun Mountain and Cosmic Pillar: Early Daoist cosmology centers on sacred mountains (Kunlun, Tai Shan, etc.) as pillars between Heaven and Earth. The paper points out that Chinese sources eventually identified Kunlun with Mount Sumeru – the world-mountain of Indian (Indic and Indo-Iranian) cosmology. Once Indian cosmic geography became known in China (through early Buddhist contacts), the Chinese had “no incongruity” accepting Kunlun as the axial center. This suggests a convergence of Chinese and Indo-European (Vedic/Buddhist) cosmological ideas. Kunlun, mythically located far to the west, was even called the earthly home of the Lord of the Sky in Chinese texts – a concept resonant with Indo-European sky-god domiciles (e.g. sacred Olympus). The integration of Western cosmic geography into Daoist geography underscores the Indo-European (Indic) contribution to Daoist cosmology.

Jade, Immortality, and Steppe Connections: Jade is a sacred material in Daoist and Chinese tradition (the Jade Emperor, jade tablets, etc.), and the study notes that ancient texts explicitly link jade to the far west. The Guanzi states that “jade comes from the Yuzhi (Yuezhi) and their mountain”, identifying a Central Asian people (the Yuezhi, an Indo-European Tokharian tribe) as the source of jade. Indeed, high-quality nephrite jade in Shang and Zhou tombs is known to have been mined in what is now Xinjiang and traded by steppe peoples. The legendary Kunlun/Jade Mountain where Xiwangmu resides “may [thus] lie in the home of Indo-Europeans” in Central Asia. King Mu of Zhou allegedly journeyed west to visit the Queen Mother on Kunlun, and Yu the Great (a sage-king) is said to have studied in the Western Queen’s country. These myths symbolically record interactions between early Chinese rulers and the far west. By situating spiritual wisdom and immortality in the farwestern mountains, Daoist lore itself hints at an exogenous origin.

Foreign Ancestry of Culture Heroes: The study highlights that several founding figures of Chinese civilization are described as having “western” origins or connections. The semi-legendary King Wen, founder of the Zhou dynasty, is explicitly called a man of the Western Yi (western barbarians) in the Mencius. Likewise, the sage-king Shun is said to be from the Eastern Yi (eastern tribes), implying that even ancient Chinese writers remembered non-Han origins for these early rulers. The Shiji (Records of the Grand Historian) lists various western tribes (Yuezhi, Qiang, Rong, Di) as living on China’s borders and notes the Zhou allied with or absorbed many of them. For example, the Qiang were possibly allies or kin of the Zhou ruling house. Huangdi (the Yellow Emperor) – often credited as ancestor of the Chinese – is linked in some sources to the Ji clan (surname of the Zhou kings) and to the west: he is said to have grown up near “Ji Shui” in Zhou territory. In mythic battles, Huangdi defeats the tribal leader Chiyou; the text suggests Huangdi’s clan (with its chariots and metal weapons) may have been a nomadic Indo-European force overcoming indigenous tribes like Chiyou’s**. All these mytho-historical clues bolster the idea that an Indo-European or steppe people blended into the Zhou and imparted key cultural-religious elements that later became Daoist and Chinese heritage.

Evaluation: The above parallels are intriguing but vary in strength. Some connections rest on broad similarity or later syncretism – for instance, nearly every agrarian culture has a sky deity and an earth mother figure, so the Tian/Dyaus analogy, while plausible, could be coincidental. Similarly, twin or sibling progenitors are a widespread myth motif (not unique to Indo-Europeans), which weakens the conclusiveness of the Fuxi–Nüwa comparison. On the other hand, the Western Queen Mother link to Near Eastern goddesses is supported by iconographic research and the geographic pattern of her cult, lending credibility to a western influence on Daoist myth. The identification of Kunlun with Mt. Sumeru and references to jade from the Yuezhi are concrete examples of cultural exchange, though they pertain more to the Han era and later Daoist lore than to the origins of Daoism. Overall, the mythological parallels provide suggestive correlations and highlight that Chinese tradition itself remembered foreign connections. However, by academic standards they remain circumstantial. Without direct texts or archaeological finds proving that, say, Fuxi was an Indo-European chieftain, these myths can only hint at an Indo-European impact on early Chinese cosmology and religion – they do not by themselves prove causation. The study’s use of reputable comparative mythology sources (Mallory, Knauer, etc.) gives some weight, but mainstream scholarship would likely view such mythic analogies as interesting hypotheses requiring further interdisciplinary evidence.

 

 

2. Linguistic and Textual Evidence (Yijing Trigrams and Language Contacts)

• Yi Jing Trigram Names as Indo-European Words
• Binary Structure and Yin–Yang Dualism as Indo-European Pattern
• Heavenly Stems / Phoenician Alphabet Parallels
• Old Chinese Loanwords from Indo-European Languages
• Feudalism and Social Structure Parallels

 

Spoiler

Yi Jing Trigram Names as Indo-European Words: One of the study’s boldest claims is that the eight trigrams (八卦) of the Yi Jing (I Ching) have names derived from Indo-European root words. For example, the trigram Qian (乾) normally means “dry” in Chinese, but in the Yi Jing it denotes “Heaven” (sky) and is pronounced qián. This unusual meaning/pronunciation is explained if qián was originally a foreign word. According to researcher Julie Lee Wei, Qian 乾 (ancient gjan or kan) might come from the Proto-Indo-European root gen- meaning “beget, generate,” akin to Latin genitor (“begetter, father”) – essentially the Indo-European Sky-Father concept. In her analysis, Heaven is the “begetter of all things” (father sky), and the Earth trigram Kun 坤 (pronounced kūn) corresponds to the Indo-European notion of an earth-mother or “receptor” of Heaven’s seed. In short, the character symbols are Chinese, but their meanings (Heaven-Father, Earth-Mother, etc.) and perhaps their sounds derive from Indo-European sacred vocabulary. The paper cites Wei’s step-by-step comparison of all eight trigram names to Indo-European stems – for instance: Zhen 震 (“Thunder”), Xun 巽 (“Wind”), Li 離 (“Fire/Brightness”), Kan 坎 (“Water/Gorge”), Gen 艮 (“Mountain”), Dui 兌 (“Marsh”). Each may conceal an ancient Indo-European word for those elements or concepts (e.g. Kan for a hollow or canyon, etc.), though the detailed etymologies are beyond the summary here. If true, this would mean the Yi Jing’s core terminology was introduced by an Indo-European-speaking group in prehistoric times.

Binary Structure and Yin-Yang Dualism: The I Ching’s divination system is based on binary symbols – broken vs. unbroken lines – combined into trigrams and hexagrams (a proto-binary code). The study asserts that this binary thinking **“appears to be very Indo-European”**. Indo-European religions, despite their tripartite social structure, often feature cosmic dualism: paired gods and divine twins representing contracts between opposites. Mallory (1989) notes binary oppositions (light vs. dark, etc.) as an underlying Indo-European ideological structure. The Yi Jing exactly embodies such dualism: it builds complex reality from fundamental polarities (later termed Yin and Yang in China). The argument is that Indo-European seers on the steppe used a binary divination technique (perhaps tossing objects to produce yes/no lines) which was transmitted to the early Zhou as the hexagram system. Indeed, Chinese legend attributes the invention of the trigrams to Fuxi and the completion of the hexagrams to King Wen of Zhou, both figures the paper links to Indo-Europeans. In this view, the famous Yin-Yang dualism at the heart of Daoist philosophy might actually descend from an Indo-European binary cosmology introduced long before Yin-Yang were given Chinese names. The concept of duality in Chinese thought (e.g. Heaven/Earth, Yin/Yang) could thus owe a debt to Indo-European intellectual influence.

Heavenly Stems and Early Writing: Another linguistic coincidence noted is that the ancient Chinese Heavenly Stems and Earthly Branches (the 10 “heaven” stems and 12 “earth” branches used in the calendar and ordinals) total 22 symbols – which strikingly matches the 22 letters of the West Semitic (Phoenician) alphabet. Wei (1999) observed one-to-one correspondences between these Chinese cyclical signs and the Phoenician alphabet, suggesting a common influence. The Shang kings of China (2nd millennium BCE) used the Heavenly Stems in their names, indicating this system was in place early. While the paper clarifies this doesn’t mean the Shang were Phoenicians, it implies contact with people from the West who transmitted this set of symbols or the idea of a coded series. It’s posited that early interactions could explain peculiar irregularities in Old Chinese vocabulary and writing. In fact, linguist Tsung-tung Chang noted that Old Chinese shows affinities to Indo-European (Germanic) languages and suggested many problems of Old Chinese phonology “can be answered” if we factor in Indo-European influence on the vocabulary. In short, the emergence of a complex writing/calendar system in China might have been spurred by Western input. The study connects this to the fully formed Shang script appearing around the same time as the chariot in China – both likely imports from the steppe or beyond. The Zhou dynasty’s emphasis on recording history and using writing (e.g. inscribing bronze vessels) may itself reflect an introduced idea of literacy and record-keeping that wasn’t present in the preceding Shang to the same degree.

Chinese Classics and Possible Loanwords: The presence of Indo-European loanwords in Chinese is another piece of linguistic evidence. The study cites Zhou (2006) as finding “a large number of Indo-European words in Old Chinese”. While specific examples are not listed in our excerpt, other scholars have pointed out words for certain plants, animals, or technology in Chinese that may derive from Indo-European languages (for instance, words for horse, honey, lion, etc., have been proposed in various research). The fact that key Zhou-era texts and classics (the Dao De Jing, Book of Odes, etc.) were composed after extensive steppe contact raises the possibility that some concepts or terminology in them came from Indo-European sources. For example, the paper notes the Zhou word for “Heaven” (tian) is best translated as “sky” and compares it to Tengri (Turkic/Mongol) or the generic sky-god in Indo-European religion. While tian is not proven to be a loanword, the concept of heaven as an impersonal force aligns more with steppe spirituality than the Shang’s more personalized high god Shangdi. In sum, linguistic clues – from mysterious trigram names to structural correspondences in symbol sets and possible loanwords – are marshaled to argue that the Yi Jing and early Daoist texts carry an Indo-European imprint in their very language.

Evaluation: The linguistic evidence in the study is provocative but among the most speculative. The idea that Yi Jing trigram names hide Indo-European roots comes from a Sino-Platonic Papers monograph (Wei 2005) – a source outside the mainstream, reflecting a novel hypothesis rather than consensus. While it’s true that some trigram names have puzzling meanings (e.g. 乾 Qian as “Heaven” despite its ordinary meaning “dry”), attributing this to Indo-European origin requires substantial phonological stretching and assumes those foreign words were adopted millennia ago without leaving clearer traces. Most historical linguists would demand more rigorous evidence (regular sound correspondences, intermediate forms, etc.) before accepting that the Zhou Chinese borrowed their fundamental cosmological terms wholesale from Indo-Europeans. Thus, this support is weak in academic eyes – intriguing as a possibility, but far from proven. The binary system argument is a bit stronger in that the Chinese themselves credit the trigrams to culture-heroes (Fuxi, King Wen) who might represent outside influences. Still, binary divination is not exclusive to Indo-Europeans; simple yes/no lots or omens arise independently in many cultures. It’s plausible that steppe people brought new divination methods, but we lack direct records of such transmission. The parallels with the Phoenician alphabet and Old Chinese words provide a wider “West-East contact” context, lending plausibility to the idea that Chinese intellectual culture did not develop in isolation. However, correlating 22 calendar signs with 22 alphabet letters could be coincidence or reflect a generalized human tendency to use similar numeric cycles. In summary, the linguistic and textual evidence for Indo-European origin of Daoist/Yijing concepts is suggestive but unconfirmed. It highlights anomalies in Chinese language and symbolism that could be explained by foreign input, but alternative explanations (indigenous development or borrowing from non-IE neighbors) must also be considered. Scholars would likely view these claims as interesting hypotheses requiring more proof (e.g. ancient inscriptions showing early forms of trigram names in a non-Chinese language) before they can be deemed strong evidence.

 

 

3. Cultural and Philosophical Comparisons

 

• Nomadic vs. Sedentary Lifestyle Fusion
• Mandate of Heaven and Indo-European Moral Kingship
• Chariot Technology and Warrior Aristocracy
• Recording of History and Philosophical Consciousness

 

Spoiler

Feudalism and Social Structure: The Zhou political system is compared to Western feudalism. The Zhou kings distributed territory to kinsmen with hereditary noble titles (Gong, Hou, Bo, etc.), forming a hierarchy of lords bound by kinship ties. The study notes this “bore a strong resemblance” to the feudal structures of medieval Western Europe. While separated by over a millennium, the implication is that the concept of organizing society into a pyramidal kinship-based feudal order may have steppe origins (since Indo-European societies often had clan chiefs, vassals, and a warrior aristocracy). In addition, by the late Zhou a four-class social division emerged – scholar, farmer, artisan, merchant – known as the sì mín (四民) categories. Indo-European societies like the Indo-Aryans had a comparable four-fold varna system (priest, warrior, commoner, servile) and other Indo-Europeans often distinguished nobles, commoners, and artisans. The Zhou class system isn’t identical to Indian castes, but the study views the Chinese four occupations as “a kind of caste system” that echoes the stratification seen in Indo-European cultures.

Nomadic vs. Sedentary Lifestyle: Chinese legends and records sometimes portray the Zhou founders as semi-nomadic outsiders who settled among agricultural people. A quote from Zhou (2006) observes that ancient Chinese did not see “Rong vs. Xia” as racial, but rather lifestyle differences – if nomads settled to farm they became Xia, and if farmers went pastoral they became Rong. This suggests a permeability between the indigenous Chinese and the western steppe peoples. The Zhou may have originally been a nomadic or pastoral tribe (perhaps Indo-European or influenced by Indo-Europeans) that adopted agriculture and statecraft. Indeed, one of the Zhou’s mythical ancestors, Houji (the Lord of Millet), is revered for teaching agriculture – possibly because the incoming tribe had to learn farming from the natives. The study infers that Zhou-era myths of culture heroes (Houji, Shennong the “Divine Farmer”) indicate the merger of a nomadic Indo-European group with an older agrarian culture, with the nomads crediting sages for introducing them to farming. This convergence of lifestyles underpins Daoism’s later idealization of simple agrarian life balanced with natural freedom – a philosophy congenial to both sedentary farmers and wandering sages (not unlike the synthesis of steppe and agrarian values).

Mandate of Heaven and Moral Order: The Zhou introduced the Mandate of Heaven ideology: the idea that a ruler’s legitimacy comes from a moral force (Heaven) and can be withdrawn if he misrules. The paper suggests this was a new political-spiritual concept in China, brought by the Zhou and possibly paralleling Indo-European notions of divine kingship. In Indo-European realms, kings often ruled by the grace of the chief god (e.g. the Vedic king as Indra’s proxy, or the Roman emperor as Jupiter’s chosen). The Zhou king similarly called himself Tianzi (Son of Heaven). While the Mandate of Heaven has no direct precursor in Shang theology, it finds echo in Indo-European moral cosmology – the ruler must uphold rita or ma’at (cosmic order) to retain divine favor. This alignment of ethical governance with cosmic law later became central to both Confucian and Daoist thought (Daoism’s Dao can be seen as a natural moral order). The study implies that Zhou moral cosmology, an Indo-European contribution, laid the groundwork for Chinese philosophies’ concern with ruling in harmony with Heaven.

Technology and Chariot Warfare: A concrete cultural import was the chariot and related military technology. The horse-drawn chariot, a hallmark of Late Bronze Age Indo-European societies, appears in China suddenly in the Shang/Zhou era. The research emphasizes that Shang chariots were “low-level” (few and primitive) while the Zhou employed chariots extensively. Archaeology confirms that the earliest chariots in China (c. 1200 BCE) postdate their invention in the West by many centuries. A Western Zhou tomb in Luoyang contained four pits with chariots and horses, including one with five chariots and twelve horses buried together – a strikingly Indo-European-style aristocratic burial (very reminiscent of Scythian or steppe kurgans with horse teams). The study cites a news report of this find (Daily Mail 2011) as evidence. Chariots gave the Zhou a tactical edge in war and are symbolically linked to the sun (solar wheel) in Indo-European myth – perhaps inspiring the Zhou’s own solar and sky associations. In fact, Huangdi’s alternate name Xuanyuan is written with the wheel/carriage radical, which the paper interprets as “lord of the chariot”, hinting that the Yellow Emperor’s clan was remembered for chariot use (an Indo-European “trademark”). The influx of chariots and metallurgy “from the cultures north and west” of Shang is well documented, reinforcing the idea that steppe Indo-Europeans didn’t just bring myths but also social and military innovations that shaped Chinese civilization.

Recording of History and Philosophy: It was under the Zhou that many Chinese classic texts were composed (the Yijing was compiled in its final form, and philosophers like Laozi and Confucius lived in later Zhou). The study points out that the Zhou had a greater consciousness of history than the Shang – they left lengthy bronze inscriptions about events, whereas the Shang’s oracle bone texts were brief and purely ritual. This new historiographical impulse may reflect Western influence (Indo-Europeans valued heroic genealogies and epics, for example). The argument is that because Zhou-era thinkers wrote down the classics, we are effectively seeing the world through the Zhou (potentially Indo-European-influenced) lens. Concepts central to Daoist philosophy, like the Dao (Way) itself, might have assimilated steppe ideas of an eternal cosmic order or logos. While the study doesn’t explicitly claim Laozi was a closet Indo-European, it notes the affinity between Daoist and foreign (Indian) ideas, as evidenced by the ease of syncretism between Daoism and imported Buddhism in later centuries.

Evaluation: The cultural and philosophical parallels drawn here are broad and interpretive. The feudal and social structure similarities are interesting yet likely independent developments – large agrarian societies tend to develop hierarchies and class distinctions whether Indo-European or not. That said, the sudden presence of chariots and a warrior aristocracy in China is strong evidence of steppe influence. This lends credibility to the idea of an Indo-European or Central Asian elite contributing to Zhou culture. Social practices like intermarriage between Zhou royalty and western tribes (e.g. the Zhou kings marrying Qiang wives, which the paper alludes to) are documented in Chinese history, and they would facilitate cultural exchange. The Mandate of Heaven and moral order concept is somewhat abstract to tie to Indo-Europeans – moral legitimation of kings is a global phenomenon (e.g. Egyptian Ma’at, Mesopotamian justice codes). Academically, claiming it was imported might be seen as overreach without explicit evidence (no text says “the Zhou learned Heaven’s mandate from the barbarians”). Still, the Zhou’s own historical memory (as quoted in Mencius and Shiji) that they sprang from “western barbarians” gives the cultural arguments a footing: the Zhou were outsiders to the Shang, so it stands to reason they brought new social and spiritual ideas. The technological and material influences (like chariots, bronze styles, jade, and possibly early writing systems) are the strongest points, as they are tangible and corroborated by archaeology and artifact studies. Those confirm real interaction with Indo-European or other Eurasian cultures, even if the direct connection to Daoist philosophy is indirect. In summary, the cultural parallels strengthen the plausibility of Indo-European impact but are not singular proof that “Daoism” per se is Indo-European – rather, they show the Zhou era was a melting pot where steppe and Chinese elements fused, out of which Daoist thought later emerged.

 

4. Archaeological, Genetic, and Migration Evidence

 

• Tarim Basin Caucasian Mummies
• Europoid Skulls at Anyang
• Chariot and Horse Burials in Western Zhou
• Steppe Cultural Motifs in Bronze, Art, and Tools
• Migrations of Yuezhi, Wusun, Qiang, and Western Rong Near Zhou

 

Spoiler

Caucasian Mummies in Xinjiang (Tarim Basin): Perhaps the most striking evidence of Indo-Europeans in ancient China is the discovery of well-preserved mummies in the Tarim Basin (Xinjiang) dating from ~2000 BCE onward. These mummies (e.g. at Xiaohe and other sites) have Europoid features and DNA. The study notes that ancient DNA testing found Y-chromosome haplogroup R1a1a in male Tarim individuals – R1a is a genetic marker strongly associated with Indo-European steppe populations. Mitochondrial DNA from the Tarim mummies showed a mix of West Eurasian and East Eurasian lineages, indicating an admixed people. In short, “the Xiaohe people were an admixture” and scientifically proven to represent an Indo-European presence in Western China. These people are often identified with the Tocharians, an Indo-European group known to have lived in the Tarim region. Their existence by 2000 BCE establishes that Indo-European speakers had migrated deep into Asia, within reach of the Chinese world. While Xinjiang is far from the Yellow River Valley, it demonstrates a pool of Indo-European population on China’s western doorstep long before Daoism or the Zhou dynasty developed.

Indo-European Skulls at Anyang (Shang Capital): Physical anthropology adds to the picture. At Anyang (the last Shang capital, ~1200 BCE), archaeologists have found “foreign” skeletal remains. The paper cites Hayes (2004) who reported Europoid skulls in the sacrificial pits at Anyang. This suggests that Indo-Europeans were not only in the far west but had made their way into the Central Plains of China by late Shang times – perhaps as captives, mercenaries, or merchants. The presence of a few Caucasian individuals at Anyang aligns with the historical record of Shang and Zhou dealing with western tribes. It lends credence to the notion that an Indo-European tribe could have been involved in the Shang-Zhou transition. If Shang rulers were capturing or employing Indo-Europeans (as the bones imply), it’s conceivable that the Zhou (who conquered Shang) had an even stronger connection with steppe peoples. In any case, the cranial evidence confirms a biological Indo-European footprint in ancient China’s heartland.

Chariot and Horse Remains: Archaeology has uncovered direct evidence of early Zhou chariotry, as mentioned earlier. The specific find in Luoyang, with multiple chariots and horses in a tomb, dates to early Western Zhou (c. 11th century BCE). Additionally, bronze bits, horse gear, and chariot parts appear suddenly in late Shang contexts, showing the influx of a new military technology. These correlate with the spread of Indo-European (specifically, Indo-Iranian) nomads who were known as expert charioteers around that time. The study references a media source on this but the fact itself is well-known in archaeology: horse-and-chariot complex reached China from the northwest. This is hard evidence of migration or at least long-distance cultural transmission consistent with Indo-European influence.

Artifacts and Cultural Motifs: Beyond vehicles, scholars have noted steppe influence in Chinese bronze motifs (e.g. certain animal styles) and burial practices. Although not detailed in the text we have, the presence of things like wagons, spoked wheels, certain weapon types, and musical instruments (the Chinese lute “pipa” may derive from a Central Asian instrument) are often cited examples of West-to-East transmission. The study compiles these as part of “technology obtained from cultures north and west” by the Shang. Such artifacts strengthen the case that people (or at least ideas) moved across the steppe into China. For instance, if a Shang king wore a motif on his bronze that matches Scythian art, that hints at contact. This tangible cultural freight likely paved the way for intangible ideas (philosophies, cosmologies) to also travel.

Migration of Tribes (Yuezhi, Wusun, Qiang): Historical records and modern research chart the movement of Indo-European tribes around China’s borders. The Yuezhi (likely Tocharian speakers) migrated from Gansu to Bactria in the 2nd century BCE, interacting with Chinese along the way. The Wusun (sometimes thought to have Iranian affinities) and the Xiongnu (Hunnic confederation possibly with some Indo-European elements) also appear in records. The study notes that the Yuezhi and Qiang had similar cultures and that some scholars (e.g. Beckwith) argue the Qiang were Indo-European, not Tibeto-Burman. The Western Rong, mentioned as enemies or allies of Zhou, likely included Indo-European groups. All this suggests a milieu of migrating steppe peoples coming into contact with early Chinese states. The Zhou-Qiang connection, in particular, is highlighted: Zhou leaders (like King Wen) were allied by marriage or kinship with Qiang tribes. This means an avenue for Indo-European genes and ideas to enter the Zhou lineage. Indeed, the summary in the study outright lists that *“the Zhou and the Qiang (an Indo-European tribe) intermarried for generations”*. Such integration could facilitate the transfer of religious practices and divination techniques that became part of Zhou heritage.

 

Evaluation: The archaeological and genetic evidence is the strongest part of the case, as it relies on concrete data. The Tarim mummies and Anyang skulls decisively show that Indo-European people were present in and around China in antiquity. This establishes a necessary condition for the theory – that contact was physically possible. The chariot and artifact finds corroborate cultural diffusion from West to East in the late 2nd millennium BCE. However, there is a gap between these facts and the claim that Daoism or the Yi Jing specifically came from Indo-Europeans. None of the mummies or skulls come with an inscription saying “I brought the Book of Changes.” Thus, while these findings make the hypothesis plausible, they do not by themselves tie Indo-Europeans to Daoist texts. The migration patterns show a general trend of interaction, which is supportive but not direct evidence of idea transmission. By academic standards, one would desire something like a clear stylistic or textual parallel (for example, an Indo-European text that mirrors the I Ching, or a Chinese mention of learning divination from the Rong). The study compiles secondary evidence (e.g. an observation that Shang obtained tech from the north/west) which historians generally accept. Indeed, mainstream sinology acknowledges Western influence on early Chinese warfare, arts, and perhaps astronomy. It’s in extending this to philosophy and religion that the evidence becomes more circumstantial. Still, the presence of steppe nomads at the right place and time lends credence to the idea that some of China’s intellectual heritage could have an exogenous component. In summary, the archaeological/genetic evidence strongly supports the reality of Indo-European interaction with ancient China, but the link to Daoism and the Yi Jing remains somewhat inferential. It provides a solid foundation (contact and exchange happened), upon which the cultural and textual arguments build the case that those interactions influenced Chinese metaphysics. Academic consensus would likely accept the former (contact) but remains cautious about the latter (degree of influence), pending more direct proof.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 10:10 AM by 心神 ~

[MadePossible]

4 hours ago, Nungali said:

The Zhou worshiped a Sky God, which is a core Indo-European belief.

( so did  Ancient Egypt, Greece, Rome, Mesopotamia various Native American, Australian and other indigenous cultures ) .

 

Ancient Egypt, mesopotamia, native American, Australians, etc aren't Indo European and don't have a sky god as head of their pantheon. Greece (Zeus), Rome (Ju - piter) and perhaps the Zhou (Di) are Indo-Europeans and have the proto-Indo-European sky god (Dyeus piter) at the head of their pantheon.

[Sanity Check]

5 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

• The Yellow Emperor used characters that hint of a chariot-like vehicle.

(  hint ?  ) 

 

....

 

The Lost Legion of Carrhae: Did a Roman Legion End Up in China?

 

 

The legend begins in 53 BC with the Battle of Carrhae between the Roman general Marcus Licinius Crassus and the Parthian general Surena. Carrhae is a location near the modern-day Syrian-Turkish border. In antiquity, it was near the fringes of the Roman Empire in the west and the Parthian Empire in the east.

 

Crassus was already one of the wealthiest men in the Roman republic, but he had a desire to access the wealth of Parthia, so he convinced the Senate to let him lead 42,000 Roman soldiers into the battlefield against the Parthians. In the battle, Crassus and his army suffered a humiliating defeat at the hands of Surena and his 10,000 archers. Crassus attempted to negotiate a truce but was killed in the process. According to legend, liquid gold was poured down his throat as a punishment for his greed. He was also allegedly beheaded, and his body was desecrated.

 

Of the surviving Roman soldiers, 10,000 of them were captured alive by the Parthians. According to some accounts, they were relocated to the eastern border of the Parthian Empire. It is believed that they were most likely sent to what is now Turkmenistan. It was a Parthian custom to send prisoners of war captured in the west to the far east to secure their loyalty against their eastern rivals, the Huns.

 

17 years later, in 36 BC, on the western border of the Han Chinese Empire, the battle of Zhizhi was fought between the Chinese and the Huns, a classical enemy of China. The Chinese annals record mercenaries fighting on the side of the Huns who used a “fish scale” formation. The fish scale formation impressed the Chinese and they invited the soldiers to come back to China and become part of the border guard in the modern Gansu province. A city and county were also made for them which were named Li-Jien or Liqian.

 

The Lost Legion of Carrhae and the Mysterious Army

The Chinese description of the fish scale formation used by the mercenary soldiers bears a vague resemblance to the testudo formation practiced by Roman legions. This has led to the popular theory that these mysterious soldiers were in fact exiled Roman legionnaires from the Battle of Carrhae who had hired themselves out as mercenaries for the Huns.

 

This idea was first suggested by the historian Homer Dubs. Dubs argued that some of the soldiers in exile gave up trying to go back to Rome and hired themselves out as mercenaries for local warlords in the region. Some of these former Roman soldiers may have found themselves working for the Huns in their war against the Chinese.

 

Assessment of the Facts

Is it possible that the inhabitants of the unusual village could be descendants of displaced Romans? This has attracted the interest of both Chinese and Western scientists. A genetic study from the University of Lanzhou showed that the inhabitants of the town do have connections to Europe, which makes the theory more plausible, though it is also true that the town is built along the old Silk Road so connections with western populations are more likely regardless of whether they were Roman. Another connection that has been noted is that the name “Li-Jien” sounds like “legion” when spoken in Chinese. Some have used this to argue that the name is originally derived from the word.

 

On the other hand, many scholars have doubts about the feasibility of the hypothesis. Although it is possible that a group of Roman mercenaries could have made it all the way to western China, it is still an enormous distance. And, even though there is circumstantial evidence, there is no evidence that would confirm that Romans had been in Liqian in the past.

 

 

Since Rome and China were aware of each other in antiquity, and it was possible to travel between the two empires at the time, this hypothesis is made more plausible. It is possible that a Roman legion did make it to China, but the evidence is not conclusive.

 

The genetic findings could also be interpreted to mean that the people of the town descend from a local Caucasian population and there is no indisputable archaeological evidence of a Roman presence in the town in antiquity.

 

 

 

https://www.ancient-origins.net/unexplained-phenomena/lost-legion-carrhae-0011019

 

Edited Tuesday at 10:21 AM by Sanity Check

[MadePossible]

@Sanity Check what's that got to do with events taking place in 1000 BCE?

 

In fact, this thread has completely gone off subject.

[Cobie]

 

 

9 hours ago, 心神 ~ said:

…

What intrigues me most, given my interests, is the proposed connection between Xi Wangmu, the Queen Mother of the West, and Kubala of Carchemish, Great Mother of the Mountains (and later as Cybele of Anatolia, Queen of Heaven and Earth.)

 

 

[From spoiler]

Elfriede Knauer’s article (cited in the study) posits that when you look at Han-era images of Xi Wangmu, the resemblance to the Western Great Mother types is too close to be accidental.

…

 

 

Herbert Giles (as in ‘Wade-Giles’ romanisation), he thought 西王母 Xiwangmu was copied from the Greek/Roman Goddess Hera/Juno.  E.g. he analyses some characters to support this view ( ADVERSARIA SINICA, e.g. pg. 14 onwards)

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 06:47 PM by Cobie

[Cobie]

 

8 hours ago, 心神 ~ said:

…

My question is, if Indo-Europeans created the Yijing and the Daodejing as distinct systems, separate from early Chinese culture, where is that system now in their own traditions? China, despite repeated waves of loss and destruction, has held onto these texts and developed their philosophy for thousands of years. If the deeper origin really lay with Indo-Europeans, where is the parallel, continuous lineage on their side?

…

 

Imo ancestor worship was the religion of ancient Chinese society from as far back as the Neolithic period; and it is still practiced alongside the main three.

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 06:28 PM by Cobie

[Cobie]

 

8 hours ago, 心神 ~ said:

… I find the sky-father deities and twin progenitors to be the weakest part of the argument …

I agree, e.g. the Chinese already had Shangdi (上帝) 

 

8 hours ago, 心神 ~ said:

… It is clear there was real contact, influence, and exchange between these worlds.  …

I agree. 

 

Edited Tuesday at 06:27 PM by Cobie

[Nungali]

10 hours ago, MadePossible said:

 

Ancient Egypt, mesopotamia, native American, Australians, etc aren't Indo European

 

Indeed ! ... and thats the point  ... if you 'get it ' . 

 

 

10 hours ago, MadePossible said:

 

and don't have a sky god as head of their pantheon.

 

Correct , however I was responding to the actual words if the claim which were ; '' worshiped a Sky God  ''  not '' had a sky God as head of their pantheon '' .

 

10 hours ago, MadePossible said:

 

 

Greece (Zeus), Rome (Ju - piter) and perhaps the Zhou (Di) are Indo-Europeans and have the proto-Indo-European sky god (Dyeus piter) at the head of their pantheon.

 

'PIE  religion and  associated 'facts' are either made up or highly speculative     as is  'Dyeus piter '

 

Spoiler

The "validity" of Proto-Indo-European (PIE) religion is that of a scholarly hypothesis, not a historically proven religion, meaning it is a plausible and productive model supported by evidence but also subject to uncertainty. This reconstruction is based on comparative linguistics and mythology, examining similarities in deities, myths, and rituals across Indo-European cultures to extrapolate a shared ancestral system. Direct archaeological evidence is scarce and difficult to match to specific cultures from the relevant period, so the reconstruction is a model with degrees of confidence rather than a known religion . 

 

[Nungali]

8 hours ago, MadePossible said:

@Sanity Check what's that got to do with events taking place in 1000 BCE?

 

 

Its best to ignore that one  ^  ( perception and communication  'difficulties'  )   

 

 

Quote

 

In fact, this thread has completely gone off subject.

 

Sorry , I thought  the original diversion to this subject and the posting of that paper  and bringing up this idea  was due to a  lack of understanding about what the term in question actually meant and this was bought up as a possible alternative   explanation / origin . 

 

; ''  There really are a thousand different ideas what it could mean, because no-one actually seems to know what it means.

 

 

.

Edited Tuesday at 08:56 PM by Nungali

[Sanity Check]

13 hours ago, MadePossible said:

@Sanity Check what's that got to do with events taking place in 1000 BCE?

 

In fact, this thread has completely gone off subject.

 

 

 

Is this not evidence of european influence on chinese culture?

 

 

[MadePossible]

7 hours ago, Sanity Check said:

Is this not evidence of european influence on chinese culture?

Not really. Green eyes was common in central asia at the time, and saka (central asian) interaction with ancient China is well-documented. Even now, half of the Uzbekistanis I've met have green eyes.

 

The discussion diverged into whether there was 'proto-Indo-European' influence on the ancient Chinese yijing. Romans have nothing to do with the writing of the Yijing and aren't proto-Indo-Europeans.

[Sanity Check]

2 hours ago, MadePossible said:

Not really. Green eyes was common in central asia at the time, and saka (central asian) interaction with ancient China is well-documented. Even now, half of the Uzbekistanis I've met have green eyes.

 

The discussion diverged into whether there was 'proto-Indo-European' influence on the ancient Chinese yijing. Romans have nothing to do with the writing of the Yijing and aren't proto-Indo-Europeans.

 

 

Half of uzbekistanis you've met have green eyes? But the demographic for green eyes there is only 5%.

 

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-the-most-green-eyes

 

The story of a roman legion settling in china is an old tale. Some sources claim european DNA is present there and has been resident in the area since the time of Marcus Crassus around 50'ish BC. 

 

In which case would that not be indo european influence?

[MadePossible]

They aren't proto-Indo-Europeans. Romans in China have zero relevance to the Yijing.

 

It seems you've had a misunderstanding.

Edited Wednesday at 02:22 PM by MadePossible

[Cobie]

 

3 hours ago, Sanity Check said:

… https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/countries-with-the-most-green-eyes …

(From the link) More than 75 percent of people who are born with green eyes can be found in Ireland and Scotland. 
 

 

[Sanity Check]

16 hours ago, MadePossible said:

They aren't proto-Indo-Europeans. Romans in China have zero relevance to the Yijing.

 

It seems you've had a misunderstanding.

 

 

If your goal was to prove europeans influenced china during that time. 1st step is to establish some type of precedent. Lost roman legion in china might help with this.

 

But if we're being honest, I think the actual influence occurred in the opposite direction. 

 

China had developed mercury based immortality elixirs long before europeans attempted to mimic these trends with their own mercury based philosopher's stones, etc.

 

 

[Nungali]

16 hours ago, Sanity Check said:

 

 

If your goal was to prove europeans influenced china during that time. 1st step is to establish some type of precedent. Lost roman legion in china might help with this.

 

But if we're being honest, I think the actual influence occurred in the opposite direction. 

 

China had developed mercury based immortality elixirs long before europeans attempted to mimic these trends with their own mercury based philosopher's stones, etc.

 

 

 

 

'During that time' was before the Romans ever existed !   That was already explained to you ,  dont you even read people's responses to you ? 

 

And dont respond to this as I will not  interact with you more here , as its clear you want to do in this thread , what you have done in other threads  on Daobums .... whatever your motivations are for that !            

[Sanity Check]

2 hours ago, Nungali said:

 

 

'During that time' was before the Romans ever existed !   That was already explained to you ,  dont you even read people's responses to you ? 

 

And dont respond to this as I will not  interact with you more here , as its clear you want to do in this thread , what you have done in other threads  on Daobums .... whatever your motivations are for that !            

 

 

You're still overreacting and going overboard over nothing.

 

Fast forward to the part where in a week or two you don't remember any of this happened, please.

 

Edited 21 hours ago by Sanity Check

[Nungali]

any of what happened ?