WI: China remains a civilization of mass human sacrifice

[Intransigent Southerner]

From Gideon Shellach, “The Qiang and the Question of Human Sacrifice in the Late Shang Period”:

Human sacrifice was an important part of Shang [the earliest Chinese dynasty] rituals... In the known oracle bone inscriptions, at least 14,197 human victims are mentioned.
​

From “Human Sacrifice During Shang Dynasty China”:

Specifically, renji sacrifice functions as prayers to Shang-Di [the supreme god of Shang China] to deliver the Shang people from famine... Hundreds of captured slaves were typically executed during a renji ceremony, usually via decapitation. The corpses of the victims, along with their severed heads, were buried in mass sacrificial pits or collectively incinerated, in order to placate what they thought was an angry Shang-Di.

To pray for the end of the famine brought by Shang-Di’s wrath, the Shang king would demonstrate to the supreme deity of their devoutness through the specular spilling of sacrificial human blood. Oracle bone inscriptions refer to such sacrificial human blood as qiu (氿, lit. “cascade”), but the precise method for extracting the sacrificial blood is unknown. The largest recorded human sacrifice of this kind was done by Shang king Wuding, where over 9,000 slaves were slaughtered as offerings to Shang-Di.​

There are tons of such references, both archaeologically and in the oracle bone texts, about different types of Chinese human sacrifice, mostly of prisoners of war from other tribes or peasants: drowning in the Yellow River, burning alive, cannibalism, burying alive, decapitation (with the skull used as a cup and the head sometimes boiled and eaten). Oracle bones feature Chinese kings asking their gods questions like:

“Should the woman Tsai be burned at the stakes? Will this bring rain?”

“Should a man be burnt at the stakes? Will rain follow?”

“Should we offer wine? [Or] Should we offer ancestor Dajia and Zuyi ten beheaded men and ten pairs of sheep to thank them?”

“Should Princess Hao be purified in front of [her late] father? Should a slave be sacrificed [in order for her to be purified]?”​

Abolishing human sacrifice was one of the earliest and greatest victories of the Confucian philosophical movement.

The few remaining signs of this ancient practice in modern China are the shapes of a few characters, like 血 “blood”, which is a stylized picture of a cup once used to offer blood to the gods, or 民 “commoner”, a stylized picture of an eye being stabbed by a dagger (Shang sacrificial victims were blinded before being sacrificed).

What if Confucian and other anti-human sacrifice ideologies had failed, and the Chinese continued to regularly offer thousands of men and women to the gods?

 

[xsampa]

Perhaps something like the Flower Wars to capture sacrificial victims becomes permanent if China remains a series of balkanized states.However, if China unifies, it may use human sacrifice as a political tool to unify the country. By forcing commoners to observe the spectacle of mass sacrifices, they can keep them in line and provide opportunities for social advancement through the capturing of barbarian warriors for sacrifice.

 

[JamesBond88]

If the areas outside of China are used as sacrifice collection areas, China could be seriously resented. Alternatively, those cultures could pick up the sacrificial ways and start doing it themselves. Europeans are going to be pretty concerned when they reach China. The Spanish might come to some kind of conclusion about an Aztec-China link.

 

[Intransigent Southerner]

Europeans are going to be pretty concerned when they reach China.

Well, to keep things a bit earlier, let's say that *Han China still exists much as IOTL, only this time, their expansion into Central Asia is accompanied by the mass human sacrifice of the locals. What does the rest of the ancient world think?

 

[Optical_Illusion]

I guess my immediate thoughts are on skepticism of the evidence:

1) How much evidence do we have of prominent is this tradition post-Shang? 1000BCE (latest Shang) to 500BCE (Confucius) and 200BCE (Analects composed) is a good stretch of time for change.

2) How much reliability does the evidence have if it's within Confucian tradition? There's a fair amount of suggestion that descriptions of competing moral factions were not always accurately portrayed within the Confucian tradition (as they wouldn't within any tradition).

Within the assumption that premise is correct, I'd find it challenging to imagine that a Chinese philosophical tradition that does not reject human sacrifice would be too sophisticated or competitive in the vitality of ideas or has the same moral authority. So I'd guess the idea is incorporated later, or eventually there is more supplanting of Chinese moral philosophy that exists in this time line by variants derived from Buddhism, etc.

Prior to that, following the idea of mass human sacrifices into Central Asia, I think that China isn't going to fundamentally be more advantaged in projection to the steppe or Central Asia, while steppe and Central Asian groups are going to have a lot more reason to wipe out rather than assimilate to the Chinese tradition, and locals will have a bit more a reason to switch identity. Partly depending on how much the ideas of human sacrifice hold sway in steppe and Central Asia.

 

[Intransigent Southerner]

How much evidence do we have of prominent is this tradition post-Shang? 1000BCE (latest Shang) to 500BCE (Confucius) and 200BCE (Analects composed) is a good stretch of time for change.

As I understand it, human sacrifice decreased greatly under the Zhou and Mencius 1A4 implies that they were being replaced by figurines like the terra-cotta army, but it continued to persist into the Han era. Historian Mark Edward Lewis says in Sanctioned Violence in Early China:

Following his defeat of the Shang army, King Wu [of Zhou] sacrificed the Shang king and his two wives, presented the heads of all the slain enemy soldiers at his she altar, and then had the heads burnt as an offering at his ancestral temple. The [Confucian] Zuo Zhuan lists several instances of human sacrifice to criticize the practice, but the existence of this polemic—which also appears in the [Mohist, anti-Confucian] Mozi—suggests that in the fourth century human sacrifice was still a common practice. This conclusion is supported by the fact that the king of Qin attempted to ban human sacrifice in 383 B.C. However, the primary evidence for human sacrifice during the Zhou comes from archaeological excavations, which show that it was continued throughout the dynasty; indeed, more examples have been found from the [late] Warring States Period than from the [early] Spring and Autumn. Even under the Han dynasty human sacrifice was practiced [in isolated areas of China]...

[The first form of human sacrifice in pre-Confucian China was] the aforementioned presentation of prisoners at the ancestral temple... In several cases the text states explicitly that the prisoners were sacrificed... Warfare logically culminated in the sacrifice of the enemy, just as the hunt culminated in the sacrificial offering of the game...

A second version of human sacrifice accepted as regular... was the use of the blood of a prisoner to consecrate newly cast war drums...

A final form of human sacrifice [in Zhou China] was the punishment inflicted upon several major rebels and assassins of rulers, who were rendered into meat sauce and fed to members of the court... Although this was a form of capital punishment... the etiological myth for this practice... clearly demonstrates that it was regarded as a form of sacrifice [as well].
​

So we have simultaneous criticism of human sacrifice from two mutually hostile traditions (Confucian and Mohist), textual evidence from the period itself (oracle bones), and archaeology. Seems like solid evidence.

 

[sloreck]

You could see a portion of the slave population being specifically bred for sacrifice, in that the supply of war prisoners or rebels will be spotty. The breeding pool for the "sacrifice slaves" would probably include non-Han prisoners added to the genetic mix so with time these slaves would be ethnically distinct from the general Han population. When the practice of human sacrifice eventually ends, you have a significant ethnic minority which would be considered the lowest of the low and readily visible as distinct. Unlike ethnic minorities in OTL China they would not be primarily in the fringes of the country (like the Uighurs as an example) or relatively isolated rural areas or offshore islands, but present throughout the main (Han) areas.

 

[Max Sinister]

Even if Confucius is responsible for the end of this IOTL and fails ITTL, someone else may have success later.

 

[Dolan]

Even if Confucius is responsible for the end of this IOTL and fails ITTL, someone else may have success later.

And if Mencius and other Han Chinese philosophers can't, the spread of Buddhism will definitely create a very serious and competitive moral alternative due to activities of Buddhist missionaries.

Especially with resentments from underclass and or slaves. Sure, it would be long, and the spread of Buddhism would be fought tooth and nail, but in the end, it would result in Chinese throughly Buddhi-fied.

 

[Intransigent Southerner]

Is a complex Chinese philosophical tradition incompatible with mass human sacrifice?

 

[Bassarion Korax]

Is a complex Chinese philosophical tradition incompatible with mass human sacrifice?

I mean, theoretically no. However, I can’t really think of an example of a society that had both.

 

[Deleted member 114175]

I mean, theoretically no. However, I can’t really think of an example of a society that had both.

Aztecs, Mixtecs, Mayans, Incas, ancient Phoenicia, and the Old Norse all had relatively complex philosophy and some degree of human sacrifice.

Strong centralized legal institutions are more of a barrier to human sacrifice than complex philosophy is.

 

[Demothenes]

I wouldn’t say the Old Norse had an incredibly strong philosophical tradition, folk tradition yeah, but nothing that compares to Socrates or Confucius.

 

[Thon Taddeo]

Is the rise of complex philosophy the cause of the abolition of human sacrifice, or could both be the result of other changes within Zhou society?

 

[Intransigent Southerner]

could both be the result of other changes within Zhou society?

Well, it does seem somewhat weird that all major Chinese philosophical movements (Confucianism, Mohism, Legalism) were strongly opposed to human sacrifice.

Even the very first work of Chinese literature, the Classic of Poetry, features a poem about the sacrifice of warriors during the funeral of the king they serve, pointing out explicitly what a waste of human resources it is:

“Jiaojiao,” cries the oriole
Perched on the thorn bush.
Who went with Duke Mu to the grave?

It was Yanxi of the clan of Ziju.
Now this Yanxi’s fine virtue
Was one of a hundred,​

But as he drew near to the pit of the tomb,
Oh, how he trembled!
Heaven so blue
Cut down our fine man.
Could he be redeemed,
He’d be worth a hundred.

“Jiaojiao,” cries the oriole
Perched on the mulberry.
Who went with Duke Mu to the grave?

It was Zhonghang of the clan of Ziju.
Now this Zhonghang’s great strength
Could fend off a hundred,​

But as he drew near to the pit of the tomb,
Oh, how he trembled!
Heaven so blue
Cut down our fine man.
Could he be redeemed,
He’d be worth a hundred.

“Jiaojiao,” cries the oriole
Perched on the bramble.
Who went with Duke Mu to the grave?

It was Zhenhu of the clan of Ziju.
Now this Zhenhu’s great valor
Could ward off a hundred,​

But as he drew near to the pit of the tomb,
Oh, how he trembled!
Heaven so blue
Cut down our fine man.
Could he be redeemed,
He’d be worth a hundred.
​

I suppose the Spring & Autumn and Warring States, which resulted in the demise of the traditional Chinese aristocracy, might have been the ultimate cause of both the development of new philosophies and the waning of human sacrifice.

 

[Neptune]

I can practically smell the Vlad Tepes award from here. China might not reach the population it did OTL, but it would probably still be able to deal out a lot of damage in the process.

Off the top of my head, with such an early POD, Genghis Khan probably wouldn't be born. With the regular slaughter of "fringe" peoples, perhaps the chance of the Mongols or the Uyghurs (and their precursors/successors) eventually fighting back might be reduced?

Another edit. Did some research and it turns out that human sacrifice in China lasted until at least 1673, though in a pretty diminished form. It was still on in full force 'till about 384BC, with 50-200 people sacrificed for every ruler in the State of Qin (the state that eventually united China).

Jesus, can you imagine it, though? A vast society built on sacrifice and slavery, feeding millions into the charnel pit. It'd be worse than the Mongols and the Holocaust combined - a civilization dedicated to slaughter and butchery even in peacetime. The Himalayas and the Gobi desert might also separate potential allies in Southeast Asia, Tibet/Turkestan and Mongolia, leaving China to take them down at their leisure. If a revolutionary movement were to come to prominence, it would still be a scale of bloodletting unmatched in history - the lower classes (slaves/sacrifices) having never known anything but brutality will kill every soldier/bureaucrat/aristocrat they find.

 

[The Ranger]

Mao would be even more bloodthirsty in this timeline.

 

[Richard Osborne]

The hunnic invasions would be worse if the huns were fleeing Aztec level sacrifice.

 

[Max Sinister]

Once I read a Chinese legend about a young man being sacrificed during the construction of the Chinese Wall - they walled him in it, alive.

 

[Deleted member 114175]

I wouldn’t say the Old Norse had an incredibly strong philosophical tradition, folk tradition yeah, but nothing that compares to Socrates or Confucius.

Well is a strong (implying doctrinized, centralized) philosophical tradition the same thing as a complex philosophical tradition? The strength of a philosophical tradition would be tied to other phenomena than pure philosophy — such as the economic relationships, legal institutions, diplomatic relations between cities and states, hierarchical social systems — that make the spreading of the philosophical traditions and promulgation of specific schools of thought possible.

Rather than a strong philosophical tradition itself, the non philosophical phenomena associated with it can preclude human sacrifice. There are exceptions to this such as the Aztecs, Mayans, and Phoenicians/Carthaginians which I mentioned alongside the Old Norse.

The society which practiced human sacrifice on the largest scale, the Aztecs, had a strong philosophical tradition pervasive across the whole Valley of Mexico, and a complex one as well, with a multi stage cosmology, the priests believing in dualistic monism and the abstract idea of a unified but multifaceted Teotl. Deities had many aspects and the sacrificial rituals were steeped in symbolism and complicated rationalizations. So other factors than the complexity of philosophy alone must suggest why human sacrifice would persist or be abolished.