China suddenly disappeared among the four ancient civilizations in the world. Some people were surprised, some questioned, and some were angry! The latest history textbook published by a well-known university last week scared everyone. On the list of world civilizations in the book, Egypt, India, and Mesopotamia are still there, but China is gone. How did this change come about? It’s not clear if anyone really touched the problem—but who can’t think about it?
This small change in typesetting or definition can actually stir up the emotions of more than 100,000 netizens. Chinese civilization has long appeared mature characters, etiquette, cities, water conservancy, bronze and silk. Sima Qian wrote "Records of the Grand Historian" and spread the ideal of "world harmony". During the heyday of the Han and Tang dynasties, his influence was not only in East Asia, but even the Western Regions had to obey orders. Experts from all walks of life, not only domestic but also foreign archaeologists, have verified that the independence and continuity of Chinese civilization are stronger than most ancient civilizations. The 2023 UNESCO press release reads: "Chinese civilization is one of the main origins of human history." To talk about tampering, this place is not like an academic "unintentional planting willow", but more like a collision of some kind of stream of consciousness.
But who stipulates that textbooks must be completely loyal to the "encyclopedia"-style ranking of the four major civilizations? Textbook reform often follows social changes, right? Some experts say that the names of the four major civilizations were summarized by European scholars in the last century. Today, some new archaeological discoveries, such as the ancient civilizations of the Americas and Africa, are also quite brilliant. The textbooks are divided more closely, and the "main ancient civilization" of mankind is greater than the "four major"; China's status is actually more solid, rather than being compared. One-size-fits-all, but the old sayings are re-introduced. Then this time the textbook editor was not serious? Or are you intentionally redefining the pattern of world civilization? There is no more news to prove which link is a mistake, or if there is any deep reason behind it, all you hear is speculation.
The textbook has a great influence. It is said that small is a few pages of paper in the teacher's classroom. It is said that it is important, and it is the starting point for influencing the worldview of several generations. Many netizens are worried that this "absence" will make students mistakenly think that Chinese history is not that powerful. Parents posted the screenshots online, and professors from the Department of History held a live broadcast on social platforms to clarify that the core contribution of Chinese civilization could not be erased. The state has set up a special investigation team to confirm that it will revise the relevant content. Xinhua News Agency released data this week, and more than 100 self-inspection teams of history textbooks have intervened, and it can basically be confirmed that the "missed column" is a temporary mistake. But is a mistake a mistake? Is anyone here doing some "experiment" intentionally or unintentionally? Can't explain clearly.
Many netizens’ comments directly hit the extreme - some say that this is a deliberate "de-Sinicization", and some suspect that overseas forces are infiltration. To be honest, this kind of random exaggeration is quite untraceable. More than nine well-known historians jointly published an article, believing that the changes in the textbook content are mostly due to academic misjudgment. Some people also argue that the new textbooks need to be actively corrected, but they cannot "trial" the entire writing team with emotion. That's right, it's not all malice, but it's certainly not everyone's peace of mind. That is to say, is this a technical reason or something else? !
On the other hand, the list of civilizations in the textbook is not necessary. However, it is a bit outrageous to delete China. No matter it is academic disagreement or editorial negligence, it cannot be taken lightly. The China Cultural Relics Administration announced in 2024: "Chinese civilization develops independently and continues to be stable." The data behind it, the annual report on archaeology stated, "There are at least 6,000 years of uninterrupted cultural existence in China." Soft power and hard evidence are all intact, can it be erased?
In fact, different texts have different opinions. Although some textbooks put the "ancient civilization" classification method behind it, no textbook will directly deny China's historical status. The "main global ancient civilization" mentioned in the textbook now has experts explained that it is in line with international standards. But who sets the international standards? The Oxford History Encyclopedia and the UNESCO database both include China as the mainstream ancient civilization. In other words, although "international standards" are sometimes changing, China's position will not change very much. But the textbook is missed, why is it so sensitive?
Yes, the confusion caused by being missed is indeed quite large. How would it feel if students open the textbook and were originally looking forward to a splendid history of their own country, but they would feel when they saw their nation being excluded? A high school history teacher posted a very direct post: "If China is not written in the textbook, it will mislead students to understand." If these misleadings are not corrected in time, the consequences can be imagined.
Someone in the writing team said, "We didn't mean it," but if we change it, we change it. Once the textbook is launched on the market, the students will accept the truth. Their curiosity is not only a lack of knowledge, but also a crisis of trust. Having said that, most of the responsibility for this matter is actually due to the lack of strict process control. Is there no more transparent verification mechanism? Actually, after complaining, have you ever thought about whether there is anything that has not been explained clearly in the textbook writing process? !
There are still two voices. While emphasizing the seriousness of the mistake, we must hold accountable, while saying that the current demands on textbooks are too high. The criteria for being selected for civilization actually have to be changed every few years, and history itself is not static. For example, the American high school world history textbook has recently added the African Nile civilization to the "Four Majors". Some scholars held a live broadcast: "The four major civilizations themselves are theories and do not have authority." This view is reasonable, but some people oppose it. After all, where does the authority of the textbook come from? Does it all depend on who can change it quickly?
Some people also say that the textbook deletion is "anti-nationalization", but on the other hand, some people say that this is just an academic adjustment. As a result, two voices coexist, and no one can tell whether it is right or wrong. The topic continues to be hot, and the university involved responded: "A comprehensive review has been launched and relevant content will be restored." The public opinion has promoted, and this matter has gradually entered the stage of error correction. But the deeper reasons are still very vague now, and everyone thinks there will be a follow-up.
Was anyone taking action on the truth of history? Or is it just an oversight of the editor group? No one can completely restore the details, but mistakes in the textbook will inevitably affect students. Judging from the official announcement and netizens’ feedback, the risk of being misled is still very obvious. The Chinese historical community has denied the statement that "China is not an ancient civilization in the world." But sometimes public opinion is not so reasonable. After all, if the historical consensus is broken, it will continue to shatter once it breaks.
About civilization sorting, there has been a lot of reflection internationally in recent years. Why do the four major civilizations have a focus on the Western perspective? China's historical status is actually more continuous than many ancient civilizations. The paper of the 2023 World History Conference shows that Chinese civilization’s unique contributions to science and technology, systems and agriculture are widely recognized. UN data has also repeatedly confirmed that ancient Chinese civilization is irreplaceable. The ignorance in the textbook is really untenable.
Of course, some people insist that the "Four Great Civilizations" are outdated, and it is better to fully demonstrate the diversity of ancient world history. This view makes sense, but "kicking" China off the list seems to be not a matter of "diversity", but more like some misunderstanding. The so-called "master behind the scenes" sounds like a conspiracy, but maybe it's just that everyone is too sensitive. After all, who would easily joke about his historical identity?
History teachers across the country have received new textbook errata. The publisher said it would review it and invited historians to intervene in the revision. Textbooks are the starting point for children to understand. If you miss ancient Chinese civilization, students will feel unconfident if you accidentally.
The feeling of being denied is very uncomfortable for adults, let alone young people. It is not only national confidence, but also the basis of our world identity. The mistakes in history textbooks are not just mistakes, but rather like a social issue that tests supervision and academic self-discipline. After this incident, the relevant departments have intervened in the rectification.
After this incident, people's discussion gradually turned to the topic of "authority of textbooks" and "historical consensus". Some netizens have reflected on whether the teaching content always changes with external standards. Some parents are also anxious, afraid that the history they learn has no foundation. No one can tell what the future teaching materials standards are, and no one can guarantee that there will be no mistakes.
Finally, this textbook incident reminds everyone: historical identity is not just a few words in the textbook. Who can guarantee that you will not encounter similar disputes again in the future? At least now, everyone is starting to keep a little more attentive. This kind of hasty textbook change is not something that can happen at will.
