在台东美术馆的自我简介
大家好！我是来自北京的苏三。感谢HP给我这么一个机会在这里介绍我自己以及我的研究概况。
我出生于中国中部的河南省，现在居住在中国首都北京。80年代初我在中国接受了英美文学专业的大学教育，许多老师来自于世界各地，但主要是英美两国。当时中国刚刚文革结束没几年，所以非常封闭，中西方是完全不同的两个世界。我当时的精神世界与今天中国的极左差不多，对中国充满了虚幻的民族自豪感，谁批评中国我就会跟他们进行激烈的辩论。但是在大学期间逐渐对于之前的中国教育的知识体系产生了极大的怀疑，逐渐如同世界崩塌，然后陷入长时间的迷茫与困惑。这就开始了我对于中国社会的诸多思考，但主要焦点是中西方的文化比较与文明历史的比较。这之后我做过10年教师，还到外国企业工作过数年，从河南省到湖北省，再到北京，有着复杂的职业生涯。面对着飞速发展的中国社会，我有着与日俱增的困惑，最后在2002年决定辞职回家读书，集中思考与探索中国社会问题。
我在书店偶然看到一本书介绍中国四川三星堆遗址。中国考古专家解释，中国人的文明是独立在东亚起源的，三星堆也一样。我很怀疑这个理论。我一直知道中国人的历史研究不客观，只是为了弘扬民族自豪感，而非科学中立的研究，这是我从大学读书时得到的认知判断。我知道他们是错误的，但是考古学也不是随便可以进入的学科。但我思考了一下，还是决心就此开始与中国考古学家与历史学家就文明起源问题进行长期的较量。之后我就中国的文明研究正式出版了十本书籍，成为中国当代研究中国文明西来说领域的学术带头人。
十几年过去了，有关中国文明起源方面，中国人的看法已经与当初非常不同了。今天中国考古学家已经很少人再坚持中国文明是完全独立起源的了，但却停留在“中国文明是中西方互动”的结论。我认为他们这样的态度还不够，宏观看中国文明起源整体就是西方影响的结果。
大约2006年前后，以分子人类学为基础的“人类出非洲”理论成为全球人类学公理。之前的全球学界是认同“各地人类是独立起源的”，中国人也一直认为中国人是本地独立起源的，所以他们也认为中国文明是独立起源的，进而全球的各地文明都是各地独立起源的，人类与文明两者之间是配套关系。
由于“人类出非洲”的出现，实际上连带推翻了旧的文明起源体系，即各地独立起源说。但由于这是一个非常复杂宏大的学术问题，所以全球学术界的反应估计会延宕好几年才会觉醒反思更改。由于核心问题又在中国，所以，全球文明的研究会跟着再慢一拍。但恰好由于我本来在“人类出非洲”理论之前就在做推翻旧的文明起源体系的工作，所以我成为这一思潮在中国的带头人，并引起国内外很多关注。国内早先骂我是胡说八道的人，现在也很多开始改口。
（人类出非洲大致路径）
在中国国内，尽管今天的历史研究与我上大学时的80年代很不一样了，有很大进步，并且有了互联网，但还是没有达到完全开放的程度。2006年《求是》杂志就专文批判过我的研究属于“历史虚无主义”，中国左派则认为我是“汉奸”，甚至北京人民广播电台采访我时说：中国人研究历史应该胳膊肘向内拐，说自己的好话，为何做不利于中国的历史研究？记者的意思是，我研究中国文明西来影响了中国人的民族自豪感，所以我的学术行为是错误的——当我得知她是北京大学毕业生之后，我为中国人的科学修养问题感到非常悲哀。所以，很明显现在中国史学界的研究还是不能达到客观与科学中立，因为中国人普遍缺乏一种现代的科学精神。
（被授予 2016年度 和平使者。无关政治 无关经济，共同的理念： truth & peace ）
但无论如何，分子人类学在中国已经逐渐推广开来，尽管还是受到很多民族主义者的干扰与谩骂，乃至胡搅蛮缠。中国人是独立起源的，还是“出非洲”，这在目前的中国学界还是个广泛讨论的问题。就中国的文明起源问题，很关键的青铜冶炼技术与马车技术来源等，现在中国的考古界已经承认是从西部进入中国，而狭义上的所谓文明起源正是主要指的类似的项目，实际上狭义上的中国文明就是由青铜贸易潮拉动的。今天，有关中国文明起源的课题在中国国内正在引起越来越多的人关注，进入火热学术讨论阶段。以前学者们认为，中国文明在本地独立起源已是定论，根本无需讨论。有关的学术研究，还有很长的道路要走。
通过文明起源的研究，另外加上人类起源的研究，到后期我发现人类发展规律逐步显现出来。这是个非常有趣的话题，它不仅有助于我们在新的科学成果下重新看待全球文明发展问题，而且对于中国在全球的文明定位，有了一个新的支点与坐标框架。就此，我主要有以下几个思想观点可能影响到当下的史学研究。
1，“发现”旧石器时代，即倡议从旧石器时代开始观察人类与中国文明
2，宏观看中国自古就是落后的，提出中国在全球文明中的“年线压制”问题
3，古代西部旧大陆对于中国文明起源的决定性影响
4，研究人类文明发展规律
之前各地人类独立起源与文明独立起源思想占主流时期，当然没有什么“人类文明发展规律”，各地自己发展自己的文明就是了。但是现在我的理论认为不是这样的，全球的文明是同源的，东亚文明是从西部传播过来的，那么就出现了一个人类与文明如何在全球逐步展开的规律性问题。这些研究成熟之后，还影响到对全球文明的趋势性看法，因为，中国是整个东亚的代表，它地域广大，一旦有关中国的错误看法纠正之后，全球文明发展就清晰了。
全球的文明发展与人类出非洲紧密相连。把人类在东北非的根源去掉，现代人在全球的扩散，就是人类文明的起源与传播路线，即人类文明是传播扩散的结果——这其实就是我的研究的核心。中国文明是人类出非洲之后向东扩散发展的一个支系，欧洲是向西的一个支系，其他的支系也都可以得到解释。由于文明的发源核心点在地中海东部地区，或曰中东地区，东亚之后的美洲文明就是亚洲之后的一个传播支系，当然日本、韩国的文明也是从西部的中国等地的东亚传播而来。这是一个总的传播方向的规律。这在我的体系里是个主线。
人类文明的发展规律当然会很复杂，还涉及到许多方面，比如恒久受气候的压制等。人类的文明传播规律实际上主要就是地缘传播规律，还有许多次要规律做补充。这些规律应该可以解释所有地区的文明发展节奏，当然尤其是中国的文明发展，而且这些规律不仅能解释古代的历史，而且甚至可以解释今天，乃至对明天的文明发展也能做出一定的预测。或许，由此我的研究开辟了一个新学科：文明学，以文明发展规律为核心的新学科。所以我的研究引起了许多智库的关注。我相信介绍到国外后一定也会引起同样的关注，因为全球现在都很关注整体人类文明的发展动向，尤其是中国的发展，而这些正是我目前研究的核心（计划中的一个纪录片是专门讲这些人类发展规律的，《苏三大历史：忽然》或改名为《人类发展的规律是什么？》）
我的书在大陆出版是很困难的，但也不是不能出，就是需要惊人的耐心和妥协。不过我一直在网络上积极推广我的研究。感谢你们的关注以及对我的图书出版的支持。
总体，我把我的研究看做是一个探索过程，因为它是有关史前的，本来就缺乏资料，而中国的历史考古又不客观，甚至是长期明确地压制中国文明西来说的研究，所以中国今天并不具备成熟的学术研究条件。我是自由作家，属于没有任何资源的独立研究，这样一个庞大艰难的学术工程对于我几乎是impossible mission。所以我对于我的研究工作有一种很放松的态度，我对于我的工作定位是一种文化呼吁与研究兼有的活动。我并不是历史专业出身，尽管我认为我的整体研究思想是有价值、有力的，但真正的严肃学术活动还是要等后人去继续完善。现在我的著述都属于科普性质，前期的一些研究非常粗糙，所以即便有人希望出我全集我也也都会拒绝了。比如之前在华人和基督徒中比较有影响的《向东向东，再向东》我一般就不建议再版，当然这本书在中国大陆实际上因为讨论《旧约》已被禁。香港的一些电视台曾经推荐过这本书，他们还专题推荐了拙著《汉字起源新解》。我后期的研究有三四本书我认为比较有价值，有的还获奖了，可以考虑再版，比如《汉字起源新解》《文明大趋势》《新文明简史》《苏三大历史：忽然》等。其中的三本书其实都已经有英文翻译，但英文书尚未出版，我还没有找出版社，多看阅读 duokan 网上有这些书的英文版。
我的大致情况就是这些。谢谢大家！
苏三 Susan Xu
wechat: susanxuxuxu
facebook：徐苏三
podcasts:听苏三聊文明
twitter:@susanxuxuxu
Speech at Tai Tung Art Museum
Greetings to everyone ! I am Susan Xu from Beijing.
I would like to extend my gratitude to Peace Mediafor providing me the opportunity to introduce myself and to give an update regardingmy research.
I was born in the central district of Henanprovince, now residing inBeijing. In early 80’s Ireceived university education specialised in English literature. There weremany teachers who came from different parts of the world, in particular,England and the United States. As it happened during the post culturalrevolution time, the situation was very isolated from the rest of theworld. My spiritual world at that time was no differentfrom the mainstreams in China today: ferventlyadored Chairman Mao, acted extremely patriotic, and be proud of Chineseethnicity. We would intensely conduct debates with whoever dared to criticiseChina. However, during university period, we were starting to doubt theso-called system of knowledge as laid down in the standards of Chineseeducation. To us, it was like gradualcollapse of the world, subsequently falling into a long term period of loss anduncertainty. We started to ponder on the focus of Chinese civilisationvis-a-vis the history of world civilisations. Thereafter, I had worked ineducation field for ten years. I also had experience working in foreign enterprise. All these constitute the complexity of myworking career. Finally in 2002, I decided to quit teaching and returned tostudy. The main focus was on the contemplation and exploration of Chineseissues.
Accidentally, I came cross a book regarding therelics of San Sing Dui in China’s Szechuan province. Some Chinesearchaeologists claimed that Chinese civilisation started independently and thatSan Sing Dui is solelyChinese domesticculture. I doubtedthistheory. I know a lot of Chinese are quite subjective in the study of our ownhistory. They would promote only the pride of inclusive ethnicity instead offrom independent scientific perspective. This was what Ireckoned during university study. I know that they were wrong. However, archaeology is not a discipline（field?） that I can easily get into. With strongdetermination, I began to venture into the arena for a long term wrestle withChinese archaeologists as well as historians on the subject of the beginning ofChinese culture. Subsequently, I published ten books based on my research ofChinese civilisation. I became the pioneer and leader in the area ofcontemporary study of Chinese civilisation originated from the west.
After ten years, the study concerning the origin ofChinese civilisation has become very different from the past. Today,archaeologists could no longer argue for independent origin of Chinesecivilisation. They accept the assumption of interactive exchange with westerncivilisation. I think this kind of attitude is still insufficient to sustain.From a broad perspective, Chinese civilization is indeed a synopsis of westerninfluence. Certainly it was interactive from micro-perspective.
Around 2006, the theory“Humanity originated from Africa”has begun to be globally recognised. A lot ofscholars thought that human beings had independent origin at differentlocations. Chinese also believed inindependent origins including the languages. As such, there are different origins of worldcivilisations. However, with emerging theory and acceptance of “Humans out of Africa”, it essentially overrules the oldtheory of the origin of civilisation, i.e. the independent emergence ofcivilisations in different parts of the world. As this is such a gigantic scholasticquestion, it will take a period of years for scholars to properly assess.Moreover, as the core relies on China, the pace for development will furtherdelay for a while. Fortunately, prior to the publication of “HumanityOriginated From Africa”, I had extensive research in overturning the old theoryof the origin of global civilisation. Therefore, I became a leading figure inpromulgating the trend of “Origin of Chinese Civilisation from the West”. Itstirred up a lot of attention. Those in China who had claimed that I wasbaffling now reversed to change their statement. In China, inasmuch as the research on historyis very different from the time when I was in university with certain advanceddevelopment and in addition to internet, it has yet reached the stage ofcomplete openness and freedom. For instance in 2006, the publication andmagazines such as “Qiu Shi Journal”( “Red Flag”) had criticised my research asnull and void.of ethnicity, and the leftists in China claimed that I am abetrayer of Chinese culture. Beijing People’s Radio Broadcast ever asked me forinterview and told me to revert my stance inclined to favourable statementstowards Chinese. They questioned my motive in engaging research against theChinese Basically the meaning of the intervieweris that my research has adversely affected ethnic pride and my conducts aremistaken. Henceforth, Chinese historians will not accept objectivity andneutrality. This is not a simple question of simple political environment. Itis a question of the level of being civilised. There are a lot of ethnicpromoter among the rightists and the moderates. They cannot accept theperspective of Chinese civilisation originated from outside. Therefore, thisresearch is not a question of trend. It is a question of Chinese society.
Notwithstanding the outcome, Molecular anthropologyhas gradually been promoted. Despite a lot of disturbance and blames and someeven near barbaric attack casted by the ethnic promoters, the question whetherChinese independently established themselves or originated from Africa remainsa broad question for debate. Insofar as the scholars are concerned, the widelydiscussed question of origin relies on a crucial questions on the techniques ofmetal plating and the construction of horse carriage, etc. Today, Chinesearchaeologists recognised that these are imported from the west. From a narrowperspective, the so-called origin of civilisation also include similarsubjects. Therefore, the agenda of the origin of civilisation has aroused aheated stage of discussions and debates. The previous theory that Chinesecivilisation originated locally has no place for discussion. Clearly speaking,the respective research still has a long way to go and we need to continue toobtain encouraging support from various parties of the society.
Through the research of the origin of civilisationand in addition of the research of the origin of human beings, I discoveredthat the pace of human development has gradually come to light. This is a very interesting topic. Not only itis helpful for us to re-examine the outcome of global development, it gives usa new anchor in examining China’s global position or to re-establish newpoints. As such, I propose the following points of thoughts that may affect contemporaryresearch.
1. “Discovery” of Old Stone Age
2. China has fallen behind since ancient time
3. Influence of Chinese civilisation from the west
4. Laws of civilization
I believe when this research matures, it willinfluence the way of looking at global civilisation. It is China that becamethe representative of entire east Asia. With vast territory, the position andtrend of the development of in East Asia had to a certain extent determined andinfluenced the pace of global civilisation development.
It was believed that human beings have respectiveorigin and independent rise. There was no such thought as the rhythm of thedevelopment of civilisation. People in different locations had respectivedevelopments. But now my theory proclaims otherwise. The entire globalcivilisation stems from the same root. Then the question follows as how theentire world has gradually developed.
The development of global civilisation has closelink with early human who left Africa. Though the root linkage with northeastAfrica has been removed, the dissemination of people around the world is indeedthe origin and the dissemination of human civilisation. It means the result ofthe dissemination of human civilisation—-this in fact is the core of myresearch. Chinese civilisation is one of the branches of early human out ofAfrica. Europe towards the west is another one. All the rest could arrive atthe same explanation. As the centre of civilisation originated from easternpart of Mediterranean Sea or the old middle east district. America civilisationis a branch of Asia. Of course, Japan and Korea’s civilisations alsodisseminated from western part of China. This is the overall rhythm ofdissemination.
the development of human civilisation is of coursevery complicated. It also concerns a lot of areas. For instance, the continuousinfluence of climate changes. The pace of the development of civilisationbasically relies on the pace of geological changes. There were major changes aswell as numerous minor changes.These changes can provide explanation for thedevelopment of civilisation in certain districts. This is specifically the casein China. Not only can these changes provide explanation for the history in thepast, it can also provide explanation for the situation today and even makeprediction for the development of civilisation in future. Therefore, my research hasaroused a lot of attention of the think tank in China.I believe it will equallyarouse tremendous notice by international think tank.It is because the world isclosely looking at the trend of development of human civilisation, especiallyChina’s development. This is exactly the core of my research. ( Originallythere was a plan to make documentary film concerning the pace of human development.I have brought the materials that I can share with you. One is titled “ Susan’s BigHistory : All in a Flash” or to be renamed as “What is the Rhythm of HumanDevelopment ?”
It is difficult for me to publish my books inChina. This is inevitable. It requires trmendous patience and compromise. Sonormally I do not take the initiative to publish unless there is someone whohas the status to make it happen. Then I will coordinate. However, I havealways maintained promoting my research on the internet.
Overall, I take my research as a process ofexploration. As the subject concerns pre-historic period, there is alwaysdifficulties for lack for materials. As Chinese archaeological materials arenot objective with long term opposition on the proposition of Chinesecivilisation originated from the west, basically there is no resource forindependent study on the subject. To me it is an enormous project and almost animpossible mission. So I began to hold a more relaxed attitude towards my work.It is more a call for true value of culture and research. In fact, I am not ahistorian .Although I believe in the overall firm value of my research and mythoughts, the serious scholastic research awaits other professionals to perfectit. My work belongs to popular science, I had declined proposal for publishingthe entire collection of my research. For instance, the publication on “Eastwardand Eastward “ though it was popular among the Christians in China, I do notrecommend for subsequent publication. Of course this book was barred frombookshelf in China due to the discussion on “Old Testament”. This book togetherwith the book “New Explanation of Chinese Characters” were actually promoted bya television channel in Hong Kong. Thereafter, 3-4 books with more values werepublished. Some even received commendations and re-publications, i.e. “NewExplanation of the Origin of Chinese Characters”, “The Great Trend ofCivilisation”, “A Brief of New Civilisation”, “ Susan’s Big history : All in aFlash”, etc. Three among the books were translated into English now awaitingfor publisher. Please read more on “duokan” on the internet with Englishversion of some books .
Basically this is an overall update of mysituation. Thank you very much.
Susan Xu
WeChat:susanxuxu
facebook : 徐苏三
twitter:@susanxuxuxu