When I Heard Mr. Zhang Shuangnan Say He’s a Capricorn, My Heart Was Utterly Crushed

Today, scholars like Hobson from the UK have revealed the pervasive Eurocentrism in Western thought. Well-intentioned netizens have even translated Jack London’s The Unparalleled Invasion into Chinese, and increasingly, brave voices are speaking out for truth.

But has the chaos manufactured since the 18th century improved? Clearly not. We remain victims today, particularly the Chinese people, who suffer profoundly. Chinese individuals face not only prejudice from the West but also bias from certain figures within China itself. Zhang Shuangnan is one such example—arguably a leading contemporary contributor to this issue.

When ancient China’s Five Elements cosmology was included in the Chinese Citizens’ Scientific Literacy Benchmark, Zhang Shuangnan exclaimed that his heart was crushed! This reflects his attitude toward traditional Chinese scientific thought.

Born on December 27, 1962, Zhang Shuangnan proudly identifies as a Capricorn, presenting this as a rational, scientific fact. For those of us who delve into China’s ancient texts, this stance feels dismissive and condescending.

So today, let’s use those very “old books” to illustrate why Su Shi could rightfully claim to be a Capricorn—and why Zhang Shuangnan cannot.

Yu Xi, a renowned Chinese astronomer, introduced the concept of axial precession, a phenomenon now globally recognized. Su Shi, the iconic poet, documented his birth under Capricorn in Dongpo’s Forest of Records: “I was born when the moon lodged in the Southern Dipper… thus, I am destined under Makara (Capricorn), and my life has been filled with praise and slander alike.”

Makara, or Capricorn, is a term borrowed from Buddhist astrology and adapted by ancient Chinese astronomers. The complexity of the zodiac’s origins is often oversimplified, but one thing is clear: it wasn’t invented by the Greeks, Egyptians, or Babylonians. Cultural exchange shaped it.

Historical records confirm Su Shi was born on January 8, 1037 (converted to the Gregorian calendar). Using this date, astrologers might assign him to Capricorn—but as scholar Song Lian argued in Dialogue with a Chu Guest, axial precession undermines such static interpretations.

Song Lian wrote: “The stars shift along the ecliptic… modern astronomers excel in timekeeping, but astrologers ignore precession. They misplace Mars by degrees, mistake conjunctions… until celestial phenomena reveal their errors.” When asked if Confucian scholars should study astrology, Song Lian refused to answer, turning instead to sleep—a poetic dismissal of the practice.

Axial precession means the zodiac signs have drifted westward over centuries. Those ignorant of this cannot claim to understand celestial mechanics. Thus, astrology’s validity was debunked by Song Lian long ago.

Now, consider Zhang Shuangnan, a self-proclaimed astronomer. Does he truly grasp these principles? Compare:

• Su Shi, January 8, 1037: Capricorn.
• Zhang Shuangnan, December 27, 1962: claims Capricorn.
• Modern Capricorn dates: December 22 – January 19.
• Sagittarius dates: November 23 – December 21.

Without precession, both would be Capricorns. But Yu Xi’s discovery changed everything: Earth’s axis rotates in a cycle, creating three motions—revolution, rotation, and precession. On December 27, 1962, the sun was not in Capricorn but in Sagittarius.

Software like Stellarium (a free, American-developed tool) confirms this vividly. Su Shi’s sun resided in Capricorn; Zhang Shuangnan’s sun was deep in Sagittarius, nowhere near Capricorn.

In short, Zhang Shuangnan is a Sagittarius. He should introduce himself: “I, Zhang Shuangnan, am a Sagittarius. The modern zodiac calendar is inaccurate, so I don’t endorse it.”

The ecliptic path—where the sun travels—is key. Adjusting for time of day doesn’t change the constellation; night views simply make stars visible. Even Ptolemy and Hipparchus observed stars like Spica in daylight, a practice Zhang might laud as scientific.

Should we debate him? Probably not. A Ming-era joke illustrates why: A family mourned their mother-in-law’s death and hired a tutor to write a eulogy. He copied one for a father-in-law from an ancient text. When criticized, he insisted, “The classic text can’t be wrong—perhaps they buried the wrong person!”

Confronting Zhang might yield similar futility: he’d likely ignore or dismiss us, perpetuating the myth that science is solely Western and China contributed nothing.

How does this differ from voices like Chloe Xiang (), who profit from disparaging China? Readers can judge.

Stellarium, though Western-made, aids global learning. But the zodiac system we use today was refined by Song and Yuan astronomers. Without them, modern astronomy would be poorer. This reminds us: contributors to human knowledge deserve respect, regardless of origin. Those who deny this deserve none.

Finally, the Yuan dynasty built four early prototypes demonstrating Earth’s rotation—three inspired mechanical clocks, one used mercury (whose hazards we now know). This innovation led to rope-driven mechanisms, precursors to springs. Three of these devices stood in Henan. As a Henan native, shouldn’t Zhang Shuangnan honor this legacy alongside Western science? If he ignores it, why blame others for disrespecting China?

Matteo Ricci’s mechanical clocks, often credited to the West, were built on earlier ideas. Who is right? Readers have minds; let them think.