The DOI matches its Crossref record; the references it cites are not checked yet.
Astrological origins of Chinese dynastic ideology
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
As a result, the contents of predictions and the Current Script trend of interpreting the Classics tended to become closer to one another.
“As a result, the contents of predictions and the so-called Current Script (jinwen 今文) trend of interpreting the Classics tended to get closer to one another.”
From EPIPHANIES OF SOVEREIGNTY AND THE RITE OF JADE DISC IMMERSION IN WEFT NARRATIVES (2014) · cites this paper as [25]
Citations
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 15 · Cited by 8
Research works printed but not linked: 2
- Pankenier, 1983, Early China, 9–10, 175
- Weitzel, 1945, Popular Astronomy, 53, 159
Metadata
- Authors
- Pankenier, D. W.
- Affiliations
- Lehigh University (US)
- Corresponding author
- Pankenier, D.W.
- ORCID
- Pankenier, D.W.
- Venue
- Vistas in Astronomy
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 1995-01
- Volume
- 39
- Issue
- 4
- Pages
- 503-516
- ISSN
- 0083-6656 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2013604213
- Cited by
- 8
- References
- 15
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2024: 1 · 2021: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
- FWCI
- 1.71
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Vistas in Astronomy (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › History › Chinese history and philosophy
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Historical Astronomy and Related Studies
- Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Historical, Religious, and Philosophical Studies
- Keywords
- astrology, dynastic ideology, Chinese dynasties, imperial legitimacy, celestial omens, Mandate of Heaven, history of astronomy
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
