Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC: Resemblance and Resistance 9781407316055, 9781407345543

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
Table of Contents
List of Figures
List of Tables
List of Maps
1. Introduction
2. Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels
3. Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells
4. Case Study III: Bronze Weapons
5. Conclusion
Bibliography

Citation preview

Celine Lai is Associate Professor in the School of Archaeology and Museology, Peking University. Her research interests cover Early China, Bronze Age Archaeology and museum display and interpretation. Every year since 2014 she has been holding a conference on Chinese Archaeology, hoping to establish a regular platform for academics to exchange new finds and research.

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

This monograph presents the first thorough study of the bronzes from south-central China. The finds from the Yangtze areas have conventionally been thought to have been entirely inspired by Shang traditions and ritual practices in Henan. This monograph applies the perspective of materiality to argue otherwise. Through investigations of three main bronze types: ritual vessels, bells and weapons, the author suggests that the Yangtze societies were far more independent from the Shang traditions than most archaeologists have understood them to have been.

LAI

‘Both in Chinese and English, work that takes this holistic approach is very rare, and the author should be commended for her efforts.’ Prof. Dame Jessica Rawson, Professor of Chinese Art and Archaeology, University of Oxford

2019

‘This is an important contribution, as it throws new light on Bronze Age China, especially cultural interactions between several major bronze-using centres during the late Shang period.’ Professor Jianjun Mei, Director of the Needham Research Institute, University of Cambridge

BAR S2915

BAR IN TERNATIONAL SE RIE S 2915

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Resemblance and Resistance

Celine Y. Y. Lai B A R I N T E R NAT I O NA L S E R I E S 2 9 1 5

2019

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Resemblance and Resistance

Celine Y. Y. Lai B A R I N T E R NAT I O NA L S E R I E S 2 9 1 5

2019

by Published in BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC © Celine Y. Y. Lai The double-sided bronze face, Xin’gan, c. 1300 BC. The Author’s moral rights under the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reser ved. No par t of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any for m of digital for mat or transmitted in any for m digitally, without the written per mission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781407316055 paperback ISBN 9781407345543 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781407316055 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library

BAR titles are available from: BAR Publishing Banbury Rd, Oxford, [email protected] + ( ) + ( ) www.barpublishing.com

,

Contents List of Figures ..................................................................................................................................................................... v List of Tables.................................................................................................................................................................... viii List of Maps ....................................................................................................................................................................... ix 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................................................................... 1 ‘China’ during the Second Millennium BC .................................................................................................................... 2 Scope and Chronology ............................................................................................................................................... 2 The Yellow River Valleys ........................................................................................................................................... 2 The Shang .............................................................................................................................................................. 3 The upper stream of the Shang territory ................................................................................................................ 9 The Shang’s outlying sites? ................................................................................................................................. 10 The South ................................................................................................................................................................. 14 Hanzhong ............................................................................................................................................................. 14 Anhui ................................................................................................................................................................... 16 The Mid-Yangtze Regions ........................................................................................................................................ 17 Jiangxi and Wucheng culture............................................................................................................................... 18 Hunan .................................................................................................................................................................. 21 The Upper Yangtze Region: Sichuan and Sanxingdui Culture ................................................................................ 23 Web of Connections ...................................................................................................................................................... 26 Arguments from Earlier Scholars.................................................................................................................................. 26 Aims of the Book .......................................................................................................................................................... 29 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................................. 31 Work Synopsis............................................................................................................................................................... 32 2. Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels ........................................................................................................................... 33 The Shang Bronze Vessels ............................................................................................................................................ 34 Taotie, Motifs of an Imagined Animal Face ............................................................................................................. 34 Sets ........................................................................................................................................................................... 37 The Ritual Vessels Found in the Tombs in Henan .................................................................................................... 38 Southern China .............................................................................................................................................................. 41 Panlongcheng ........................................................................................................................................................... 41 Anhui ........................................................................................................................................................................ 42 The Large Numbers of Zun, Lei, Pou, and You in Hanzhong, Hunan, and Sanxingdui................................................ 46 Xin’gan Dayangzou ...................................................................................................................................................... 53 Three Levels: Southern Vessels Re-examined .............................................................................................................. 56 Level I: Physical Resemblance................................................................................................................................. 56 Level II: Social Ranks .............................................................................................................................................. 56 Level III: Conceptual Differences ............................................................................................................................ 56 Southern Contributions ................................................................................................................................................. 57 3. Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells................................................................................................................................. 61 Northern Nao................................................................................................................................................................. 62 The Origins of Bronze Nao ........................................................................................................................................... 65 Hypothetical Forerunners of the Nao: Zhengzhou Prototypes versus Clapper-Bell Ancestors ............................... 66 Transition from Signaling to Musical Bells ............................................................................................................. 67 Southern Nao and Ritual Culture .................................................................................................................................. 67 Type One: Xin’gan Nao ........................................................................................................................................... 69 Type Two: Xiang River Nao..................................................................................................................................... 70 The Musical Tones of Nao and the Notion of a Bell Set............................................................................................... 73 The Musical Set from Ningxiang Laoliangcang Shiguzai ....................................................................................... 73 The Thirty-Six Bosses ................................................................................................................................................... 76 Yongzhong ..................................................................................................................................................................... 77 iii

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Reconsidering Bronze Bells Using Rawson’s Three Level Model ............................................................................... 78 Physical Comparisons and Reversed Contribution from South to North................................................................. 78 The Social and Ritual Significance of Bells in the Southern and Zhou Contexts .................................................... 78 4. Case Study III: Bronze Weapons ................................................................................................................................ 81 The Neolithic Origins of Ceremonial Weapons ............................................................................................................ 82 Liangzhu Societies and Axes.................................................................................................................................... 82 Longshan Culture and the Zhang ............................................................................................................................. 84 The Early Bronze-Casting Societies: The Erlitou and Erligang Periods ...................................................................... 85 The Weapons Found in the Tombs at Anyang ............................................................................................................... 89 Bronzes and Rituals in the Society at Xin’gan.............................................................................................................. 93 The Ceremonial Blades from Sanxingdui ..................................................................................................................... 96 Reconsidering Bronze and Jade Weapons in the Scheme of Three Levels ................................................................... 98 Shared Types, Contrasting Practices ........................................................................................................................ 98 Social Changes at the End of the Anyang Period ..................................................................................................... 99 Ideas about Weaponry in Other Societies ................................................................................................................. 99 5. Conclusion .................................................................................................................................................................. 101 Bibliography ................................................................................................................................................................... 105

iv

List of Figures Figure 1.1. An inscribed turtle shell found at Anyang Xiaotun. Anyang period. Oracle bone inscriptions. Four sets of inscriptions were found on this piece of turtle shell in private collection. They should be read in the directions of the arrows shown. Anyang period ................................................................................................................................... 2 Figure 1.2. Top: the extant hangtu walls found at Zhengzhou Erligang. Bottom: layers of earth were pounded hard piled up. Erligang period...................................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 1.3. Top: clay moulds and models used for casting a bronze li. Found at Zhengzhou Erligang, c. 1400– c. 1300 BC. Bottom: the final step reconstructed, in which the clay was broken to take out the case item ........................ 4 Figure 1.4. Bronzes buried in a cache found at Zhengzhou Nanshunchengjie. The largest ding measures 82 cm in height.................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Figure 1.5. Comparisons of taotie and southern motifs Drawing of taotie motifs on Shang bronzes. The face of the imagined animals was always symmetrical and centred around the eyes; it had been growingly more elaborate and extensive during the Shang period. Drawing of the taotie motifs found on a bronze vessel from Xin’gan. Tigerand-man motif found on a bronze zun from Funan, Anhui. Tiger-and-man motif found on a bronze axe from tomb M5 (Fu Hao) at Anyang, Henan ........................................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 1.6. Royal tomb no. M1001 excavated at Anyang Houjiazhuang. Left: the tomb was built in a rectangular pit connected by sloping passageways on four sides; right: decapitated human sacrifices found on the southern passageway .......................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 1.7. Some bronze vessels found from the tomb of Fu Hao. Top: photograph taken during the excavation in 1976. Middle left: a bronze ding (H 80.5 cm) cast in a rectangular shape after its predecessors of the Erligang period at Zhengzhou; middle right: two sumptuous bronze jia (H 68.8 cm), which were also of a drinkingcup type popularly used in the Erligang period but became obsolete at Anyang. Here the jia were cast in an exaggerated form, probably highlighting Fu Hao’s connections with predecessors. Bottom left: a bronze zun (H 45.9 cm); and bottom right: a bronze gong (H 36 cm). These were cast in what is now conventionally called the animal shapes – a novel design that began to appear during the time of Fu Hao, i.e. the beginning of the Anyang period...................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Figure 1.8. Drawings of some of the bronze ritual vessels found at tomb M54 at Anyang Huayuanzhuang. The jia (last row, far left) measures 66.6 cm in height. c. 1150 BC ................................................................................................. 8 Figure 1.9. Drawings of some of the bronze ritual vessels found at tomb M2 at Panlongcheng Lijiazui. The ding (top, far right) measures 17.6 cm in height ........................................................................................................................ 11 Figure 1.10. Left: bronze jia found at tomb M44 at Laoniupo. H 23 cm. The jia probably dated from c. 1300 BC. Right: bronze jia found at a tomb at Zhengzhou Baijiazhuang. H 28.5 cm. c. 1300 BC .................................................. 12 Figure 1.11. Chariots buried in pits accompanying burials. Left: a chariot found at M27 at Laoniupo; right: a chariot found at M7 at Anyang Xiaomintun ...................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 1.12. Bronze faces found at Laoniupo, Chenggu, and Xin’gan. c. 1300 BC. Top left: human-like face found at Tomb M44 at Laoniupo. H 6.5 cm; Top right: ox face found at tomb M10 at Laoniupo. H 16 cm. Middle left: human-like face found at Chenggu Sucun. H 16.4 cm; middle right: ox face found at Chenggu Sucun. H 19.1 cm. Bottom left: human-like face found at Xin’gan in Jiangxi. H 53 cm. Bottom right: Bronze chariot fitting from Yidu Sufutun, Shandong. Anyang period. H 6.8 cm.......................................................................................................... 13 Figure 1.13. Bronzes found in Hanzhong, Shaanxi province. c. 1300 BC. Top left: jia. H 57.7 cm. Found at Yangxian Machang. Top centre: zun. H 36.9 cm. Found at Chenggu Baoshan Sucun. Top right: pou. H 31.8 cm. Found at Yangxian Machang. Below left: crescent-shaped objects. Found at Chenggu Longtouzhen. L 53–56 cm. Below right: pao with a pointed top. D 10.5; pao with an open top. D 11.7 cm. Both found at Chenggu Baoshan ......... 15 Figure 1.14. Zhang. Left: bronze zhang. Hanzhong Yangxian Fanjiaba, Shaanxi province. H 17.8 cm. Right: jade zhang. Sanxingdui pit no. 2, Sichuan province. H. 38.2 cm .............................................................................................. 15 Figure 1.15. Bronze vessels found at Funan, Anhui province. There were twenty-one vessels: a pair of jia, a pair of jue, a pair of gu, two different zun, one fangding (now lost), and possibly twelve li (some were lost). Only a few of them have been published; only one in each pair of jia, jue, and gu are illustrated. The photographs of these v

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC vessels are repeated here to suggest what the whole set may have looked like. Top: (left) jue, H 28 cm; (centre) gu, H 29.5 cm; (right) li, H 23 cm; Below: (left) jia, H 46 cm; (centre) zun, H 47 cm; (right) zun, H 50.5 cm ............... 16 Figure 1.16. Bronze jia found at Feixi, Anhui province. H 55.4 cm. c. 1300 BC ............................................................. 17 Figure 1.17. Bronze nao. Anhui Lujiang. H 49.5 cm......................................................................................................... 17 Figure 1.18. Ceramic guan. Left: Wucheng. Height not given, approx. 20–30 cm; right: Xin’gan. H 18.8 cm ............... 19 Figure 1.19. Kiln site. Panlongcheng Wangjiazui, Hubei. Length 30 m; width 3–5.6 m. Kiln (Y6). Wucheng, Jiangxi. L 7.5 m; W 1.07 m ................................................................................................................................................ 19 Figure 1.20. Reconstruction of the site found at Xin’gan .................................................................................................. 19 Figure 1.21. Nine flat-legged bronze ding found at Xin’gan, Jiangxi province. c. 1300 BC ............................................ 20 Figure 1.22. Bronze nao found in Hunan province. Left: nao. Ningxiang Yueshanpu. H 103.5 cm; weight: 221 kg. Top and bottom right: nao. Found at Ningxiang Laoliangcang, buried together with four similar but smaller ones, as well as with the one shown below. The largest bell measures 53.5 cm in height and 31 kg in weight. Below right: nao. H 54 cm; weight: 28.5 kg ................................................................................................................................. 21 Figure 1.23. Animal-shaped vessels. A boar-shaped zun excavated from Xiangtan Jiuhua, Hunan province. H 40 cm; L 70 cm. An elephant-shaped zun excavated from Zhuzhou Liling, Hunan. H 22.8 cm; L26.5 cm.................. 22 Figure 1.24. City walls found at Ningxiang Tanheli, Hunan province .............................................................................. 23 Figure 1.25. Pit no. 2 found at Guanghan Sanxingdui, Sichuan province. c. 1200 BC. The pits were neatly filled with bronzes, jades, elephant tusks, and gold objects ........................................................................................................ 24 Figure 1.26. Bronzes found in the pits at Sanxingdui, Sichuan province. c. 1200 BC. Left: drawing of a standing figure found at pit no. 2. H: 262 cm (including the stool). Top right: head. H: approx. 36 cm. Sanxingdui pit no. 2. Below right: mask. Sanxingdui pit no. 2. H 82.6 cm; W 77 cm ........................................................................................ 24 Figure 1.27. Jades found in the pits. Sanxingdui, Sichuan province. c. 1200 BC ............................................................. 25 Figure 2.1. Two bronze zun from Funan and comparisons. Bronze zun decorated with the man-and-tiger motif. Transition period. Funan, Anhui. H 50.5 cm. Bronze zun decorated with motifs in undulating relief. Transition period. Funan, Anhui. H 45 cm. Bronze zun. Chenggu Baoshan Sucun, Hanzhong. H 36.9 cm. Bronze zun. Probably Anyang period. Pit no. 1, Guanghan Sanxingdui, Sichuan. H 44.5 cm. Bronze figure with a zun on head. Pit no. 2, Guanghan Sanxingdui, Sichuan. H 15.6 cm ....................................................................................................... 36 Figure 2.2. Drawings of bronze vessels, and jade and stone objects excavated from tomb M1, Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu, Henan. Upper Erligang period. Jade and stone halberds found in the same tomb .......................................... 38 Figure 2.3. Copper mine site. Western Zhou to Han period. Daye Tonglushan, Hubei..................................................... 42 Figure 2.4. Lead vessels excavated from a tomb at Yinshang Huanggang, Anhui. Anyang period. The largest vessel, yan (top right), measures 37 cm tall ....................................................................................................................... 44 Figure 2.5. Drawings of a group of bronze vessels, five pou and one lei, found at Yangxian Machang, Hanzhong. Anyang period. Heights of the pou: 24–38 cm; and widths 29–38 cm.............................................................................. 48 Figure 2.6. Drawing of a bronze jia. Transition period. Sucun Xiaocong, Hanzhong ...................................................... 49 Figure 2.7. Bronze zun excavated from Huarong, Hunan. H 73.2 cm ............................................................................... 50 Figure 2.8. A group of bronze ding and fragments. Xin’gan Zhongling Reservoir, Jiangxi. Heights: 51–77 cm ............. 55 Figure 2.9. Three sets of bronze ding. Early Western Zhou period. Tomb of Chang Zi Kou, Luyi Taiqinggong, Henan. Heights approx. 27–35 cm ..................................................................................................................................... 58 Figure 2.10. Ceramics. Early Western Zhou period. Tomb of Chang Zi Kou, Luyi Taiqinggong, Henan ........................ 59 Figure 3.1. Set of 64 chimed yongzhong and one bo excavated from the tomb of the Marquis Yi of Zeng. 433 BC. Hubei. Bronze and wood. Long arm length: 748 cm; short arm length: 273 cm............................................................... 62 Figure 3.2. Musical instruments excavated from the tomb of the Marquis Yi of Zeng. 433 BC. Hubei. Chimed stones. Height 109 cm; Zither. Wood. Length 167.3 cm; width; Pipe-flutes. Lacquered wood. Length 22.8 cm; width 11.7 cm; Drum on bronze stand. Drum and staff reconstructed. Height 365 cm..................................................... 62 Figure 3.3. Set of three bronze nao. Anyang period. Inscribed. Tomb M160, Anyang Guojiazhuang, Henan ................. 64

vi

List of Figures Figure 3.4. Set of three bronze nao. Anyang period. Inscribed. Tomb M699, Anyang Xiqu (Western District), Henan .. 64 Figure 3.5. Set of three bronze nao. Inscribed. Anyang period. Tomb M5 (Fu Hao), Anyang Xiaotun, Henan ............... 65 Figure 3.6. Two sets of bronze nao. Early Western Zhou period. Tomb of Chang Zi Kou, Luyi Taiqinggong, Henan .... 65 Figure 3.7. Clapper bells (ling) found in different regions of China. Bronze clapper bell. Erlitou period. Erlitou, Henan. Height 8.5 cm; Bronze clapper bells. c. 1200 BC. Guanghan Sanxingdui, Sichuan. Heights 7.35/14 cm; Bronze clapper bell. Late Neolithic period. Taosi, Shaanxi. Height 2.65 cm; Pottery clapper bell. Late Neolithic period. Tianmen Shijiahe, Hubei. Height 5.5 cm............................................................................................................... 66 Figure 3.8. Three bronze nao. Transition period, c. 1300–1200 BC. Xin’gan Dayangzhou, Jiangxi................................ 67 Figure 3.9. Bronze bo. Transition period, c. 1300–1200 BC. Xin’gan Dayangzhou, Jiangxi ........................................... 70 Figure 3.10. Two bronze nao. Probably Transition period, c. 1300–1200 BC. Huangshi Yangxin, Hubei. Bronze nao. Probably Transition period, c. 1300–1200 BC. Yuhang, Zhejiang ............................................................................ 71 Figure 3.11. A group of bronze nao (the fifth is not shown here) found in 1959 at Ningxiang Laoliangcang Shiguzai, Hunan. Probably Anyang period ........................................................................................................................ 72 Figure 3.12. A group of ten bronze nao. Probably Anyang period. Changsha Ningxiang Laoliangcang Shiguzai, Hunan ................................................................................................................................................................................. 75 Figure 3.13. Early bronze yongzhong. Late Anyang and early Western Zhou periods. A single yongzhong found at Liuyang Chengtan, Hunan. A set of yongzhong found at Tomb M1, Baoji Ruijiazhuang, Shaanxi ................................. 75 Figure 3.14. A set of three bronze nao from tomb M51 at Anyang Dasikuncun, Henan. Late Anyang period. Heights approx. 20–30 cm ................................................................................................................................................. 79 Figure 3.15. Bronze drums. Excavated from Chongyang Wangjiazui, Hubei. H 75.5 cm. Decorated with a figure motif in relief. Collection of Senoku Museum. H 79.4 cm................................................................................................ 80 Figure 4.1. Jade axe from M12 at Liangzhu Fanshan. Late Neolithic period. Length 17.9 cm. Jades buried in M20, Liangzhu Fanshan. Late Neolithic period .......................................................................................................................... 82 Figure 4.2. A group of jade zhang from Shenmu Shimou, Shaanxi. Heights approx. 35–45 cm. Jade blades (including zhang) excavated from Shenmu Xinhua, Shaanxi ............................................................................................ 84 Figure 4.3. Jade zhang excavated from Erlitou, Henan. Erlitou period ............................................................................. 85 Figure 4.4. Jade zhang excavated Guanghan Sanxingdui. Probably Anyang period. Lengths 35–50 cm ......................... 86 Figure 4.5. Jade halberds. Drawing of a stone halberd from tomb M1, Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu, Henan. Upper Erligang period. Length 37 cm. Drawings of jade halberds from tomb M2, Panlongcheng Lijiazui, Hubei. Upper Erligang period. Largest blade measures 44 cm long. Jade halberds excavated from Xin’gan Dayangzhou, Jiangxi. Length approx. 35–44 cm .................................................................................................................................................. 88 Figure 4.6. Comparisons of two types of jade or stone halberds excavated from pit number two, Guanghan Sanxingdui. Probably Anyang period. Longest blade measures 55 cm ............................................................................. 88 Figure 4.7. Rubbings of some jade halberds excavated from tomb M5 (Fu Hao) at Anyang Xiaotun. Anyang period. Lengths 30–35 cm.................................................................................................................................................. 89 Figure 4.8. Some bronze weapons excavated from tomb M5 (Fu Hao) at Anyang Xiaotun. Anyang period ................... 90 Figure 4.9. Drawings of some bronze weapons excavated from tomb M54 (Ya Chang) at Anyang Huayuanzhuang. Anyang period. Lengths of halberds: 25–30 cm ................................................................................................................ 92 Figure 4.10. Drawings of some bronze weapons excavated from Xin’gan Dayangzhou. Transition period .................... 94 Figure 4.11. Drawing of some bronze tools excavated from Xin’gan Dayangzhou. Transition period ............................ 95 Figure 4.12. Drawings of some stone zhang excavated from tomb M1046 at Anyang Liujiazhuang. Inscribed. Late Anyang period.................................................................................................................................................................... 95 Figure 4.13. Bronze halberds excavated from Guanghan Sanxingdui. Jade halberd from the same site. Possibly an imitation of the bronze versions ......................................................................................................................................... 98

vii

List of Tables Table 2.1. Bronze ritual vessels found in the major tombs at Zhengzhou, Panlongcheng, and Anyang ........................... 39 Table 2.2. Comparisons of the bronze ritual vessels excavated from Xin’gan and from the tomb at Luyi Tiqinggong; comparisons with table 2.1 ............................................................................................................................ 39 Table 2.3. Bronze ritual vessels (except for those from Yinshang, 1980) excavated from known sites in Anhui, c. 1300–c. 1100 BC ............................................................................................................................................................ 43 Table 2.4. Bronze ritual vessels found at different sites within the counties of Chenggu and Yangxian in Hanzhong, southern Shaanxi, probably c. 1300–c. 1000 BC ............................................................................................ 47 Table 2.5. Bronze vessels found at known archaeological sites in Hunan province, probably c. 1200–c. 1000 BC ........ 51 Table 2.6. Bronze vessels excavated from the sacrificial pits at Guanghan Sanxingdui, Sichuan .................................... 53 Table 3.1. Bronze nao excavated from known archaeological sites in northern China, c. 1200–c. 1045 BC ................... 63 Table 3.2. Bronze nao found at known archaeological sites in Hunan Province, probably c. 1300–c. 1000 BC.............. 68 Table 3.3. Bronze nao unearthed from known archaeological sites in southern China (except Hunan province) ............ 69 Table 3.4. A list of bronze nao set, as well as the tunes of each bell, found in the tombs at Anyang ................................ 74 Table 3.5. The pitch taken from each of the ten bells excavated from Ningxiang Laoliangcang Shiguzai ....................... 75 Table 4.1. Comparisons of the numbers of bronze and jade weapons excavated from known archaeological sites in different regions of China, c. 1700─c. 1000 BC................................................................................................................ 83

viii

List of Maps Map A. Major archaeological sites of China, c. 1500–c. 1000 BC...................................................................................... 3 Map B. Distribution of bronze nao and early yonghong bells from known archaeological sites in China, c. 1500–c. 1045 BC............................................................................................................................................................ 61

ix

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Drawings of some ancient bronze vessels, bells, and weapons of ancient China: (top row) cooking vessels: ding, li, and yan (second row left) food vessel: gui (second, third, and fifth rows) wine containers: lei, hu, zun, and you (third, fourth, and fifth rows) wine-drinking vessels: gu, jia, jue, jiao, and zhi (sixth row) water vessels: he and pan (last row) bronze bells: yongzhong or zhong, bo, and nao (far right) bronze weapons: yue and ji. The rest of the bronzes shown in this table were cast after the Shang period and are, therefore, not covered in the discussions of the thesis. Allan 2005, p. 309.

x

1 Introduction In recent decades, archaeological sites revealed in the Yangtze River valleys 揚子江流域, among which bronzes are conspicuous, provide an additional source of data about the territory, which we today call China, during the early Bronze Age (c. 1500–c. 1000 BC). The actual number of Yangtze or southern bronzes that have been found is relatively limited, compared with those excavated from the domains of the Shang civilization in the Henan province, which is located in the mid Yellow River valley, more than 500km north of the Yangtze regions.1 Nonetheless, the bronzes from the Yangtze themselves are intriguing in at least three ways. First, the Yangtze bronzes were cast with using clay moulds, a technique that was most probably developed in Henan during early second millennium BC.2 Through what means did this technique transmit from the north to south is not entirely understood; but there was no question the bronze-casting workshops of the Shang society in Henan would have been the original source. Second, apart from borrowing the bronze-casting technique, the southern casters also copied some of the Shang bronze vessels, which were central in the religious performance of the Shang kings and elite. The southern bronze casters also designed their own versions of the taotie 饕餮 motif, the face of an imaginary animal typical of bronzes produced by the Shang.3 Did the Yangtze societies copy for the purpose of imitating the Shang religious activities? Or did they copy the Shang royal articles simply because the vessels and the motifs visually appeared prestigious? The widespread knowledge about the Shang, however indirectly distributed, was astonishingly broad. Third, perhaps the most remarkable discovery is that there appear to have been at least five cultural groups who lived in different parts of the Yangtze River valleys, an extensive region measuring more than 1000 kilometres from east to west and 300 kilometres north to south. Unlike the cosmopolitan Shang civilization, which dominated the Yellow River valleys in the north, none of the identified bronze-using societies in the south was found as dominant. Their territorial extents were relatively limited, so that the Yangtze landscape was divided among different groups in cultural terms. Altogether, these features gathered from the archaeological finds of the Yangtze areas will develop a new picture about the Early Bronze Age of China. The present work begins with a fundamental question: to what extent were these Yangtze groups adapted to the Shang

political domination, ritual activities, and religious beliefs? A comprehensive study of the Yangtze finds, as they are presented below, is necessary to resolve this untouched aspect of the studies of the Shang. Ever since the earliest Shang site at Anyang 安陽, in northern Henan 河南 province was discovered in 1928, it has been central in Shang studies.4 Between 1928 and 1937, fifteen seasons of excavations were carried out, and revealed sites on both sides of the Huan River 洹河, a tributary of the mid-Yellow River valley. 5 A number of important finds were made: a royal cemetery containing eleven looted but large tombs; hundreds of elite tombs which held bronzes, jades, ivories, and other precious objects; three clusters of architectural structures; and probably most important of all, several caches of burnt and cracked scapulas and turtle shells, bearing inscriptions (fig. 1.1). The inscriptions were fortune-telling records. They are so far the earliest form of writing identified in East Asia.6 These inscriptions, moreover, loosely resembled the modern Chinese language in grammatical and ideographic structure.7 The discovery of writing has, thus, given the Shang a central role in the beginning of Chinese history and archaeology. The excavations confirmed the site as the

Established in 1921, Academia Sinica’s Institute of History and Philology was the first official Chinese institute for undertaking excavations in the country. The work at Anyang was one of the organisation’s first and most important projects. After the establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949, most of the Academia’s archaeologists moved to Taiwan, taking with them some of the finds from Anyang, which they continued to study and analyse in their publications (Li Ji 1977, pp. 139–157). In Mainland China, the Institute of Archaeology was established in 1950 and was administered by the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (CASS) based in Beijing. In each province, an Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology was also established to take charge of local archaeological projects and conservation. As we shall see below, such administration has important bearing on archaeological interpretations. For a discussion of the administration and terminology of Chinese archaeology, see Falkenhausen 1995, pp. 200–208 and Thorp 2007, pp.xiv–xxiv. 5 For a summary of the finds during the period from 1928–1937, see Li Ji 1977, pp. 49–138. 6 Oracle bones were used for the purpose of divination. Diviners told fortunes by reading the cracks in the burnt bones. Sometimes the questions, prognostications, and subsequent events were inscribed on the cracked bones themselves. For a brief introduction to the purposes and features of oracle bone inscriptions, see Keightley 1978, pp. 3–55. The form and structure of oracle bone inscriptions was notably welldeveloped. Despite a lack of evidence discovered by archaeologists, it appears highly possible that writing had been in use for some time before the Anyang period (Bagley 2004, pp.190–249). 7 For the contents of oracle bone inscriptions, see the comprehensive work by Chen Mengjia 1988; see also Keightley 1978, pp. 63–90 (English). Detailed discussion of the inscriptions on the oracle bones are not within the scope of this thesis, partly because the inscriptions were religious records written entirely from the perspective of the Anyang kings (although from time to time they mentioned some neighbouring groups involved in affairs concerning the kings), and partly because such a study would demand a separate mode of analysis and additional contextual knowledge. 4

1 The distance between Zhengzhou, the provincial capital of Henan and Wuhan, the provincial capital of Hubei is approximately 518km. 2 For technical aspects of the Shang and southern bronzes, see Bagley 1990b, pp. 7–20. 3 For example, a bronze zun possibly cast in the middle Yangtze regions and found at Sanxingdui in Sichuan carried a dismembered form of taotie, which suggests a non-Shang connection (Rawson 1996, pp. 72– 74).

1

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC late. The amount of archaeological surveys and finds is far less and complete than that of Henan. This imbalance of archaeological focus has shaped the understanding that the developments of the Yangtze societies were relatively late, and rather heavily dependent on the Shang to acquire both bronze-casting techniques, political and/or social organization mechanisms. The present work questions this interpretation of the Shang-period finds. It aims to offer a thorough study of the scattered archaeological finds from the Yangtze areas. In addition, it argues the southern groups were themselves engaged in a complicated network of contacts, in which the Shang may have only taken up a small part, so that the Shang political or religious impacts in the south were not dominant. Evidence is found in the forms, types, decorations, and contexts of archaeological bronzes. Before turning to the discussion of the bronzes, a review of archaeological finds from the period in question is necessary. ‘China’ during the Second Millennium BC Scope and Chronology The ‘China’ discussed here refers to the valleys of the Yellow and Yangtze Rivers, as well as to the intermediate regions of the Han River to the west and the Huai River 淮河 near the coast. The ‘peoples’ concerned included the Shang of the mid and lower Yellow River valleys; and the Zhou, who were based on the upper stream of the Shang in present-day Shaanxi. In c. 1045 BC, the Zhou made an eastward expedition and defeated the Shang king; their founders established a new dynastic era, and adopted the practice of bronze-casting techniques of the Shang, as well as some of the bronze ritual vessels for religious and burial purposes. The Zhou founders identified themselves as legitimate heirs of the Shang. Nonetheless, little is known about the origins of the Zhou people. While historical resources suggest that they may have been a subordinate group of the Shang kings, archaeological evidence indicates their presence only towards the very end of the Anyang period. Jessica Rawson argues the Zhou may have been a formation of semi-nomadic groups who migrated from further northwest. Except for the site at Xi’an Liaoniupo 西 安老牛坡, major bronze-casting or bronze-using activities were absent in central Shaanxi. In contrast, the last groups under concern were far more developed than the Zhou throughout the Shang period. That how these peoples addressed themselves is not known. Suggestions have been made that they were migrants from the Shang territory; former subordinates of the Shang kings; or defeated elite in the background of the Shang and Zhou combats. It is uncertain how much we may relate the finds to historical information. In the case of the Yangtze finds, historical accounts may not be applicable at all.

Figure 1.1. An inscribed turtle shell found at Anyang Xiaotun. Anyang period. After Anyang 1994, pl. 21.1. Oracle bone inscriptions. Four sets of inscriptions were found on this piece of turtle shell in private collection. They should be read in the directions of the arrows shown. Anyang period. After Shaughnessy (ed.) 1997, p. 27.

latest royal residency of the Shang kings, who occupied during c. 1200–c. 1045 BC.8 The identification of the last capital of the Shang excited further search for the pre-Anyang settlements. The archaeological expeditions of the 1950s managed to identify two major sites: a walled settlement at Zhengzhou Erligang 鄭州二里崗 (c. 1500–c. 1300 BC); and an extensive site at Yanshi Erlitou 偃師二里頭 (c. 1900–c. 1500 BC) near Loyang 洛陽. The last eighty years of work have mainly been focused on the early phases of the Shang, as well as the excavations in Henan.9 The archaeological finds have substantially filled in the gaps related to the lives of the Shang prior to the Anyang period. In contrast, the archaeological works in the Yangtze areas began relatively The Shang are also understood through references contained in a number of traditional texts, such as the Shu jing 書經 (The Book of Documents) and the Shi jing 詩經 (The Book of Songs), most of which were written in a much later period and were edited in the third century BC. Sixteen generations of Shang kings—from Cheng Tang 成湯, the founder of the line, to Zou 紂, the last king—were said to have ruled between c. 16th to the 12th century BC. They were conquered by an inferior group (in terms of the relative size of population and level of technology) called the Zhou 周, who migrated from the upper tributaries of the Yellow River in the west. For reasons still unknown to us, the texts indicate that the Shang probably moved their capital city several times during their period of dynastic rule. It was probably King Pan Geng 盤 庚 (c. 13th century BC) who settled in a place called Yin 殷, at site from which the succeeding eleven Shang kings ruled until the conquest of the Zhou in c. 1045 BC. It has therefore been suggested, and is now widely accepted, that Anyang was most probably the Yin capital. 9 Falkenhausen 1993, pp. 845–848. 8

The Yellow River Valleys The Shang were an extensive group (map A). The stratigraphy in Henan suggests a chronological sequence in several successive phases: 2

Introduction 1. The Erlitou period (c. 1900–c. 1500 BC) 2. The Erligang period (c. 1500–c. 1300 BC); 3. The Transition period (c. 1300–c. 1200 BC), also known as Middle Shang; and 4. The Anyang period (c. 1200–c. 1045 BC).10 The sites at Zhengzhou (c. 1500–c. 1300 BC) and Anyang were very probably two metropolitan centres of Shang society during the Erligang and Anyang phases. The stylistic features of the Erligang and Anyang bronzes indicate that there was possibly an intermediate period between these settlements of about a century.11 Some small tombs and sites in Henan may be dated to that period, but they are relatively less well-understood.12 Therefore, the intervening century has been tentatively called the Transition. Archaeological debates have not resolved whether the Erlitou period belonged to an early stage of Shang civilization. The frustration came from historical records, which suggest the Shang had a predecessor group, who were called the Xia. To what extent the textual records can be trusted has been severely challenged. Neither Zhengzhou Erligang nor Yanshi Erlitou revealed inscriptional or other supporting evidence to facilitate convincing identification. Nonetheless, the connection between Zhengzhou and with Anyang was clear in terms of bronze-casting practices. It is mostly agreed that the Shang kings had been firmly established in Henan by 1500 BC. For such, there was little question that the walled site at Zhengzhou was a major royal residency of the Shang.13

Map A. Major archaeological sites of China, c. 1500–c. 1000 BC.

The Shang The earliest bronze-casting activities have been discovered in Henan and are dated to the Erlitou 二里頭 period. 14 The range of objects cast was limited. There were small clapper bells, knives, and small tools. Perhaps the most remarkable pieces were the bronze jue (a three-legged drinking cup) in imitation of the pottery versions. Bronzecasting technique evidently was further developed during the next two centuries, known as the Erligang period (c. 1500–c. 1300 BC). The type site, found at modern-day Zhengzhou, was a large walled settlement, about twentyfive square kilometres in area. Like many settlements in northern China, the city plan of Zhengzhou was rectangular in shape. The city walls were constructed using the hangtu 夯土 method, in which numerous hard, thin, horizontal layers of earth were pounded vigorously with wooden logs orsimilar objects, leaving many round impressions of the tools in the profile of the walls (fig. 1.2).15 Archaeologists have not been able to excavate most of the site, because it lies underneath the modern city. The sheer size of Zhengzhou speaks to its significance. Unlike Anyang, Zhengzhou has not yet revealed major royal tombs.16

Most archaeologists in Mainland China do not subscribe to the three phases of the Shang suggested by scholars in the West. They consider there to be two phases: the Erligang and Anyang periods. Nevertheless, more and more Chinese scholars are coming to accepting the three phases theory (see, for example, Shi Jinxiong 2005, pp. 312–313). However no conventional translation or application of the term ‘Transition period’ has yet appeared in Chinese writing. 11 Robert Bagley first proposed the ‘Transition’ in the exhibition catalogue, The Great Bronze Age of China, 1980, pp. 95–117, and established the three phases of the Shang in 1999, pp. 146–155 (see also Tang Jigen 唐際根 「中商」, pp. 175–180). He suggests that there is a stylistic discontinuity between the Erligang and Anyang bronzes, and that the archaeological finds in Henan reveal very little about the Shang after the Erligang period. Surprisingly, as Bagley notes, many refined bronzes from the south seemed to fit well into the stylistic gap between Erligang and Anyang. Therefore, he argues that there was an intermediate phase of the Shang yet to be discovered by archaeologists. Research comparing the bronze vessels from Henan and the south by Robert Thorp has also reached a similar tentative conclusion, 1985, pp. 5–75. This thesis aligns with the Western method of dividing up the Shang period. 12 In 2003, through the use of a remote sensing device, the Anyang archaeologists discovered a walled city within the northern bank of the Huai River, which istraditionally called Huanbei (the North of the Huai River). A preliminary analysis suggests that the Huanbei city was probably dated from the period immediately prior to c. 1200 BC. It seems likely that this new discovery may shed some light on the Shang during the Transition. For the brief report on Huanbei, see Tang Jigeng et al 2003, pp. 3–16. Roderick Campbell presents an updated account of the Huanbei period and its finds, 2014, pp. 107–119. 13 The Shang site at Zhengzhou Erligang was discovered in 1952. Since then, many excavations have taken place. A thorough report was published in three volumes (Zhengzhou Shangcheng, 2001). For a summary of the finds from Zhengzhou, see Bagley 1999, pp. 158–168 and Thorp 2006, pp. 21–116. 10

A few finds at Zhengzhou testify to its sophistication. Outside the walled settlement, archaeologists uncovered two groups of bronze-casting workshops (fig. 1.3)17 and Some smaller bronze objects were found at earlier Neolithic sites at Qijia, in Gansu in the northwest; for the links between Qijia and Erlitou, see Fitzgerald-Huber 1995, pp. 17–67. When bronze-casting began in Erlitou, the technology was already reasonably advanced—the casters formulated a rather standardised proportion of the alloys of copper and tin. For the origins of metallurgy in ancient China and early evidence of bronze-casting, see Bagley 1987, pp. 15–18. 15 The full report of the excavations at Zhengzhou is published in three volumes, Zhengzhou Shangcheng 2001. 16 Bagley 2004, pp. 230─237. 17 In the 1980s, bronze-casting workshops were found at Nanguanwai 南 關外 and Zhijingshan bei 紫荊山北 to the south and north, respectively, of the walled settlement. Among the objects found were large pottery urns for molten bronze, processed copper ores, broken clay moulds, and 14

3

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 1.3. Top: clay moulds and models used for casting a bronze li. Found at Zhengzhou Erligang, c. 1400–c. 1300 BC. After Zhengzhou Shangcheng 2001, pl. 58. Bottom: the final step reconstructed, in which the clay was broken to take out the case item.

Figure 1.2. Top: the extant hangtu walls found at Zhengzhou Erligang. Bottom: layers of earth were pounded hard piled up. Erligang period. After Zhengzhou Shangchang 2001, pl. 7 and 39.

three caches of bronze vessels (fig. 1.4).18 The finds demonstrate that the Erligang casters used techniques developed previously in Erlitou, but surpassed their predecessors in at least three ways: refinement of casting techniques and diversity of vessels, production of large heavy vessels, and development of taotie motifs. First, the Erligang casters refined and standardised the shapes of existing vessel categories, mainly the drinking tripods Figure 1.4. Bronzes buried in a cache found at Zhengzhou Nanshunchengjie. The largest ding measures 82 cm in height. After Zhengzhou Jiaocang 1999, colour pl. 2.

numerous other tools in pottery and bronze (Zhengzhou 1989, pp. 100– 122). 18 The three caches were respectively found at Zhangzai nanjie 張寨南 街, Xiangyang Huizu Food Factor y向陽回族食品廠, and Nanshuncheng jie 南順城街. These were accidental discoveries made over the period of 1974–1996 and have been published in a single monograph, Zhengzhou Jiaocang 1999. All three caches were located close to the city walls. Although the excavators have tentatively called them the ‘hoards’, the purposes of these caches are not actually known. I shall discuss the bronzes from these caches in the following chapter on bronze vessels.

called jue 爵 and jia 斝. They also added more types to the repertoire developed from these pottery categories. The new types included a steamer for food, called yan 甗; the round, foot-ringed containers called lei 罍, zun 尊, and you 卣; and the more unusual water basin called pan 盤. Robert Bagley estimates that at least twenty-two different 4

Introduction

Figure 1.5. Comparisons of taotie and southern motifs Drawing of taotie motifs on Shang bronzes. The face of the imagined animals was always symmetrical and centred around the eyes; it had been growingly more elaborate and extensive during the Shang period. Rawson 1990, pp. 25–26. Drawing of the taotie motifs (copied from Henan) found on a bronze vessel from Xin’gan. Xin’gan 1997, p. 40. Tiger-and-man motif found on a bronze zun from Funan, Anhui. Anhui 1987, no.1. Tiger-andman motif found on a bronze axe from tomb M5 (Fu Hao) at Anyang, Henan. Fu Hao 1980, p. 106.

vessel types were produced during the Erligang period.19 In addition, the cooking tripod called ding 鼎 was cast in a square section, suggesting that bronze casters were growing more independent from pottery traditions. In several publications, Bagley discusses the difficulties involved in the use of the section-mould technique. He argues that the Erligang casters had overcome the technical limitations and that the results of these endeavours were obvious.20 Second, the Erligang casters succeeded in producing large and heavy vessels. The two bronze ding from the bronze cache found at Zhangzai nanjie 張寨南街 in 1974 are both about 62 cm tall. One weighs 64.3 kilograms and the other 86.4 kilograms.21 Third, the Erligang casters managed to master the piece-mould technique and render the details and forms of the animal-mask, or taotie (fig. 1.5). Taotie

were, therefore, growing progressively more and more complicated, being rendered in fine, curved relief lines that stood out against the background, which was sometimes elaborately filled with regular spirals.22 Robert Bagley argues that the Erligang period was remarkable, and significant in terms of the development and expansion of Shang culture. He demonstrates that there was widespread distribution of the Erligang type of bronzes in the north of the Yellow River as well as in the southern regions under present discussion. He suggests that the Erligang culture had expanded outwardly into the realms outside Shang influence, and tentatively describes this phenomenon as the ‘Erligang Horizon’, as opposed to the rather contracted developments of the Anyang civilisation.23 The significance of the Erligang period in

19 Bagley 1987, p. 25. For further descriptions of the Erligang type of vessels, see Bagley 1987, p. 22–27 and Zhu Fenghan 2009, pp. 604–22. 20 Bagley 1987, pp. 24–28. 21 Zhengzhou Jiaocang 1999, pp. 75–78.

Rawson 1990, pp. 24–27 and Rawson forthcoming. Bagley 1992, pp. 226–31 and 1999, pp. 208–212. In his study of the bronze bells (called nao) from a southern site at Xin’gan in the 22 23

5

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 1.6. Royal tomb no. M1001 excavated at Anyang Houjiazhuang. Left: the tomb was built in a rectangular pit connected by sloping passageways on four sides; right: decapitated human sacrifices found on the southern passageway. After Anyang 1994, pl. 10.

as well as 6820 cowries.27 The inscriptions on the bronzes show that the tomb’s owner was called Fu Hao 婦好 (or Lady Hao), the wife of the fourth Anyang king, Wu Ding 武丁 (c. 1200 BC).28 Because the tomb was found intact, it became useful reference for understanding the Shang rituals during the Anyang period.

terms of cultural influence may, therefore, be discerned from the widespread distribution of the Henan-related finds in the Yangtze regions.24 Anyang was located about 187 kilometres to the north of Zhengzhou. Archaeologists have not yet located its city walls. Sites discovered to date are scattered about the north and south banks of the Huan River. Before the Sino-Japanese War, Li Ji 李濟 (1896–1979) and archaeologists from the former Academia Sinica revealed a royal cemetery at Xibeigang 西北崗 (fig. 1.6) to the north of the river; three clusters of large architectural structures in the south; and thousands of large and small elite tombs, as well as accompanying graves containing chariots, horses, dogs, and human sacrifices.25 After the war, archaeological work at Anyang resumed, revealing bronze-casting workshops and several large intact elite tombs (most of those discovered before the war had been looted in antiquity).26 The richest and most important site excavated to date is Tomb M5 at Xiaotun 小屯 (fig. 1.7). It was constructed in a rectangular pit and contained sixteen human sacrifices, 210 bronze vessels, 130 bronze weapons and tools, five bronze bells (called the nao), 800 jades and precious stones, 564 ivories and bone objects,

Bronze vessels were important in the Shang culture. They were ritual paraphernalia intended for the offering of food and drink during religious ceremonies paying tribute to one’s ancestors. Often found in the space between the inner and outer coffins in elite tombs, Shang bronze vessels always comprised several different types. Excavated in 2000, the forty bronze vessels found at the tomb of a major elite member, Tomb M54 at Huayuanzhuang 花 園莊, illustrate a typical set of Shang burial vessels (fig. 1.8): nine pairs of drinking vessels, the jue and gu 觚; one large drinking vessel, the jia (66 centimetres tall); six cooking tripods, the ding, in two sets—four in one and two in another; a large steamer, the yan (79.5 centimetres tall); and finally, a large liquid container, the 27 The tomb of Fu Hao 婦好 was uncovered in 1976. The preliminary report was published in Zheng and Chen 1977, pp. 57–97, and the full report in Fu Hao 1980. The finds from the tomb represent standard Anyang productions. Given the elevated and exceptional status of Fu Hao as both a queen and a military leader, it has been argued that the inventory of her tomb contained a number of exotic objects which were likely to have come from or been inspired by societies in the Northern Zone [Is the Northern Zone a technical term? If so, expand. If not, remove capital from ‘zone’ to indicate that it’s just a regular noun.] and from the Yangtze valleys; see Rawson 1992, pp. 1–24, Rawson 1996, cat. entry no. 46–49, and Bagley 1999, pp. 194–202. 28 For the oracle bone inscriptions that make reference to Fu Hao, see Wang Yuxin et al. 1977, pp. 1–21. On one occasion, King Wu Ding divined about her health in delivering a baby; and on another, he divined about her success in leading a campaign against the Guifang, who were possibly a group to the northwest of the Shang. It is supposed that Fu Hao probably died several decades before the king. Hence, her tomb is dated to c. 1150 BC, which roughly corresponds to the second early strata (Yinxu II period) of the four tombs found at Anyang, Anyang 1994, pp. 25–39.

mid-Yangtze valley and those of less assertive forms from Anyang, Falkenhausen reaches a similar conclusion: that the essential creations of the Erligang casters are yet to be found. Falkenhausen 1993, p. 25. 24 Bagley 1999, pp. 229–231. 25 Headed by Fu Sinian, the Academia Sinica was established in Beijing in 1921 to take charge of all archaeological work within the country. Its members, Li Ji (1896–1979), Liang Siyong (1904–1954), Guo Baojun (1893–1971), and Dong Zuobin (1895–1963) took turns in leading the fifteen seasons of excavations which took place from 1928 to 1937. During and after the war, they published reports in several monographs; for concise accounts of the first generation of archaeologists working at Anyang, see Thorp 2007, pp. 118–120. 26 In the 1950s, Guo Baojun and Xia Nai (1910–85) took charge of the archaeological work at Anyang. For a summary of the finds from Anyang after 1949, see Anyang 1994, pp. 51–147.

6

Introduction

Figure 1.7. Some bronze vessels found from the tomb of Fu Hao. Top: photograph taken during the excavation in 1976. Middle left: a bronze ding (H 80.5 cm) cast in a rectangular shape after its predecessors of the Erligang period at Zhengzhou; middle right: two sumptuous bronze jia (H 68.8 cm), which were also of a drinking-cup type popularly used in the Erligang period but became obsolete at Anyang. Here the jia were cast in an exaggerated form, probably highlighting Fu Hao’s connections with predecessors. Bottom left: a bronze zun (H 45.9 cm); and bottom right: a bronze gong (H 36 cm). These were cast in what is now conventionally called the animal shapes –a novel design that began to appear during the time of Fu Hao, i.e. the beginning of the Anyang period. Top rows: after Anyang 1994, p. 3, 25 & 29; bottom row, photo courtesy of Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage & Archaeology.

forty pieces, while Fu Hao’s contained 268.30 We have not yet, however, ascertained the specific rules governing

zun (52 centimetres tall).29 The excavations of the Anyang tombs have suggested that the number of the vessels and the size of the set were commensurate with the political or social ranking of their owners: Tomb M54 contained

29

30 Jessica Rawson has demonstrated the correlation between the status of the tomb owners and the features of their vessels during the Anyang period in 1993, pp. 805–809, which compares the ritual vessels from Fu Hao’s tomb and those from Tomb no. 18 (that of a lesser noble in the same geographical area).

Anyang 2004, pp. 7–19.

7

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 1.8. Drawings of some of the bronze ritual vessels found at tomb M54 at Anyang Huayuanzhuang. The jia (last row, far left) measures 66.6 cm in height. c. 1150 BC. Xu and He 2004, pp. 10–15.

8

Introduction remarkable figure-casting group which comprised part of the Sanxingdui culture 三星堆文化 was found in Sichuan 四川, which lies in the remote upper Yangtze regions.38

the use of the vessels during ritual ceremonies, such as how the vessels were arranged and installed on the altar, what bodily movements were associated with the use of different types of vessels, and what determined the number and size of the vessels permitted to be used by a specific member of the elite class.31 All that could be summed up is that bronze ritual vessels were key features of the Shang elite in Henan.

The distribution of these southern societies is suggested primarily by the locations of found bronzes. Most bronzes were chance finds made by local residents and are of unknown or questionable provenance.39 In each southern province, archaeologists have been making efforts to locate the settlements of the early bronze-casting groups. They have excavated some sites, have revealed a few large architectural structures, and have discovered small numbers of minor tombs. Nevertheless, the amount of archaeological work carried out in southern China to date is still limited.40 Among all the finds, no major burials or other archaeological features have been able to shed light on the political or social organisation of local societies. All that is known with certainty is that sophisticated bronze casters existed who were in contact with the north. The southern sites described below may suggest the locations of some major social centres. In the extensive Yangtze regions, it is highly possible that even more bronze-using societies were present.

It is clear that the Shang had established the practice of burying a set of bronze vessels along with at least one, but often many more wine-drinking cups in their tombs. As a result of the presence of such a distinctive feature, archaeologists have been able to map the territorial extensions of the Shang populations in northern China; other sites containing this combination of burial goods have been found in Shandong 山東, western Shanxi 山西, and southern Hebei 河北 provinces.32 In contrast, many diverse societies existed in the south: some groups produced more bronze vessels than bells; one group in Hunan 湖南 produced many extraordinarily heavy bells; yet another group in Sichuan preferred figures to vessels or bells.33 Altogether, five different groups are clearly represented in the archaeological records. One of them settled in the Han River valley in southern Shaanxi, in a region called Hanzhong 漢中, an intermediate region which links the Yellow and Yangtze River regions.34 In the east, small groups of bronzes have been found near the Huai River valleys in Anhui 安徽, which is also an intermediate region.35 Further south, in the mid-Yangtze regions, a major bell-casting group was found in Hunan,36 and a different neighbouring group of Wucheng culture 吳 城文化 was found in Jiangxi 江西.37 In the southwest, a

The upper stream of the Shang territory The Zhou lived to the west of the Shang on the upper plateaus of Shaanxi 陝西. A permanent archaeological team is stationed at Zhouyuan 周原 (The Plains of the Zhou), the acclaimed fabled homeland of the Zhou, to search for anticipated pre-dynastic Zhou remains. But the search has not yet revealed much remarkable evidence.41 near the site of Wucheng, whereas only a small number of tiny bronze objects were found at Wannian. 38 The Sanxingdui culture is one of the most (‘distinguished’ has a sense of being elegant and refined. Do you mean ‘distinctive’?) among all cultures discovered in southern China. This group of people cast many bronze figures, which are unique on the Yellow and Yangtze river regions. In many ways the remains of the Sanxingdui culture show links with the Erlitou 二里頭 culture (c. 1900–c. 1500 BC) in Henan. Sun Hua and Su Rongyu argue that the Sanxingdui people were possibly migrants from the north, Sun and Su 2003, pp. 129–155. On the other hand, Falkenhausen has demonstrated that the Sanxingdui culture also displays many connections to local Neolithic societies. The Sanxingdui people may, therefore, have emerged from the local population, although it is possible that they had acquired some material features or technology through their widespread connections with the outside world, 2006, pp. 191–245. 39 Gao Zhixi 1992, pp. 76–79. Most southern bronzes were discovered by local residents and sent to the corresponding archaeological institutes. There were occasions when archaeologists were able to visit the spots where the bronzes were found. However, they were very rarely able to make further discoveries. Some other bronzes were simply kept in storerooms for many years before they were published: see, for example, the bells described in Gao Zhixi, 1984a, pp. 129–134. 40 Unlike Henan, most archaeological work in the southern provinces only began in the 1970s, when the provincial archaeological institutes were given permission to carry out surveys and excavations. For the restructuring of the administration of archaeological work, see Falkenhausen 1995, pp. 200–202. 41 Archaeologists expect to discover the Zhou royal tombs, because Zhouyuan 周原 was most probably the religious centre of the regime during the Western Zhou period (whereas the Feng 豐 and Hao 鎬 capitals on the east were political centres). The recent discoveries of what were possibly the large tombs of some high-ranking elite members at Zhougongmiao have been much referenced in reportage. The excavations of the tombs are still under preparation. Currently the archaeological teams at Zhouyuan are from the Peking University (Feng Tao 2004).

Ibid. For a concise summary of the Shang sites in northern China, see XiaShang 2003, pp. 535–566 (northwest) and pp. 575–584 (southern Inner Mongolia). 33 The features of each group of southern bronzes have been widely discussed. While there are debates over the dates, there is little question that most of them were produced locally. For brief discussions, see Kane 1974/75, pp. 77–92 and Bagley 1992, 215–226. For a survey of most of the existing Yangtze bronzes, see Shi Jingxiong 2005, pp. 41–101 (Jiangxi), 102–160 (Hunan), and 161–220 (Sichuan). 34 Zhao Congcang 2006. 35 Kane 1974/75, pp. 78–80. On the other hand, some Chinese archaeologists believe that the bronzes from Anhui were possibly the remains of the Shang, Song Xinchao 1991, pp. 176–191. 36 On the other hand, Xiang Taochu argues that a bronze-casting society did not seem to have been developed in Hunan. He suggests that most bells and other bronzes were possibly cast by the Shang and carried to the south after the Zhou conquest, 2006, pp. 75–78. But Xiang’s argument cannot convincingly explain the remarkable stylistic differences between the Hunan bronzes and the traditional Shang bronzes. Indeed, the Hunan bell type has not yet been found at any Shang site in the north (see Chapter Three), suggesting that the local group was in some way distinguished from the Shang. It seems, therefore, justified to believe that there was a local bronze-casting group in Hunan. 37 Two bronze-using cultures were found in northern Jiangxi: the Wucheng culture in the northwest and Wannian culture 萬年文化 in the northeast; both were named after their respective type site. The two cultures are distinguished by a slight difference in their pottery types, and the Wannian sites often show larger numbers of glazed ceramics than do most Wucheng sites (Li Jiahe 1989, pp. 26–37 and Liu Shizhong 2000, pp. 26–27). This thesis is mainly concerned with the Wucheng culture, because a large group of bronzes were found at Xin’gan, which is located 31 32

9

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC (fig. 1.9). Bronze-casting remains found near the city indicate that the bronzes were probably cast locally. The stylistic features of the vessels demonstrate that the local casters followed the practices at Zhengzhou. It has been suggested that Panlongcheng was most probably a Shang establishment, occupied during the Upper Erligang period, that is, c. 1400-c. 1300 BC.45

Archaeological finds in Shaanxi 陝西 do not suggest an organised social group, although evidence has been found of several scattered societies whose level of sophistication was less advanced than that of those found in Henan.42 Not until the final decades of the 11th century BC does there appear evidence of large architectural structures (of which only the foundations are preserved) constructed at Zhouyuan. At most, it appears certain that, during the Shang period, a unified major bronze-casting group did not exist in Shaanxi. After the Zhou conquest of the Shang, however, large numbers of bronze vessels and weapons were produced locally in Zhouyuan, and some southern connections are suggested by certain stylistic features of the local bronzes.43 The relationship between the Zhou and the south is intriguing and important. In the discussion of the following chapters, we shall look at some southern features that appeared in the north during the late Anyang period and the early decades of the Western Zhou 西周 (c. 1045–771 BC).

The middle and lower Yangtze valleys are rich in copper mines. Several early copper mines have been excavated in Hubei, Anhui, and northern Jiangxi provinces.46 Robert Bagley suggests, therefore, that the Shang may have established an outpost at Panlongcheng to secure the supply of copper to Henan, where the demand for copper must have been very high.47 The occupation at Panlongcheng, however, did not seem to have lasted very long, because the site was abandoned by the end of the Upper Erligang period, about the same time as Zhengzhou.48 Had the Shang kings been able to establish an outpost as far south as Panlongcheng, the extensiveness of the Shang travels must have been remarkably wide—much wider than what their Zhou successors were able to achieve.

The Shang’s outlying sites? Between the Yellow and Yangtze River valleys, two major sites may illustrate the outward movement of the Shang population into foreign realms. One of these was Huangpi 黃坡, located near present-day Wuhan 武漢 in central Hubei 湖北 province. About 500 km away from Zhengzhou, this southern settlement was established on the northern bank of the Yangtze River. The other was Laoniupo 老牛坡, near Xi’an 西安 in Shaanxi province. It was located in the Wei River 渭河 valley on the upper reaches of the metropolitan region.

The site at Laoniupo was discovered in 1978 and was excavated by archaeologists from the Northwestern University at Xi’an 西安 during a period from 1986-88. The number of Shang period finds in Shaanxi has been rather limited overall, but Laoniupo was an exceptionally rich site. The excavators revealed an extensive bronzecasting area which contained clay moulds and slumps of copper, thirty-eight tombs, two horse pits, one chariot pit, several kilns, and two large architectural foundations.49

Huangpi was probably the earlier of the two sites and was closely related to Zhengzhou. It was an extensive site, covering an area the size of several modern villages. Some remains of what appear to be the city walls were preserved. Panlongcheng 盤龍城, the walled city, was probably about 260 m from north to south and 290 m east to west.44 The walls were constructed using the hangtu method, like those at Zhengzhou. Dozens of tombs were revealed outside the walled areas. They were constructed in rectangular pits. Tomb M2at Lijiazui was one of the largest discovered. It contained twenty-two bronze vessels, which were dominated by wine-drinking types that were indistinguishable from those found in many Shang tombs

45 The excavations at Panlongcheng were carried out during the period from 1974 to 2000. The finds have been well reported and discussed. For the early excavations, see Panlongcheng 1976, pp. 5-15 (in English, see Bagley 1977, pp. 165-198). In the same volume, Yang Hungxun discusses the architectural structure at Panlongcheng and his own reconstruction (Yang Hongxun 1976, pp. 16-25); the excavators also produced a separate comparative study of the bronzes from Panlongcheng and Zhengzhou (Panlongcheng 1976b, pp. 26-41). For more recent finds, see the full report, Panlongcheng 2001. 46 The middle and lower Yangtze valleys are still rich in copper today. Ruichang in northern Jiangxi was probably mined in as early as the late Shang (Liu and Lu 1998, pp. 465-496). For descriptions of the ancient copper mines found in the Yangtze valleys, see Qiu Shijing 2004, pp. 2540. 47 Bagley 1977, pp. 198-200. In opposition to Bagley’s suggestions, Jiang Hong and a number of other Chinese scholars have argued that most of central Hubei may have been invaded and controlled by the Shang; and Panlongcheng was possibly one of the many Shang settlements established in the south (Jiang Hong 1976, pp. 42-46 and Li Taoyuan 2002, pp. 20-24). Although a few other Shang-period sites (containing minor finds) have been found in Hubei, evidence is far from sufficient to convincingly suggest that the Shang hadextended their political control that far south. Moreover, Panlongcheng was apparently occupied for only a short time. I am, therefore, inclined to support the more cautions argument by Bagley that the site was an outpost established in the region outside the main Shang spheres. Zhang Changping is now taking charge of the excavations at Panlongcheng. On the more updated accounts about the recent finds, see the first two chapters in 2016, pp. 7-32. 48 Li Taoyuan 2002, pp. 62-68. 49 Earlier reports of Laoniupo were published in 1988 in two journal articles in the same volume. They cover mainly the discoveries from the tombs (Liu and Song 1988, pp. 1-22 and Liu Shie 1988, pp. 23-27). In the full report, Wang Changqi gives a useful list of all the bronzes found in Laoniupo (apart from those found during the excavations in 1986-88); most of them were previously unpublished (Wang Changqi 2001, pp. 415-428).

Rawson 1999, pp. 375–382. As the present archaeological finds at the Shang period sites in Shaanxi indicate that local societies were rather incoherently organized and simple in metallurgical developments, Jessica Rawson argues that the Zhou were probably a semi-nomadic group that migrated from further west. See Rawson 1989, pp. 75–79. 43 Some southern features of the Zhou bronzes are discussed in Rawson 1989, pp. 79–87. One of the most obvious of these is the representation of sculptural animals and birds on bronze vessels. 44 The site at Huangpi was ravaged by a disastrous flood in 1954, although archaeologists were commissioned to carry out salvage surveys. On a map drawn in 1932, they discovered a marked area called Panlongcheng, which appeared to be an ancient site. When the archaeologists arrived on the spot, they found that the walls had been taken down for the construction of a dam against the flood. Only parts of the western walls and a small section of the northern walls had been preserved. The dimensions of the walls at Panlongcheng were therefore taken from descriptions contained in the 1932 map (Li Taoyan 2002, pp. 12-13). 42

10

Introduction

Figure 1.9. Drawings of some of the bronze ritual vessels found at tomb M2 at Panlongcheng Lijiazui. The ding (top, far right) measures 17.6 cm in height. Zhu Fenghan 1995, fig. 10.21.

have formed part of the set of bronze vessels typical of any Shang tomb. A bronze jia found at Tomb M44 shared many stylistic features with the tomb found at Zhengzhou Baijiazhuang in Henan (fig. 1.10).51 In the refuse pits, the excavators found more than one hundred processed oracle bones. Most of them were broken, and they were not

Nonetheless, the range of scholarly perspectives on Laoniupo has been limited, because the full excavation report was not made available until fairly recently, in 2000.50 The Laoniupo tombs possess many Anyang features. The tombs were constructed in rectangular pits. Most of them had been looted, but a few bronze vessels remained. Jue, jia, and ding were present, which could possibly 50

51 Five cultural strata (I-V in chronological order) were revealed at Laoniupo; the Shang remains were found in strata IV and V, and most bronzes were found in stratum IV, Liu Shie 2000, pp. 283-301.

For the full excavation report on Laoniupo, see Liu Shi’e 2000.

11

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 1.10. Left: bronze jia found at tomb M44 at Laoniupo. H 23 cm. The jia probably dated from c. 1300 BC. After Liu Shie 2000, colour pl. 5. Right: bronze jia found at a tomb at Zhengzhou Baijiazhuang. H 28.5 cm. c. 1300 BC. Zhengzhou Shangcheng 2001, colour pl. 25.

Figure 1.11. Chariots buried in pits accompanying burials. Left: a chariot found at M27 at Laoniupo (after Liu Shie 2000, colour pl. 3); right: a chariot found at M7 at Anyang Xiaomintun (Anyang 1994, pl. 18.1).

practices with the Shang, the question remains, however, as to whether the chariot was introduced from Anyang or whether it was directly inspired by the peoples of the Northern Zone in southern Inner Mongolia.54 The site was located on a major route connecting Henan to the west, from which the formidable Zhou were to come. Therefore, the connection between Anyang and Laoniupo must have been very important. The excavators argue that Laoniupo was probably a settlement established by the Shang during the Anyang period. They suggest that the Shang may have

inscribed. But they were burnt and cracked as were those found in the caches at Anyang.52 Among all the finds at Laoniupo, the chariots (fig. 1.11) are probably the most remarkable. Horses and chariots were probably introduced from the northwest to the Yellow River regions in the last centuries of the second millennium BC. The earliest chariots were found at Anyang, buried in separate pits accompanying the large tombs of highranking elites.53 Found within the cemeteries of many large and small tombs, the chariot and horse pits discovered at Laoniupo were probably also part of the burials. While the people at Laoniupo appear to have shared many burial Liu Shi’e 2000, p. 161. See Liu Yonghua 2002, pp. 6-18 for drawings and comparison of the Anyang and Laoniupo chariots.

54 Liu Shie, the principal excavator at Laoniupo, argues that chariots were probably introduced from Anyang. See Laoniupo 2000, pp. 344345; however, Liu doe not entertain other possibilities.

52 53

12

Introduction

Figure 1.12. Bronze faces found at Laoniupo, Chenggu, and Xin’gan. c. 1300 BC. Top left: human-like face found at Tomb M44 at Laoniupo. H: 6.5 cm; Top right: ox face found at tomb M10 at Laoniupo. H 16 cm. Liu Shie 2000, colour pl. 10. Middle left: human-like face found at Chenggu Sucun. H 16.4 cm; middle right: ox face found at Chenggu Sucun. H 19.1 cm. Zhao Congcang 2006, pl. 98 and 114. Bottom left: human-like face found at Xin’gan in Jiangxi. H 53 cm. Xin’gan 1997, colour pl. 37. Bottom right: Bronze chariot fitting from Yidu Sufutun, Shandong. Anyang period. H 6.8 cm. Xia and Liu 1996, pl. 1.

the excavators. In Tomb M41, one of the largest looted burials, the excavators found thirty bronze faces of an ox or human-like creature (fig. 1.12).56 Surprisingly, many similar faces were found at Chenggu 城固 in Hanzhong (fig. 1.12), on the other side of the Qinling Mountains in the south;57 another humanoid bronze face (fig. 1.12), an

possibly expanded as far west as the Wei River valley, where they came into contact with the Zhou people.55 But other features at Laoniupo indicate that the site is possibly more complicated than initially suggested by At the end of the report, Liu Shie lists a number of Shang neighbours (who probably lived on the west) made reference to in the oracle bone inscriptions. He argues that a group of Shang may have lived in the border regions, where they encountered the various fangguo (regional states) outside the Shang realms (Liu Shie 2000, pp. 328-355).

55

Liu Shie 2000, pp. 269-270 and 296-299. The bronze masks from Laoniupo are about 10-20cm tall, featuring two round and hollow eyes, a stout nose, a broad and grinning mouth, openwork teeth, and two angular ears. Their forms and details are very 56 57

13

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC societies (c. 5th-1st century BC) in Yunnan in the southwest developed much later.62 The bronzes in the far south possess features that developed earlier in the mid-Yangtze regions, but they display limited connections to the Shang or Zhou further north. The finds from the far south will, therefore, be excluded from the present discussion.

enlarged version, was found at Xin’gan 新干 in the middle Yangtze.58 In contrast, no similar faces have been found in Henan.59 Thus, the people at Laoniupo were not only familiar with the practices at Anyang, but they were also in contact with other societies not as clearly identified as the Shang. The cultural network established in Shaanxi was extensive. This was an area in which settled and nomadic groups encountered one another, and in which the Shang interacted with southerners. Whether or not Laoniupo was a western extension of Shang territory must be substantiated by further archaeological finds in the region.

Hanzhong Hanzhong is a narrow valley of the Han River in southern Shaanxi. The region is rather isolated. It is flanked in the north by the extensive Qinling Mountains 秦嶺 (about 300 km long), which essentially blocked most connections with the eastern Wei River valley where Laoniupo is located; in the south, the Micang Mountains 米倉 and Daba Mountains 大巴 separate Hanzhong from Sichuan’s Chengdu Basin 成都盆地, which is an extensive area of flat-lying lands on the Upper Yangtze. Hanzhong is an important intermediate region that connects the north and south of China. Today, the Hanzhong area is still a major stop along the railway that links Baoji in Shaanxi with Chengdu. Moreover, the Han River is another major transport route that leads to the mid-Yangtze regions in central Hubei.

Undoubtedly, Shang culture was dominant over other societies in the Yellow River region. Panlongcheng and Laoniupo comprise two different types of societies established in the peripheral regions of the metropolitan Shang areas: the people at Panlongcheng closely followed northern burial and bronze-casting practices, while those at Laoniupo appear to have been more receptive to a greater variety of cultural influences. Both sites make clear that Shang culture was known and identified as Shang in distant lands, or at least that people who were familiar with the Shang travelled and established themselves outside Henan. Bronze-casting technique was possibly introduced more widely to the south during the 14th to 13th century BC, around the time of the abandonment of Panlongcheng. Because most Yangtze finds were dated to the Transition period and after, i.e. c. 1300 BC, Panlongcheng appeared to have contributed significantly to the distribution of both the bronzecasting technique and the practice of casting ritual bronze vessels. However, the finds were too scattered to draw any concluding suggestions about the contacts. So far it can only be certain that the distribution of the technique was one-way, which was transmitted from north to south.60

Some bronze-using peoples once lived in Hanzhong. Archaeologists have found more than seven hundred bronze vessels, weapons, masks, chariot fittings, and various other objects of unknown purpose (fig. 1.13). The bronzes were found in about thirty-three groups in different combinations, buried in pits located within the confines of two neighbouring counties: Chenggu 城固 and Yangxian 洋縣, both beside the Han River.63 The purposes of the bronze pits at Chenggu and Yangxian are unknown. The dates of the vessels range between the Upper Erligang and Anyang periods.64

The South

The Hanzhong people cast a few bronze vessels; most of the fine bronze vessels found there probably came from

The ‘southern China’ defined here refers to Hanzhong, the Huai River valley, and the Yangtze valley. In the southernmost Chinese provinces of Fujian 福建, Guangdong 廣東, and Guangxi 廣西, archaeologists have also discovered bronze vessels and bells dated to the sixth to third centuries BC.61 The Dian 滇 bronze-casting

suggests that the Lingnan bronze-casting industries were probably inspired by the societies in the Yangtze regions; see Falkenhausen 2002, pp. 194-236. In turn, Higham argues that the bronze-casting industries in continental Southeast Asia can possibly be attributed to inspiration from the Lingnan regions, Higham 2001, pp. 61-71, 90-103. 62 One distinctive feature of the Dian culture is their having cast many bronze figures, animals, and a bronze type now called the drum. The Dian drums were shaped like the zun, a bronze vessel which originated in Henan and which was frequently found in the mid-Yangtze region. The Dian culture shared quite a number of features with the culture of the mid-Yangtze regions (Rawson 1983, pp. 7-9 and Zhang Zengqi 1997, pp. 19-31). 63 The Hanzhong bronzes were discovered between 1950 and 2004. Most of them have been reported (is there an archaeologically specific synonym you can use here, to avoid repetition?) in the form of short published reports, and illustrated in two recent catalogues The three volumes of Hanzhong Chutu Shang Dai Qingtongqi 漢中出土商代青銅 器 edited by Cao Wei provide useful details about each piece individually (Cao 2006). On the other hand, the single volume Cheng-Yang Qingtongqi 城洋青銅器, edited by Zhao Congcang, arranges the finds by site. At the end of the book, Zhao includes several research articles by a range of authors, who discuss different bronze types. He also includes his research of many years on the Hanzhong bronzes (Zhao Congcang 2006). 64 Zhao Congcang 1996, table 2. Bagley dates some of the Hanzhong vessels to the Transition period (1999, pp. 178-180).

similar to those discovered at Chenggu in Hanzhong in southern Shaanxi; another parallel example was found in Xin’gan in Jiangxi, in the middle Yangtze valley (Bagley 1999, p.178-180). See also Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 88-99. 58 Xin’gan 1997, pp. 131-132. 59 A few bronze human faces were found in the royal tombs at Anyang. These faces were cast with far more realistic features. For discussions on the different bronze faces from the Shang period, see Rawson 1998b, pp. 124-148. The finds from Hanzhong and Xin’gan will be described below. 60 The dates of the southern bronzes are highly controversial. Nevertheless, Jessica Rawson and Robert Bagley have demonstrated that the earliest pieces found in most southern regions were invariably related to Zhengzhou (Rawson 1994, pp. 1-14 and Bagley 1987, pp. 32-34 and 1999, pp. 175-180). See Shi Jingxiong 2005, pp. 312-315 for a list of the approximate dates of the southern bronzes. 61 For a summary of the finds from southernmost China – that is, the Lingnan regions – see Xia-Shang 2003, pp. 635-658. Falkenhausen

14

Introduction

Figure 1.13. Bronzes found in Hanzhong, Shaanxi province. c. 1300 BC. Top left: jia. H 57.7 cm. Found at Yangxian Machang. After Cao Wei 2006, pp. 91; Top centre: zun. H 36.9 cm. Found at Chenggu Baoshan Sucun. After Cao Wei 2006, pp. 102. Top right: pou. H 31.8 cm. Found at Yangxian Machang. After Zhao Congcang 2006, pl. 38. Below left: crescent-shaped objects. Found at Chenggu Longtouzhen. L 53–56 cm. After Zhao Congcang 2006, pl. 159–160. Below right: pao with a pointed top. D 10.5; pao with an open top. D 11.7 cm. Both found at Chenggu Baoshan. After Cao Wei 2006, p. 407 and 499.

Henan and from the Yangtze regions.65 The local bronze casters seemed to have specialised in producing smaller items. Many different bronze weapons are numbered among the finds: spears, triangular blades, arrowheads, knives, and adzes.66 Many small implements and fittings also appear; a disc-shaped object with a bulging side, which we now call the pao 泡 (fig. 1.13) is the most frequently found of these.67 In addition, bronze faces were found, similar to those in the tombs at Laoniupo, as discussed above.68 Also discovered were quite a number of bronze zhang 璋 (fig. 1.14), an elongated and flat piece shaped

Rawson, forthcoming. Zhao Congcang, therefore, argues that Hanzhong may have been a major weapons production centre (1996, pp. 17-25). For a typological study of the Hanzhong weapons, see Guo Yanli 2006, pp. 260-280. 67 Most pao came from Chenggu Baoshan Sucun. There were two different forms: one has a hollow centre on the bulging side, and the other has a pointed centre. Their diameters range between one and thirty centimetres (Zhao Congcang, 2006, pp. 83-156). The functions of these pao are unknown. However, similar bronze pao were found in the Western Zhou tombs, often associated with chariots. Wang Zhiyou suggests that the pao were decorative fittings on the leatherwork and shields (2006, pp. 281-209). 68 All the masks were found at two nearby sites at Chenggu Baoshan Sucun 城固寶山蘇村 (Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 69-99). Similar masks were found at Xin’gan in Jiangxi (see below);, and in an early Western Zhou tomb, M1193, found at Fangshan Liulihe 房山琉璃河 in Hebei, where the pieces were likely to have been collected from elsewhere (Liulihe 1990, pp. 20-31). 65 66

Figure 1.14. Zhang. Left: bronze zhang. Hanzhong Yangxian Fanjiaba, Shaanxi province. H 17.8 cm. After Cao Wei 2006, p. 226. Right: jade zhang. Sanxingdui pit no. 2, Sichuan province. H. 38.2 cm. After Bagley 2001, p. 169.

15

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 1.15. Bronze vessels found at Funan, Anhui province. There were twenty-one vessels: a pair of jia, a pair of jue, a pair of gu, two different zun, one fangding (now lost), and possibly twelve li (some were lost). Only a few of them have been published; only one in each pair of jia, jue, and gu are illustrated. The photographs of these vessels are repeated here to suggest what the whole set may have looked like. Top: (left) jue, H 28 cm; (centre) gu, H 29.5 cm; (right) li, H 23 cm; Below: (left) jia, H 46 cm; (centre) zun, H 47 cm; (right) zun, H 50.5 cm. After Anhui 1987, catalogue entry no. 1–3, 31–33.

Anhui

like a tablet. The zhang was possibly a ritual object dating from the Neolithic period in Henan, and it was usually made of jade or stone.69 The bronze versions of the zhang found in Hanzhong are intriguing, because no jade zhang or other ritual jade has yet been reported as discovered at that site. It is even more intriguing that a large number of jade zhang of extraordinarily large size were excavated at Sanxingdui in Sichuan on the other side of the Micang and Daba Mountains to the south of Hanzhong.70

The Huai River valley in northern Anhui is an intermediate valley between the Yellow and the Yangtze Rivers in the east, near the coast. During the 1950s and 1970s, a few sites with bronzes dated to the Transition period were found in the Huai valleys and in the regions further south near the Yangtze.72 Nearly all the discoveries were chance finds made by local residents. The original provenance of the bronzes has been lost, but their large size and fine quality is comparable with those excavated from the highest-ranking elite tombs at Anyang.

In 1998–1999, Zhao Congcang led an archaeological team from the Northwest University to excavate at Baoshan in Chenggu city. They revealed sixty one irregularly-shaped pits that contained signs of fire, as well as various sorts of pottery shards, animal bones, and pebble stones. The site contained a large number of pottery shards but only a few broken bronze pieces.71 The bronzes of Hanzhong strongly suggest that other, more important settlements existed. Despite the large number of bronzes found, we still understand very little about the people who lived in Hanzhong. Archaeologists have not yet found any major settlement sites.

Three groups of Anhui bronzes are notable. The largest group (fig.1.15) – consisting entirely of pieces of unmistakably northern type – was found at Funan 阜南 in 1957. The group includes twenty-one ritual vessels: pairs of jia (46 cm tall), jue (28 cm), and gu (29.5 cm); two different zun (47 and 50.5 cm); one fangding 方鼎 (this piece is now lost); and twelve similar li 鬲 tripods (about

Virginia Kane and Robert Bagley are credited with establishing the dates of the Anhui vessels (Kane 1974/5, pp. 79-80). Following the fivestyle scale proposed by Max Loehr in 1959 (Loehr 1959, pp. 42-53 ), Bagley establishes a revised typological sequence of the bronze vessels with reference to the known archaeological sites. The decorative motifs evolved from simplicity to complexity and from Style I to V, with Style I roughly corresponding to the Erlitou period and Style V to the Anyang period. The Anhui vessels represent Style III. Hence, Bagley argues that they probably dated to the Transition period (Bagley 1999, pp. 146-155 and 175-176).

72

The bronze zhang were found at Chenggu Wulangmiao 城固五廊廟 and Yangxian Fanba 洋縣范霸 (Zhao Congcang 2006, pp.46-57, 166176). 70 Some large Sanxingdui jade zhang are nearly one metre long, Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 61-80 (pit no. 1) and 354-367 (pit no. 2). For the studies of the distribution and types of zhang, see the essays collected in Tang Chung 1994. 71 Zhao Congcang 2002, pp. 25-163. 69

16

Introduction

Figure 1.16. Bronze jia found at Feixi, Anhui province. H 55.4 cm. c. 1300 BC.

Figure 1.17. Bronze nao. Anhui Lujiang. H 49.5 cm. After Anhui 1987, catalogue entry no. 10.

23 cm).73 A smaller group, including two jia (55.4 cm tall), two jue (38.7 cm), and one gu (height unknown) was found at Feixi 肥西, further to the south, in 1965. The Feixi jia (fig. 1.16) were extraordinarily large, comparable with the one (66 cm tall) found in Tomb no. 54 at Anyang (fig. 1.8), mentioned above.74 The third group of ritual vessels, which date slightly later than the previous two groups, was found at Yinshang 穎上 near Funan in 1980. This group consists of pairs of jue, gu, and ding, and single pieces of yan, gui, you, and zun – an extensive set similar to the typical collection of objects found at any Shang tomb in Henan. The Yinshang vessels, however, were not cast in bronze as were the others. They were cast in lead. The excavation report did not specify whether the lead vessels showed signs of use. It is curious that they were buried together with small tools made of bronze.75 Discovered in the same area in 1972, another group of finds comprised =only bronze vessels and lead tools.76 The Anhui casters seem unusual. Ritual vessels were very rarely been cast in any material other than bronze, and the use of lead was even rarer. The lead vessels from Yinshang are unique.

inadequately documented and illustrated. The twentyone vessels from Funan may have been a set, but only a few of them have been published and illustrated in the catalogues.78 The lead vessels from Yinshang were depicted in very poor quality photographs.79 In addition, the sparse distribution of the Anhui bronzes may have resulted in further difficulties in establishing any particular pattern which underlay local bronze-using traditions. The two nao 鐃 bells found at Lujiang 廬江 (fig. 1.17) and Qianshan 潛山 near the Yangtze further to the south also complicate the picture.80 Both bells were similar in form to those found in the mid-Yangtze regions. The practice of burying individual bells in pits was almost certainly a practice developed in the mid-Yangtze. Thus, it would appear that the bronze-casting and bronze-using groups in Anhui both possessed a knowledge about the Shang and had contact with other groups upstream. The Mid-Yangtze Regions The middle Yangtze valleys feature two large freshwater lakes: Poyang 鄱陽 and Dongting 洞庭.81 The mid-Yangtze

The Anhui ritual vessels are remarkable and unusual in form and design, but they have been discussed relatively rarely.77 This is partly because the Anhui vessels were

of the Anhui vessels and bells in her paper on the southern bronze-casting industry (Kane 1974/75, pp. 79-80). Elsewhere, a couple of Anhui bronzes are illustrated in Bagley 1980, cat. No. 15-16; others are briefly discussed in Bagley 1999, pp. 175-177 as well as in a forthcoming paper by Jessica Rawson on the bronze-casting industries related to Hanzhong. 78 In the original report, only four of the twenty-one vessels were illustrated (Ge Jieping 1959, p. 1). Although the Funan vessels are later illustrated again in colour plates in the bronze catalogue of the Anhui Provincial Museum, only a few vessels were selected for publication (Anhui 1987, cat. no. 1-4 and Anhui 2006, cat. no. 1-4). 79 The Yinshang vessels are illustrated only in the excavation report published in Liu Haichao 1985, pp. 36-38. They were then housed in the Fuyang Municipal Museum 阜陽市博物館. No further details about them have been published. 80 The Qianshan nao was discovered in 1955 and the Lujiang nao in 1973. Neither was documented in the form of an archaeological report. But they are illustrated in the catalogue of the bronze collection in the Anhui Provincial Museum, Anhui 1987, catalogue entry no. 10-11. 81 There has been a considerable research on the geological transformation [is this the kind of transformation you mean?] pollen records of the two lakes. Most of this research is concerned with the features of the lakes

The Funan vessels were found in two groups. The first discovery was made in 1957 by local residents, who found jia, jue, gu, and zun. According to the residents’ accounts, the archaeologists reported that during the Sino-Japanese War, another group was discovered close to this same spot. It was said that there were twelve small bronze li and a large fangding 方鼎. Later, the archaeologists were able to recover five bronze li in the original group of twelve. One of them was found at the antique market at Fengbang, about 180 km to the west of Funan (Ge Jieping 1959, p. 1 and Anhui 1987, catalogue entry no. 3). 74 The Feixi vessels were not documented in the archaeological reports. They were illustrated in Bagley 1980, catalogue entry no. 15-16. They are now included in the collection of the Anhui Provincial Museum. 75 There were five bronze spears (about 23 cm long) and a broken triangular-shaped weapon, Liu Haichao 1985, pp. 36-38. 76 Liu Haichao 1985, pp. 38-41. 77 In contrast, the early bronzes from Anhui have been discussed in the West. Virginia Kane is the first scholar who took note of the importance 73

17

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC about 613,000 square meters, about one-fourth the size of Zhengzhou. Although the walls of Wucheng were constructed somewhat irregularly, they were substantial constructions: the surviving parts measure 5-8 m tall and are 15-20 m wide at the base. The archaeologists noted that the walls were built in horizontal layers, with a technique quite different from that used in the north.86

valleys are today administered under three provinces: Hubei (the North of the Lakes) is located on the north bank of the Yangtze; Jiangxi (the West of the River) is to the south of Lake Poyang; and finally, Hunan (the South of the Lakes) is to the south of Lake Dongting. Unlike the extensive low-lying plains that spread across the lower Yangtze valleys, the topography of the mid-Yangtze valley is more diverse. The lake regions of Jiangxi and Hunan are separated by the zigzagging Jiuling 九嶺, Wugong 武功, and Luoxiao 羅宵 mountains. Lake Poyang links the major river of the province, the Gan River 贛江, with the Yangtze, while Lake Dongting receives the Yuan 沅 and Xiang 湘 Rivers of Hunan. The lake regions around Poyang and Dongting, therefore, constitute two distinctly separate geographical regions.

In the 1970s, archaeologists estimated that the dates of occupation for Wucheng spanned from the Upper Erligang period to early Western Zhou. However, subsequent excavations have made few attempts to refine the broad chronology of the site subsequently established.87 We can be certain only that the city of Wucheng was roughly contemporary with Zhengzhou and that it was in use for a fairly lengthy period. Some small bronze tools and stone moulds for bronze-casting were found. In addition, two broken bronze vessels similar to those cast in the north but evidently locally cast were excavated.88 Wucheng is a large and important site in the mid-Yangtze valley. There is early evidence of bronze-casting activities. Despite the relatively small number of bronzes found, the site was clearly a major settlement of some sophisticated people that we are yet to understand.

Jiangxi and Wucheng culture Jiangxi lies upstream of Anhui. Unlike Hanzhong and Anhui, archaeological work in Jiangxi has been more focused. The resources for excavations are concentrated on the settlement site at Zhangshu Wucheng 樟樹吳城, where archaeologists from the Jiangxi Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology carried out ten seasons of excavations between 1973 and 2002.82 Meanwhile, in 1989, these archaeologists accidentally discovered and subsequently excavated a pit at Xin’gan Dayangzhou, about twenty kilometres to the east of Wucheng. Hundreds of bronzes, jades, and ceramics were buried inside the pit. Although the purpose of the site is unknown, its connection with Wucheng is clearly evinced by the similarity of the two sites’ ceramics.83 The two sites can therefore be assumed to have been contemporary. They are the key sites that represent what is now called the Wucheng bronze-using culture in Jiangxi.84

Inside the city, archaeologists revealed roads that connected to the city gates, a large earthen platform, pits with bronzecasting remains, and fourteen kilns.89 No major tombs have yet been found. The site perhaps tells us most about the highly developed skills of the Wucheng potters. They were capable of firing at a sufficiently high temperature, probably around 1200℃, allowing the surfaces of the pots to vitrify. Some of the Wucheng wares have a thin greenish glaze (fig. 1.18).90 One of the fourteen kilns (Y6) (fig. 1.19) excavated had as many as eight firing chambers; it had domed rooftops and sloping firing tunnels that would have increased and stabilised the temperatures within the firing chambers.91 Moreover, the potters marked their ceramics. From time to time in their examination of the ceramic artefacts, archaeologists found between one and several characters inscribed on shards. The longest inscription contained twelve characters.92 Wucheng writing is not decipherable,

Wucheng is one of the few known Early Bronze Age settlements in southern China. The carbon dates of the site range between c. 1530 and c. 1050 BC.85 It is located in the Gan River valley in central Jiangxi. The site measures during the Neolithic (c. 10000-c. 5000 BP) period (Guo Lixin 2004, pp. 5-6 and Jiang and Piperno 1999, pp. 250-258) and practically nothing has been accomplished in terms of academic inquiry into the physical environment of the mid-Yangtze during the Shang. Today, Lake Poyang measures about 2,900 square meters, and Lake Dongting 2740 square meters. 82 Between 1973 and 2002, the finds from Wucheng were published in several short excavation reports: Wucheng 1975, pp. 51-71; Wucheng 1978, pp. 1-13; Wucheng 1987, pp. 20-31; Wucheng 1993, pp. 1-32, 18; Wucheng 1995, pp. 5-23. The full report was published in Wucheng 2005. The final report provides a map of Wucheng, lists of objects and features (including pits, kilns, and bronzes), and photographs of the objects which may not have previously been published. The report summarises the finds from different parts of the city but fails to integrate them. For example, during the first few excavations, archaeologists established that there were three successive strata at the site, which, as they argued, corresponded respectively to the Erligang, Anyang, and Western Zhou periods of the north. The later excavations simply followed these divisions. No attempt has been made to refine these overly simplistic correspondences suggested in the site’s first excavation reports. 83 A preliminary report of Xin’gan was published in Xin’gan 1991, pp. 1-24 and a final report in Xin’gan 1997. 84 Peng Minghan 2005, pp. 112-189. 85 Peng Shifen 1997, pp. 145-146.

In a conference held in 2004, the excavators of Wucheng, Huang Shuigeng, and Li Kun reported some recent finds from 2001. The paper has not yet been published but is available online: http://www.xianqin. org/xr_html/articles/yshwhxh/195.html. 87 For the dates of Wucheng and other sites in northern Jiangxi, see the summary in Peng Minghan 2005, pp. 19-46. 88 Wucheng 2005, pp. 83-86 and 361-374. 89 The excavators found seven refuse pits (called hui keng 灰坑) in the northern parts of the site which contained various sorts of remains from bronze-casting activities: copper slag, charcoal, ceramics, stone axes, stone knives, and a large number of stone moulds for casting small bronze tools. Stone moulds were a particular feature of the Wucheng culture. First, the casters cut a slab of local sandstone into halves and carved out the shape of the desired tool on each half. One stone mould for casting an adze was also found at Xin’gan, along with many bronzes (Xin’gan 1997, p. 182). 90 Kerr and Wood 2004, pp. 9-12. 91 Wucheng 2005, pp. 75-84. 92 Wucheng 2005, pp. 375-390. 86

18

Introduction

Figure 1.18. Ceramic guan. Left: Wucheng. Height not given, approx. 20–30 cm. After Wucheng 2005, colour pl. 10; right: Xin’gan. H 18.8 cm. After Xin’gan 1997, p. 48.2.

Figure 1.19. Kiln site. Panlongcheng Wangjiazui, Hubei. Length 30 m; width 3─5.6 m. Panlongcheng 2001, p. 99. Kiln (Y6). Wucheng, Jiangxi. L 7.5 m; W 1.07 m. Wucheng 2005, p. 84.

A large group of bronzes found at Xin’gan (fig. 1.21) is an important discovery, indicating that the Wucheng people were also a major bronze-using group. The pit contained 475 bronzes: forty-eight ritual vessels; three nao bells (fig. 3.8), which stand mouth upward; one bo 鎛 bell (fig. 3.9) which stands mouth downward; 232 weapons; 143 tools (mainly agricultural); one double-sided mask of a face similar to those found at Laoniupo and Hanzhong; and forty-seven various objects that may have been fittings or implements (although no pao were found). In addition, the find also included 754 jade beads, tubes, and other ornamental pieces as well as 139 intact (or restored) thinly glazed ceramics.94 Figure 1.20. Reconstruction of the site found at Xin’gan. Installed at the National History Museum, 2007. Author’s photograph.

The Xin’gan vessels speak to an unusual feature of the site (fig. 1.20). Of the forty-eight vessels found, thirty-eight were cooking tripods (ding, li, and yan), two were basins for serving food (one was a pan and another a dou), and the remaining eight were various sorts of liquid containers (hu 壺, you, lei, and pou). This set of vessels is remarkably different from those found in the north and at

but it indicates that some of the Wucheng people were probably semi-literate.93

93 Tang Lan, an eminent scholar of Chinese palaeography, argued that the Wucheng writing was similar to that of the Shang in form and structure (Tang Lan 1975, pp. 72-76). The small number of characters found on the Wucheng shards, however, tells us very little about the linguistics and structure of the local language.

The Xin’gan ceramics are similar to those found in the second strata of Wucheng. This find consisted of mostly guan jars (some were lidded), zun, and dou (a dish on a pedestal) – all were containers or utensils for serving food (Xin’gan 1997, pp. 163-180).

94

19

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 1.21. Nine flat-legged bronze ding found at Xin’gan, Jiangxi province. c. 1300 BC.

own needs, may have selected certain vessel types to be used in the performance of religious activities. Clearly, the Xin’gan vessels are an important example of an alterative arrangement of Shang ritual objects. In my opinion, the purpose of the Xin’gan pit remains an open question. I am inclined not to consider the site to be a burial, because such an assumption oversimplifies the cultural diversity that has been found in many southern societies.

Panlongcheng. Wine-drinking vessels – the jue, gu, and jia– are not represented. In this group, the most dominant vessel type is the bronze ding; sixteen ding of various sizes and shapes were found, with the largest one (now marked as XDM: 8) measuring 97 cm in height.95 The following chapter will return to discuss the combination of the Xin’gan bronze vessels, and its implications. The combination suggests that it was certainly unlike the vessels found in the burials in Henan and Panlongcheng.

Indeed, the remaining bronzes at Xin’gan suggest that the local society may have had high regard for other bronze types less commonly found in Henan. A wide variety of bronze weapons and agricultural tools were found. The two hundred weapons found comprising eleven different types, including spears, blades, daggers, knives, axes, and a helmet.98 Among the agricultural tools were plough shovels, spades, axes, sickles, drills, and adzes.99 In addition, the four bells at Xin’gan were all of different shapes and designs. Bronze nao were not uncommon in southern China, particularly in Hunan (discussed below), but they have hardly ever been found buried with ritual vessels.100 The Xin’gan discovery has rendered many more questions rather than concluding remarks about the reception of the Shang material culture in the Jiangxi area.

The purpose of the site at Xin’gan Dayangzhou is controversial. The excavators argued that the site was possibly the tomb of a member of the local elite class.96 They found twenty-four poorly-preserved human teeth from three individuals – possibly one woman and two children.97 The excavators suggest that the Xin’gan bronze vessel set, which was evidently different from a standard set in the north, was possibly a local variant of that of the Shang. In their opinion, the Xin’gan people borrowed the bronze-using features from the north and, according to their Xin’gan 1997, pp. 8-48. Peng Shifan, one of the principal excavators, argued that there may have been a set of outer and inner coffins (Peng Shifan 1997, pp. 137=142). Nevertheless, the notes taken by the excavators have not been substantiated by the publication of photographs taken during the excavations: the site had been disturbed and the objects scattered all over the site. The amount of wood traces found is meagre, and no other human body parts were found. See the descriptions of the site in Xin’gan 1997, pp. 5-7. An alternative perspective on the pit at Xin’gan is that it was possibly a hoard of sacrificial objects (Peng Minghan 1994, pp. 1619). The evidence is not convincing either way. The finds from Xin’gan comprise a unique example of the range of bronze types and other objects produced and used by the Wucheng society. We have not yet found a parallel case for comparison. Therefore, regarding the purpose of the pit, I opt to leave the question unanswered for the time being. 97 According to the excavators, the teeth were collected near the centre of the pit. They were analysed by Han Kangxin from the Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Science (Han Kangxin 1997, pp. 234–237). 95 96

The Xin’gan helmet was possibly an import from the north, because about dozens of similar bronze helmets were discovered at a royal tomb at Anyang (Xin’gan 1997, pp. 87-115). 99 Xin’gan 1997, pp. 115-129. 100 In a paper delivered in 1989, Gao Zhixi reported a survey of all the bronzes that had been found in southern China by 1989. Except for the finds in Sichuan (discussed below) and Xin’gan, the southern bronzes were usually found individually or in small groups (Gao Zhixi 1992, pp. 76-79). 98

20

Introduction

Figure 1.22. Bronze nao found in Hunan province. Left: nao. Ningxiang Yueshanpu. H 103.5 cm; weight: 221 kg. Top and bottom right: nao. Found at Ningxiang Laoliangcang, buried together with four similar but smaller ones, as well as with the one shown below. The largest bell measures 53.5 cm in height and 31 kg in weight. Below right: nao. H 54 cm; weight: 28.5 kg. After Shanghai Museum 2000, p. 16–20.

were buried in the pits is still a major question in Hunan archaeology.103

Hunan In Hunan, many exquisite bronze vessels and bells have been found since the 1920s.101 However, our present understanding of the bronze-using people or peoples in Hunan is very limited. Archaeologists have not yet found any remarkable settlement sites, tombs, or bronze-casting workshops in the province. The bronzes were only chance finds. They were buried in pits that did not contain any other objects. Moreover, the pits were usually located near rivers or on hills. Although in most cases archaeologists were able to visit the bronze pits and to make notes of their features and surroundings, nothing much of interest was identified.102 In fact, for what purposes the bronzes

On the other hand, the large number of bronzes found in Hunan shows us that there must have been a major bronze-casting group there. As of June 2008, about fiftytwo bronze bells (including nao, yongzhong, and bo) had been found at thirty-five known sites (fig. 1.22), and about thirty vessels at twenty others. Xiang Taochu, a Hunan archaeologist, estimates that three hundred more bells and vessels from unknown sites have been

provide detailed descriptions of the sites and clear rubbings of the bronzes; see, for example, Huang and Wang 1997, pp. 16-27 and Pan Maohui et al 2001, pp. 66-70. 103 Gao Zhixi, a Hunan archaeologist, suggests that the burial of the bronzes in pits may have comprised some part of the rituals performed for the deities of nature (Gao Zhixi 1984, p. 131). His suggestion is widely accepted in China. The assortment of objects placed in the bronze pits in Hunan display some regular patterns (see below). It seems possible that the bronze pits were intended for ritual purposes, but the evidence is far from sufficient to suggest what kinds of rituals were performed, or for whom they were performed.

Many bronzes found in Hunan before the Sino-Japanese War were incorporated into museum collections overseas. For example, the British Museum has a two-ram zun, the Senoku Museum has a you in the form of a tiger and a man, and the Musee Guimei has a large elephant-shaped zun (Zhongguo qingtongqi quanji 1998, no. 131, 133, and 152). The provenance of these vessels has not been determined, but they were said to have come from places near Changsha. (Bagley 1987, pp. 32-36). 102 The excavation reports in Hunan published before the 1990s are all very brief and unclear. Only in the most recent reports do archaeologists 101

21

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 1.23. Animal-shaped vessels. A boar-shaped zun excavated from Xiangtan Jiuhua, Hunan province. H 40 cm; L 70 cm. He Jiejun 1982, p. 20. An elephant-shaped zun excavated from Zhuzhou Liling, Hunan. H 22.8 cm; L26.5 cm. Chen Jianming 2004, p. 15.

collected in local museums.104 Some bronze weapons and tools have been found, but bronze chariot fittings and masks that were not uncommon at other southern sites are either absent or very rare.105 The bronze pits are distributed throughout the Lake Dongting regions and in the Xiang River valley; most of them were discovered in Ningxiang 寧鄉 county near modern-day Changsha 長 沙, the provincial capital.

Dating the Hunan bronzes is difficult. The majority lack a chronological context. Moreover, the seemingly randomlylocated bronze pits do not correspond with stratigraphy. For these reasons, archaeologists usually estimate the dates of the Hunan bronzes by comparing their decorative features with those developed in Henan. Gao Zhixi and Bagley have reached similar conclusions that most Hunan bronzes can be dated to the Anyang period, more or less.109

The Hunan bronzes consistently display several remarkable features. First, the bronze pits were usually located near rivers or on low mounds, quite similar to those found in Hanzhong. However, the contents of the Hunan bronze pits display regular patterns: they usually contained at least one, but in a few, more than ten bronzes; and no bell has reportedly been found with the vessels. Second, bronze bells must have been important to the local society. The number of nao bells found in Hunan exceeds the sum of all those found at the metropolitan Shang and other southern sites (see Chapter Three). Third, Hunan casters tended to produce large and heavy objects: the largest bronze nao, found at Ningxiang Yueshanpu 寧 鄉月山舖, measures 103.5 cm in height and 221 kg in weight;106 while the zun found at Huarong measures 72 cm tall, nearly double the size of an average Shang zun.107 Moreover, the Hunan bronzes feature representations of animals. Elephants, tigers, boars (fig. 1.23), rams, and birds in various combinations were not uncommonly depicted on both vessels and bells. Hunan casters even produced vessels in the form of a life-sized animal.108 Some of these were also very large.

Two recent excavations have revealed other remains of the bronze-using people in Hunan. In 1999, Xiang Taochu and other archaeologists from Hunan excavated at Gaoshazhi 高沙脊 near Changsha city. Nineteen pits containing shattered bronzes and pottery shards were revealed. The bronzes and pottery were likely to have been smashed before burial. The charcoal, burnt clay lumps, and warped objects suggest that fires were set in the pits. Although the excavators proposed that the pits were possibly tombs, they noted that no human remains or traces of coffins were found in any of them.110 In 2001-2005, Xiang Taochu led excavations at Ningxiang Tanheli 寧鄉炭河里, a site discovered in 1963. Two large architectural foundations and several pits with small numbers of bronzes and jades were revealed.111 It is important to note that the excavators also found remains of a moat and a wall, which appear to be parts of a walled settlement.112 The walls were Gao Zhixi 1993, pp. 49–52 and Bagley 1992, pp. 221-222. It must be noted that the tops of pits were destroyed by construction work near the site. Therefore, the original depths of the pits is unknown (Xiang Taochu 2001, pp. 29-32). The assertion that the pits were tombs seems rather questionable. 111 In the reports, the excavators describe the pits as tombs of local elites. As in the case of Xin’gan, the observations of the excavators are questionable. [This repeats fina sentence of previous paragraph.] The pits at Tanheli 炭河里 contained no human remains. The bronzes were likely to have been shattered before burial, similar to those found at the Gaoshazhi pits. The Shang elites in Henan took bronzes and jades as their grave goods. It is not known whether the elite of the Hunan societies shared any northern practices. Indeed, the fact that the objects were broken intentionally demands an explanation. Therefore, regarding the purposes of the pits at Tanheli and Gaoshazhi, I suggest that we must leave the question open for the time being. 112 In several journal papers, Xiang Taochu published the finds from Ningxiang Tanheli. The information given is more or less repeated from one paper to another. The reports can be found in Xiang Taochu 109 110

Xiang Taochu was one of the curators at the Hunan Provincial Museum, where most of the bronzes are kept. He does not describe the figures in detail (2006b, p. 37). 105 About two hundred bronze axes of about 10 cm in height were found in the bronze pou buried at Ningxiang Huangcai 寧鄉黃材, Chen Jianming 2004, p. 12. Two tiny bronze chariot fittings (4.5 cm tall) were found at Gaoshazhi 高沙脊 in 1999 (Xiang Taochu 2001, p. 41). 106 Cheng and Wang 1986, pp. 44-45. 107 Rawson 1996, p. 72. 108 See, for example, a boar-shaped vessel found at Xiangtan Jiuhua 湘潭 九華 in 1981. The vessel measures 40 cm tall and 72 cm long, He Jieju 1982, pp. 19-20. 104

22

Introduction constructed with clay and pebble stones. The extant section is arc-shaped; it measures 300 m long, is 12-15 m wide at the base, and is 1-2 m tall. The walls were constructed parallel to a six-metre wide moat. The site was severely damaged by the Huangcai 黃材 River, which changed its course in 1969. In the reconstruction plan, the excavators suggest that the settlement had probably been surrounded by a circular wall (fig. 1.24).113 If this is true, the city at Ningxiang Tanheli would have looked very different from the rectangular settlements at Zhengzhou, Panlongcheng, and Wucheng. The Upper Yangtze Region: Sichuan and Sanxingdui Culture In contrast to the flat, low-lying plains in the middle reaches of the Yangtze, the upper reaches have a diverse and rugged landscape. Archaeologists found some remains of the Sanxingdui culture, which was named after a type site on the Chengdu Plains in eastern Sichuan.114 The Sanxingdui people lived at the edges of the Qinghai-Tibetan Plateaus, surrounded by high mountains of between 2000 and 3500 m in altitude. Geographically, the sites are quite isolated. The Yangtze must have been a primary route connecting them with the peoples downstream in Chongqing 重慶, Hubei, and Hunan, while the Jiangling River 嘉陵江 in the north of the Plains enabled them to reach Hanzhong, on the other side of the Daba Mountains.

Figure 1.24. City walls found at Ningxiang Tanheli, Hunan province. After Xiang Taochu 2005, p. 81.

for the presence of several pits completely filled with elephant tusks, jades, and half-processed jade and stone objects – items that were also found at Sanxingdui. A small quantity of gold foil was also found.118 Jinsha is a site that belongs to the Sanxingdui culture. As pottery typology suggests, the settlement at Jinsha was probably established to have been occupied at about the same time as the city at Sanxingdui was abandoned.119

Two settlements were excavated in Sichuan. The earlier one, probably dating from the Anyang period, was found at Guanghan Sanxingdui 廣漢三星堆, about 40 km to the north of the Chengdu city. Jade and stone objects were reportedly discovered at Guanghan in the 1930s.115 In 198086, archaeologists from the Sichuan Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology excavated at Sanxingdui. They confirmed that the walls found on the east, south, and west of Nanxiangzhen 南鄉鎮 (where Sanxingdui is located) were built using the hangtu method, similar to that used at Zhengzhou. The surviving parts measure approximately 6 m high and 40 m wide at the base, enclosing an area of 2.65 square metres. The city was abandoned probably around 1000 BC.116

The bronzes at Sanxingdui were excavated from two rectangular pits (fig. 1.25) that probably served sacrificial purposes.120 They were discovered in 1986 at Sanxingdui and are located about twenty metres apart. The smaller of the two, now called pit no. 1, measures approximately 4.5 m long, 3.4 m wide and 1.6m deep. This pit contained 178 bronzes, two hundred jade and stone objects, thirty-nine pieces of pottery, thirteen elephant tusks, 124 cowries, and four thin gold foils of about 650 g in weight altogether. In addition, the pit contained three cubic metres of ash and burnt bones. The pit shows signs of fires having been set there, and some of the jades may have been broken before burial.121 The pit, however, is different from an ordinary refuse pit, because the pit walls were carefully flattened and the filling earth pounded hard. Moreover, the objects were stacked in layers in some sort of order: the large

In 2001, archaeologists discovered the Jinsha 金沙 site in the northwest of Chengdu city itself. In 2001-2005, nearly 20,000 square metres were excavated. The find included eighteen kilns, several hundred small graves, and nearly one thousand refuse pits.117 The site was most remarkable

118 Some of the finds from Jinsha are illustrated in Jinsha 2002. The excavation report has not yet been published. 119 Zhu Zhangyi 2006, pp. 267-271. 120 The full excavation reports for the two pits are published in Sanxingdui 1999. The excavators note that another two pits were excavated in April 1989. The find included sundry bronzes, jades, and burnt bones. The features of these two minor pits and their finds were not documented in detail, but they seem to be quite similar to what was found in the major pits discovered in July 1989 (Sanxingdui 1999, p. 12). 121 Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 19-157. Both pits also contained many broken objects, fixings, and appendages, which are impossible restore to their original forms. Falkenhausen 2002a, pp. 1-33 discusses the similarities and differences of the two pits.

2005 (report on the excavations at of city walls); Xiang Taochu 2006b (description of the stratigraphy of the site); and Xiang Taochu 2006a (descriptions of pottery). The bronzes and jades found in the pits at Tanheli were mentioned, but most of them have not yet been documented in detail. 113 Xiang Taochu 2005, p. 77-82. 114 Sanxingdui 1987, pp. 249-250. 115 Chen Dean 1998, p. 5-6. 116 Sanxingdui 1987, pp. 227-254. 117 The full excavation report of Jinsha is yet to be published. Zhu Zhangyi, Zhang Qing, and Wang Fang (the excavators) briefly reported their finds in Zhu Zhangyi et al 2006.

23

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 1.25. Pit no. 2 found at Guanghan Sanxingdui, Sichuan province. c. 1200 BC. The pits were neatly filled with bronzes, jades, elephant tusks, and gold objects. After Bagley 2001, p. 30.

Figure 1.26. Bronzes found in the pits at Sanxingdui, Sichuan province. c. 1200 BC. Left: drawing of a standing figure found at pit no. 2. H: 262 cm (including the stool). Top right: head. H: approx. 36 cm. Sanxingdui pit no. 2. Author’s photograph. Below right: mask. Sanxingdui pit no. 2. H 82.6 cm; W 77 cm. After Rawson 1996, p. 62, 67.

The Sanxingdui bronzes can be divided into many categories. The bronze heads, masks, and figures are the most unusual. Their faces are human-like, but their features are imaginary. They have thick, relief eyebrows; the eyes are widely-spaced (sometimes protruding) and upturned at the ends at an angle; the noses are broad and stout; the cheek bones are accentuated and ridge-like; the thin lips stretch from ear to ear; the ears are long and angular, with circular perforations on the earlobes; and the jaws are always square. Different and exaggerated headdresses can also be observed.124 These visual attributes must have been

pieces were buried at the bottom, while the smaller ones were on the top. Pit no. 2 contained very similar objects, but it was much richer. It measures about 5 m long, 2 m wide, and 1.6 m deep. It contained 735 bronzes (fig. 1.26), five hundred jade and stone objects (fig. 1.27), sixty-seven elephant tusks, three perforated tiger teeth, 120 ivory beads, and 4600 cowries. Pottery and ashes are absent in this pit.122 The excavators note that pit no. 1 could possibly be dated slightly earlier. Both were dated to c. 1200 BC.123 Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 157-423. Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 432-437. For the stratigraphical sequence of Sanxingdui, see Xu 2006, pp. 149-190.

122 123

124

24

Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 23-29 and 162-195.

Introduction

Figure 1.27. Jades found in the pits. Sanxingdui, Sichuan province. c. 1200 BC. Author’s photographs.

hierarchy of Sanxingdui, there is no question that the society was a conglomeration of people who possessed different specialities: bronze casters, potters, jade and stone workers, bone carvers, and ritual performers. Copper, tin, nephrite, and possibly also the elephant tusks came from afar.129 The accumulation of these resources at Sanxingdui and Jinsha would have demanded a high level of organisational skill. No writing from these people has yet been found. The archaeological finds suggests that Sanxingdui culture can perhaps be characterised by both three-dimensional and two-dimensional representations of figures and ritual scenes, which were found in both bronze and jade. Their form of religious expression emphasised visual presentation. This is important, because this form of expression is quite different from the Shang in Henan – who instead made offerings of food and drink presented in bronze vessels – and from the people in Hunan, who focused rather on acoustic presentations with the use of bronze bells.130

essential, because they were cast in extraordinarily large numbers and sizes. About seventy such heads were found in the Sanxingdui pits.125 One standing figure, from pit no. 2, measures 262 cm tall and is 180 kg in weight (inclusive of the base); the largest mask, also from pit no. 2, measures 82 cm tall, 77 cm wide, and is 17 kg in weight.126 Apart from the human-like figures, a large number of smaller objects were also found in imitation of the forms that were more commonly made in jade (fig. 1.27): zhang (tablets), bi (discs), huan (rings), and hun (flat, square jades with round perforations in the centres). The pit also included blades (with saw-tooth sides), axes, adzes, drills, and knives.127 In addition, some vessels were found: zun, lei, and pou – types that were usually found in Hanzhong and Hunan. Indeed, these vessels were likely to have come from the middle Yangtze regions.128 Sanxingdui was a remarkable civilization. While archaeological discoveries tell us little about the social

During the last thirty years, archaeological work has gradually established the differences between the Shang and their southern neighbours. The Shang were so dominant in

Falkenhausen 2002, table 1, pp. 74-76. Rawson 1996, pp. 60-63 and 67-69. 127 Falkenhausen 2002, table 1, pp. 74-76. 128 The find consisted of fifteen zun, one pou, six lei, one pan, and two vessel lids altogether. The vessel forms had originated in Henan, but their decorative features were closer to those of the Hunan and Anhui bronzecasting workshops. Jessica Rawson, therefore, suggests that these vessels had come from downstream (Rawson 1996, pp. 70-74). 125 126

Falkenhausen 2006, pp. 191-245 discusses some external connections of the Sanxingdui society. 130 Rawson 1990, pp. 17-32. 129

25

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC the Yellow River valleys that some aspects of their culture may have been understood in the areas outside their actual territory. In contrast, archaeologists have not found a single similarly established and extensive cultural power in the southern regions. But remarkable groups of people did exist in the south, people who also cast bronze and did so according to their respective designs and needs. As far as sporadic finds suggest, local bronze-casting centres probably developed at different times. Panlongcheng was one of the earliest bronze-casting centres that developed in the south. The others were gradually established in Hanzhong, Anhui, and Jiangxi at approximately the time of the Transition period. Those in Hunan and Sanxingdui came slightly later, contemporary with the settlement at Anyang. Laoniupo does not belong to the southern regions, but it shows notable connections with the south. Moreover, it was an early bronze-casting centre in the Wei River valley – a region which did not feature significant development during most of the Shang period, but which would become important during the Western Zhou.

a bronze zun was found, which resembled the one found at Funan in Anhui as well as to one found at Yueyang in Hunan. Like the Sanxingdui, bronze casters in Hanzhong also produced some ritual types in imitation of objects that were usually made with jades. Yet the form and features of the Hanzhong bronze faces were very different from those produced by the Sanxingdui society. While the bronze zun typical in Hunan have been found in Hanzhong and Sanxingdui, the bronze bells that were cast on a large scale in Hunan did not seem to have gained much favour elsewhere. The southern societies exchanged some material forms, but it seems that they simultaneously rejected others. Panlongcheng is an important site that demonstrates the intimate connections between the north and south. The establishment at Panlongcheng must have been costly and difficult to sustain. The site was located about 200 km away from the metropolitan region. It seems that Panlongcheng maintained well-established communication links with Zhengzhou, and that the city was inhabited for almost a century. Panlongcheng hints at a possible southward expansion of the Shang. Was the city constructed as part of a grander empire-building process? Or, was it a southern outpost intended to maintain the supply of copper to the north, as has been suggested by a number of scholars? Exactly how extensive was the power of the Shang?

Web of Connections Like the assemblage of a jigsaw puzzle, archaeological finds are adding, little by little, to our knowledge about the world of the Shang. In the north, the Shang culture was solidly established in the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River. The kings in Henan maintained dynastic rule over the territory, developed a writing system, and cast bronze vessels for ritual performances. The groups that settled to the west of the Shang in Shaanxi were less culturally coherent and sophisticated. Laoniupo was an exceptional site with many bronzes and large tomb features, similar to those found in Henan. Among the various groups of peoples in Shaanxi, those in Laoniupo must have been quite familiar with the Shang traditions. There is no evidence to suggest that Henan traditions were popularly followed in Shaanxi, but it appears that the Shang culture was dominant over most of the northern plains and diffused into the Wei valley.

On the part of the southerners, how did they respond to the Shang intrusion? It is highly possible that they borrowed bronze-casting techniques from the Shang. In what ways did this new technology change the local societies? Did they accept other aspects of the Shang traditions, as did the Zhou? Arguments from Earlier Scholars Previous studies of Yangtze bronzes were focused on dating and material features in relation to the Shang developments. Ma Chengyuan is a recognized expert on the topic of ancient Chinese bronzes. He was Curator of the Shanghai Museum, which houses more than 6000 ancient bronzes from Erlitou to the Han (206 BC-231 AD) – one of the biggest bronze collections in China. Based on his experience in working with bronzes, Ma Chengyuan argued that the large bronze bells in Hunan and the bronzes at Xin’gan could not possibly be dated as early as the Shang. He went on to consider the bronzes found at Xin’an. There the casters removed the foot-ring of a bronze you, which possibly had come from the north, cast three legs in order to support the vessel like a tripod. A bronze pou, which may also have come from the north, was similarly cast with three supporting legs. Both vessels suggest that the casters were very unfamiliar with Shang vessel shapes.131 In Eastern Zhou tudun 土墩 (mound) tombs in the lower Yangtze region, it is not uncommon to find that bronzes from earlier periods had been collected

In c. 1045 BC, a small group from the west called the Zhou overpowered the Shang. The origins of the Zhou are unknown, but it seems probable that they came from the steppe regions further to the west, in present-day Gansu 甘 肅. In historical terms, the Zhou conquest put an end to the Shang dynasty and marked the beginning of the Western Zhou period. In cultural terms, however, the Western Zhou were in many ways connected to the Shang. Coming from a cultural background with little bronze-casting experience, the Zhou borrowed Shang techniques and produced very similar types of bronzes. They also built cities as did the Shang, used writing, buried the deceased with bronze vessels, and practiced ancestor worship. To the Zhou, the Shang were an important source of cultural traditions. In contrast, the southern societies were far more diverse and complicated. None of them was as dominant as the Shang, but the far-flung communities were linked by discernible connections among themselves. In Hanzhong,

131

26

Ma Chengyuan 1997b, pp. 19-24.

Introduction and buried.132 Therefore, it seemed to Ma Chengyuan that the stores of Xin’gan vessels were probably antique collections made during the Western Zhou period. According to this theory, the Xin’gan and Hunan bronzes could probably be attributed to the workshops of the Wu 吳 and Yue 越 kingdoms in the southeast during the Spring and Autumn period (771-481 BC).133 In other words, he argued that the Shang in Henan were probably the only bronze-using society before the Zhou period throughout the territory of present-day China proper, and that the southward distribution of bronze-casting technology was only realized during the Western Zhou era.134

土 (the southern lands) and xi-tu 西土 (the western lands) in the oracle bone inscriptions. In contrast, Song does not pay as much attention to the southern regions (nor to the northern zones), although he realises that Shang power in the south may have subsided after the abandonment of Panlongcheng. The southern societies in Hunan, Jiangxi, and perhaps also Sichuan were probably non-Shang and were known as various fang (meaning regional) groups, who lived on the Shang periphery. Song argues that the members of these fang 方 societies were receptive to Shang culture, in that they imitated Shang pottery types, bronzes, writing, and possibly religious beliefs.141 At the end of the book, he concludes that the Shang were a central power in the territory (i.e., present-day China) and that they were also a source of cultural influence upon neighbouring societies outside Henan.142

Ma Chengyuan’s argument has not been widely accepted. Important bronze vessels from Anhui indicate that there was already a local bronze-casting centre in the south during the Shang.135 The unusual Xin’gan vessels could have been modified by the southern casters, who had little knowledge of or concerns with conventional practices in the north.136 Moreover, Gao Zhixi has extensively discussed the bronze bells from Hunan and has demonstrated that the southern bronze nao were probably early versions of the yongzhong 甬鐘 (fig. 30) found in early Western Zhou tombs (see below).137 Thus, it is highly unlikely that the Hunan and Jiangxi bronzes were later imitations of Shang bronzes. Perhaps out of respect for the eminent scholar, no one has ever argued against Ma Chengyuan. Chen Peifen, who was Curator of the Shanghai Museum and one of the editors of the Zhongguo Qingtongqi Quanji 中國青 銅器全集 (A Compendium of Chinese Bronzes), follows Ma’s argument and proposes that the Hunan and Xin’gan bronzes be dated to the Western Zhou period.138

Many of Song’s assumptions about the Shang are deeply rooted in the military image created by ancient historians, probably in the period between the Eastern Zhou and the Han. A poem called “Yin Wu” 殷武 and included in Shi jing (The Book of Songs) illustrates the conflict between the Shang and the south: “Swiftly those warriors of Yin Rushed to the onslaught upon the Jing and Chu, Entered deep into their fastnesses, Captured the hosts of Jing, Divided and ruled their places; Such was the work of Tang descendants. O you people of Jing and Chu, You must have your home in the southern parts. Long ago there was Tang the Victorious; Of those Di and Jiang None dared not to make offerings to him, None dared not to acknowledge him their king, Saying, ‘Shang forever!’” (The Book of Songs, Yin Wu; translated by Arthur Waley)143

Song Xinchao has completed what is probably the most comprehensive survey of the Shang period finds excavated from the Central Plains (mid-Yellow River regions), the northern zone (which includes northern Shanxi, Shaanxi, and Inner Mongolia), as well as the Yangtze regions.139 Song cites many accounts of warfare between the Shang and their neighbours drawn from oracle bone inscriptions, historical texts, and a few short inscriptions found on the late Anyang bronzes.140 He argues that the Shang may have expanded the size of their empire by force, thus stationing troops at Panlongcheng and Laoniupo, called nan-tu 南

To Song Xinchao and other Chinese scholars, the finds at Panlongcheng and Laoniupo appear to be obvious evidence of Shang colonial enterprises. In my opinion, it is risky to correlate these textural records with the southern archaeological find, partly because the texts were not originally intended to locate the exact expeditions, even if they truly took place; and partly because the historical texts were written centuries after the fall of the Shang.144

132 For example, the Eastern Zhou tombs at Dantu Yandunshan in Jiangsu contained some mid-Western Zhou vessels; see Ma Chengyuan 1997b, pp. 3-19 and Rawson 1999, p. 425-6. 133 The Wu were located in present-day Anhui, Jiangxi, and northern Jiangsu, while the Yue were further south in Zhejiang. Flourishing bronze-casting industries existed in the southeast during the Eastern Zhou period; see the essays collected in Ma Chengyuan 1997a and Shao and Liu 2004. 134 Ma Chengyuan 1997, pp. 22-24. 135 Kane 1974/75, pp. 78-80. 136 For a comparison of the Xin’gan and Shang bronzes, see Bagley 1993, pp. 20-36; for the Xin’gan you in question, see particularly pp. 27-29. 137 Gao Zhixi 1993, pp. 45-53. 138 Hence, in the Compendium, the bronzes from Xin’gan and Hunan were included in the volume on Western Zhou; see Chen Peifen, 1988, pp. 14-22. 139 The book by Song Xinchao was published in 1991. 140 Song Xinchao 1991, pp. 200-254.

141 Song Xinchao 1991, pp. 149-199. For detailed descriptions of the tu and fang in the Shang writing, see Keightley 2001, pp. 142 Song Xinchao 1991, pp. 255-264. Song is aware that many exotic finds were made at the Shang sites, but he only describes these finds in a very short section (pp. 264-279). 143 The names, which are in Wade-Giles transliteration in the original translation, have neem are romanized in Pinyin (Waley, 1954, p. 279). 144 Presumably the title, “Yin Wu,” refers to King Wu Ding of Anyang (Yin), who, according to the oracle bone inscriptions, had many physical confrontations with neighbouring groups. Tang was the Shang dynastic founder. The Jing 荊 and Chu 楚 were kingdoms developed in the Han River valleys during late Western Zhou, while the Di 氐 and Jiang 羌 were probably less politically coherent groups living in the northwest. According to Waley, the poem was most probably written for the Duke

27

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC view that the Chinese civilisation grew out of a single culture developed on the Central Plains (Zhongyuan).149

Lothar von Falkenhausen calls the tendency to compare archaeological discoveries with texts the “historiographical orientation.” He notes that the trend probably grew out of modern political trends. Archaeological literature published in Mainland China suggests that the standard Chinese history should begin with a single line of governance, from the Xia 夏 dynasty (for which no archaeological evidence has been found), to the Shang, to the Zhou – now referred to as the three earliest dynasties in Chinese history. This preference is intended to promote a uniformity representing one ‘China’.145 Subsequently, in most standard texts on Chinese archaeology, the Shang have always been the focus, while any ‘unusual features’ of southern sites have been casually explained away as deviations from the Shang.146 As Falkenhausen quotes Bagley, ‘written history holds a double danger for archaeology. Not only does it steer the archaeological sample toward conformity with tradition by telling archaeologists where to look; it also tells us what to see.147 With regard to adherence to historical texts, the significance of the southern finds and their implications relating to our understanding of the world of the Shang has, in recent years, been substantially reduced.

Provincial archaeologists in particular follow the regionalist view. At Xin’gan, Peng Shifan made a considerable effort to distinguish the tu zu 土著 (indigenous) bronzes from those inspired by the Shang or pre-dynastic Zhou.150 In Hanzhong, Zhao Congcang similarly concentrates on contrasting the Henan bronzes with the bei di 本地 (local) productions.151 In excavation reports from the southern sites, di fang xing 地方性 (regional) is presently used as a conventional term to describe archaeological features which are different from those found in the Central Plains. Tu zu, bei di, di fang xing are alternative terms taken to suggest that the ‘local’ finds diverged quite obviously from those in Henan. But the terms are applied only to make the suggestions less prominent. The regionalist approach is rife with practical concerns. In China, archaeological work is administered through a provincially-based institute, which means that archaeologists are responsible for excavating, managing, and publishing finds from sites discovered in their corresponding provinces.152 Establishing the archaeological sequence and features of a province is, therefore, a most pressing task. Thus, it is not uncommon to find that leading provincial archaeologists are perfectly familiar with local finds but less concerned with those in neighbouring provinces. Falkenhausen calls this approach the ‘regionalist paradigm’, because current archaeological work in China has been very much conditioned by this administrative framework.153 In practice, Su Bingqi’s quyu xitong is reduced to a much more simplified form: scholarly analysis of ‘interactions’ address only those between the societies found in a particular province and those of the Central Plains. The major contributions of archaeological cultures to ‘Chinese’ cultural identity were, and still are, considered to be derived primarily from the Shang and Zhou in the north.

In the early 1980s, regionalism became an important theoretical framework in Chinese archaeology. Su Bingqi, the late Director of the Institute of Archaeology, is credited with establishing the quyu xitong 區域系統 (the regional system) model for interpreting the various cultural centres that developed in different parts of China. He argues that mutual interaction between regional centres resulted in the sharing of certain material features found in pottery, jades, and other objects.148 Su does not discuss in detail what kinds of interactions may have existed between these centres. Quyu xitong has earned high regard in Chinese archaeology, because this new framework better explains the formation of what we now call the ‘Chinese’ civilisation, as opposed to the traditional historiographical

of Xiang (or Xiang Gong 襄公, r. 650-637 BC) from the State of Song in present-day Henan. The Song rulers were said to be descendants of the Shang royal family. During his reign, Xiang Gong fought with the Chu in the south, with the aim of curbing the Chu’s northward expansion; see Waley 1954, p. 279 and Hsu Cho-yun 1999, pp. 558-562. Regardless of the background of the poem, many Chinese scholars have cited the above poem as evidence of the Shang’s sovereignty over the south; see, for example, Song Xinchao 1991, pp. 248-251 and Wan Quanwen 1996, pp. 88-92. 145 Falkenhausen has discussed the interchangeable [I’m not sure what you mean by this – are they really interchangeable? If so, that’s a big deal and it’s necessary to say a little more about it. Do you mean, dynamically interacting?] role of archaeology and history in China and how these roles have been subtly shaped and modified since the establishment of the People’s Republic of China in 1949; see Falkenhausen 1993, pp. 839849. 146 See, for example, Chen Xu’s book Xia-Shang Kaogu (The Archaeology of the Xia and Shang) 2001, which includes only a short section on the south, pp. 231-240. Chen has been a prominent member of the Anyang archaeological team. 147 Bagley 1992, p. 229, quoted in Falkenhausen 1993, p. 845. 148 Su Bingqi worked out his interpretation model on the basis of his decades-long fieldwork experience at Neolithic sites in various part of China; see 1989. On the contributions of Su Bingqi to contemporary Chinese archaeology, see Wang 1997, pp. 31-39.

149 Su Bingqi’s quyu xitong inspired K.C. Chang, the author of The Archaeology of Ancient China. In the fourth edition of the book, Chang modifies his previous views about the formation of Chinese civilisation and follows Su to argue that extensive ‘regional interactions’ took place between various archaeological cultures (Chang 1999, pp. 54-65). The regionalist view is still followed in more recent publications; see, for example, Allan 2005, Liu and Chan 2012, pp. 360-389; and ShelachLavi 2015, pp. 227-263. Shelach-Lavi presents the most agreed way of treating the finds from the Yangtze areas, as well as those to the north of the Shang territory as evidence of peripheral states, as opposed to the Shang, which was located in the ‘centre’. 150 Xin’gan 1997, pp. 192-203. 151 Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 244-247. 152 On the archaeological organisation in China, see Falkenhausen 1995, p. 198-217 and Thorp 2007, pp. xix-xxvii and 1-20. 153 ‘The regionalist paradigm in Chinese archaeology’ by Falkenhausen is another important paper discussing the current trends in the scholarly field. Contextualised within China’s political background, he explains how the theoretical framework changed from an historiographical orientation to quyu xitong. The author makes insightful observations on the intense competition for fame and funding between Chinese archaeologists at a provincial level (Falkenhausen 1995, pp. 202-215).

28

Introduction But Bagley is not as ambitious as are many Chinese scholars, in their suggestion that the Shang may have expanded entirely by means of force. He suggests that the Shang horizon was realised in cultural terms.159

In the West, a separate lineage of scholarship on southern bronzes has developed. Virginia Kane was the first scholar to publish articles on the southern bronzes. In her extensive paper ‘The independent bronze industries in the south of China contemporary with the Shang and Western Chou [Zhou] dynasties’, she notes that other bronze-casting traditions developed in parallel with those of the Shang and Zhou.154 Given the limited number of archaeological finds available in the early 1970s, she could investigate only the few bronzes that had already been found in Anhui and Hunan.155 Kane argues that the southern bronzecasting industries probably operated independently from Shang control.

Bagley and his work address an important issue in Shang archaeology: the cultural extension of the Erligang society. During the Transition period, the southern bronze-casting workshops appear to grow more and more independent from the Shang. Bronze bells and figures found in Hunan and Sichuan suggest that these local communities were even further removed from northern cultural traditions. During the Erligang period, the Shang may have been more privileged than their neighbours as a result of their having mastered bronze-casting techniques. However, the later Anyang people likely faced great difficulties, because neighbouring groups were certainly equally sophisticated. What were the connections between Anyang and the south? How did the Anyang kings manage these connections? And what were the implications of these connections for the rise of the obscure Zhou in the west?160 These questions cannot be easily answered without a thorough review of the Yangtze finds.

On the other hand, Kane suggests that the southerners were heavily dependent on the Shang for technological inspiration. They borrowed northern bronze-casting techniques and imitated certain vessel types. Even today, archaeological records show that the southern industries gradually collapsed during the early Western Zhou period. Kane suggests that the collapse was possibly related to the Zhou’s conquest of the Shang, which may have cut off regular contact with the south, presumably including any technological exchange.156 In spite of this later collapse, regional contact during the Shang period must have been relatively complex. The remarkable success of Hunan bell-casting suggests that southerners were fully capable of developing techniques to cater to their own needs. In Kane’s paper, the southern contributions are recognised, but they are underestimated.

On the topic of connections between Anyang and the south, a paper published by Jessica Rawson in 1994 is notable. She provides some examples of the Anyang culture’s borrowing of southern material features and suggests that there were probably different patterns of borrowing which took place during the Anyang period. In the times of Fu Hao, southern inspiration could be found in the casting of bird-shaped zun and an unusual vessel type called guang. Both types, however, became very rare towards the end of the Anyang period. 161 ‘Reverse borrowing’, the borrowing of external southern material features by the craftspeople of Anyang is a topic rarely discussed. It is even more important to note that the Shang may have subtly changed their attitudes towards the south. In another publication, Rawson notes that the Zhou may have had a different attitude towards the south. Unquestionably, southern bronze bells and animal-shaped vessels, which were absent at the Shang sites in Henan, were actually found in the early Western tombs at Baoji in Shaanxi.162

Robert Bagley has written extensively on the bronzes found in the Yangtze regions and developed a new angle in Shang archaeology. He established what he calls the ‘Erligang Horizon’ in Shang archaeology.157 Important evidence from Panlongcheng suggests a southward expansion of the Shang culture during the Erligang period. The archaeological record evinces a wide geographic distribution of the Erligang vessels. They were found in Hanzhong, Anhui, Jiangxi in the south, as well as at Pinggu and Gaocheng in Hebei in the north. In contrast to this widespread distribution, the Anyang bronzes were narrowly distributed, having been found mainly in the Shang metropolitan areas.158 Thus, Bagley argues that the Erligang civilisation based in Zhengzhou had by that period formed extensive external contacts, possibly far more so than those established during the Anyang period.

Aims of the Book In this book, I intend to examine two sets of questions. First, what do the southern finds reveal to us about the Shang, and to what extent could they modify existing views? Historiography leads us to frames the Shang as a dominant power; archaeological evidence suggests that the southern groups were dependent upon the Shang for bronze-casting technology. Could the southern bronzes illustrate the relationships between local social groups and

Kane 1974/75, pp. 77-107. In addition, she points out that another independent bronze-casting industry probably existed in Sichuan (Kane 1975/75, p. 78). As described earlier, the discovery of the pits at Sanxingdui in 1986 confirmed that a flourishing bronze culture had existed in the southwest. 156 Kane 1974/75, pp. 78-86. 157 For the ‘Erligang Horizon’, see Bagley 1999, pp. 165-219; for the southern bronze features, see Bagley 1977; 1980, cat. No. 20-22 (Anhui); 1988, pp. 78-86 (Sanxingdui); 1992, pp. 215-255 (Panlongcheng, Xin’gan, Hunan, and Sichuan); and 1993, pp.20-36 (Xin’gan); 2004 (Hunan). Bagley has written less often on the finds from Hanzhong (1999, pp. 178-180). 158 For the contrast between the geographical distribution of the Erligang and Anyang bronzes, see Bagley 1992, pp. 226-231 and 1999, pp. 175208; and Thorp 1985, pp. 6-75 and 2007, pp. 99-116. 154 155

159 160 161 162

29

Bagley 1992, pp. 216-217 and 1999, pp. 208-212. Bagley 1999, p. 211-212. Rawson 1994, pp. 1=24. Rawson 1999, pp. 427–430

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Xin’gan is reported to have been a Shang dai damu 商代 大墓, or large tomb from the Shang Dynasty; the nao bells from Hunan are described as the remains of the Shang; and the bronze vessels from Hanzhong and Anhui are said to be remains of the fangguo 方國, or regional states, of the Shang.164 The southern finds seem to have been perceived as having had little significance unless they were linked with the north. Consequently, this lack of discrimination has resulted in some rather confusing connotations: does ‘Shang’ provide only a chronological reference for the southern sites? Or does the term indicate that the southern remains were parts of the Shang culture? Without much hesitation, however, the authors of the excavation reports did in fact use the northern terms “Shang” and “Zhou,” without having provided clear definitions of what these meant beforehand. This is because both the Shang and the southern sites are presently located within the territory of the same country: China.

the Shang? And if so, does the material evidence conform to historiographical views? A second set of questions are built upon the first ones: during the Shang period, what societies existed within the territory that we today call China? The Shang and Zhou have been traditionally regarded as the early ‘Chinese’ civilisations, because their written and possibly spoken languages have been linked with modern Chinese. But China cannot be understood in such a simplified way. Archaeological finds suggest that the Yangtze peoples had close interactions with the north. For reasons still unknown to us, they gradually disappeared from the material record around the tenth century BC—that is, soon after the fall of the Shang.163 What were the contributions of the southern peoples to the cultural complex, derived from Shang and Zhou civilisation, that we now understand as ‘Chinese’? Some of the most debated and heavily discussed topics in the study of the Shang have been the relationships between the Shang and neighbouring societies. Both historical texts and archaeological finds in Henan suggest that the Shang were a great civilisation who pioneered developments in writing, bronze-casting, chariot-making, and social organisation. The Zhou appear to have emerged out of obscurity – but ultimately, this semi-nomadic group swiftly brought down a once-great civilisation. Contact and conflict with the Zhou may have taken place only during the last decades of the Shang. But in earlier centuries, how had the Shang kings managed connections with their neighbours? What distinguished the Shang among societies in existence at that time? And finally, what might have brought about their demise at the hands of the Zhou?

Chinese archaeologists have a strong tendency to adhere to and maintain regularity; they usually work in the general direction of some existing body of knowledge or arguments. In the first decades of the twentieth century, they followed historical texts in their search for the Shang. In the 1970s, when diverse Neolithic finds were revealed in different parts of the country and Su Bingqi published and made a case for the concept of regional cultures, provincial archaeologists modified their arguments and worked to establish evidence of local cultures.165 Shang archaeologists have acknowledged the differences between the southern bronzes and those of the Shang, but most of the time they have dismissed these differences as difang teshe 地方特色, or regional/local features, and have emphatically pointed out the features these pieces in fact share with the Shang. On the other hand, the Shang in Henan have rarely been described as a regional culture. To most Chinese archaeologists, the Shang are still unique.166 All surrounding societies are perceived to have been variants of the Shang.

The finds from the Yangtze regions have further complicated our understanding of the world of the Shang. The southern societies were short-lived, but their periods of development invariably overlapped with those of the Shang. While their material remains contain features that were noticeably inspired by the Shang, they were evidently distinguishable from the Shang. The southern societies produced large bronze bells that were preludes to the northern practices of bell-casting during the Western Zhou period. They also produced animal-shaped vessels – in contrast with Shang vessels, which were nearly always decorated with an imagined taotie. Nevertheless, it is striking that, despite their relative independence from the Shang bronze-casting industry, most southern bronzecasting workshops seem to have gradually disappeared after the fall of the Shang. Was their collapse somehow linked with the shift of political power in the north? What roles did these societies play in the overall transition from Shang to Zhou?

The idea that there has ever been a unitary cultural tradition within the territory of modern China is highly questionable. In contrast, I argue that a remarkable degree of cultural diversity was in fact present. In the case of the Shang, the contributions of the early bronze-using cultures in the Yangtze regions have not yet been adequately acknowledged. This work is entitled Resemblance and Resistance because its intent is to study the ways the southerners understood the Shang and vice versa: what did the southerners borrow from their Shang neighbours, and more important, what did they decline to borrow?

164 For example, Xin’gan 1997, pp. 192-203 and Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 438-442. 165 Falkenhausen 1995, pp. 202-208. 166 For example, in a volume of finds dated from the Shang period published by the Institute of Archaeology, CASS, the finds in Henan have been the most emphasized, whereas the finds from the southern provinces as well as those from the northern regions (Liaoning 遼寧 and Inner Mongolia) are briefly mentioned in several short chapters arranged at the end of the book.

In most excavation reports, the term ‘Shang’ has often been used indiscriminately to describe southern sites: the site at A note on the abrupt disappearance of the southern bronze-casting groups can be found in Kane 1974/75, pp. 93–98. Otherwise the topic has rarely been discussed.

163

30

Introduction Methodology

The Shang casters in Henan were commissioned to produce ritual vessels that the elite made use of to emphasize the significance of making offering to the deceased ancestors. These practices were borrowed by the people who moved to and lived temporarily at Panlongcheng in the midYangtze basins. Conversely, the Wucheng people, who were established a little south of Panlongcheng, appear to have cast similar ritual vessels in what Bagley describes as idiosyncratic ways, contrary to the standards established in Henan. The people in Hunan and those living downstream of the Yangtze cast large bronze bells to display wealth and technological mastery. Furthermore, the people at Sanxingdui cast extraordinarily large figures and masks to conjure an entirely different ritual world, populated by creatures and fantastic figures. These are several of the physical differences which distinguish the material culture of the Shang and the southern societies.

The recent literature on materiality provides a major source of inspirations for the discussions in the present work. First adopted by anthropologists and sociologists, materiality is an approach which studies a society by focusing on the interactions between people and material objects. The work of Christopher Tilley,167 Daniel Miller,168 and Tim Dant169 have established a widely shared understanding that material objects are integral to the formation of social structure, and that objects contribute significantly to directing the actions and thinking of individual members of a society. One of the most important conceptual contributions to the theory of materiality, as made by Tim Dant, is the idea that shared actions and concepts form basic components in the construction of a society. Dant studied the routine work of two groups of automobile technicians. He observed that the technician who worked in a small private garage, handled a set of basic and old-fashioned tools to carry out his repair duties. On the other hand, the technicians who worked in a well-established garage equipped with up-to-date electronic devices, provided repair services with a different set of actions and knowledge. Dant argues that there exist the two groups of technicians working in very different working environments, which he calls the ‘field’.170 Equipped with different tools available, the technicians appear to have set out with different intentionality to perform their respective job duties.171 Although the two garages are similar workplaces, they epitomize two connected but distinctly different societies.

Despite these differences, many similarities connected the material culture of those societies. First, the southerners imitated the Shang casters and produced their own versions of ritual vessels. Second, there were similar bronze bells, which were cast in distinctively elliptical shape that was later developed into important ritual objects used in the Zhou courts. Finally, there were very similar bronze halberds, spearheads, axes, and other weapon types. The transferral of objects from one society to another has been widely discussed in literature on colonialism, which has recently assumed a central role in archaeological research. Chris Gosden argues that the exchange of material culture involves the establishment of a new set of social relations. It is this re-contextualization of objects that provides for new social interactions and meanings to the people of a society.173 Rawson argues that there is an additional ideological level to the study of objects;174 and Tim Dant coins a similar term, intentionality, to emphasize the significance of the human thinking behind material interactions.

Materiality as a methodological approach is useful to the study of Shang archaeology. As discussed in the literature review, one of the key questions which arise as a result of the discoveries of bronzes in the Yangtze regions is in what way were the southern peoples, who cast some similar bronzes, connected to the Shang society based in the Yellow River basins?

My discussions are shaped by the three levels scheme suggested by Jessica Rawson in an article published in 2008.175 Drawing on examples drawn from the elite tombs of the Western Han dynasty (206 BC-15AD), Rawson suggests three possibly successive stages in interpreting material culture: physical features, social institutions, and concepts. Using this scheme, Rawson suggests that the physical setting of the Shang tombs probably defined a ritual space for the deceased elite to live out and existence in the afterworld similar to that of the living. Seals in the tombs and the genealogical arrangement of cemeteries constructed the hierarchy of political power and social status. Finally, jade suits and the solid mountainous

Once bronze-casting technique was introduced during the second millennium BC, many peoples living in the Yellow and Yangtze River basins seemed to have quickly established highly organized and hierarchical societies. There appeared a distinguished group of people who comprised the dominant class in each of those societies. Those peoples, or simply the elite, in turn used bronzes to express and reinforce power and status. As Bagley indicates in his early paper on the subject of southern bronzes, the ‘main types’ of bronzes produced in the Shang and Yangtze societies appear to have been very different.172

See the concise summary of writings about materiality in Buchli 2002, pp. 9-19. 168 Miller 2005b, pp. 15-29. 169 Dant 2005, pp. 1-10. 170 Dant 2005, pp. 108-135. 171 Dant 2005, pp. 93-102. 172 Bagley 1992, pp. 215-231.

Gosden 2004, pp. 24-40. Rawson 2008, pp. 110-112. Similarly, Wu Hung applied the concept of materiality to analyse tomb objects of medieval China, which included mainly miniature figurines and painted images, 2010: 85-148. So far these are the only works that incorporate Chinese archaeological objects into the discussions 175 Rawson 2008, pp. 106-112.

167

173 174

31

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Some patterns within these finds have been observed: that the bronze vessels in Anhui were of unusually large size; that certain northern vessels types have repeatedly been found in Hanzhong, Sichuan, and Hunan; and that the finds in Xin’gan are notable for comprising numerous food and ding vessels of graduated sizes. I argue that the many southern societies each responded differently to the borrowed forms from the north. The select nature of the borrowings that took place also suggests that the southerners did not follow northern religious practices. The functions of the southern vessels remain unclear. Furthermore, I shall argue that some southern features were in turn borrowed reciprocally by the north in the late Shang and early Western Zhou periods. Evidence for this hypothesis is found in elite tombs in Baoji in Shaanxi, and also in the large tomb excavated at Luyi Taiqinggong 鹿 邑太清宮 in southern Henan in 1997.177 The latter tomb probably belonged to a member of the Shang royalty who had survived the Zhou conquest.

backgrounds of the tombs possibly suggest the quest for immortality and eternality. Rawson argues that different levels of material interactions are simultaneously at work in a given society, which seems to have been constructed with dynamic connections. Together the three levels of interactions form what she calls ‘the diverse strands that make up complex phenomena.’176 This research aims to examine similar bronzes produced by different societies within their respective contexts, and to suggest that their applications within these local societies appears surprisingly diverse. The recent literature on materiality and the agency of material objects contributes significantly to the central approach of this research, the understanding that objects are produced with an intention to create a set of social relationships, and also that objects can, in turn, reinforce the ideas that the makers of the object – in this case, the casters and their elite patrons – intended to materialize. The Shang people used a set of ritual vessels to create a ritual arena for the living elite and their deceased ancestors to communicate. It was probably through this kind of performed offering that they disseminated concepts of ritual offerings and ancestral worship, and therefore, reinforced their power in relation to the genealogy. In contrast, we know very little about the social and ideological aspects of any southern societies. The discussions of the next three chapters set out to explore the interactions between the southern elite and their bronzes, and to attempt to understand their ideas about rituals. As for physical features, I shall focus on the archaeological contexts, and on the form and decorations of the bronzes. On the social level, I will investigate evidence for bodily actions within ritual contexts. Finally, in terms of the conceptual level, I will examine what these indicate that the elite of the Shang and the southern societies intended to express through ritual performance.

The subjects of the second chapter are the nao bells, a hollow, elliptical-sectioned bell that stands mouth upwards on a cylindrical and hollow cast shaft. Nao were sounded by striking the bell with a mallet near the mouth. The nao bells from Anyang were found in the tombs of the elite. They usually appear in a set of three bells of graduated size and were most likely used for musical purposes. However, their musical qualities are limited. On the other hand, the musical functions of the southern nao are quite evident. The aim of this chapter is to establish in what ways the southerners were superior to the Shang in terms of bellcasting. The third chapter is about bronze weapons. This category is an important one in societal terms, as weapons are essential to maintaining a society’s military power. In addition, neither Shang nor southern weapons are discussed in the existing literature. Although the total number of weapons found to date is relatively small, some weapons have been discovered in the Anyang tombs. In the south, several groups of weapons were found in Hanzhong and a large group came from Xin’gan. Can any patterns be established among these finds? Do any links exist between southern and early Western Zhou weapons? Could the south have been in contact with the Northern Zone, an important source of new weapon types during the early Bronze Age? The discussion of these weapons is intended to address these questions.

Work Synopsis This work comprises three case studies. Each is focused on one of the three categories of bronze-work produced by the workshops of the most relevant societies: namely, ritual vessels, nao bells, and weapons. In the first chapter on ritual vessels, which have been found at almost all southern sites, I propose that the casting of food and drink vessels in bronze was a practice that probably originated in Henan. The bronze vessels were ritual paraphernalia used by the elite in Shang period religious ceremonies for the offering of sacrifices. Of the bronze vessels which have been discovered at the southern sites, some probably came from Henan, but many others were produced by local workshops. The southern vessels are evidence of southern contact with northern groups. Their appearance requires explanation.

176

Rawson 2009a, p. 106.

177

32

Changzikou 2000.

2 Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels Making offerings of food and drink was a long-established religious practice in ancient China. Thousands of ancient Chinese bronze vessels survive today. Most of them have been found in tombs excavated in Henan province. They were employed in ceremonies offering food and wine to nourish the dead.1 During the Erlitou period (c. 1900c. 1500 BC), when bronze metallurgy was introduced in Henan, the elite commissioned the casting of ritual vessels in bronze. These were buried in tombs and were probably intended for use by the dead.2 The vessels, which are decayed and tarnished today, glitter a pale golden colour when they were freshly cast. Thereafter, bronze vessels were employed for nearly a millennium in ancient Chinese societies.3 Bronze vessels remained the precious possessions of the ruling elite, in much the same way as did gold and silver ware in the West.

groups were most likely to have borrowed northern vessel shapes and decorations. The group at Panlongcheng in the mid-Yangtze basins in Hubei province was probably the earliest of the southern vessel-casters.5 Another group was probably active in Anhui province in the low-lying areas between the Huai and the Yangtze Rivers.6 Perhaps slightly after that, there appeared a major vessel-casting group in northern Jiangxi.7 Further west, we have found a major collection of bronze vessels in area of Hanzhong on the upper stream of the Han River.8 The peoples that settled in northern Hunan and those in Sichuan to the south of Hanzhong also produced and used some bronze vessels. 9 In spite of their varying dates, the southern vessels are consistent in displaying features that refer to the Shang bronze-casting workshops in Henan. A far-reaching network of contacts must have existed. A considerably large number of scholars, including Song Xinchao, Liu Li and Chen Xingcen, and Sarah Allan, have argued the Shang people appear to be a central source of cultural and ritual practices for this network.10

During the Shang period, Zhengzhou (c. 1500-c. 1300 BC) and Anyang (c. 1200-c. 1045 BC) were major bronzecasting centres for ritual vessels. Studies by Virginia Kane, Robert Bagley, Jessica Rawson, and Shi Jinxiong have respectively established that other vessel-casting centres existed in the Yangtze River basins.4 Those southern

The aim of this chapter is to question the extent of Shang power and to assess the stimulus the Shang provided to the southern regions. Given that the subjects of this present discussion are ritual vessels, namely, religious

1 The Shang elite believed that the ancestors of the royal lineage and the spirits could intervene in the worldly affairs by means of showering blessings or inflicting disasters. The Shang kings, therefore, constantly performed appropriate rituals, with food and drink, to satisfy their ancestors and spirits. For further discussions on Shang religious ideas and on various kinds of rituals known from the oracle bone inscriptions, see Chen Mengjia 1988, pp. 523-531 (on rituals and agriculture) and 561603 (on rituals made to ancestors and spirits); Keightley 2000, pp. 1-16 (on climate and agriculture) and 97-129 (on spirits and powers). 2 In northern China, the elite buried bronze vessels in the space between the double coffins. The vessels were arranged in an orderly fashion, and some were inscribed with the name of the owner. These features suggest that the vessels buried were probably intended to serve their owners in the afterlife. 3 Bronze vessels were cast between the Erlitou period and the Western Han Dynasty (206 -15 BC). For a brief history of ancient Chinese bronzes and the changes in their decorations and social significance, see Zhu Fenghan 1995, pp. 595-1150 and Rawson 1992, pp. 54-80. 4 In her article, Kane discusses the decorations on the bronze vessels excavated from Anhui and those on the bronze bells from Hunan, suggesting that the southern casters worked independently from the Shang workshops in Henan. I shall cover the bells in the next chapter; in the section follows I shall further elaborate the significance of the finds from Anhui, which have not yet been sufficiently discussed. Bagley argues that Panlongcheng, Xin’gan, Ningxiang, and Sanxingdui were major bronze-casting centres in southern China (1992, pp. 215-226). He establishes a useful chronological order for those southern sites in the chapter on Shang archaeology published in the Cambridge History of Ancient China, in which he also includes the finds from Anhui and Hanzhong (1999, pp. 165-180 and 208-219). His suggestions about the dates of the southern vessels inspire the present thesis to investigate the early bronzes from Panlongcheng, Anhui, and Hanzhong. As noted in the introduction, Rawson argues that the Yangtze societies may have employed bronze vessels and other bronzes in social practices different from those of the Shang people (1992, pp. 1-24). I develop the present thesis from her argument, and aim to contribute by showing the ways that bronzes were employed and understood in the southern societies.

Shi Jinxiong has completed a thorough survey on the bronze vessels excavated from Jiangxi, Hunan, and Sichuan provinces (2003, pp. 41-220). His study includes some later bronzes from Tunxi in Anhui province (2003, pp. 221-275). Those were certainly cast after the Zhou founders took over the Shang territory. For this reason, they will not be discussed in the thesis. 5 Most bronze vessels from Panlongcheng came from tombs excavated between 1963 and1994. They were published and illustrated in the full excavation report, 2001, pp. 450-468. Of all southern sites, the provenience of Panlongcheng is probably the best understood. 6 Not all of the bronze vessels from Anhui have been documented in publications. Some of them are illustrated in Li Guoliang 1994, pp. 153155, Anhui 1987, nos. 1-11, and in Gong and Zhang 2006, pp. 1-13. In the section that follows I shall mainly discuss the vessels from Yingshang Wanggang, where a useful report was made available (Liu Haichao 1985, pp. 36-38). 7 In Jiangxi, most bronze vessels came from the site at Xin’gan (Pang Shifen ed. 1997, pp. 8-73); a few were found from the settlement site at Wucheng 20 km to the east (Wucheng 2005, pp. 361-366.) 8 The bronze vessels from Hanzhong were scattered over more than a dozen sites in the counties of Chenggu and Yangxian. Most of them are illustrated in Cao Wei 2006, volume 1. 9 The bronze vessels from Hunan were usually buried individually and the sites were scattered in the area of Lake Dongting and the Xiang River basin. The reports were, therefore, scattered over a number of different journals published between 1960 and 2000. The staff of the Hunan Provincial Museum gathered these reports and reprinted them in 2007, pp.1-192. Wherever possible, I shall refer to the original reports. All bronze vessels in Sichuan came from the sacrificial pits excavated at Sanxingdui, Li and Huang 1999, pp. 33-43 (pit no. 1) and pp. 238-283 (pit no. 2). 10 Liu and Chen 2003, pp. 85-148.; Song Xinchao 1991.; Allan 2007, pp. 466-472 and 485-488.

33

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC wide variety of forms, but is made recognizable by some standard facial features: eyes, eyebrows, nose, nostrils, and ears. The more developed forms include also claws, legs, and, sometimes, a body. Found on ritual vessels of different shapes, the taotie was stretched or compressed to cover different horizontal sections of the vessel surface. During the five centuries that the Shang were in power, taotie motifs underwent remarkable variations in the hands of Henan craftsmen.12 One feature that remained unchanged was the constant use of a symmetrical form – that is, facial features arranged around a central axis, with the nose dividing the motif into two halves. The image, therefore, can sometimes be seen as either a frontal view of a full animal face, or as two halves each depicting an animal in profile.13

paraphernalia, I shall define power very broadly and refer mainly to the religious and cultural stimulus that derived from the Shang and which, through inter-societal contact, entered the south. I will analyse both the appearance of ritual vessels in the south and social habits related to the usage of vessels within the southern contexts in order to determine the extent to which southern peoples adopted not only Shang technology, but also Shang ritual practices and corresponding religious and social beliefs. I argue that Shang religious practices were probably absent in most southern societies, and that therefore the extent of Shang power appears to have been limited. In the following discussion I will first firmly establish in what ways the Shang used bronze vessels to communicate a specific complex of social and religious values. Then, I will compare these usage patterns to that of southern finds. Beginning with the finds at Panlongcheng, I will contrast what appears to be a Shang settlement demonstrating evidence of Shang culture with two societies based in Funan and Yinshang, whose adaptations of the material forms of Shang vessels evince close contact, but also fundamental indifference to the purpose of those vessels within Shang rituals. I will then examine three southern peoples, based in Hanzhong, Hunan and Sanxingdui, whose use of bronze vessels speaks to a more profound misunderstanding or rejection of Shang culture: all three decontextualize individual vessels, and in the cases of Hunan and Sanxingdui incorporate them as ordinary containers in what appear to be strikingly different religious rituals and will finally discuss the large number of bronze vessels discovered at Xin’gan, arguing that despite evidence that these possibly indicate the use of vessels to signal social status in a similar fashion to the Shang, the exclusion of certain vessels types and the use of ceramic materials nevertheless indicate key differences in conceptions of ritual meaning. I will also argue that the Xin’gan bronzes can be used to make a case for borrowing by the Shang from the south, further evidence that the southern peoples were flourishing, autonomous cultures distinct from the Shang. Ultimately, my intention is to set this up as the new ground to reconsider the finds of bells and weapons in the following chapters.

A wide variety of speculative theories have attempted to elucidate the meaning of the taotie. The discussion, however, has not reached an agreed understanding.14 Since the creature was an essential decoration on ritual vessels, its connections with the Shang religious beliefs seem selfevident. Did it represent a higher spiritual being that the Shang elite attempted to appease and worship? Or, was it considered a guardian creature that was for practical purposes under the command of the Shang elite? Taotie were also cast on bronze weapons, and were painted in black and red pigments on wooden coffins.15 While there has been no scholarly progress at all in understanding of the meaning of the taotie, it has been possible to plot the On the Shang ritual vessels, the designs of the taotie became progressively complex and ornamental over time, Rawson 1990, pp. 24-30 and 1993, pp. 67-80. Nonetheless, the fully developed form of the taotie seemed to have existed on other media before the time of the Shang. It was produced in mosaic versions on the bronze plaques inlaid with turquoise at Erlitou (c. 1900-c. 1500 BC) (Zhang and Lei 2008, pp. 139-141). Moreover, some painted versions were found on the Late Neolithic pottery at Xijiadian (c. 2500-c. 2000) in southern Inner Mongolia. The Shang, therefore, probably adopted a long-established motif already in use in northern China. However, the Shang casters appear to have taken some time to overcome the technological limit of modifying the clay and mould for the purpose of rendering curvy, taotie motifs into their casting. Bagley has contributed extensive literature on bronze-casting craftsmanship and artistic inventions (1987, pp. 19-21). 13 Chang 1983, pp. 56-61. 14 K.C. Chang puts forward a theory, initially widely endorsed, that the taotie represented an animal was central in the Shang religious beliefs. Chang argues that the Shang kings probably ruled in a fashion similar to that of the priests, and exercised their power by granting themselves the privilege to make contact with ancestors and the spirits. The role of the Shang king, according to Chang, was probably similar to that of a shaman. Quoting a number of received texts, Chang argues that the taotie creatures appearing on ritual vessels were probably the assistant animals of shamans (Chang 1983, pp. 61-72). However, the received texts that have been widely quoted by K.C. Chang and other scholars in support of the shamanistic view of the Shang kings are problematic sources of evidence. The texts were written between the fifth and third century BC, who may not have had at their disposal as much information about the Shang as we do today. Moreover, some of the textual accounts, which included a widely quoted story about shamans in the Zuo zhuan, were actually legendary stories collected from the state of Chu in southern China. Max Loehr and Robert Bagley have argued strongly against the attempt to attribute any specific religious ideas to the taotie on the Shang ritual vessels (Bagley 1987, pp. 19-21). 15 For example, see the five bronze axes excavated from Tomb M54 at Anyang Huayuanzhuang. The taotie were rendered in mosaic of turquoise, Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 137-138. See also the remains of coffins found in Tomb M54 at Anyang Huayuanzhuang, Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 71-73. 12

The Shang Bronze Vessels Taotie, Motifs of an Imagined Animal Face The taotie was an important feature of Shang artifacts, especially bronzes. As the motif can be widely observed on Shang ritual vessels, a description of it is necessary. The term ‘taotie’ is borrowed from Kaogu tu 考古圖, a text on antiquities and connoisseurship published in AD 1092.11 The name as known today refers to a recurring motif found on the Shang ritual vessels, representing the face of an imaginary animal (fig. 1.5). The taotie has a

11 Lu Dalin 呂大臨 (1044-1091) is the author of Kaogu tu, which was published in 1092 AD. He was charged to compile a descriptive catalogue of the antique bronzes and jades in the Imperial Collection. Lu’s term for these animalian motifs, taotie has thereupon been used to describe the animal faces seen on ancient bronzes, see Lu Dalin 1987, pp.6-16.

34

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels the tigers’ head is the figure rendered in an animated posture: arms stretched out and knees bent. Together the tigers and the figure seem to represent a narrative about the movement and relationship between the creature and man.

range of different styles in which the taotie was executed on diverse materials at the major Shang sites in Henan.16 Through kind of analysis, it has been possible to discuss the revival of early designs by later casters. It would seem that the patrons and owners of bronzes employed these devices to indicate the associations of their families with a long and distinguished genealogy.17 The decoration of the ritual bronzes is likely to have been as significant to the social structure of the Shang as to Shang ideology.

K.C. Chang suggests that this motif probably represents a shaman performing rituals, with aids of two animals.21 Chang appears to have extrapolated too far on the basis of the textual descriptions of shamanism practiced much later during the late Bronze Age. The motif could alternately be read as two tigers devouring a man. In any case, these kinds of motifs certainly did not develop from the Henan traditions. Although a simplified version of this representation of man and tigers was found on the handle of a large bronze ding from a large tomb at Anyang, tiger motifs are rare in Henan. Representations of human figures are even fewer. This tiger-and-man motif seems most probably southern in origin. The Anhui casters probably experimented with rendering a local ritual motif on a borrowed material form. The fusion was successful, because the zun was finely-cast and bore relief patterns. However, this kind of vessel was not popular. They were not reproduced for long.

Before discussing the ritual vessels found in the Yangtze regions, I would like to add a few words about what have been identified as ‘taotie’ found in the southern castings. The Shang taotie were imitated in the south. However, most southerners did not realize the motif in ways comparable with those used in Henan. Examples of bronzes carrying southern taotie have come from Jiangxi, Hunan, and Sichuan.18 The southern casters captured some of the taotie features, but they rendered the motif in new ways. An extreme example is found on a pair of bronze fangding (XDM: 12) from Xin’gan (fig. 1.5). A taotie is placed in the centre of the vessel’s surface. It has a pair of distinct round eyes, while its eyebrows, ears, claws, and the body are only faintly suggested by a series of quills and spirals recalling the motif types in use at Erligang. This symmetrical face is placed inside a central panel, which is emphasized by a surrounding row of raised-line circlets. Most unusually of all, five other taotie have each been cut into halves and fill up the rest of the vessel surface.19 The taotie on Xin’gan vessels were unusual and deployed in ways different from their Henan relatives. We do not know whether the peoples who used the bronzes at Xin’gan subscribed to the belief systems of the Shang people. It is likely that they did not. It is also likely that they did not use these vessels and their decorations to express and ritually reinforce their social systems in the ways that the Shang elite were accustomed to do.

Nevertheless, the tiger-and-man motif had remarkably wide distribution. A very similar zun (fig. 2.1) was excavated from pit no. 2 at Sanxingdui on the upper reaches of the Yangtze River.22 Another lei (fig. 2.1) in Hanzhong displays a similar technique in the casting of relief patterns as does the vessel found at Funan, suggesting that the southerners also exchanged casting techniques amongst themselves.23 Moreover, motifs of tigers were frequently found on the bronze vessels and bells cast in the slightly later workshops in northern Jiangxi and Hunan.24 These connections suggest that the southern casters also frequently exchanged designs and motifs. Most important, they shared a number of motifs other than the taotie.

Indeed, some southern casters even removed the taotie from bronze vessels copied from the Shang people, and replaced it with an entirely different motif. One of the two bronze zun from Funan in Anhui is a large vessel, about 50 cm tall and 26 kg in weight (fig. 2.1).20 On its body is a large, relief motif that shows two tigers confronting one another in profile, and a frontal view of a figure in human form (fig. 2.1). The tigers have robust bodies and curling tails. Remarkably, they share the same head, represented by an animal face borrowed from Henan. Directly underneath

It is likely that the form of a taotie envisioned by the Shang was created on the basis of their religious concepts. As the taotie appears in unconventional forms in the south, and is much less prevalent also, it is likely that all southerners did not attribute the same significance to the taotie as did the Shang elite. While the Shang casters were skilled at executing the taotie motif based on their understanding of its meaning and representation, the southerners appear to have imitated the taotie, simply reproducing what they saw either on the Shang bronzes from Henan, or

Max Loehr devised a useful chronological scheme called the Five Styles to date the Shang bronzes, Loehr 1953, pp. 42-53. Robert Bagley is credited for correlating the five different styles suggested in Loehr’s scheme with the bronzes excavated from datable archaeological sites, Bagley 1999, pp. 146-155. 17 Rawson 2009, forthcoming. 18 In those archaeological reports, excavators often use the term taotie indiscriminately to describe the animal faces found on the southern bronzes. 19 This ding had a smaller version, which is XDM: 11. Given their similarity in shape and design, they were probably intended as a pair, Xin’gan 1997, pp. 32-41. 20 Ge Jieping 1959, p. 1.

Chang 1983, pp. 44-55. Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 33-35. On the Sanxingdui zun, the figure has no head. It appears as though the tigers have devoured the head of the figure; or, that the beasts and the man share the same head. The similarity of designs and casting between the Sanxingdui and Funan zun is discussed in Xu 2001b, pp. 140-141. 23 Rawson, forthcoming. 24 At Xin’gan, tigers in sculptural forms were cast as appendage on the vessel handles; tigers were also represented on vessel legs, Pang Shifen (ed.) 1997, pp. 18-39. In Hunan, the tiger motifs shared the same robust bodies and curling tails as those used in the Anhui and Xin’gan workshops. As the bronzes from Hunan were probably slightly later, it seems reasonable to suggest that the Hunan casters borrowed the motifs from the other southern bronze-casting groups. 21

16

22

35

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 2.1. Two bronze zun from Funan and comparisons. Bronze zun decorated with the man-and-tiger motif. Transition period. Funan, Anhui. H 50.5 cm. Anhui 1987, no. 1. Bronze zun decorated with motifs in undulating relief. Transition period. Funan, Anhui. H 45 cm. Anhui 1994, no. 1. Bronze zun. Chenggu Baoshan Sucun, Hanzhong. H 36.9 cm. Cao Wei 2006, p. 102. Cao Wei 2006, p. 102. Bronze zun. Probably Anyang period. Pit no. 1, Guanghan Sanxingdui, Sichuan. H 44.5 cm. Xu 2001, p. 140. Bronze figure with a zun on head. Pit no. 2, Guanghan Sanxingdui, Sichuan. H 15.6 cm. Xu 2001, p. 139.

36

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels group of ritual vessels for burial.28 The vessel types now known include tripods for cooking grains or meat (ding, li, and yan); tripods for warming wine (jia, jue, and jiao); foot-ringed vessels for serving food (gui and dou); wine cups (gu); as well as various kinds of wine containers (lei, zun, yi, you, and pou).29 The variety of types and forms of these vessels became increasingly complicated over time. Robert Bagley estimates that there were at least twentytwo different types of ritual vessels by the end of the Erligang period.30 In the next phase, the Anyang period, the Shang casters produced ritual vessels in rectangular sections and rendered ornamentation with even higher degree of elaboration. The bronze vessels from the tombs in Henan, therefore, present a chronological reference for dating many southern vessels of unknown provenience. As Bagley has demonstrated, southern vessels contained features that referred to the bronze-casting practices of the Erligang period.31

on copies of Shang bronzes created by another southern centre. Among the Yangtze peoples, the execution of the taotie seems as if it was most probably intended to build associations with an advanced society, that is, the Shang. Judging from the unusual forms of most southern taotie, it could be concluded that the southerners probably knew very little about the Shang people. Sets From the perspective of the discussion that follows, it is relevant to establish that the Shang elite had nearly always employed ritual vessels in a group that we may consider to be a ‘set’. The defined ‘set’ of bronze ritual vessels defined here is taken from the work of Jessica Rawson.25 Rawson remarks on the differences in the types of ritual vessels found in the Shang and Zhou tombs.26 She argues that in c. 900 BC, the Zhou elite evidently removed most wine-warming and drinking vessels from the burial set, as those vessel types disappeared abruptly from present archaeological records, suggesting that the Zhou kings seemed to have obliterated some wine-offering practices which were deemed essential in the Shang society. Rawson also points out that a major ritual change probably took place in c. 850 BC, when the Zhou elite employed greater numbers of the ding and gui vessels for cooking and serving food than they previously had. Rawson argues that the Zhou kings seemed to have implemented a new ritual programme that probably included a different sequence of bodily movements within ritual contexts, and possibly also a new set of ideas about ritual offerings.27

At any time, the set of ritual vessels always included pieces for serving food and wine considered crucial by members of the Shang elite at a particular rank. At different social levels and at different periods, the numbers and types of vessels varied; the greater elite tended to be buried with larger number of vessels which were more elaborately ornamented.32 The combination of food and wine vessels determined a set of actions deemed appropriate to offer the ancestors with food and wine. The Shang elite appear to have reinforced their social structure and religious ideologies by means of performing a sequence of actions facilitated by the set of ritual vessels for food and drink. From the archaeological point of view, such a set of ritual

During the Shang period, ritual practices that required the use of a ritual vessel set seemed to have already developed. In Shang tombs, we found that ritual vessels usually appear in a group of several recurring types, including the ding, yan, jue, and gu mentioned above. For that reason, we can suggest that there must have been a programme that directed the regular use of vessels, which involved steaming grains, cooking meat, warming wine, and eating and drinking. Those movements must have been essential parts of a ritual performance, because bronze vessels were precious and have been discovered in almost all large tombs in the metropolitan Shang areas. Such a ritual programme has not been recorded in oracle bone inscriptions or in received texts. However, it certainly existed.

Documenting the combinations of different vessels found in Shang tombs of the Erligang and Anyang periods, Guo Baojun (1980) has established a useful reference for suggesting relative dates on the basis of vessel combinations. See also Zhu Fenghan 1995, pp. 609-663, in which Zhu also emphasizes the significance of ritual vessel sets. In spite of these studies, the existing literature rarely pursues questions as to why the Shang elite assembled certain vessel types and what possible interactions existed between the ritual performers and bronze vessels. 29 For descriptions of various vessels cast during the Shang period, see Zhu Fenghan 1995, pp. 604-663. 30 The Erlitou casters made bronze vessels whose form depended on the shapes and designs of their contemporary pottery vessels. In contrast, the Erligang casters must have achieved full mastery of the metallurgical technique so that they were able to break away from the pottery traditions. There appeared some shapes and décor that both accommodated metal forms and lessened technical defects (Bagley1987, pp. 15-64). From an archaeological point of view, the inventions in the Erligang bronzecasting workshops are important. As Bagley has extensively written, these innovations were probably a major source of inspiration for the southern bronze-casting workshops in the Yangtze basins (Bagley 1992, pp. 226-232 and 1999, pp. 168-180). 31 This is discussed at great length in Bagley 1992, pp. 21-34 (on Xin’gan bronzes) and 1999, pp. 146-155 (on most southern bronzes); Rawson 1992, pp. 7-14 (on southern vessels); Falkenhausen 1991, pp. 16-19 and 1993b, pp. 138-145 (on bronze bells). Here I will briefly mention one example. On bronze vessels, the Erligang casters sometimes defined the taotie décor with a row of circlets rendered in raised lines. Such designs became obsolete during the Anyang period. However, they were found on the bronzes from Panlongcheng, Xin’gan, Anhui, Hanzhong, and also Hunan. Apart from the work of Bagley, the significance of the Erligang casting has not been adequately acknowledged and studied. 32 See, for example, the comparison of the bronze vessels from the tomb of Fu Hao and from that of Zi Yu (a lesser elite) in Rawson 1993, pp. 806-809. 28

From the Erligang period onwards, we are able to suggest that the elite at Zhengzhou usually gathered a different Rawson 1990, pp. 20-52 and 1998, pp. 113-119. Rawson 1993, pp. 806-820. 27 Rawson calls the change the Ritual Revolution (1989, pp. 79-93 and 1999, pp. 433-440). Based on Rawson’s research, Lothar von Falkenhausen elaborates on the changes in the Zhou ritual system on the basis of bronze vessels found in various groups of elite tombs in northern China. See Falkenhausen 2006, pp. 31-64. With regard the present discussion, the Shang elite appear to have inspired some of their neighbours to present food and drink offerings using a standard set of ritual vessels. The Zhou dynastic founders were keen followers of the Shang ritual programme, although only a few decades later they probably removed Shang ritual practices from the court. 25 26

37

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC vessels usually comes from a standard context, that is, the tomb. The rituals of the Shang can be compared to those performed in a Christian church. The priests need a set of a silver dishes, a stemmed cup, and candlesticks. It is through the movements of breaking bread distributing and drinking wine, with the aid of these appropriate objects, that the role of the priest is reinforced and the status of the church in the community expressed. Through the sequence of movements, the gospel of sacrifice and resurrection is materialized and disseminated. The context is another determining factor; the whole performance takes place in the church. The Shang vessel sets were probably associated with temples, funerals, and, above all, with tombs. These kinds of structures, vessels, and ceremonies would have been specific to the Shang. The absence of sets of vessels at the southern sites discussed strongly suggests that the southern peoples probably did not share Shang rites for the ancestors, or indeed, Shang beliefs.33 The absence of the sets is fundamental to the argument that follows. I shall discuss the ritual vessels discovered in two important tombs. The earlier one is a medium-sized elite tomb (M1) excavated at Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu, dated to c. 1300 BC.34 It is one of the few intact and well-documented tombs dated to the Erligang period (c. 1500-c. 1300 BC), when the Shang kings were based at Zhengzhou. The later tomb was excavated at Anyang Huayuanzhuang (M54). Its tomb owner was a major member of the elite, who is known by inscriptions on his vessels as Ya Chang. He probably lived in the early decades of the 12th century BC.35 The Ritual Vessels Found in the Tombs in Henan Tomb M1 at Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu contained seven bronze vessels (fig. 2.2 and table 2.1). There was one cooking tripod, a ding; and six cups for alcoholic beverages. The cups included all three types that were widely in use during the Erligang period; they are now known as the jia, jue, and gu respectively.36 All tripods are cast on wellbalanced legs, which are pointed and slender. The décor on them was is similar; all are rendered in a narrow band of raised lines that centred on an animal face, now known as the taotie. The vessels were buried outside the coffin, where there were also a few ceremonial weapons typical of Shang burial practices. Jade weapons, small discs, and other ornaments were buried next to the tomb owner.37 At Zhengzhou archaeologists have not yet found a major tomb belonging to Shang royalty. Despite this, the finds from tomb M1 at Bei’erqilu suggest that a standard ritual vessel set had been developed. In the tombs of the elite, the numbers of wine cups were usually greater than those of

Figure 2.2. Drawings of bronze vessels, and jade and stone objects excavated from tomb M1, Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu, Henan. Upper Erligang period. Yang and Guo 1983, p. 69, 71, and 73. Jade and stone halberds found in the same tomb. Yang and Guo 1983, pp. 71 and 73.

cooking vessels. Although the cups were usually smaller, their larger numbers in burial contexts probably indicate their greater ritual significance. Bronze ding vessels appear to be important as well, as they have been found very often. The tombs at Zhengzhou, however, tell us very little about the significance of bronze ding. I shall return to this point later, because the finds at Xin’gan Dayangzhou

The point elaborated here is initially noted in Rawson 1992, pp. 1-4. Yang and Guo 1983, pp. 60-77. 35 The preliminary report of tomb M54 was published in Xu and He 2002, pp. 28-33; while the full report was made available in Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 68-231. 36 Yang and Guo 1983, pp. 69-71. 37 Yang and Guo 1983, p. 67. 33 34

38

c. 1300

c. 1200

c. 1200

c. 1100

Anyang Xiaotun M5 (Fu Hao)

Huayuanzhuang M54 (Ya Chang)

Guojiazhuang M160

1

6

8

31

6

–

–

–

–

Li

1

1

10

–

Yan

1

2

5

–

Gui

1

–

–

–

Dou

1

1

12

3

3

Jia

–

9

40

4

1

Jue

10

9

53

1

2

Gu

–

1

8

–

10

–

–

–

Guang Jiao

1

–

2

–

Zhi

3

1*

10*

1

–

Zun

1

1

2

–

Lei

–

–

3

–

Pou

39

c. 1000

Tomb at Luyi Taiqinggong (Chang Zi Kou)

22

30

2

5 2

3 3

– –

1

Dou

3

– 8

–

Jue

8

–

Gu

3

–

Guang

2

–

Jiao

5

–

Zhi

Wine cups (for warming wine/drinking)

Gui

Jia

Yan

Ding

Li

Food vessels (for cooking/serving)

References are stated in the bibliography arranged by individual sites.

c. 1300

Xin’gan

Site

–

–

4

–

Hu

–

1

5

–

Yi

5

–

Zun

2

1

Lei

–

–

Pou

6

3

You

1

2

Hu

–

–

Yi

Wine containers (lidded or not lidded)

1

–

–

–

You

Wine containers (lidded or not lidded)

Table 2.2. Comparisons of the bronze ritual vessels excavated from Xin’gan and from the tomb at Luyi Tiqinggong; comparisons with table 2.1

*Animal-shaped vessels are included.

c. 1300

Panlongzheng Lijiazui M2

Ding

Date (BC) Food vessels (for cooking/serving) Wine cups (for warming wine/drinking)

Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu M1

Site

Table 2.1. Bronze ritual vessels found in the major tombs at Zhengzhou, Panlongcheng, and Anyang Others

1

1

Pan

Others

1

2

2

1

–

Pan

1

–

He

1

–

6

1

–

He

74

47

Total

41

40

201

20

9

Total

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC have been cast as the result of stimulus from neighbouring societies. The workshops in Hunan were probably one of these stimuli, as we shall see in the next chapter.42 The Anyang elite expressed their social status and connections by displaying the number, size, and decoration of their bronzes.

probably suggest some ritual practices originated in the north, that were otherwise not preserved on the finds in Henan. The tomb of Ya Chang was found intact when it was excavated in 2000. Ya Chang lived at the time when the Shang kings were newly established at Anyang; there the elite were found to have accumulated an enormous amount of resources. Ya Chang had an extensive set of forty ritual vessels (fig. 1.8 and table 2.1). Most of them were inscribed with his name, as was fashionable during the Anyang period.38 His set included nine outstanding pairs of jue and gu cups, which were almost uniform in design; one enormous jia cup (66.6 cm tall) that perpetuated a shape widely used during the Erligang period; three different containers of alcoholic beverages, known as the fanglei, fangyi, and zun respectively; eight bronze ding tripods of varying sizes to cook meat; one enormous yan steamer, 80 cm tall, to cook grains; and two large bowls on ring-feet, called the gui, to serve food. 39 To facilitate the serving, his set of vessels was accompanied by three fine bronze scoops, which were rather rare. The vessels weighed more than 250 kg altogether.40 This weight does not take into account of the three nao bells, 161 bronze weapons, and approximately fifty miscellaneous objects, including adzes, chariot fittings, and clapper bells. Those bronzes were small and light-weight. Expending the most bronze material on the casting ritual vessels in this way was a notable feature of the Shang elite.

In both tombs, bronze vessels were probably not buried in positions which indicate the ways that they may have been employed within an offering setting (fig. 1.7). They were usually left in rows in the space between the double coffins. Occasionally, archaeologists have found that the same types of vessels were grouped together. The vessels were not stacked; most of them were buried intact, and sometimes traces of food were found at the bottom of the cooking vessels. Shang ritual vessels may be understood, in the terms suggested by Jessica Rawson, as the props of a visual performance.43 If the analogy is taken further, the vessels in the Shang tombs may be understood as props stored backstage; they were made ready for the operators to install, when the performance was called upon. Ya Chang most likely to have performed more elaborate rituals than did the lesser individuals buried at Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu. With nine pairs of wine cups, Ya Chang could have given a grand feast. In the Shang society, bronze vessels were items that enabled Ya Chang to negotiate privileged status and bonding with the spirits. The Shang elite were very concerned with death and afterlife, as suggested by the rich numbers of bronzes, jades, and other precious items found in their tombs. The elite may have expected to engage continually the spirits and their ancestors by the means of cooked food and freshly warmed beverages, as they would have when they were alive, Aad they expected ancestors to enjoy the provisions presented by their descendants.

Compared to casting of the Erligang period, the vessels from M54 show much more elaborate décor. The taotie was much emphasized and was stretched to cover the main surface of the vessels. As for the pairs of jue and gu, the casters added some inverted triangular panels to emphasize their flaring necks; flanges were also added on the sides to accentuate their curvy profiles.41 I have mentioned that the tomb set contained a rare and large bronze jia, which was probably cast under the inspiration of the older traditions. Bronze jia gradually became less ornamented during the Anyang period; the large one found in M54 seems intended to evoke associations of the past. In addition, Ya Chang also had an unusual ox-shaped vessel. Similar animal-shaped vessels cast at Anyang were most likely to

The finds from Tomb M1 at Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu and those from Tomb M54 at Anyang Huayuanzhuang clearly demonstrate the typical features of Shang bronze vessels and their usage across the Erligang and Anyang periods. First, the number of buried vessels was probably proportionate to the social and political rank of their owners. A more important member of the elite was likely to have been granted the privilege to employ a larger number of ritual vessels for making offerings to the ancestors. Second, bronze décor were applied to the vessels, and this décor effectively distinguished the status of the owners. Despite variations in the size of the vessel sets and in varying degrees of décor, the Shang elite in Henan consistently employed similar vessel types to present their food and drink offerings. The set of ritual vessels, therefore, can be considered a defining feature of the Shang society.

38 Beginning from the Anyang period, Shang elite inscribed names on bronzes. Those inscriptions were short and usually pictographic, quite unlike the neat and lengthy inscriptions found on the later Zhou bronzes. In contrast, the southern casters did not share this practice, although there were a few inscribed vessels in Anhui and Hunan. Again this probably suggests that southern casting related more closely to the Shang practices during the Erligang period, if not the Anyang. For further discussions of this topic, see Yang Xiaoneng 2000, pp.84-171 and Bagley 2004, pp. 200-213 and 221-237. 39 The Shang had many different containers for alcoholic beverages. They are now known as the lei, zun, pou, you and yi; the you and yi were usually lidded. Zhu Fenghan’s study (1995, pp. 96-111) suggests that these containers were probably intended for different type of alcoholic beverages. Zhu’s argument has not yet been verified by archaeological evidence, but the received texts do state that the Shang produced wine from different grains. 40 This was calculated based on the documented and published weight of each individual vessel. See Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 94-133. 41 Bagley 1987, pp. 26-28.

42 43

40

Bagley 1987, pp. 32-36 and Rawson 1992, pp. 4-7. Rawson 1998, pp. 107-111.

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels Southern China

Indeed, this set of vessels bears a strong resemblance to the set discovered in Tomb M2 at Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu (fig. 2.2), having a wide variety of types and a significantly large number of wine vessels. The finds from the twenty of so tombs excavated at Panlongcheng also suggest similar references to the vessel sets buried at Zhengzhou.48

The discovery of ritual vessels at southern sites has raised many questions. Did the southerners import Shang vessels and, based on those, cast their own versions? Why did the southerners value those vessels at all? Did they employ vessels for similar ritual purposes? There are remarkable differences between the finds made at distantly separated sites along the Yangtze. It is clear that vesselcasting techniques were transferred from north to south. Some groups may have followed Shang casting practices closely, while the others diverged. Most Shang-inspired vessels ended up being buried, in possible association with religious events that were very different from those practiced in Henan.

Indeed, the connections between the elite at Panlongcheng and the Shang kings in Henan appear to be rather close. The earliest bronze mines were found at Daye Tonglushan (fig. 2.3), which was about 100 km on the downstream of Panlongcheng.49 Nearby there were other mines at Yangxi Gangxia in Hubei, at Ruichang in Jiangxi, and at Tongling in Anhui further south.50 In contrast, copper mines are archaeologically absent in Henan. The Shang people seemed likely to have travelled south with the aim to obtain copper in the lower and mid-Yangtze regions.51 The elite stationed in the southern city probably brought with them casters from the Zhengzhou workshops. Using the section-mould techniques of the north, the casters produced ritual vessels in accordance with the standards established back in the Shang heartlands. It is possible to make this argument because, first of all, the vessels excavated are very close in all their features to those found at Zhengzhou. Second, given that these people buried sets very similar to those used in Henan, it is probable that the people living at Panlongcheng followed religious practices which closely resembled those current in Henan.

Panlongcheng Some Shang people appear to have travelled. They were probably the casters of the earliest group of ritual vessels discovered in the Yangtze regions. During the later phase of the Erligang period (that is, between 1400 and 1300 BC) a group of Shang people from Henan appear to have established a small city at a place now called Huangpi Panlongcheng, in Hubei province. There they built city walls using the northern kengtu method, by pounding hard layers of earth. Moreover, the city was rectangular, a shape typical of the north.44 When discovered in the 1950s, the site had been severely eroded by the Fuhe River. Archaeologists were nevertheless able to salvage twenty or so rectangular tombs which contained bronze vessels and other burial items, including jades.45

On the other hand, the people living at Panlongcheng were also in touch with local groups established in the Yangtze basins. A number of Panlongcheng tombs, including M2 at Lijiazui, contained between one and a few high-fired ceramic jars.52 These jars would have to be fired at over 1200 degrees Celsius – a technique that was possibly achieved first in northern Jiangxi, further south.53 The

Tomb M2 at Lijiazui was found intact and contained four human bodies. The body buried in the centre of the pit, which was presumably the placement area of the inner coffin, was probably the tomb occupant. The other three individuals were likely to be his or her attendants. This tomb was one of the richest excavated. Among the fifty bronzes found, there were twenty-three bronze vessels: three jia, four jue, one gu, four ding, one li, one yan, one gui, one zun, one he, one pan, and five small pan (fig. 1.9 and table 2.1).46 All of these were decorated with taotie motifs drawn in thin, sunken lines. The motifs were executed within a narrow band placed near the rim of the vessel or in the centre of the body; sometimes a row of circlets was added to emphasize the band of décor. These kinds of designs unmistakably originated in Zhengzhou.47

In other tombs excavated at various sites within the area of Panlongcheng were similar sets of vessels with emphasis on winedrinking types. See Luo and Yang 2001, appendix 3, pp. 511-512. 49 Tonglushan literally means the Mountain of Copper and Greenness. Being exceptionally rich in copper, Tonglushan is still presently one of the major sources of the resource. The ancient mines were discovered during mining construction. Between 1974 and 1985, archaeologists excavated an area of nearly 5000 square metres, revealing wooden structures in 231 shafts and one hundred passageways, as well as seven open-mining sites. Even with the use of carbon-14 dating, the estimated dates of the Tonglushan mining operation span range widely, falling between 1500 and 500 BC. Thousands of bronze, bamboo, and wooden tools suggest that the mining probably began during the Western Zhou, Tonglushan 1999, pp. 3-16 and 183-187. 50 Yangxi Gangxia is located about 30 km to the south of Tonglushan. It is a smaller site with an excavated area of 170 square metres. The excavation report was published in Li Tianyuan 1988, pp. 30-42. At Ruichang, archaeologists excavated 103 shafts, nineteen passageways, and three open mining sites, which add up to a total area of 1800 square metres. The carbon dates of the site give an approximate age of 500 +/70 BC. However, at this site were many late Shang and Western Zhou pottery artefacts which suggest an earlier date. The excavation report for Ruichang was published in Liu and Lu 1998, pp. 465-495. For Tongling, see Zhang Guomao 1988, pp. 77-79. 51 Bagley 1977, pp. 195-213, Zhang Yongshan 1994, pp. 42-48. 52 See, for example, the ceramics found at Lijiazui Phase IV, Luo and Yang 2001, p. 161. Other ceramics are listed in ibid, Appendices 1 and 2, pp. 505-510. 53 See the two papers by Li Boqian on the Wucheng ceramics and bronzes reprinted in 1998, pp. 195-217 and 218-230. 48

Panlongcheng 2001, pp.14-32. Panlongcheng 2001, pp. 1-10. 46 In the first excavation report of Tomb M2 at Lijiazui, twenty-three vessels were found and some of them were illustrated (Panlongcheng 1976b, pp. 26-32). In the full report, however, the five small pan were omitted without reasons provided (Panlongcheng 2001, pp. 161-176). These vessels were probably mistakenly added in the original report, or alternately, they may have been lost. 47 Bagley argues that Panlongcheng and other southern casters probably developed more elaborate and extensive motifs based on the Zhengzhou traditions. For discussions on the Panlongcheng bronze décor and its relevance to those motifs used in the Henan workshops, see Bagley 1999, pp. 146-153. 44 45

41

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC local Yangtze societies. While those groups may have been in touch with Zhengzhou, they may also have gained skills by way of the people at Panlongcheng. Within a short period, a few decades perhaps, after the time of Panlongcheng, the peoples living in Anhui and Jiangxi had fully mastered bronze-casting. There appeared many ritual vessels and other items which displayed marked differences to those found at Panlongcheng. It would be interesting to know what happened to the people at Panlongcheng after the city was abandoned in about 1300 BC. The many tombs there suggest that some members of the elite decided to bury their deceased ancestors locally, suggesting that they may have intended to settle permanently in the south. Although thereafter the Shang people in Henan may not have made another major attempt at a southward excursion, they appear to have contributed significantly to the Yangtze societies by introducing bronze-casting techniques. Anhui During the 14th century BC or earlier, a major vesselcasting group appears to have been established in the Huai River basin in Anhui. Judging from the décor on the vessels associated with this group, both Bagley and Rawson suggest that local workshops appear to have developed out of the Erligang tradition. 56 Because most Anhui vessels display little reference to the Anyang casting, Virginia Kane suggests that the Anhui workshops were probably extremely short-lived.57 Nevertheless, many Anhui bronze vessels are very fine in quality and large in size (table 2.3).58 While it can be anticipated that more remains of this sophisticated society will be discovered, the two groups of bronzes found at Funan and Yinshang seem to suggest that the Anhui peoples were made up of groups originating from different areas.

Figure 2.3. Copper mine site. Western Zhou to Han period. Daye Tonglushan, Hubei. Tonglushan 1999, colour pl. 1 and pl. 10.

ceramics at Panlongcheng must have been rare goods, and may have been specially acquired for the members of the elite. Indeed, the kiln remains excavated suggest that the Panlongcheng potters attempted to produce high-fired ceramics locally, resulting in the discoveries of a small number of high-fired potsherds. Found outside the city walls, a large kiln (fig. 1.19) with a remaining length of 54 m was excavated. As that kiln measures between 2.4 and 4 m wide, it is conventionally known as the long kiln, widely found in the lower and mid-Yangtze basins.54 Such a kiln structure certainly originated in the south. The long kiln at Panlongcheng was similar to that found at Wucheng in Jiangxi (fig. 1.19).55 In fact, it seems likely that some Panlongcheng potters may have come from Jiangxi.

In 1957, eight vessels were reportedly found at Funan (fig. 1.15). There were two different large zun (47-50 cm tall), two similar jia (46 cm tall); two similar jue (28 cm

Bagley 1980, pp. and 1999, pp. 149-153 and 175-177. Kane also suggests that the vessels found at Anhui might have been brought from workshops located elsewhere in the south (1974/75, pp. 79-80). This seems unlikely, because the vessels collected at Funan (Ge Jieping 1959, p. 1), Mingguang (Ge Zhigong 1965, pp. 23-26), Feixi (Fong ed. 1980, nos. 15-16), and Fengbang (Li Guoaliang 1985, no. 8) are consistently similar in designs, having, for example, tall capped posts on the wine-drinking vessels. Such feature seemed typical of Anhui. Indeed, the wine-drinking jia found at Xiangtan Qishanqiao in Hunan (Chen Jianming 2004, p. 25) and that at Sucun Xiaocong in Hanzhong (Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 83-84) were possibly imported from Anhui or that they were designed in imitation of the Anhui casting. 58 Both Li Guoliang (1985 ed., pp. 153-157, 1987, nos. 1-11, and 1988, pp. 161-186) and Gong Xicheng (2006, pp. 1-4) have written extensively about the bronzes from Anhui. Both of them remark on the fine quality of the bronzes and on the unusual technique that the Anhui casters used during the Shang period (see below). Nevertheless, literature on the Shang-period bronzes in Anhui remains very sparse, probably because later bronzes from the province were found in even more substantial numbers and from better-known provenience, so that they have invited the most scholarly attention. 56 57

The city at Panlongcheng is an important discovery in southern China, because it marks the initial stage of contact between the Shang people and the southerners. The trading of copper and ceramics was established. It seems that the network of connections was rather extensivebecause it covered the regions between the metropolitan Shang areas in the mid-Yellow River basins, and the heartland of the Huai and Yangtze basins in Anhui and Jiangxi. As a result of its placement within this inter-regional network of contact, Panlongcheng appears to have been a major source for the spread of technological skills amongst the

54 55

Panlongcheng 2001, pp. 84-88. Wucheng 2005, pp. 82-84.

42

Anhui 1987, no. 8 Retrieved from refuse.

Li Guoliang 1994, p. 153

Retrieved from refuse; said to have been Anhui 1987, no. 3 one of those found at Funan.

Li and Gu 2000, pp. 65–68

Liu 1985, pp. 36–41

Liu Haichao 1985, pp. 36–41 All are lead vessels, buried with bronze tools.

The Funan vessels are in several ways unlike conventional Shang bronzes. First of all, in the collection were many bronze li (fig. 1.15). Li are cooking tripods similar to the ding in form, but their legs are lobed. Pottery li have been found in both northern and southern China. In bronze vessel sets, however, the Shang elite usually used ding and yan to cook; bronze li were relatively rare.62 The dozens of small bronze li discovered at Funan, therefore, are an unusually large group that has not been found in metropolitan Shang areas. Secondly, the Funan zun display a rare casting technique that rendered the motifs in undulating relief (fig. 2.1). This kind of technique appears to have been difficult to achieve, because the inner sides of the vessels carry the motifs in intaglio relief, as if they were hammered from a sheet of metal. Li Guoliang notes that the casters were able to keep thickness of the vessel even, despite the rendering of such elaborate motifs. As Li points out, some later casters who were established in the mid and lower Yangtze basins probably still employed this method in executing bronze décor. However, this method was not employed in the Shang workshops in the north.63 This kind of technique appears to have developed mainly in the south.64 Thirdly, as noted above, the tiger-and-man motif seen on the larger zun from Funan is in striking contrast to the taotie motifs in Henan. The casters placed these southern motifs in the centre, and added a taotie motif on either side of the figure (fig. 2.1). Though elaborately rendered, the taotie motifs appear of somewhat secondary importance on the vessels.

1

One jue was Inscribed.

Liu Haichao 1985, pp. 36–41 The third vessels is a zhi, a wine cup. Inscribed

Ge Zhigong 1965, pp. 23–26

One ding and six li were lost.

tall); and two similar gu (29.5 cm tall).59 These vessels were salvaged from the Yue’er River. As informed by the local residents, Ge Jieping reported that during the SinoJapanese War (1937-1945), another group of vessels had been found nearby. Among them were twelve small li and one large ding (probably 80 kg). Except for the two small li collected by a local resident, the other vessels of that group were dispersed and lost.60 Later, the staff members of the Anhui Provincial Museum bought back five small li (22-25 cm tall) from local antique markets, in the belief that those li probably belonged to the group originally found at Funan.61 Altogether, the site at Funan appears to have contained at least twenty-one bronze vessels.

1

1 2 1

12

1

2

1 3

1

1 2 2

2

1

2

1

2

1

2

2

1

Ge Jieping only illustrated five of these eight vessels (1959, p. 1 and back cover). The other three, a jia, a jue, and a gu, have never been published. 60 Those two li were kept by a resident, named Zhang Dianchuan, who lived at Baizhuang. Ge Jieping possibly obtained from Zhang the information about the descriptions of the previous group of vessels found at Funan. Those li were not illustrated (1959, p. 1). 61 Li Guoliang illustrates two of these five bronze li in the catalogue of the Anhui 1987, nos. 3 and 6 (the other three have never been published). The bronze li shown in no. 3 is decorated with heavy flanges typical of the Anyang period. The animal face on the vessel also has high-relief horns that refer to the Anyang casting. This vessel seems later than the other pieces from Funan, which are quite consistent in their dates. That bronze li, therefore, may not have belonged to the group originally found at Funan. 62 Bagley 1987. While there were some bronze li at Anyang, they were rare at both Zhengzhou and Panlongcheng 63 Li Guoliang 1985, p. 154. 64 Except for a bronze lei found in Hanzhong, no other vessel appears to have been cast with such a technique. As the piece in Hanzhong is likely to have been bought from elsewhere, Anhui is a possible source.

1 Fangbang (1957)

Fangbang (1965)

5 Feixi Guanyi

10 Yinshang Wanggang (1980)

Liu’an

3 Yinshang Wanggang (1972)

Yinshan Zhaoji (1971/72)

21

4

Funan Yue’erhe

2

1

1

59

Mingguang Poguang

Jue

Gu

Lei Zun Jia

You

Remarks Wine containers Wine cups

Total Food vessels (for cooking/ number serving) of vessels Ding Yan Li Gui found Site

Table 2.3. Bronze ritual vessels (except for those from Yinshang, 1980) excavated from known sites in Anhui, c. 1300–c. 1100 BC

Reference

Ge Jieping 1957, p. 1

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels

43

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC They were probably added to enhance the exoticism of a vessel borrowed from the north. Because of these three features, we can argue that the casters at Funan were quite unlike those living at Panlongcheng. Funan casters worked independently of the standard designs employed in the Henan workshops. However, because their vessels included many wine-drinking types, and because they were all accurately copied from those cast in Henan or Panlongcheng, it seems possible to suggest that the elite at Funan were in close contact with the Shang elite and their casters. Through such contact, the people in Anhui were probably aware of the significance of bronze vessels among the Shang elite. Nevertheless, we do not know whether the Funan elite used vessels to present provisions to the deceased; the site at Funan lacks this kind of evidence. The two Funan jia were both nearly half a metre tall, so presumably their casting would have been both costly and difficult. Having spent such a large amount of bronze material and technological effort on the casting of vessels borrowed from the north, the Anhui elite appear to have intended to establish an association with the Shang elite in Henan. This association may have benefited the Anhui elite by expressing and enhancing their special connection to the outside world, thus securing their power within local society.

Figure 2.4. Lead vessels excavated from a tomb at Yinshang Huanggang, Anhui. Anyang period. The largest vessel, yan (top right), measures 37 cm tall. Liu Haichao 1985, p. 37.

Indeed, the large 50 cm jia discovered at Funan and at other sites in Anhui may provide some hints by which to understand the finds at Anyang. While the finds at Zhengzhou or Panlongcheng lack a comparably large piece, jia of that size were found in the tomb of Fu Hao and in that of Ya Chang.65 Those discoveries were unusual, because jia had become obsolete by the beginning of the Anyang period. The Anyang elite may have revived the type with the aim of emphasizing their links with deceased ancestors because these links probably secured their positions of power, as discussed above. Alternatively, the Anyang elite may have been inspired by the vessel types of another society or may even have had the large pieces cast elsewhere, possibly at Anhui. In addition to this, there most likely existed several other contributions from the south, and I shall return to them later. In 1980, the residents at Yinshang Huanggang discovered a group of ten ritual vessels (fig. 2.4). These vessels were very unusual because they were cast in pure lead, according to the excavators.66 The site was located about 60 km to the

east of Funan. It had already been destroyed before the Anhui archaeologists undertook their investigation. Liu Haichao reported that the vessels were probably arranged in a row running from north to south and were buried in a rectangular pit about 1.5 m below ground level. There were two jue, two gu, two ding, one yan, one zun, one gui, and one you. Most of the vessels were found intact. They were discovered together with a few bronze weapons and a pottery jar.67 The vessel types and forms were similar to those cast in Henan during the Anyang period. Among the weapons there was a gongxingqi 弓形器, which is a bowshaped object commonly found in the tombs at Anyang. Because of these references, the site of Yinshang can probably be dated to the early Anyang period, between 1200 and 1100 BC. Liu Haichao suggests that the site was probably the tomb of a member of the local elite. This seems likely, because the combination of the vessels resembles that found in the tombs at Anyang, although no human remains were found.68

65 Twelve bronze jia were found in the tomb of Fu Hao. Apart from a single small example, the other jia measure between 42 and 66 cm in height. Like the pair from Funan, the jia of Fu Hao were usually found in a pair comprising two identical pieces (Fu Hao 1980, pp. 67-70 and plate no. 33-38). While the rendering of the taotie and the inscriptions suggest that those jia were most probably cast locally at Anyang, they all featured two tall posts similar to those found on the Funan pieces. In the tomb of Ya Chang excavators found one large jia, 66.6 cm tall, (M54), Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 114-116. While this vessel was cast in square sections which suggest Anyang casting, the bottom of the cup was flattened to imitate the Erligang-period casting (the wine cups at Anyang were usually rounded.) 66 Nonetheless, there is no further publication regarding these lead vessels. They are not clearly illustrated in the original report, and the

descriptions of them are very brief (Liu Haichao 1985, pp. 36-41). 67 Liu Haichao 1985, pp. 36-38. 68 In the same report, Liu Haichao described two other groups of bronzes previously found in the same area. Those bronzes were found by the local residents and sold to recycling collection points, from which the staff members of the museum at Yinshang retrieved the bronze vessels published in the report. The archaeological contexts of those bronzes, therefore, are unknown. As bronze vessels usually came from burials in northern China, Liu Haichao suggested that the vessels at Yinshang may have come from similar backgrounds. The finds at Funan have shown that those people living at Anhui were probably culturally distinct from the Shang people in Henan. Southerners may not have shared the practice of burying bronze vessels with the deceased, and, therefore, their bronzes may well come from very different contexts.

44

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels intended to produce objects which were different from those created by the people in Henan.

It is striking that the Yinshang vessels display very little reference to the casting practices related to Funan. In the first place, the jue (18.5 cm tall) and gu (16 cm tall) from Yinshang were modest in size, being two-thirds the heights of those from Funan.69 The Yinshang jue, moreover, lacked tall posts typical of the Funan castings. Secondly, the motifs on the Yinshang vessels lacked embellishments of various sculptural animals. In place of them, the gui showed a geometric pattern accentuated with relief bosses, which were decorations often employed by the Anyang casters in Henan.70 The Yinshang casters were most probably in contact with the people of the north. Indeed, among them there may have been some northern casters. Two groups of bronze vessels were discovered in another district of Yinshang in 1971 and 1972 respectively. There were altogether five bronze jue and one bronze gu.71 These vessels were unmistakably of Anyang design; and they were all inscribed: Yue Ji 月己 or You 酉, which were characters often found on the Anyang bronzes.72 It seems possible that these vessels were originally cast at Anyang and brought to Yinsheng when the elite travelled. It also seems likely that these vessels had been cast by people from the Anyang workshops, or by those who were familiar with the Anyang bronze-casting practices.

Lead vessels were not entirely absent in Henan. In the early 1950s, excavations at Anyang revealed hundreds of small tombs. In some tombs archaeologists found a few buried objects. It was reported that a small number of lead vessels had been found in one of those tombs.74 The available archaeological reportage does not contain further information about these unusual vessels in northern contexts. It is certain that the lead vessels from both Yinshang and Anyang were probably quite similar, as Lui Haichao, the excavator of Yinshang, suggests that the vessels found at Yinshang carried Anyang designs. As lead had not ever been significantly employed in northern casting, it seems probable that the vessels cast in lead were initiated in the lower Yangzi areas.75 Some members of the elite at Anyang were certainly connected with the people in Anhui in the south. This contact resulted in circulation of rare material goods, but do not appear very significant in formulating close social or ideological exchange. The lead vessels found in Yinshang suggest that the Anhui people were interested in some northern material features, but were not entirely engaged with concepts of food and drink offerings or ancestor worship as practiced in Henan. Similarly, lead vessels and lead material were never deemed important in Henan. While it is yet to be discovered what kind of contact was established between Anyang and Anhui, it is quite certain that the societies in both regions had very different traditions.

Those people living at Yinsheng were probably made up of an entirely different group about which we know very little. They seemed unrelated to the people who lived at Panlongcheng, because their bronzes hardly suggest any reference to the Erligang-period casting. Given their precise knowledge about Anyang, they seemed to have been outsiders who arrived in the Huai River basin where other bronze-casting groups had previously been established.

The scattered distribution of bronze vessels in Anhui suggests that there probably existed some incoherent societies. The finds at Funan and Yinshang suggest there probably existed two different bronze-casting groups in the Huai River basin. Further south, at Liu’an in the lower Yangtze River basin, a large bronze zun was found buried individually – which was a practice frequently occurring in Hunan. In southern Anhui, there were also a few large bronze nao bells similar to those found in Jiangxi and Hunan (Chapter Three).76 These finds suggest was close contact between the peoples on the upstream of the Yangtze River. In Anhui, the movements of people from different places appears remarkably frequent, suggesting that the local bronze casters may have comprised a mixture of the population.

The elite at Yinshang appear to have imitated the Anyang elite in casting vessels, and in arranging them with similar combinations of wine cups and cooking vessels to form an offering set. Nonetheless, material interactions with lead vessels were likely to have led to a very different offering experience in comparison to that facilitated by the use of bronze vessels. Lead vessels were dark in colour, whereas bronze vessels were golden and shiny. Because of their heavy weight, lead vessels would have caused much inconvenience in cooking and serving food and drink.73 Hence, lead vessels would have appeared inferior in both appearance and quality to the bronze ones. The elite at Yinshang may have intended to copy the northern vessels with a slightly less valuable material, or, they may have

The lead vessels were found in the small tombs at Dasikungcun and in the Western Districts of Anyang, as described in Liu Shizhong 2003, pp. 67-68. It is reported that one of the ding found in Tomb M606 in the Western Districts was cast with 98.97% lead. Apart from this secondhand information found in the work of Liu Shizhong (2003), no further information or photographs of these lead vessels has been published. 75 Few lead vessels or weapons were found at the Western Zhou sites in Shaanxi (Baoji), Henan (Luoyang), and Shandong (Changqing) in the north. Apart from the finds at Yinshang, lead vessels were also found in the large tombs at Xichuan in Hubei and at Changsha in Hunan. 76 The bronze zun from Liu’an measures 70 cm tall. Its décor is very similar to those found on the zun from Huarong in Hunan and from Sanxingdui in Sichuan. For descriptions of the décor on the other two bronzes, see Rawson 1996, pp. 72-74 and compare that of the Anhui zun published in Li and Gu 2000, pp. 65-68. For discussion of the Anhui nao bells, see Li Guoliang 1985, no. 10-11 and Lu and Yang 2005, pp. 14-19. 74

Liu Haichao 1985, p. 36. Bagley 1987, pp. 504514. 71 Liu Haichao 1985, pp. 38-41. 72 Ji and you are both characters used in the ganzhi calendar of the Shang people. It runs on a sixty-day cycle and each day is named after the sequential combination of one of the ten Heavenly stems and one of the twelve Earthly branches. Yue Ji literally means Moon Ji (the sixth Heavenly stem). You is the eighth Earthly branch. The inscriptions on bronzes may be personal names. For discussion of Anyang bronze inscriptions, see Yang Xiaoneng 2000, pp. 135-154. 73 The weights of those lead vessels are not published. 69 70

45

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC from Hanzhong are the earliest, dated to the 13th century BC.81 Hence, I shall begin the discussion from there.

The Anhui people, however, did not appear to have been dependent on the technology and designs that they learned through outside contacts. I argue that that their casting techniques and material culture had probably contributed significantly to the other southern societies, because some finds related to Anhui have been discovered along the Yangtze River. A bronze lei from Chenggu Baoshan Sucun (fig. 2.1) was decorated with undulating relief patterns similar to those seen on the Funan zun, and so was a bronze pan found at Changxing in Zhejiang.77 At Xin’gan, there were a group of four exquisite bronze li, which were probably inspired by the casting at Funan.78 At Sanxingdui, a bronze zun was decorated with a slightly simplified version of the tiger-and-man motif, suggesting that it possibly came from Anhui.79 No doubt, many more remains are still to be found in Anhui. The bronze vessels discovered to date suggest that local casters were energetic in their practice of different techniques, motifs, and even in the use of different metal materials. Such a quality of craftsmanship appears to be exceptional and important to a highly developed society.

In Hanzhong, nearly one hundred ritual vessels have been reportedly found at various sites within the territories of Chenggu and Yangxian counties during the past few decades. The discoveries feature bronze which is not the same as the bronze used in vessels discovered at Panlongcheng and Anhui. Most vessels found in Hanzhong were probably gathered from other regions. Jessica Rawson discusses the long-distance inter-societal connections of Hanzhong, and argues that some of the vessels there probably came from workshops in Henan, whereas others were probably acquired from the Yangtze regions in the south.82 In their comprehensive research into the Hanzhong bronzes, Cao Wei and Zhao Congcang have respectively remarked on the far-reaching network of contacts established in Hanzhong.83 Though the number of wine containing vessels is extraordinary, how the people in Hanzhong acquired these vessels from afar and why they buried them at Chenggu and Yangxian is yet to be understood. It is clear, however, that the Hanzhong inhabitants favoured the round containers, zun, lei, pou, and you.

The Large Numbers of Zun, Lei, Pou, and You in Hanzhong, Hunan, and Sanxingdui The vessels now known respectively as zun, lei, pou, and you were probably different types of wine containers used by the Shang elite. The four types were similar in form, having a round body and a ring-foot (see, for example, fig. 2.1). Those cast in Shang workshops usually measure between 30 and 60 cm tall. On the evidence of bronze inscriptions, Zhu Fenghan suggests that these different containers were probably intended for different types of alcoholic beverages.80 However, this has not been substantiated by archaeological evidence. At Zhengzhou and Anyang, we often found that one or more types of wine containers were usually included in a ritual vessel set. In Shang society, as discussed above, wine-drinking cups – jue, jia, jiao, and gu, were basic types used for ritual offerings; wine containers were usually added to the sets employed by the greater elite.

The vessels at Chenggu and Yangxian were usually buried individually or in small groups (table 2.4). It was found that the numbers of bronzes buried at each site varied between one and several dozen pieces; and, that the bronzes buried included any number of combinations of vessels, weapons, and other small fittings. No regular pattern have yet been found. At Yangxian Machang Ancong 洋縣馬暢安冢 a group of six fine bronze vessels was discovered, which included five pou and one lei (fig. 2.5). Because of the neat execution of taotie motifs, these vessels appear to have come from Henan.84 On the other hand, a group discovered at Chenggu Longtou contained eleven vessels, which included two zun, one you, one lei, one hu, one pan, one gui, and four gu.85 Those vessels probably came from various other places: one of the zun was cast using a rare technique seen on a similar piece found in Funan, discussed above, whereas the gu seemed most likely to have come from Henan. These vessels were buried with many finely cast weapons, including four bronze axes, seven spearheads, and forty-three crescentshaped blades (fig. 1.13).86 These blades appear to be unique to Hanzhong, because they have not been found found elsewhere. While the Hanzhong peoples may have

In contrast, in the south, especially in the areas of Hanzhong, Hunan, and Sanxingdui, there were overwhelming numbers of wine containers zun, lei, pou, and you (tables 2.4–6). Those discoveries suggest frequent movement and contact between the peoples who lived in the upper Han River basin and those in the upper and mid-Yangtze basins. It is important to understand their interactions, because these involved the vessel types which originated in Henan. Of the finds from the three southern regions, some of those

For the dates of the Hanzhong vessels, see Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 237-242, Bagley 1999, pp. 178-180, and Rawson, forthcoming (Ornament and Territory). 82 Rawson, forthcoming (Ornament and Territory). 83 Cao Wei 2006; Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 244-247. 84 Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 159-165. 85 [If you’re not planning to expand these footnotes with further commentary, you can put ‘Ibid’ (as above) for references of the same name following one another.] Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 1-27; [does this semi colon suggest that you’ve begun a new reference?] this group of bronzes was discovered in 1980. Two other similar groups discovered in 1981 and in 2004 respectively, see ibid, pp. 28-42. 86 Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 1—27. 81

This kind of lei was given the label 1981CHLTT:2, Zhao Congcang 2005, pp. 27-30. For discussion of the Changxing bronze pan, see Zhejiang 1960, p. 48-49. 78 See Pang Shifen 1997, pp. 48-53 and compare them with the Anhui li illustrated in Li Guoliang 1987, p. 155 and 163. 79 Xu 2001, pp. 140-141. 80 Zhu Fenghan 1995, pp. 96-111; see also the notes in the above section concerning offering sets. 77

46

1

1

Wulangmiao (1965)

Wulangmiao (1974)

47 1

1

1

Gui

1

Hu

Others

1

1

Pan

One bronze halberd

One bronze guang, a wine cup on ring-foot

97 halberds; 11 animal faces; 21 human-like faces; 283 pao fittings

15 animal faces

16 crescent-shaped halberds

One bronze halberd

Two broken bronze foot-rings; one halberd; one knife, 3 zhang; and one fitting

Two bronze halberds; three axes; 15 arrowheads

Two halberds and 17 crescent-shaped halberds

Four bronze axes; seven spearheads; 43 crescent-shaped halberds

Other finds at the site

The data is collected from the catalogue on Hanzhong bronzes edited by Zhao Congcang 2006. The presentation is re-arranged to emphasize the large numbers of wine containers found in the region.

1

1

Zhangbao

1

1

1

1

Beihuanlu

Zhangcun (1981)

Zhangcun (1964)

Machang Ancong

Yangxian

Niujiazai

Sucun Xiaocong (1976)

1

2

Sucun Tacong (1974)

Sucun Xiaocong (1959)

1

Sucun Tacong (1963)

1

1

1

Baoshan

1

9

1

Li

1

1

Ding

2

1

Yan

3

5

1

1

1

4

Gu

Shoushui (1975b)

2

4

1

1

Jue

Food vessels (for cooking/ serving)

Shoushui (1975a)

Shoushui (1970)

Wulangmiao (1975)

3

Wulangmiao (1964b)

Wulangmiao (1964a)

1

1

Lucun

Lianhua

2

1

1

2

You

Jia

Pou

Zun

Lei

Wine cups

Wine containers

Longtou (2004)

Longtou (1981)

Longtou (1980)

Chenggu

Sites

Table 2.4. Bronze ritual vessels found at different sites within the counties of Chenggu and Yangxian in Hanzhong, southern Shaanxi, probably c. 1300–c. 1000 BC

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 2.5. Drawings of a group of bronze vessels, five pou and one lei, found at Yangxian Machang, Hanzhong. Anyang period. Heights of the pou: 24–38 cm; and widths 29–38 cm. Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 160–165.

48

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels at Panlongcheng. The extraordinary pieces in Hanzhong seem to have been selected individually, according to the level of casting and the quality of their designs. In other words, the peoples in Hanzhong may not have been fully aware of the original functions of these vessels. The most puzzling issue about Hanzhong is probably that local societies do not appear to be as sophisticated as the Shang or other societies established in the Yangtze basins. Apart from the bronze blades found at Chenggu Longtou, there is no evidence of any large-scale bronzecasting activities. Mei Jianjun argues that a small number of bronze vessels were probably cast locally, and that these possibly included the zun found at Yangxian Xiaozhuangxiang Zhangcun. Measuring about 24.5 cm tall, this zun was probably an imitation of those cast in the late Erligang-period workshops in Henan.89 We can see from the illustration that this piece lacks any of the elaborate motifs found on almost every Shang vessel, although it succeeded in capturing the curvy shape of the vessel. Compared with the zun from Huarong in Hunan (fig. 2.7), which is another, different imitation made in the south, this zun looks rather simplified and crude. Moreover, according to the published descriptions of the sites, the Hanzhong bronzes appear to have been buried in a rather careless manner. Inside the pits, the bronzes were not neatly arranged, though they were usually found intact. The pits were probably crudely dug, because there was no obvious finishing made on the pit walls.90 All these observations seem to suggest that the burial of bronzes were probably carried out without any careful planning or organization. For these reasons, we cannot be sure whether there existed a distinguished group of people whom we can describe confidently as the elite.

Figure 2.6. Drawing of a bronze jia. Transition period. Sucun Xiaocong, Hanzhong. Zhao Congcang 2006, p. 84.

Despite this, some peoples living at Chenggu and Yangxian must have gained control of a fairly large number of bronzes. Inside the bronze lei excavated from Chenggu Sucun, archaeologists found 193 small circular fittings, about 10 cm long each (fig. 1.13).91 Similar fittings were discovered in the early Western Zhou tombs at Baoji in Shaanxi. There the fittings were mounted in the centres of wooden or leather shields.92 Those found in Hanzhong were probably had a similar original function. There were three similar discoveries at Zhengzhou, where bronze vessels and some weapons were buried together in some hastily dug pits.93 There may not have been a connection between the peoples living in the two areas. The bronzes

acquired the vessels from other places, they were probably the casters of those blades. Some of the blades have sawtooth sides, which are even and regularly-spaced (fig. 1.13), suggesting that the casters possessed reasonably developed casting skills. The peoples in Hanzhong appear to have been benefited considerably from external connections, because, as Bagley notes, the pou at Yangxian Machang are extraordinarily fine in quality.87 The taotie motifs on these vessels are compact and neatly organized, and the shapes of the vessels are in balanced and calculated proportion. Such superb pieces have only rarely been found, even in tombs excavated in Henan. The jia (fig. 2.6) from Sucun Xiaocong and the lei from Chenggu Longtouare other superb examples from the southern workshops in the Yangtze regions. 88 It seems that some peoples must have travelled and brought these fine vessels with them to Hanzhong. However, these vessels may not have been intended to form a standard set similar to those used by the Shang elite in Henan or

87 88

Cao Wei 2006, pp. 64-65. Tang Jinyu 1980, pp. 211-215, Wang Shouzhi 1988, p. 3, and Li Ye 1996, pp. 73-74. 91 Those fittings have a pointed centre. Another ninety circular fittings with an open top were scattered around the bronze lei. See Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 116-156. 92 The circular fittings found at Baoji have round or open tops, closely similar to those found in Hanzhong. See the finds in Tomb M13 at Zhuyuangou, Lu Liancheng 1986, p. 76 and pp no. 28.6-7. 93 Three groups of bronzes were found near the Shang city walls at Zhengzhou, probably dated to the end of the Erligang period, see Zhengzhou 1999, pp.1-3. 89 90

Bagley 1999,pp. 178-179. Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 83–84; Ibid pp. 27-30.

49

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC measures 72.3 cm tall; its size is nearly one-third larger than most Shang zun found in Henan. It seems that the local workshops were fairly resourceful. Because there existed clear control over the casting of vessels, we can argue that the Hunan societies were highly organized, having a distinguished group of elite. The archaeological contexts of the Hunan vessels show some consistencies (table 2.5). The Huarong zun, as well as many other Hunan vessels and bells, were usually buried alone in individual pits. As the archaeologists noted in their excavation reports, some of these zun were found in the lake regions or close to the rivers, while others were located on low-lying hills,– which resembles the placement of bronzes in those sites found in Hanzhong. The Hunan bronze pits were widely distributed around the Lake Dongting and along the Xiang River and its tributaries. We know very little about the contexts of these bronze pits. They seem to have been crudely dug without recognizable finishing on the pit walls.95 The bronzes were usually deposited at the bottom of the pits without any accompanying finds. The pits were probably not associated with burials or other recognizable sites. Given these unusual contexts, most bronzes in Hunan were accidental discoveries made by local residents rather than excavations. Most often archaeologists did not uncover other finds in the surrounding areas of the bronze pits. The Hunan bronzes and their contexts remain a unique and unexplained feature.

Figure 2.7. Bronze zun excavated from Huarong, Hunan. H 73.2 cm. Hunan 1983, no. 17.

were probably stored as treasures in the pits, which the people who buried them could possibly retrieve later. This activity appears to set the Hanzhong people apart from those living in the Yangtze regions, where bronzes were more clearly buried for ritual purposes. In Hanzhong, there is still much to be discovered. We are yet to understand how the bronzes functioned in the lives of the Hanzhong peoples, and how they contributed to bolstering the local social structure.

Gao Zhixi suggests that the burial of bronzes in Hunan was probably part of the local religious activities.96 He argues that the Hunan elite may have worshipped nature spirits, who took residence in the rivers or on the hills, and that the elite probably buried the bronze vessels and bells as sacrifices presented to the spirits. As more than fifty bronze pits containing either bronze ritual vessels or bells were found, there is reason to believe that the burials of bronzes were probably associated with local religious institutions. There is, however, practically no evidence to suggest what the local elite believed. Although the bronze pits appear to have been distributedrandomly, most of them have been found in the county of Ningxiang to the east of Changsha, which is now the provincial capital. Ningxiang, therefore, seems most likely to have been an important residence of the local elite. However, we are as yet unable to determine the purposes of buried bronzes, nor can we determine whether the Hunan elite intended to retrieve the buried vessels or bells on other occasions.

Hunan is located near the lower reaches of the Han River, where it joins the Yangtze. During the 20th century, fifty or so bronze vessels were reportedly excavated at different sites in northern Hunan. The Hunan vessels resembled those found in Hanzhong, most especially because these excavations included an overwhelming number of zun, lei, and you vessels – the types that Shang elite probably used as containers for alcoholic beverages (table 2.5). Unlike those found in Hanzhong, most vessels in Hunan were probably cast in a local workshop or workshops. They were consistently rather large in size, following some of the décor used in the Henan workshops. The zun from Huarong (fig. 2.7), for example, features three large animal heads on the shoulder of the vessel. Taotie motifs in the main register of the body and the ring-foot are rendered in dissembled forms, which are notably connected to, but distinct from, the standard Shang versions.94 The vessel

The Shang ritual vessels were intended as implements by which to offer a feast in religious ceremonies. In Hunan, however, the elite seemed to have employed the vessels in different functions. Two lidded you from Ningxiang Huangcai contained hundreds of jade beads, tubes, and small ornaments; and a lidded pou found in the same area

94 Rawson published a detailed discussion on the décor of the Huarong vessel, and contrasted it with that found on the Shang vessels in Henan (Rawson 1996, p. 72.) The Huarong vessel, moreover, is probably linked to a similar example excavated from Sanxingdui, as discussed below.

95 96

50

Pan Mouhui 2001, pp. 66-68. Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 130.

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels Table 2.5. Bronze vessels found at known archaeological sites in Hunan province, probably c. 1200–c. 1000 BC Sites

Wine containers

Wine cups

Zun Lei Pou You Yi Changde Shimen

Food vessels (for cooking/serving)

Jue Gu Yan

Ding Li Gui He

1

1

Changde Shimen

Hunan 1983, fig. 22

1

Changde Taoyuan Shijiahe

Hunan 1983, fig. 20 Vessel lid Gao Zhixi 1960, pp. 57─58 only

1

Changsha Baoti Temple Changsha Diaomajian (?)

Others Remarks Reference

1

Hunan 1983, fig. 24

1*

British Museum collection

Changsha Huangshi Tanshancun Jintangju

1

Li Qiaosheng 1999, p. 27

Changsha Ningxiang Huangcai

1

Xiong Chuanxin 1983, p. 72

Changsha Ningxiang Huangcai Shuitangwan

Gao Zhixi 1963, pp. 647─648

1

Changsha Ningxiang Huangcai Tanhecun

1

Hunan 1972, pp. 6─7

Changsha Ningxiang Huangcai Tanheli

1

Gao Zhixi 1963, pp. 646─647

Changsha Ningxiang Huangcai Zaizishan (1959)

1

Changsha Ningxiang Huangcai Zaizishan (1961)

Gao Zhixi 1960, 57─58

1

Changsha Ningxiang Huilongpu Yangguanhe

Gao Zhixi 1963, p. 648 1

Xiong Chuanxin 1983, p. 72

Changsha Ningxiang Longquancun

1

Chen Jianming 2004, p. 13

Changsha Ningxiang Yueshanpu 1 Changsha Ninxiang Huangcai

Gao Zhixi 1960, pp. 57─58 1

Chen Jianming 2004

Hangyang Baojiataizi Hangyang Changning

Guang 1

Feng Yuhui 1978, p. 88 Chen Jianming 2004, p. 9

Hangyang Qidong Xinhuacun

1

Zheng and Tang 2000, pp. 58─60, 11

Hangyang Xinhuacun

1

Zheng and Tang 2000, pp. 58─60

Jinshi Xingtan Farm**

1

Tan Yuanhui 1993, pp. 54─56

1

Lianyuan Qiaotouhezhen Shuitongcun

1

Dai Xiaobo 1996, p. 85

Luodi Shuangfeng Jintianlong

1

Huang and Cai 1986, pp. 56─57

Shaoyang Jiqibo

1

Shaoyang Xinshao Chenjiaofang

Gao Zhixi 1992, p. 78

1

Yiyang Anhua

Ma Daming 1986, p. 27 1*

Senoku Museum collection

Yiyang Taojiang

1

Yiyang Taojiang Lianhechong

Chen Guo’an 1983, pp. 842─843

1

Yiyang Taojiang Majitang

2

Yiyang Xielingang Yueyang Huangxiuqiao Yueyang Huarong

Gao Zhixi 1992, p. 77

1

One is now lost

Zhu Fenghan 2007, p. 168

1 jiao

Gao Zhixi 1992, p. 77 Zhang and Fu 1984, p. 26

1

Chen Jianming 2004, p. 8

Yueyang Pingjiang Wutouzhen

1

Zhu Fenghan 2007, p. 168

Yueyang Rongwan Fangyushan

1

Chen Jianming 2004, p. 10

Yueyang Tonggushan Yueyang Xinkaixiang Zhuzhou

1

Xiu Weihua 2004, pp. 455─459

1

1

Zhu Fenghan 1995 2

Cai Jixiang 1960, pp. 75─76

Zhuzhou Junbei

1

51

Ma Daming 1986, p. 29

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Table 2.5 continued Sites

Zhuzhou Liling Shixingshan

Wine containers

Wine cups

Zun Lei Pou You Yi

Jue Gu Yan

Ding Li Gui He Chen Jianming 2004, p. 15

1

Zhu Fenghan 2007, p. 169

1*

Zhuzhou Xiangtan Liuyang Xiuqiaoxiang Baotangcun

He Jiejun 1982, pp. 19─20 1

Zhuzhou Xiangtan Qingshanqiao 1

Ma Daming 1986, pp. 28─29 6

3

Zhuzhou Xiangtan Qingshanqiao 1 Gaotuncun Laowu Zhuzhou Xiangtan Xiangxiang Zhuzhou Xiangtan Xiangxiang Niuxingshan

Others Remarks Reference

1*

Zhuzhou Nanyangqiaoxiang Chengtangcun Zhuzhou Xiangtan Jiuhua

Food vessels (for cooking/serving)

2 jiao

Yuan Jiarong 1982, pp. 21─24 Zhu Fenghan 2007, p. 169

1

Chen Jianming 2004, p. 13

1

Hunan 1983, fig. 26

*These vessels were shaped like an animal, namely, elephant or boar. **This site is probably a burial, which is different from the others.

contained more than two hundred tiny bronze axes.97 The Hunan elite misinterpreted the Shang-inspired vessels, which they seemed to have used as storage containers for other precious objects. It seems possible that the Hunan elite adopted the Shang vessels from elsewhere, especially Hanzhong. In Hunan, those wine containers were probably valued for their sizes and decorations, hence large vessels were perhaps more preferable than smaller ones. Larger vessels also suggest that the people had access to ample supplies of the tin and copper both needed to smelt bronze. The tastes of the Hunan elite, in turn, seem perhaps to have led the people in Sanxingdui follow suit, where the Shang vessel types were similarly employed as containers of jades, as discussed below.

frequently found in Hanzhong and Hunan (table 2.6). Jessica Rawson, Robert Bagley, Zhang Changping, and Jay Xuhave written extensively on the décor of the Sanxingdui vessels and other finds. 99 Most vessels found at Sanxingdui were likely to have been cast by the peoples in Hunan and by those who lived further downstream. The zun (K2: 129) and lei (K2: 158) share the same exaggerated sizes and dissembled execution of the taotie motifs typical of the Hunan casting.100 As discussed above, the Sanxingdui zun (fig. 2.1) is unmistakably linked to the zun decorated with the rare tiger-and-man motif found at Funan in Anhui.101 Moreover, inside this zun are burnt fragments of cowries and jades, suggesting that the vessels were probably used as containers, as were those found in Hunan.102

The Hunan elite, indeed, may have held religious ideas which were very different from those held by the Shang. We have established that the Hunan elite buried ritual objects individually, and that this action appears to have distinguished Hunan society from most other southern groups. Moreover, the Hunan elite seemed far more concerned with bronze bells rather than ritual vessels. In local workshops, casters appeared to have allocated bronze materials unevenly, so that the bells tended to be given larger shares. Using these bells, the Hunan elite must have enacted ritual performances quite unlike rituals involving the offering of food and drink. In Hunan society, the playing of music was probably an important component in engagement with the spiritual world.

A miniature bronze female figure from pit no. 2 has attracted much attention, because she is holding in both hands a bronze zun on her head (fig. 2.1e). Decorated with a few lines and small circles, this little zun imitates the pieces found in the same pit. It is also lidded in the same fashion as the lidded lei.103 The figure is kneeling on a circular openwork base. Her attentive posture perhaps representsthe moment at which the jades or cowries kept in the vessel were presented during a religious performance. The Shang casters in Henan rarely covered the zun or lei with a lid. The zun represented together with the female figure here was probably copied from the southern Rawson 1996, pp. 60-84.; Bagley 1988, pp. 78-86, 1990, pp. 5267, and 1999, pp. 212-219; see also the exhibition catalogue edited by Bagley 2001, pp. 21-175.; Zhang Changping 2002, pp. 99-114 (on bronze pou) and 2004, pp. 116-127 (on bronze zun and lei).; Xu completed his doctoral research on the finds from the sacrificial pits and the Sanxingdui culture in Sichuan. Discussions of the Sanxingdui vessels are given in length in Xu 2008, pp. 79-112. 100 Rawson 1996, pp. 70-74. For further examples, see Xu 2001, pp. 142149. 101 Xu 2001, pp. 136-137. 102 Sanxingdui 1999, p. 33; a lei from pit no. 2 was also found with many cowries and jades inside (their numbers are not given). See ibid, p. 241. 103 See Xu 2001, pp. 138-139, and compares it with the lei, K2: 205 in Sanxingdui 1999, p. 276. 99

In 1986, archaeologists excavated eighteen ritual vessels from the two sacrificial pits at Sanxingdui; there were four vessels in the smaller pit, no. 1, and fourteen in pit no. 2.98 Those vessels were all zun, lei, you, and pou – the types Chen Jianming 2004, pp. 11-12. These vessels were what the excavators can retrieve from broken fragments and burnt pieces. As the bronze lids do not match the vessels, many more seemed to have been destroyed during the time of burial, see Sanxingdui 1999, pp.33-40 and 238-265. 97 98

52

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels which incorporated many precious items, including jades and elephant tusks; and, in reinforcing religious ideas and power through the use of bronze figures. Sanxingdui seems no less complex than Shang society. Although the vessels found at Sanxingdui originated in Henan, they were most probably acquired from the peoples living in Hanzhong and in Hunan. It is, thus, questionable as to whether the Sanxingdui casters had any significant contact with the workshops established in Henan. It is also questionable whether the Sanxingdui elite shared any Shang ritual practices and beliefs.106

Table 2.6. Bronze vessels excavated from the sacrificial pits at Guanghan Sanxingdui, Sichuan Pit

Zun Lei

Number one 2 Number two 9

4

Pou Hu

Pan Extra vessel lid

1

1 1

1 1

workshops. The way that she handles only a single vessel and holds it up on the top of her head may not have been the usual way that the Shang elite held vessels during their ritual performance. It seems possible that the Sanxingdui peoples may have imitated this mode of offering from the other southern groups.

The interactions between the peoples living in Hanzhong, Hunan, and Sanxingdui produce an intriguing subject for further discussion. While some peoples must have travelled between the three southern areas, they did not appear to have exchanged many ritual practices. The large bronze nao bells typical of Hunan (fig. 1.22) were not found at any sites in Hanzhong or Sichuan. A few bronze figures were found in Shaanxi, but none was found in Hunan.107 This suggests that the peoples who travelled probably only brought with them the ritual vessels which originated from the Shang. As suggested by the jades found in the Hunan vessels and by the bronze fittings inside the vessels from Hanzhong, it seems reasonable to suggest that these three groups of southerners may have understood the ritual vessels to be ordinary containers. Their contact appears likely to have included trading or exchanges of gifts. It is interesting to discover that these kinds of exchanges were made through the use of the Shang vessels, or through the vessels associated with the Shang people. Although these southerners did not share in Shang ritual practices, the use of Shang materials suggests their acknowledgement of the strength and sophistication of Shang society.

The excavators suggest that the two pits probably represented two separate occasions on which ritual objects were burnt and buried.104 During the larger performance of the two, that is, at the occasion associated with pit no. 2, more vessels were demanded. Although the functions of vessels were specific to the local society at Sanxingdui, the numbers of the vessels in use seems to have a connection with the size of a religious activity. The spiritual world of the Sanxingdui society appears to have been very different from that which was established in Henan. The Shang emphasized genealogy and believed that deceased ancestors would continue to live as beings in need of attendance and provisions. Using food and drink presented in ritual vessels, the elite believed that they could interact with the unseen ancestors and spirits. Conversely, the Sanxingdui elite appear to have taken a different approach to the materialization of their religious ideas. The local elite appear to have created a lively spiritual world filled with animals and objects taken from the nature. Discovered were life-sized figures with prominent and somewhat exaggerated features, and trees decorated with dangling birds, clapper bells, and other unidentifiable ornaments. In addition, in the pits were some diamond-shaped bronze plaques and wheel-shaped bronzes, which were probably fittings to an unknown object now perished.105 Bronze vessels seemed to have been additions to a grand visual performance, but they do not appear to have been central in it.

Xin’gan Dayangzou The site at Xin’gan Dayangzhou is a very important discovery, because it features the largest collection of bronze vessels ever found in southern China. The issue of whether the elite at Xin’gan shared Shang ritual practices and beliefs remains controversial. Dayangzhou is a small village in Xin’gan county, Jiangxi province. In 1989, archaeologists excavated large numbers of bronzes, jades, and ceramics from what was possibly a rectangular pit.108 Forty-eight ritual vessels were excavated. They were buried together with four large bronze bells; two hundred or so bronze weapons and tools bronzes;

Sanxingdui is a rich site containing many distinctive ritual objects (fig. 1.26). The bronze types and variety are in sharp contrast to those found in any of the Shang tombs excavated in Henan. At Sanxingdui, religious performance appears more likely to have centred less on vessels, and more on life-sized bronze figures and heads. Whatever their symbolic meanings were, these figures demonstrate that at Sanxingdui there existed a well-organized social institution which was remarkably successful in commissioning bronze casting; in establishing a set of religious practices

For different opinions, see Gao Congwen 2002, pp. 8-16 and Zhang Xin 2002, pp. 37-46, where the authors argue that the use of ritual vessels possibly indicates some adoption of northern ritual practices. It seems unlikely so, because the Sanxingdui elite were probably unaware that the ritual vessels were intended to be used as a set in the north. 107 A bronze head of unmistakable Sanxingdui designs was found at Zhouzhi (Zhang Tinghao 2001); and two similar bronze figures with large clasping hands were found in tombs M1 and M2 at Baoji Ruijiazhuang (Lu and Hu 1986, pp. 315-316 and p. 375. 108 The pit was notably destroyed during construction works before the excavation took place. The excavators estimated that the pit originally measured about 8.22 m long and 3.6 m wide, Xin’gan 1997, pp. 1-5. 106

Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 438–448; see also Falkenhausen 2000, pp. 1-29. For further discussions on different types of ritual bronzes and jades used at Sanxingdui, see the doctoral dissertation by Jay Xu (2008, pp. 113-155 and 184-218), which incorporates a thorough summary of previous research in both Chinese and English literature. 104 105

53

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC one thousand jades (including beads and tubes); and 139 ceramic dou (stemmed plates) and jars.109 The high-fired ceramics are unmistakably similar to those found in walled cities at Niucheng and Wucheng, where a few sophisticated kiln sites have been excavated.110 Hence, the people who buried the bronzes at Xin’gan seem most likely to have come from the settlements in the adjacent areas.

Moreover, a couple of jia of unmistakable Zhenghzou design were excavated in the city of Wucheng.115 Given such intimate contact with the Shang casters, the peoples in Jiangxi were likely to have acquired some wine-drinking types from the north or from Panlongcheng. It also seems likely that Xin’gan people were aware that these wine cups were the objects used by the Shang elite to express and reinforce their social and political hierarchy. There must be an explanation as to why the people at Xin’gan buried many vessels acquired from the north, yet excluded some essential types. As there are at present no comparable groups of finds, it is difficult to express further opinions on this point. It seems certain, however, that the site at Xin’gan contains features which are distinct from anything discovered so far in southern China. Unlike the inhabitants of Panlongcheng, Anhui, Hanzhong, and Hunan, the peoples in northern Jiangxi probably responded differently to the borrowing of Shang ritual vessels.

Referring to aerial photographs taken in the early 1980s, the excavators found that the pit was possibly originally located underneath a low mound. By the time of the excavation, the mound appears to have been removed during local construction work.111 Although the site was partially destroyed, the pit and the ritual objects found in it seem likely to have been related to religious practices. The purpose of the pit remains an open question, but it is evidently quite unlike the sacrificial pits at Sanxingdui, in which the objects were burnt and broken before burial. At Xin’gan, most bronzes and jades were found intact.

The Xin’gan vessels are most notable for the presence of many bronze ding. There is a group of nine ding, all of which possess round, shallow bowls and three flat legs carved in tiger forms (fig. 1.21). Their bowls are similarly decorated with a band of taotie-like motifs, which are flanked by two narrow rows of circlets rendered in relief lines. The heights of these nine vessels vary between 20 and 62.4 cm. Except for the two smallest ones, a tiger in crouching form was cast on each upright handle of the vessels.116 While the shapes of the vessels and the rows of circlet decorations are derived from the Zhengzhou workshops, the tiger forms are definitely southern.117 These bronze ding were probably cast locally in the same workshop. They are a remarkably large group, and a similar example is absent even in the rich tomb of Fu Hao. In addition to these nine ding there were discovered another four pairs at Xin’gan.118 Those included a pair of round ding on flat-shaped legs with a bird perching on each handle; a pair of round ding on flat-shaped legs carved in fish form; a pair of rectangular ding decorated with the peculiar dissembled motifs described earlier; and a pair of irregularly shaped ding decorated with textile patterns and a band of fish motifs.119

The bronze vessels at Xin’gan are an important collection, because, first of all, they include many pieces and a variety of types are represented. There are thirty ding, five li, three yan, one pan, one dou, two hu, three you, one lei, and one pou (table 2.2 and compare with table 2.1).112 Among the thousands of elite tombs excavated at Anyang, that of Ya Chang is one of the largest and most intact. In Ya Chang’s tomb, there were forty ritual vessels (fig. 1.8), which is eight pieces less than the total number of collections made at Xin’gan.113 Some of the elites at Xin’gan appear to be no less wealthy and rich in resources than the highest-ranking members of the Anyang society. Secondly, despite containing a variety of other types, the Xin’gan vessel collections excluded all the wine-drinking cups – jia, jue, and gu, which the Shang elite widely used. The exclusion was unusual, because the people in northern Jiangxi appeared quite familiar with the vessels from Henan. A few bronze ding and hu buried at Xin’gan were inspired by the Zhengzhou workshop; it is also possible that they were cast there and brought to Xin’gan.114 Xin’gan 1997, pp. 5-7. Niucheng is located 5 km away from Xin’gan. Despite the discovery of some irregular city walls, the excavations there are still in a preliminary stage, see Niucheng 1991, pp. 68-74 and Zhu Fusheng 2005, pp. 4-6. See also Wucheng 2005, pp. 75-86 and 153-329. 111 Xin’gan 1997, p. 5 and Li Jiahe 1998, pp. 304-305. 112 Xin’gan 1997, pp. 8-73. In addition to the forty-seven bronze vessels, there was also discovered a rare type called a zan 瓚, which is shaped like a beaker with a broad, flat handle extending from the middle of the cup. See Ibid 1997, p. 73. 113 Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 93-133. 114 For further discussions comparing the Xin’gan and Henan vessels, see Bagley 1993, pp. 21-30, Rawson 1992, pp. 7-14, and Zhang Changshou 2000, pp.251-272. While Bagley, Rawson, and Chang argue for connections between the workshops at Zhengzhou and Xin’gan, a number of other scholars suggest that Xin’gan was possibly closer to the Anyang workshops, which were established later. See, for example, Peng Shifen 1997, pp. 142-146 and Peng Minghan 2005, pp. 39-46 and 241-245. As the vessels at Xin’gan employed some Zhengzhou features which had otherwise became obsolete in Henan during the Anyang period, they seem more likely to have been derived from Zhengzhou. Hence the dates of Xin’gan probably overlapped with the early Anyang period or were even slightly earlier. 109

The elite at Xin’gan seemed particularly fond of the northern ding vessels. In 1983, six years before Xin’gan Dayangzhou was excavated, Peng Shifen and Li Yulin reported that a group of five large bronze ding were discovered near the Zhongling Reservoir in Xin’gan county. Though partially destroyed, the largest one measures 77 cm tall (fig. 2.8).120 The site was located no

110

See Wucheng 2005, pp. 364-366, and compare those jia with that which were found in Tomb M2 at Panlongcheng Lijiazui Panlongcheng 2001, pp. 165-167. 116 Xin’gan 1997, pp. 18-28. 117 Bagley 1987, pp. 34-36 and Rawson 1992, pp. 4-14. 118 They are XDM:11 and 12; XDM: 9-10; XDM: 26-27; and XDM 2425, Xin’gan 1997, pp. 28-38. 119 Xin’gan 1997, pp. 22-48. 120 The excavation report of Zhongling Reservoir is very brief. See Peng and Li 1983, p. 93. Li Chaoyuan discusses and illustrates the bronze ding in his paper, 2002, pp. 216-225. 115

54

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels

Figure 2.8. A group of bronze ding and fragments. Xin’gan Zhongling Reservoir, Jiangxi. Heights: 51–77 cm. Li Chaoyuan 2002, pp. 218–221.

the piece at Xin’gan was taken from Zhengzhou. The other three fangding, however, were of far less refined casting; the studs were irregular and the bands of taotie motifs were misplaced. In spite of these defects, those three fangding are large and heavy. They were probably some unsuccessful examples cast before the other fine pieces.125 The vessels in the caches at Zhengzhou appear to have included some earlier pieces that the Shang elite did not bury with deceased ancestors.

more than 6 km away from Dayangzhou. Peng and Li also found a few small bronze ding, yan, jue, and a large number of ceramics.121 Although the finds from Zhongling Reservoir have not been published in detail, that site appears to be very similar to Dayangzhou. Despite the great distance from Zhengzhou, the people at Xin’gan appear to have acquired some bronzes from Shang workshops and to have cast very close copies. Casting a group of ding in grading sizes was probably a practice borrowed from the Zhengzhou workshops. Comparable groups of bronze ding were found in the three caches excavated at Zhenghou between 1974 and 1996.122 The cache found on Nanshuncheng Street was located outside the western walls of the Shang city. Clearly the cache was not a burial. There were four bronze fangding (i.e. ding cast in square section), two jia, two jue, one gui, two halberds, and one axe. The fangding are between 38 and 51.5 cm tall.123 The largest one (H1 upper: 1) was cast on four sturdy legs, and the sides were decorated with neat rows of studs and taotie, very similar to those present on ding XDM: 8 found at Xin’gan.124 It seems possible that

It is remarkable that most Shang elite tombs lacked such impressive groups of bronze ding. Even in the tomb of Fu Hao, among the thirty-one bronze ding discovered there were only two pairs that were of substantial size; the largest pair measures about 80 cm tall and weighs between 117 and 128 kg. The others are an assortment of varying types and sizes, measuring between 10-30 cm tall and 0.59 kg in weight.126 The finds at Zhengzhou suggest that the Shang elite do not appear to have buried all large bronze vessels with the deceased. They seem to have kept among the living members some important and valuable pieces that they continued to use. Among these vessels, large bronze ding appear to be an important type.

Li Chaoyuan 2002, p. 216. For excavation reports of those caches, see Zhengzhou Jiaocang1999, pp. 1-93. 123 Zhengzhou Jiaocang 1999, pp. 9-23. 124 Zhang Changshou compares the Xin’gan ding with those found in another cache at Zhengzhou excavated in 1982, see 2000, pp. 252-257. 121 122

See the typology of bronze vessels established by the excavators, Zhengzhou Jiaocang 1999, pp. 99-102. 126 Fu Hao 1980, pp. 33-44. 125

55

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Zhengzhou and brought to the south. Hanzhong presents a different but important case. Hanzhong People must have been to Henan and brought with them a number of vessels cast in the workshops there. In the regions further south, namely, Anhui, Jiangxi, and Hunan, the local casters invariably borrowed the Shang casting techniques, and imitated northern vessel shapes. They also attempted to design their own versions of the taotie, which was central in the bronze motifs used in the Henan workshops. In the Yangtze societies, as the bronze vessels suggest, the Shang were probably considered highly advanced in terms of craftsmanship and designs.

The Xin’gan bronze ding suggest that the local elite may have imitated the ritual methods by which the Shang elite established identity and power in the context of the living society. As they did not use many wine-drinking vessels, the Xin’gan elite appear less concerned with the ways that the Shang elite treated death and burial. While the Shang elite usually buried the deceased with sets of ritual vessels of similar designs, those vessels at Xin’gan are of diverse shapes and décor, suggesting that those vessels were most probably gathered from different workshops.127 The elite in Jiangxi appeared interested in collecting ritual vessels related to the Shang, but it seems unlikely that they performed similar offering activities. Their incomplete sets of ritual vessels would have prevented them from doing so.

Level II: Social Ranks The Shang elite appear to have established social rankings in relation to their religious roles. Fu Hao, the queen of King Wu Ding, was buried with more than two hundreds bronze vessels in her tomb. These included vessels of a wide variety of shapes and designs, and her tomb contained more than fifty virtually identical pairs of wine-drinking vessels, the gu and jue. In the tomb of Ya Chang, possibly a slightly lesser member of the elite, were fifty bronze vessels, including ten pairs of gu and jue. There is a pointed difference between these two burials in the level of wealth. What appears to be more important is the difference in the religious roles of the owners. Fu Hao was likely to have presided over a larger performance than did Ya Chang. Her offering would have engaged a larger number of deceased ancestors and spirits, or would have involved more complicated steps and movements. The material interactions with bronze vessels were closely connected to the social structures of the Shang.

Ceramics were an important achievement of the peoples in northern Jiangxi, and these peoples were probably among the earliest groups who succeeded in improving kiln structures and in firing at high temperatures. At Xin’gan, bronzes were buried with more than 139 ceramic guan jars and dou stemmed dishes (fig. 1.18). As the excavations of the kiln sites in northern Jiangxi revealed only small proportions of high-fired wares, the large group of ceramics at Xin’gan must have been rare and, therefore, very precious. 128 Ceramics probably assumed an important role in the material world of the local elite. Zheng Zhenxiang suggests that some highfired wares found at Anyang were probably imported from Jiangxi, because the ceramic technology in Henan during the Shang period was probably inferior to that of the south.129 Ceramics appear to have contributed to the wealth of the Jiangxi elite. We can probably argue that their material world was quite unlike that of the Shang elite. As the groups of ceramic jars and dishes at Xin’gan suggest, the local elite presented their ritual offerings in quite different ways.

In the southern societies, conversely, it is not possible to observe any similar interactions between the local elite and bronze vessels. Except for Panlongcheng, most southern sites contained only a few to a dozen vessels, arranged in types which were quite unlike those discovered in Henan tombs. More importantly, the southern vessels were not found in burial contexts, suggesting that these vessels were unlikely to have been attributed to an individual member of the local elite. It is even less clear as to whether the southern vessels were intended for use in the offering of food and drink. While the Shang elite constructed their status by using different sizes of vessel sets, the southern elite appear to have valued bronze vessels for different reasons The southern vessels did not contribute similarly to the expression of social hierarchy.

Three Levels: Southern Vessels Re-examined Level I: Physical Resemblance On the physical level, the techniques and artistic designs of the Shang casters appear to have been profoundly inspiring in the south. As we have discussed, the transfer of the Shang bronze-casting techniques was very probably related to population movement. The elite at Panlongcheng employed bronze vessels which were very similar to those found at Zhengzhou, suggesting that they probably cast the bronze vessels locally in accordance to the practices of the Zhengzhou workshops, or that they had the vessels cast at

Level III: Conceptual Differences The tombs in Henan demonstrate that the Shang probably believed in an afterlife. The deceased were most likely treated as though they lived in a world which continued to make use of the material objects of the living: food and drink, weapons, musical instruments, and servants (sacrificed humans were commonly found in the Shang tombs). The kings’ lists inscribed on the oracle bones

127 The excavators divide the Xin’gan bronzes into four types: imports from Henan; local copies of Henan vessels; copies of vessels related to the pre-Zhou workshops in Shaanxi; and finally, some indigenous types (Peng Shifen 1997, pp. 192-203). The bronzes at Xin’gan, however, seemed more diversified than what the excavators suggested. 128 Peng Shifen and Li Keyou tallied that among the potsherds found at Wucheng high-fired wares took up between 1% and 15%. See Peng and Li 1975. 129 Anyang 1994, pp. 237-240.

56

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels have confirmed that the Shang elite practiced ancestor worship.

in the mid-Yangtze regions were a possible source.130 Indeed, further finds excavated in Henan suggest that the borrowing of vessel attributes by the Shang, from the south (henceforth referred to as ‘reversed borrowing’) probably amounted to more than superifical sharing of material features.

Although we lack similar evidence of burials and writing in the Yangtze basins, the bronze figures and bells discovered to date suggest that some groups experienced very different material interactions in their respective religious practices. In archaeological and art-historical literature, agency is an effective term used emphasize the integral role of objects in human actions and thoughts. In the case of the early Bronze Age southern China, about which much is still unknown, I prefer the term ‘communication’.

In 1998, archaeologists excavated a large tomb at Luyi Taiqinggong in eastern Henan. The tomb is located in the Huai River basin near the provincial border with Anhui. Anyang is located about 270 km to the northwest, while Funan and Yinshang are about 140 km to the south. The tomb was found in a rectangular pit which contained four sloping passageways. The largest of these passageways measures 49.5 m in length and 7 m in which. The tomb structure is very similar to that of the royal tombs of the Anyang kings. There were eleven sacrificed attendants. Most of the eighty-five ritual vessels found were inscribed with the name Chang Zi Kouwho was possibly the tomb owner.131 The tomb was dated to very beginning of the Western Zhou period, c. 1050 BC, soon after the conquest of the Shang.132 Chang Zi Kou appears to have been familiar with the ritual practices of the Anyang elite, as his tomb contained some standard sets of ritual vessels, which included eight pairs of jue and gu; two jiao; and three jia.

Most religious activities and beliefs are concerned with communication with the aid of objects. This communication is aimed at both a living and a spiritual audience. At Sanxingdui, the communication was made through lifesized figures and the symbolic objects held in their hands: elephant tusks, jade zhang (sceptres), jade bi (discs), and small number of ritual vessels. The solemn expressions of the figures and their respectful posture would have created distance between the objects and the people who attended the performance, in this way conveying some unseen and awe-inspiring power. In Hunan, in contrast, the playing of musical bells would have drawn the full attention of the audience, thus placing focus completely on the actions of the performers. The Xin’gan society presents yet another form of material interaction. There the elite employed significant numbers of stoneware objects in religious practices. Stoneware was probably less precious than bronzes and jades. However, they were important objects produced locally which were significantly distinct from the earthenware produced by neighbouring societies. The rituals at Xin’gan appear to be intended to represent the extraordinary techniques of the local potters.

Nevertheless, unlike most Anyang elite, Chang Zi Kou was buried with an unusually large number of bronze ding (table 2.2). There were twenty-two pieces in his tomb. There were two groups of five very similar pieces (fig. 2.9). The first group were flat-legged ding vessels, each measuring about 20 cm tall and 1.2 kg in weight.133 The shapes of these vessels probably referred to those cast at Xin’gan in the south, because they did not appear to have been very popular in the Henan workshops. The second group were fangding densely decorated with bird motifs, textile patterns, studs, and taotie faces. Each of them measures about 20 cm tall and 1. 7 kg in weight.134

The Yangtze societies display diverse and distinct forms of material interactions. The southern vessels bear some physical resemblance to those discovered in Henan, yet their usage and engagement in the Yangtze contexts deviated significantly. In place of bronze vessels, there existed other ritual objects which communicated social power and conveyed religious beliefs.

The ding vessels of Chang Zi Kou are not large, but they are strikingly uniform in design. Henan casters were capable of producing pairs of similar vessels, but the Anyang elite rarely buried significantly large numbers of bronze ding in their tombs. Another flat-legged bronze ding of Chang Zi Kou was decorated with a band of bird motifs, flanked by two rows of circlets rendered in thin, raised lines.135 This mode of execution first appeared at Zhengzhou during the Erligang period and became obsolete in the Anyang

Southern Contributions We have discussed different groups of southern vessels found along the Yangtze River. Some southern vessels were rather unconventional by the standards of Henan, suggesting some southern groups probably did not quite understand the original forms and functions of ritual vessels in the context of the Shang society. The strikingly widespread distribution of ritual vessels suggest that the southerners probably distributed among themselves some material features borrowed from the north. The contact was certainly mutual. As Jessica Rawson argues, the animal designs on bronzes and jades found in the tomb of Fu Hao were unlikely to have developed from Henan artistic traditions. Inspiration must have come from outside societies, and among these, the southerners

In her recent research on the contact between the Western Zhou states and the societies in the northwest of China, Rawson argues that representations of animals were possibly borrowed indirectly from Inner Asia. As the Anyang elite began to use chariots and bows and arrows, they must have established contact with the nomadic groups in the Northern Zone. Therefore, the animal designs found on the Anyang bronzes and jades could also possibly have been inspired from the societies further north. See 1992, pp. 10-20. 131 Changzikou 2000, pp. 5-20. 132 Ibid, pp. 199-209. 133 Changzikou 2000, pp. 57-66. 134 Ibid, pp. 68-71. 135 Ibid, pp. 57-62. 130

57

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 2.9. Three sets of bronze ding. Early Western Zhou period. Tomb of Chang Zi Kou, Luyi Taiqinggong, Henan. Heights approx. 27–35 cm. Changzikou 2000, pp. 32–34.

connections. No major tombs excavated in Henan contained a substantial amount of pottery vessels. Chang Zi Kou, by contrast, was buried with 209 pieces. It seems most probable that this feature can be attributed to the peoples in Jiangxi. Chang Zi Kou and the group of elite in southern Henan appear very likely to have been on familiar terms with some southerners. It also seems likely that they borrowed some ritual practices and ideas from the south and because of this buried such a remarkable number of ceramics in the tombs of the elite.

workshops; however, it was widely adopted by the casters at Xin’gan. Indeed, the shape of the vessel and the tiger forms found on its legs also refer to those vessels found at Xin’gan. The casters of Chang Zi Kou’s vessels seem likely to have gathered some knowledge about southern casting. The burial of many ding vessels suggests that the group of elite related to Chang Zi Kou were probably even closer to the peoples in the south. The remarkably large number of ceramics (fig. 2.10) in the tomb provides further evidence about southern

58

Case Study I: Bronze Ritual Vessels

Figure 2.10. Ceramics. Early Western Zhou period. Tomb of Chang Zi Kou, Luyi Taiqinggong, Henan. Changzikou 2000, pl. 1 and colour pl. 13.

59

3 Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells This chapter is concerned with the early history of bronze bells used in the societies of ancient China, and in particular, the evolution of the bronze nao 鐃. Much scholarship exists on the topic of a major bell type now known as the yongzhong 甬鐘, or shank-bells, which were cast in elliptical sections with a hollow shank extending from the top of the resonating body.1 The Zhou elite used yongzhong as ritual paraphernalia alongside bronze vessels; and the casting of bronze yongzhong appears to have spanned nearly a millennium. The finds in the famous tomb of the Marquis Yi of Zeng (c. 433 BC) excavated in Hubei province included a full set of sixty-four yongzhong hung on their original rack made of wood (figs. 3.1 and 3.2).2 As a result of such finds, we understand that yongzhong were sounded by striking the lip with a lacquered mallet.3 These bells appear to have been developed from the early sets of yongzhong (fig. 3.13), which were probably cast in c. 1000 BC, excavated from the early Western Zhou tombs of the Lords of Yu in Baoji in Shaanxi province. The two sets found there were each made up of three bells of graduated sizes.4 The fact that these sets were discovered in fully developed form suggests that there must have existed a long history of bell-casting culminating in their creation, which is at present not understood. In fact, scholars know very little about the bells cast before yongzhong. However, finds made in the Yangtze basins suggest that this region fostered a network of very active and technologically accomplished bronze bell casters.

yongzhong.6 Nao (see, for example, figs. 3.3, 3.8, and 3.11) were cast with similar physical features, except that their shanks lacked a loop for hanging, and they were probably instead held mouth-upward on the shanks. The following discussion on nao centers on the questions: what were the functions of bronze nao in the Anyang and Yangtze societies, and, what do the large numbers of bronze nao found in southern China suggest to us? As the Yangtze peoples appear to have borrowed casting technology and the forms of ritual vessels from the casters in Henan, scholars who have written extensively on bronze nao, including Virginia Kane, Gao Zhixi, Falkenhausen, Bagley, and Xiang Taochu, suggest that the nao cast in the south were possibly borrowed from the north.7 Nonetheless, the southern nao were larger and heavier than those cast in the north, suggesting that bell-casting appears to have been far more vigorous and substantial in the southern societies. Those peoples seem to have been highly concerned with the musical qualities of bells and to have developed some ritual practices, using bronze bells, which were very different from those of the Shang elite in Henan. The southern bell-casting appears to have contributed in significant ways to the bell-casting traditions of the north, but these have not been adequately recognized.

During the Shang period, there were probably two very different bell-casting traditions: one of them was established at Anyang, and the other in the extensive region covering the mid and lower Yangtze basins (map B).5 Those casters produced bells of similar forms now known as the nao, which were probably the early form of

1 Other bell types that served different purposes include the ling 鈴, bo 鎛, niuzhong 鈕鐘, duo 鐸, zheng 鉦, and chunyu 淳于. Apart from the bo, none of these types have been found in the southern sites dating to the Shang period. Although all types were cast with an elliptical section (with the exception of the chunyu, which probably served as sounding bells for military uses), it is yongzhong which are most frequently mentioned in historical texts; depicted in the ritual scenes on some Warring States period (486–221BC) ritual vessels; and found in the tombs of the Zhou elite. For descriptions of the early bronze bells, see the monumental volume on chime bells by Lothar von Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 23-76. 2 For descriptions of the musical instruments and bronze bells found in the tomb of the Marquis Yi of Zeng, see So 2000, pp. 12-46. 3 The shape of the nao bell is also of musical significance. It cuts short the wavelength when the bell is struck, producing a more precise and shorter tone than does a round-shaped bell. Thus, the sound of the nao will not linger and disorder the melody. For the tests on the vibration frequency of the nao and yongzhong and their comparisons with the round bells, see Ma Chengyuan 2002, pp. 514-525. 4 Lu and Wu 1988, pp. 96-97. 5 Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 134-150.

Map B. Distribution of bronze nao and early yonghong bells from known archaeological sites in China, c. 1500–c. 1045 BC.

Once yongzhong wers introduced, nao appear to have begun to fade out of use. The possible transition from nao to yongzhong is discussed in Kane 1974/75, pp. 90-92; Gao Zhixi 1992, pp. 268-270; and Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 153-157. 7 Kane 1974/75, pp. 88-90; Gao Zhixi 1993, pp. 45-52; Falkenhausen 1991, pp. 18-19; Bagley 1992, pp. 221-222; Xiang Taochu 51-55; see also Shi Jinxiong 1997, pp. 73-79. 6

61

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 3.1. Set of 64 chimed yongzhong and one bo excavated from the tomb of the Marquis Yi of Zeng. 433 BC. Hubei. Bronze and wood. Long arm length: 748 cm; short arm length: 273 cm. So 2001, p. 37.

I argue that the Anyang nao did not derive from an Erligang prototype, but were in fact borrowed from the south. The list of Anyang bell sets excavated makes possible an analysis of their rarity, simplicity of design, and lack of musical utility, which is in striking contrast to the material care lavished on ritual vessels and indicates both an absence of a complex developmental tradition, and ignorance of underlying principles of musical technology. These features compel us to revisit the arguments for the origin of the southern and Anyang nao, covering both the theory that they were developed from a bronze Erligang ancestor from Zhengzhou, and the theory that they were an evolution of ling clapper bells. However, both of these theories contain the problematic assumption that musical bells did not evolve in the south, and that southern musical bells were simply enlargements of Anyang bells, even though this does not correlate with archaeological evidence for a rich southern tradition of ritual music and technological refinement in aid of musical utility, entirely absent in Henan. I will present that evidence for a musical and technological tradition developed in the south, using the examples collected from Xin’gan and the Xiang Rvier societies. The central point of this chapter is to bring in the proof that southern people, rather than simply using bells for signaling, actually developed their music-making capacity to a degree that so far out-performs the Anyang bells that it seems extremely unlikely that that the southern bells developed out of the Anyang bells. Moreover, the complex evolution of the thirty-six bosses, and the presence on large diverse bell ensembles in the south speaks to a long, complex history of bell production focused on musical accomplishment and strengthening inter-societal bonds. I will again conclude by using Rawson’s model to compare and contrast Anyang and southern nao bells. Because of the absence of any of these physical elements in the Shang bell casting tradition, it is improbable that the simplistic and technologically inferior Anyang bells could have developed over the same time period from a common

Figure 3.2. Musical instruments excavated from the tomb of the Marquis Yi of Zeng. 433 BC. Hubei. Chimed stones. Height 109 cm; Zither. Wood. Length 167.3 cm; width; Pipe-flutes. Lacquered wood. Length 22.8 cm; width 11.7 cm; Drum on bronze stand. Drum and staff reconstructed. Height 365 cm. So 2000, pp. 53; 69; 88; and 126.

ancestor, and that material references to the southern bells on the Anyang finds in fact suggest that they were borrowings in imitation of the southern style. Northern Nao Table 3.1 is a list of bronze nao found in the Yellow River basins. As the table suggests, most bronze nao were excavated from the tombs at Anyang; a few were found in the large elite tomb at Yiyang in Shandong; and a few others were found in the tomb of Chang Zi Kou and in 62

Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells Table 3.1. Bronze nao excavated from known archaeological sites in northern China, c. 1200–c. 1045 BC Entry Province Site no.

Tomb no. (or No. of nao Inscriptions Heights (cm) otherwise found stated)

Reference

1

Henan

Anyang (Western M699 District)

3

Yes

Not reported

Anyang Xiqu 1979, p. 53

2

Henan

Anyang (Western M765 Destrict)

3

No

Not reported

Chen Quanyou 2005, p. 19

3

Henan

Anyang Dasikung M51

3

Yes

Not reported

Anyang Dasikung 1958, p. 56

4

Henan

Anyang Dasikung M288

3

No

Not reported

Chen Quanyou 2005, p 20

5

Henan

Anyang Dasikung M312

3

Yes

13.9─18

Ma Dazhi 1955, p. 49

6

Henan

Anyang Dasikung M663

3

Yes

17.5/14.8/12.3

Anyang Dasikung 1988, p. 871

7

Henan

Anyang Dasikung M303

3

Yes

14.3–20.3

Yue Hungbing 2008, pp. 373–377

8

Henan

Anyang Gaolouzhuang

M8

3

No

Not reported

Henan Music 1996, p. 72

9

Henan

Anyang Guojiazhuang

M160

3

Yes

24.6/20.6/17.2

Yang and Liu 1998, pp. 104–105

10

Henan

Anyang Guojiazhuang

M26

3

No

21.6/17.4/15

Chen Quanyou 2005, p 19

11

Henan

Anyang Huayuanzhuang

M54 (Ya Chang)

3

Yes

17.6/14.4/12.3

Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 133–135

12

Henan

Anyang Qijiazhuang

M269

3

Yes

18.4/13.7/11.9

Meng Xianwu 1991, pp. 340–341

13

Henan

Anyang Xiaotun

M5 (Fu Hao) 5

Yes

7.7–14.4

Fu Hao 1980, pp. 100–101

14

Henan

Anyang Xibeigang M1083

3

Not reported Not reported

15*

Henan

Luyi Taiqinggong M1

6

Yes

24.5/19.5/15.2 19/17.6/16.4

Changzikou 2000, pp. 121–126

16

Henan

Wenxian

Tomb number 3 not assigned

Yes

Not reported

Chen Quanyou 2005, p 19

17

Henan

Xinxiang Huojia

Unknown provenience

1

No

14

Henan Music 1996, p. 78

18

Henan

Zhengzhou

Unknown provenience

1

Yes

21

Henan Music 1996, p. 70

19*

Shaanxi

Baoji Ruijiazhuang

M13

1

No

19.4

Shaanxi Music 1999, p. 25

20

Shandong Qingzhou Sufutun M8

3

No

21/17.5/15

Chen Quanyou 2005, p 19

Falkenhausen 1993b, p. 388

*Those nao came from burials dated to early Western Zhou, probably c. 1000 BC.

Tomb M13 at Baoji Zhuyuangou, which were both dated to the early Western Zhou.8 Despite those later finds, most nao bells cast in the north appear to have been related to the Anyang workshops, hence they can possibly be dated to between 1200 and 1000 BC. Notably, the northern bells were usually found in groups of three pieces.

Fig. 3.3 illustrates the three nao found in Tomb M160 at Anyang Guojiazhuang 郭家莊, dating to c. 1100 BC. The largest bell measures 24.6 cm tall, while the smallest is 17.2 cm tall. They share the same design. They both have a round, oval-shaped sounding body attached to a hollow circular shank. At the center of the lip is a rectangular panel of wider thickness, possibly indicating the striking point for the musician. A large taotie motif is set to fit a rectangular field that stretches across the full width of the piece; its horns, eyes, nostrils, and ears are cast in relief, but it is laid on an undecorated background, rather unlike those taotie appearing on vessels, which were usually set on a background completely filled with spirals or other creatures. While the central axis that divides the taotie motif into halves on the Anyang vessels usually takes the form of a flange, it is replaced here with a diamond-shaped bulge. The shanks are all inscribed with one word, zhong (fig. 3.3), and the inner sides with the name or names Ya

While most Anyang tombs contained one set of three bronze nao, there were two sets found in the tomb of Chang Zi Kou. See Changzikou 2000, pp. 121-126. In addition, there was only one bronze nao found in Tomb M13 at Baoji (Shaanxi Music 1999, p. 25). That piece was probably copied from the Anyang workshops, and was cast with a loop ring on the shank imitating yongzhong, which were also found in the tomb and were likely to have been copied from the Yangtze workshops. The rare nao at Baoji suggests that the bell would have been held mouth downward, as the early Zhou bronze casters in Shaanxi probably did not quite understand the original functions of bronze nao in the Anyang society; on the other hand, it also seems possible that the Zhou casters attempted to copy and experiment with different bronze bells from the other societies. Bronze nao soon faded out of use, whereas yongzhong were elaborately developed.

8

63

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 3.3. Set of three bronze nao. Anyang period. Inscribed. Tomb M160, Anyang Guojiazhuang, Henan. Chinese Bronzes IV 1998, no. 183.

Figure 3.4. Set of three bronze nao. Anyang period. Inscribed. Tomb M699, Anyang Xiqu (Western District), Henan. Chinese Bronzes IV 1998, no. 182.

Dou Zhi, possibly indicating the tomb’s owner. These characters were also found on ritual vessels contained in the same tomb.9

casters embellished ritual vessels, where they usually distinguished motifs in broad relief from backgrounds made up of dense spirals. On the bells, however, the backgrounds of the taotie were plain.10

In Tomb M699 in the West Zone of Anyang was a set of similar bells (fig. 3.4) cast with the same taotie motifs and with the same word, zhong, inscribed on the shanks, as were those from M160. Such similar castings are do not resemble at all the level of individual care in crafting observed in the Anyang ritual vessels, which were usually unique and distinct from one another due to the use of individual clay moulds. In contrast, these nao appear to have been cast using a less meticulous technique, and display a less elaborate rendering of décor. Indeed, the relatively simple designs of both the bells are strikingly dissimilar to the ways in which the Anyang

9

As the two sets of bells found in Tombs M160 and M699 were so similar, there appears to be a question as to how the Anyang casters, or the patrons of the bells, could have possibly distinguished the bells in each set – in other words, how could they have identified which bells belonged to which set? This is a crucial question, because the sizes of The bronze nao found in other tombs had no décor, but a couple of thin raised lines rendered in two concentric rectangles defining the bell faces (figs 3.5 & 3.6). As those bells were found in the tomb of Fu Hao, which was dated slightly earlier than Tombs M169 and M669, they appear to have been cast earlier than those decorated with taotie motifs (Fu Hao 1980, pp. 100-101). It is unusual that the Anyang casters left the nao unornamented, because nao (excepting the tiny clapper bells) appear only to have been found in large elite tombs. 10

Guojiazhuang 1998, pp. 104-105.

64

Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells

Figure 3.5. Set of three bronze nao. Inscribed. Anyang period. Tomb M5 (Fu Hao), Anyang Xiaotun, Henan. Wu Chao 1999, p. 41.

the bells determined the tones that they were capable of producing. If a set included a ‘wrong’ bell, the musicians could not have produced the tone they necessary join in the music played at a performance. The arrangement of the bells appears to have been entirely dependent on the similarities of the taotie motifs found on the bell faces.11 The Anyang elite seem to have been more concerned with the neatness and harmony suggested by the physical appearance of three bells of graduated sizes than with the musical functions of the bells. Moreover, this lack of actual musical utility suggests that the Anyang casters were unlikely to have performed many experiments to obtain control over the size, thickness, and tunes of the bells. They appear to have been commissioned to cast these instruments, but do not appear to have understood their musical function. Indeed, the simple design of all Anyang nao is puzzling. As can be observed from the finds discovered in the large tomb Ya Chang (Tomb M54, discussed in Chapter Two), ritual vessels were heavily embellished to emphasize the status of their owners. In contrast, the bells of Ya Chang and those of Fu Hao (fig. 3.5) were very plain.12 Their sizes were very modest in comparison with all the bronzes found in the same tombs. Moreover, the designs of bronze nao appear to have remained unaltered throughout the entire Anyang period, as the later pieces found in the tomb of Chang Zi Kou (fig. 3.6) are not in any way different from the nao at Anyang.

Figure 3.6. Two sets of bronze nao. Early Western Zhou period. Tomb of Chang Zi Kou, Luyi Taiqinggong, Henan. Changzikou 2000, colour pls. 63–66.

the question ought to be raised here is: how did the Anyang elite come to develop the tradition of casting bronze bell set? The Origins of Bronze Nao It remains unknown as to where the Anyang casters derived the practice of casting bronze nao. As the Anyang nao have been consistently found in groups of three which can probably be understood as a set of musical instruments, they appear to be the product of a lengthy historical tradition of bell-casting which transpired before the Shang elite were established at Anyang. However, the origin of this tradition remains a source of scholarly debate. The present archaeological evidence suggests that Henan was a possible source of this historical forerunner, either through a bronze nao prototype, or through adaptation of the ling clapper bell. Nevertheless, current theories universally assume that this Erligang prototype was adapted directly by the casters at Anyang, without southern mediation, even though this does not correlate with archaeological evidence of a chronologically sustained period of bell refinement in the south. Similarly, the assumption that musical bells were first established in Henan and simply imitated and expanded by the southerners does not fit either the ritual or technological centrality of music to southern culture, absent in the Anyang societies.

The patrons of bronze nao do not appear to have been particularly concerned with the impressions that these bells would have made upon a ritual audience. As of 2009, seventeen sets of bronze nao were excavated from Anyang. This a small number, when considered in comparison to the thousands of tombs excavated. However, bronze nao were usually buried in the tombs of the great elite which contained large numbers of ritual vessels. While the physical appearance of nao was relatively unimpressive, their association with the great elite suggests that they were likely to have been deemed important. From such,

11 In the case of Tombs M160 and M699, the bells were also distinguished from those found in M160 through additional inscriptions cast on the inner sides of the bells. 12 The bells of Ya Chang are similar to those from M160, decorated with a taotie motif stretched across the bell faces. See Huayuanzhuang 2007, p. 135.

65

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 3.7. Clapper bells (ling) found in different regions of China. Bronze clapper bell. Erlitou period. Erlitou, Henan. Height 8.5 cm; Bronze clapper bells. c. 1200 BC. Guanghan Sanxingdui, Sichuan. Heights 7.35/14 cm; Bronze clapper bell. Late Neolithic period. Taosi, Shaanxi. Height 2.65 cm; Pottery clapper bell. Late Neolithic period. Tianmen Shijiahe, Hubei. Height 5.5 cm. Wu Chao 1999, p. 31 and Xu 2001, pp. 126–127.

Hypothetical Forerunners of the Nao: Zhengzhou Prototypes versus Clapper-Bell Ancestors

Both Bagley and Falkenhausen argue that Zhengzhou was probably the primary source of nao bells cast in both north and south.

Archaeologists have not excavated any bronze bells at Zhengzhou.13 However, as the ritual vessels at Xin’gan consistently refer to the bronze-casting practices at Zhengzhou, Bagley argues that the nao bells at Dayangzhou (fig. 3.8) were probably similarly diffused from Zhengzhou to the south during the Erligang period (c. 1500-c. 1300 BC). Bagley also suggests that the southerners at Xin’gan possibly developed bronze nao by imitating and significantly enlarging bells from the north.14 Falkenhausen reaches the same conclusion in his studies of the motifs of the Xin’gan bronze bells; he argues that the Xin’gan casters were likely to have imitated the prototype nao bells developed Zhengzhou, which he speculates also served as the early forms of those cast at Anyang.15

The tiny clapper bell sof elliptical shape, known as the ling, are also a hypothetical source for the origins of the bronze nao. The earliest bronze ling (fig. 3.7) were cast in the workshops at Erlitou (c. 1900-c. 1500 BC).16 They measure between 8-11 cm tall. These ling were cast with a loop for hanging on the top of the bell, and their sides were usually cast carrying two vertical strips of bronze of unknown purpose. Those bells were sometimes cast with an inner clapper; others contained jade or wooden clappers (fig. 3.7a).17 Although these bells were hung mouth downward and were used primarily for signaling, their unusual elliptical cross-sections appear to have lent their shape to the later bronze nao.18 Falkenhausen argues that this form of bell appears to have been developed into several different genres of bronze bells cast in the Bronze Age societies.19 At Anyang, bronze clapper bells were cast in parallel with bronze nao.

13 In 1974, a single bronze nao of unknown provenience was retrieved from a dump at Zhengzhou. That bell measures 21 cm tall. It was inscribed with the word, she 舌 (probably a clan’s name), and was decorated with thin raised lines similar to those nao found in the tomb of Fu Hao (Henan Music 1996, p. 70). 14 Bagley 2000, pp. 46-47. 15 Falkenhausen 1991, pp. 18-19. On the other hand, Gao Zhixi holds slightly different opinions on the origins of southern bronze nao. Gao considers the southern nao to be possibly derived from those cast at Anyang. He argues that the earliest nao in the south were usually decorated with quasi-taotie motifs, which appear to have been eventually dissolved to form the abstract T-hooks patterns (see below). His suggestion, therefore, provides a slightly later sequence of dates than those suggested by Bagley and Falkenhausen concerning the southern nao. See Gao Zhixi 1993, pp. 45-52 and also Xiang Taochu 2006c, pp. 35-55, which follows the sequence provided in Gao’s work. As the finds at Xin’gan strongly suggest, bronze-casting workshops were likely to have been established before the Anyang period (that is, before c. 1200 BC.) Nao seem to have appeared in southern China before that date, and therefore, are unlikely to have been developed from those cast at Anyang.

Bagley 2000, pp. 46-47. On the other hand, Falkenhausen argues that ling may have also developed into a different bell type known as the bo, which shared similar morphological features, such as a flat rim, and were hung by suspension through a loop at the bell top. Falkenhausen therefore suggests that the Anyang nao were possibly derived from a type known as duo, and the Anyang nao in turn became a prototype for the southern nao. See Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 132-139. 17 At Erlitou, bronze ling were sometimes found bearing impressions of textiles. They occasionally formed part of the attire of the tomb occupants worn at waist level; others were found on the necks of dogs buried in tombs. See Chen Guoliang 2008, pp. 137-139. 18 Bagley 2000, p. 46. 19 Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 129-134. 16

66

Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells

Figure 3.8. Three bronze nao. Transition period, c. 1300–1200 BC. Xin’gan Dayangzhou, Jiangxi. National History Museum 2006, pp. 189, 193; Xin’gan 1997, colour plates 21.

Nevertheless, the finds at the late Neolithic sites appear to paint a very complex picture of the use and distribution of clapper bells. Pottery clapper bells (fig. 3.7c) have been found at Taosi (c. 2000 BC), Shanxi province, in northern China. Moreover, similar pottery bells (fig. 3.7d) were also found in the Neolithic societies established at Tianmen Shijiahe in central Hubei in the mid-Yangtze basins.20 K. C. Chang and Falkenhausen have written extensively in the effort to establish that there were probably frequent interactions and exchange of material culture among the late Neolithic societies now found in the Yellow River and Yangtze River basins.21 Clapper bells appear to have developed in one society and were then borrowed by the others during the third millennium BC.22 Although the Erlitou casters were probably the earliest group to have developed bronze versions of bells, some independent traditions of using bells of elliptical shape appear to have already existed prior bronze casting.

peoples in the early bronze-casting societies must at some point have discovered the utility of these bells for playing music. They suggest that these people were northerners, and that the Yangtze peoples simply enlarged the sizes of musical bells developed previously in Henan and to have eventually produced the large bells which have been discovered. However, this theory does not correlate easily with available archaeological evidence. The theoretical transition is abrupt and the rapid enlargement of the bells is puzzling. Although southern casters, especially those in Hunan, appear quite fond of producing large ritual vessels, enlarging a bell was a complex activity which completely altered the original function of these bells. The musical bells the southern casters produced are so different from any predecessors discovered in the north that it is hard to conceive that they are anything other than the product of an independent southern bell-casting tradition distinct from that of the Anyang people.

Indeed, once bronze bells were introduced at Erlitou, they seem to have soon been diffused to the area of Sanxingdui, whose peoples further developed the form and produced even more embellished clapper bells (fig. 3.7b).23 The finds at Sanxingdui suggest that bronze bells of elliptical shape were likely to have existed in the Yangtze basins prior to the Erligang period.

In the following pages I will review evidence for this theory. I will examine two major types of southern nao, and the ways in which their appearance and burial contexts demonstrate that the southern peoples appear to have been far more concerned with music in their ritual and material culture. While bronze bells seem to have been developed and used independently by both the Shang and the Yangze peoples, complex rituals related to bells and drums appear to be uniquely southern. As a result, the elite of some Yangtze societies appear to have expended significantly more material resources and energy on the casting and technological refinement of bronze musical instruments than did the Shang, making a southern origin for the Anyang nao a feasible possibility.

Transition from Signaling to Musical Bells The process of transition from clapper bells to musical bells is a major gap in scholarly understanding, which remains undocumented by archaeological evidence. Bagley, Falkenhausen, and Gao Zhixi argue that some

Southern Nao and Ritual Culture

Li Chunyi 1996, pp. 84-88. Chang 1986, pp. 234-294; Falkenhausen 2006, pp. 213-234. 22 See the group of pottery clapper bells illustrated in Li Chunyi 1996, p. 85; see also Falkenhausen 2006, pp. 210-212. 23 See the bird-shaped clapper bell from Sanxingdui illustrated in Xu 2001, p.127, and the bells from Jinsha in Jinsha 2005, pp. 35-36. 20 21

A large number of bronze nao have been found in the mid and lower Yangtze basins. They are substantially larger and heavier than those found in the Anyang tombs. 67

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Table 3.2. Bronze nao found at known archaeological sites in Hunan Province, probably c. 1300–c. 1000 BC Entry City no.

Site

No. of nao found

Height (cm)

Weight(kg)

No. of bosses on bell faces

Reference

1

Changsha

Liuyang Pajia

1

44.5

20.7

0

Huang and Cai 1986, pp. 56-7

2

Changsha

Ningxiang (?)

2

45/68

Not reported

0

Gao Zhixi 1960, pp. 57-8

3

Changsha

Ningxiang Hunagcai Ermaodi

1

66.3

79

0

Gao Zhixi 1984a, p. 129

4

Changsha

Ningxiang Laoliangcang Xingchuanwan

5

66.7-70

55.75-71.5

0

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 129

5

Changsha

Ningxiang Laoliangcang Shiguzai

10

36.5-53.5

9.5-31

36

Huang and Wang 1997, pp. 16–19

6

Changsha

Ningxiang Laoliangcang Beifengtan

2 (buried 5 metres apart 84-89 from each other)

109-154

0

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 129

7

Changsha

Ningxiang Tangshan Chenjiawan

1

71.8

85.75

0

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 129

8

Changsha

Ningxiang Yueshanpu 1 Quaner

103.5

221

0

Cheng and Wang 1986, pp. 44–45

9

Changsha

Wangcheng Gaotangling Gaocong

1

48

18.75

0

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 129

10

Changsha

Wanxin Banqiao

1

43.5

10.5

36

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 130

11

Hangyang Fengyang Xiajiashan 1

32

5

36

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 130

12

Xiangtan

Xiangxiang Goubeixiang

1

44

18

0

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 129

13

Xiangtan

Xiangxiang Jinshi Huangmacai

1

39

14.6

36

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 129

14

Yiyang

Yiyang Heshan Qianjiazhou

1

74

90

0

Pan Mouhui 2001, pp. 66–70

15

Yueyang

Huangxiuqiao Feijiahe

1

74

82

0

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 129

16

Zhuzhou

Liling

1

29.8

8.2

36

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 129 Xiong Chuanxin 1987, pp. 19─21

17

Zhuzhou

Piaoshajin

1

39.5

18.2

18

Zhuzhou

Taihu

1

34.5

14.6

36

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 130

19

Zhuzhou

Zhaoling Huangzhu

1

40.5

9.4

36

Gao Zhixi 1984b, p. 129

Zhuzhou

Zhuzhou Huanglong Xinglongcun

1

41.5

11

2

Chen Jianming 2004, p. 21

20

Hubei, Jiangxi, Anhui, Zhejiang, Jiangsu, and Fujian (table 3.3). The forms of the bells suggest that they can probably be divided into two types, and each of which appears to have different geographical associations. Although we are uncertain about in exactly what ways these two types of southern nao are related, their casters appear to have exchanged designs and motifs. Despite regional differences, the diversity, aesthetic detail and advanced technological development of both types speak to the central importance of bells and music in southern ritual, and to dynamic intersocietal exchange focused on bell exhcanges.25

While the bells at Anyang usually came from burial contexts, southern nao were usually found in pits, placed near a river or on a low hill. They were often found individually, with a few important exceptions that will be discussed later. As of present, more than fifty bronze nao have been found to date at known archaeological sites in Hunan province. Most of them were found in the present-day cities, Ningxiang and Xiangtan, near Changsha, the provincial capital (table 3.2).24 Another twenty or so were found in other southern provinces:

24 Most of the nao found in Hunan were published individually (see table 3.2), but those from unknown provenience that are now kept in the Hunan Provincial Museum were published in Gao Zhixi 1984a, pp. 2934 and 128-135.

Gao Zhixi suggests that the Xin’gan bronze nao and the other similar nao found in the lower Yangtze basin were probably the earliest bells cast 25

68

Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells Table 3.3. Bronze nao unearthed from known archaeological sites in southern China (except Hunan province) Entry no.

Province

City

Site

No. of nao found

Height (cm)

Weight (kg)

No. of bosses on bell faces

Reference

1

Fujian

Nanping

Jiangao

1

76.8

100.35

36

Wang Zhenyong 1980, p. 95

2

Hubei

Huangshi

Yangxin

2

27/24

4.7/5.1

2

Hubei Music 1999, p. 93

3

Hubei

Huangzhou

Luotian

1

44.5

15.5

36

Hubei Music 1999, p. 15

4

Hubei

Jiangning

--

1

41.5

13.5

36

Hubei Music 1999, p. 15

3

45.3/43.5/41.4 22.6/19.4/18.1 2

Xin’gan 1997, pp. 80-90

5

Jiangxi

Ji’an

Xin’gan Dayangzhou

*6

Jiangxi

Xinyu

Zhulongshan

1

51

25

36

Xue Rao 1963.8, pp. 416–417

7

Jiangxi

Yichun

Yifeng Tianbaoxiang

1

56

40

0

Hu Shaoren 1985, p.12

*8

Jiangxi

Yichun

Jing’an Linkesuo

1

46

15.5

36

Kaogu 1984.4, p. 375

*9

Jiangxi

Yichun

Wanzai Youchaishan

1

42

12

36

Liu Jian 1984, p. 3

10

Zhejiang

Pan’an

Shenzai

1

27

6.25

36

Zhao Yixin 1987, p. 727

11

Zhejiang

Hangzhou

Yuhang

1

29

Not reported

0

Wang Shilun 1965, p. 5

12

Zhejiang

Huzhou

Changxing

1

51.4

Not reported

36

Zhejiang Changxing 1973, p. 62

13

Zhejiang

Huzhou

Changxing

1

21

32

36

Zhejiang CHangxing 1973, p. 62

* The bells found at Xinyu Zhulongshan, Yichun Wanzai, and Yichun Jing’an in Jiangxi were mistakenly described as yongzhong in the original reports. But none of them has a suspension loop on the shank.

Type One: Xin’gan Nao

As Lin Rui and his team members tested the bells from the tomb of Marquis Yi of Zeng, they found that the bosses on the bell faces probably functioned to shorten the frequency of vibration of the bell when it was sounded, hence emitting a clearer tone.26 While the later nao and yongzhong usually had thirty-six bosses evenly spaced on the bell faces, the nao from Xin’gan had only two. Gao Zhixi and Xiang Taochu argue in support of a northern origin for these bells, contending that the two bosses loosely resemble the eyes of the taotie-animal represented on Shang bronzes, and that the motifs on the whole appear to be a dissolved version of the taotie motifs.27 On the other hand, Falkenhausen suggests that the pair of relief bosses were probably southern innovations, the early versions of the thirty-six bosses found on the later bells.28 What Falkenhausen suggests seems more likely to have been the case, because the bosses on all three Xin’gan nao are rendered in high relief and are evenly spaced on the bell faces. They appear more likely to have been added for practical purposes, rather than in the intention of imitating the taotie.29 As a result of their presence, we can infer that these southern casters were concerned with the quality of the bells as sound-making instruments, and that this

The first type of southern nao was mainly found at Xin’gan and at sites located downstream in the east. The three nao excavated from Xin’gan (fig. 3.8), share the same shape as the Anyang nao, but they are larger and heavier. The nao on the far left in fig. 5 measures 41.5 cm in height and weighs 18.1 kg. This piece has an unusual hexagonal section, but the other two possess elliptical sections, as do the Anyang nao. Its concave lip is slightly inverted, and the striking point at the center is emphasized by some larger thickness. The casters seem to have added many more spirals all over the faces to emphasize the shape of the bell. As in the other two examples, the casters divided the faces of the bell into two rectangular fields defined by intaglio lines, and they fully embellished the bells by means of a maze of loose spirals. The level of ornamentation on these bells appears to indicate that they are of far greater ritual importance than those cast at Anyang, which were plain and simple, lacking in careful craftsman or attention to detail.

in the south, as they appear closer to the shape of those cast at Anyang, having no supporting collar (xuan) cast underneath the resonating body, which was a feature of yongzhong (Gao Zhixi 1993, pp. 45-52). See also Xiang Taochu 2006c, pp. 35-51, which substantially expounds upon Gao’s ideas. Nonetheless, it is an assumption to consider the bronze nao from the Yangtze areas to have originated from Anyang or from the north, as discussed in the previous section. The two different southern nao that I shall describe below may have been contemporary, cast in parallel in the workshops of different regions.

Lin Rui 1980, pp. 22-23. Gao Zhixi 1993, p. 45-47 and Xiang Taochu 2006c, pp. 35-39. 28 Falkenhausen 1991, pp. 16-17. 29 See, in particular, bell XDM: 66. That bell was decorated with patterns probably borrowed from textiles and yet also bears a pair of bosses standing out from this background. These bosses seem unlikely to have been related to the taotie. 26 27

69

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC suggest the probability that bells of different designs were collected from different sources rather than cast together. As a result, we can probably establish from bronze nao some connection between the societies at Xin’gan and those societies further east. The relief lines and circlets on fig. 3.8 from Xin’gan are similar to one of the two pieces discovered in Yangxin in Hubei (fig. 3.10), and also to those on a larger piece found at Qianshan in Anhui (fig. 3.10).32 The second nao from Yangxin (fig. 3.10) featuring two bosses against what resembles a geometric version of the taotie is similar to the one found at Yuhang in Zhejiang (fig. 3.10) near the coast, except the Yuhang piece features more circlets in the background.33 These finds suggest that the elite of those societies in the mid and lower Yangtze basins appear to have circulated and exchanged bronze nao cast in different workshops. These connections and exchanges were likely to have formed some sort of bonds between the southern elite. Moreover, the exchanges suggest that these southerners were likely to have shared similar ritual practices that required the use of large bronze nao. These distinct peoples were, therefore, probably connected by the fact that they shared similar ideas about music and ritual. In contrast, we cannot infer similar social interactions from the material contexts of bronzes bells cast and used by the elite at Anyang. In the north, bronze nao appear to have only been intended to signal the status of their patrons, rather to indicate connection with peoples from outside that society. The Shang elite seem extremely unlikely to have taken part in this kind of network of contacts established in the south.

Figure 3.9. Bronze bo. Transition period, c. 1300–1200 BC. Xin’gan Dayangzhou, Jiangxi. Xin’gan 1997, colour plate 22.

method of bell-casting operated independently from the northern traditions. Most southern bells were buried individually, in pits, which, like certain southern ritual vessels, were usually associated with hills or rivers. The bronze nao from Xin’gan are one of the rare examples in southern China in which more than one bell was buried together.30 Those three bells all look very different (figs. 3.8 and 3.9), contrasting with those found at Anyang, where bronze nao of different sizes were probably cast together to make up a set (fig. 3.3). Considering the strikingly dissimilar decorative patterns on the three nao from Xin’gan, Falkenhausen suggests that they were probably produced by different workshops, and possibly also at different times.31 The bells at Xin’gan appear to have been collected to express wealth and wide ownership. The variety of designs echo the Xin’gan collections of ritual vessels, which were also very different from one another. Indeed, the three examples from Xin’gan

Type Two: Xiang River Nao The second type of southern nao (fig. 3.11) is of even larger size and weight. A number of similar bells of different sizes have been found at various places at Ningxiang, Liuyang, Wancheng, Xiangtan, and Yiyang. These sites are intensively distributed in the lower reaches of the Xiang River, south of Lake Dongting. The bronze nao discovered at these sites (fig. 3.11) measure about 50 cm tall, and weigh 50 kg each, on average. A nao from Ningxiang Yueshanpu, is so far the largest piece found. It is 103.5cm tall, and weighs 221kg.34 It is probable that for this reason a collar, known as the xuan, was added on the round shank near the bottom of the resonating body of this bell type, most likely to facilitate the mounting of the bell’s extraordinarily heavy weight.35 The décor of type two southern nao bells is very similar. Falkenhausen offers a precise description:

Those three bells were buried with a large bell called the bo, which was a different bell type cast mouth downward with a loop on the top for hanging. The earliest bronze bo were probably cast in the areas of Hunan and Jiangxi. The tonal tests carried out on the bo from Hunan suggest that the bo produced a rather dull and short tone, quite unlike the sharp and clear tones produced by nao or yongzhong (Hunan Music 1999, pp. 52-59). The functions of bronze bo remain unclear, although the set of bells found in the tomb of the Marquis of Yi of Zeng included one bronze bo (sent as a gift from the State of Chu, as inscribed), hung on the rack together with sixty-four yongzong. Falkenhausen argues that the bo were probably an enlarged version of bronze clapper bells, ling, intended for giving signals. But the exact purpose and timing for striking is not known. (Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 168-174). The number of bronze bo found to date is much smaller than that of bronze nao; however, bo were usually heavily embellished with openwork motifs of birds and tigers, as was from the bo found at Xin’gan. It appears to be a distinctively southern feature that the elite used two types of bells which were held in different directions: nao were held mouth upward, while the bo downward. For further literature on bronze bo from the south, see Gao Zhixi 1986, pp. 209-214, 109. 31 Falkenhausen 1991, pp. 16-18. 30

‘The eyes are separated from the surrounding parts of the face, which may be described as a highly abstracted configuration of molded ridges. The broad central ridge (“nose”) has a fork-shaped top (“forehead”) and ends 32 33 34 35

70

Xian Bo 1981, p. 93.; Anhui 1987, pl. no. 11. Falkenhausen 1993b, p. 146. Shanghai Museum 2000, pp. 16-17. Falkenhausen 1993b, p. 142.

Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells

Figure 3.10. Two bronze nao. Probably Transition period, c. 1300–1200 BC. Huangshi Yangxin, Hubei. Xian Bo 1981, p. 93. Bronze nao. Probably Transition period, c. 1300–1200 BC. Yuhang, Zhejiang. Author’s photograph.

motifs rendered in relief and their backgrounds. In Hunan, the bronze nao carry the T-hooked patterns in broad relief, but the backgrounds remain plain.37 On the other hand, the T-hooked patterns of the Hunan nao were likely to have been borrowed from the workshops at Xin’gan and from those located further east.38 The Hunan casters appear to

in two hooked bends at the bottom (“muzzle”). Two symmetrical T-shaped “cheeks” branch off in the center of the central ridge; the arms of the T in turn branch out into hooked bends filling the space around the eyes and forming the “fangs” in the lower portion of the decoration panel. One wonders about the iconographic significance of this motif and whether it was even still perceived as a mask.’36

A number of bronze vessels from Hunan also show close connections with Anyang, Bagley 1999, pp. 208-212. 38 Colin MacKenzie argues that the T-hooked patterns were probably borrowed from textiles, as suggested by the attire seen on some small sculptural figures found in the Anyang tombs (MacKenzie 1999). Bagley comments that the T-hooked patterns ‘…were never of more than secondary importance [as motifs on northern bronze vessels], [but] the T-hooked pattern never quite went out of use. It reappears on Western Zhou vessels, serves as a background on Eastern Zhou bronze mirrors, and turns up later still as a decorative border on one of the coffins from Han tomb no. 1 at Mawangdui.’, Bagley 1987, pp. 321-323. Indeed, the T-hooks appear rather attached to the southern societies. The closest representation is found on a painted cloth depicting what is believed to be 37

On the basis of these descriptions, it appears that the Hunan nao were decorated by means of an unusual combination of bronze-casting practices. The ‘moulded ridges’ probably originated in the Anyang workshops: Bagley describes the Anyang bronzes as displaying clear separation between

36 The account is based on the Yueshanpu nao, Falkenhausen 1993, p. 143.

71

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 3.11. A group of bronze nao (the fifth is not shown here) found in 1959 at Ningxiang Laoliangcang Shiguzai, Hunan. Probably Anyang period. Chen Jianming 2004, pp. 18–19 and Gao Zhixi 1984b, plates 5–6.

Funan and those upon many bronze vessels from Xin’gan. Elephants are also a southern feature, as there have already been many examples of vessels cast in the shape of elephants (fig. 1.23) discovered at Liling.39 Elephants were cast on the stand of the life-sized figure from Sanxingdui (fig. 1.26); and there, large numbers of elephant tusks were also found.40 Despite the popularity of animal motifs in the south, it seems rather unusual that these were not the primary motifs used on bronze bells. The bell faces were usually covered with T-hooks, or bosses, when these bells

have established intricate relationships with the casters at Anyang and with some other peoples in the south. However, in terms of size, the nao cast in the Hunan workshops exceed all others. Another essential feature of the Hunan nao is the representation of tigers and elephants. These animals are often depicted in profile and placed near the lip of the bell (details of fig. 3.11). Tigers can often be found on many southern bronzes, such as that of the zun discovered at the afterlife of the deceased of Tomb no. 1 at Mawangdui (dated to about 186 BC). In addition to the presence of a couple of T-shaped blocks, a yongzhong (in the colour green) is painted in the centre of the cloth, possibly defining an imagined boundary between heaven and the present world. Moreover, the cloth itself takes the shape of a T. The meaning of the representation is now lost, but it seems that of bronze bells, along with some other religious symbols, in use in antiquity may have lingered, probably in the areas of Hubei and Hunan.

Chinese Bronzes IV 1998, no. 130. See Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 162-164 and 415-417. The elephant tusks found at Sanxingdui and Jinsha were usually original, showing no signs of craftsmanship. They measure between 80 and 120 cm long. Thirteen elephant tusks were found in pit no. 1 at Sanxingdui and sixty-seven were in pit no. 2. The exact numbers of tusks found at Jinsha have not been published. 39 40

72

Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells which provide evidence for the refined musical utility, and corresponding musical purpose, of southern bells, in striking contrast to the inferior utility and apparent absence of musical purpose in the Anyang bells.

came to be in use. The animals were usually hidden in the corners or on the collar, underneath the resonating bodies. Ornaments are useful in shaping the ways people look at an object.41 The Shang casters used taotie to convey ideas about their pantheon, while the Hunan casters appear to have applied ornamentation to convey ritual concepts which were very different. As suggested by the archaeological contexts and designs of the nao, we can make a list of some elements these indicate were probably included in the rituals performed in Hunan. There were hills and rivers, which were probably the setting; soundmaking instruments, including bells and drums; bronze, which was a shiny and valuable material representing the advanced technology of the society; T-hooked motifs or textiles, which must have had an important symbolic function, now lost; and finally, representations of animals, namely, tigers and elephants. The symbolic meanings of these representations are still a mystery. The burial of bronze bells was a unique practice which most probably originated in the Hunan societies. The Hunan elite possibly intended to communicate with spirits, who could have been attentive to sound rather than to the nourishment of food and drink.

The Musical Set from Ningxiang Laoliangcang Shiguzai In 1993 the ten bells were found at Ningxiang Laoliangcang Shiguzai. Fig 1.22 illustrates nine of the ten bells found. Their sizes are substantial. Their heights range between 36.5-53.5 cm; and their total weights measure approximately 230 kg.43 The tenth bell looks slightly different (fig. 1.17). It was perhaps cast slightly earlier, because it lacks the ubiquitous bosses on the bell faces, which were features of the other nine bells and of later yongzhong. When displayed together, these ten bells from Shiguzai were no less substantial than those found in the tomb of the Marquis Yi of Zeng (fig. 3.1). As can be inferred from the finds in the tomb of the Marquis, yongzhong formed part of a large ensemble of musical instruments. The sixty-five bells of the Marquis were found together with organs, zithers, flutes, panpipes, drums, and a set of forty-one stone chimes (fig. 3.2).44 Due to the inscriptions found on the bells of the Marquis, we know that the bells could have been played by striking the center of the lip, or by striking the sides of the lip to obtain a higher note. Bells of elliptical shape are able to produce two different tones.45

Of all nao found in southern China, those from Xin’gan appear to be the most unusual. Xin’gan was probably the only southern site of the Shang period in which ritual vessels and bells were buried together. While the peoples in Hunan and those living in the lower Yangtze basins shared the same practices of burying bronze bells separately from other objects, the people at Xin’gan seem to have intended to incorporate the rituals that used bronze bells into ritual practices borrowed from the north (if the bronze bells and vessels were indeed intended to be used together for ritual purposes). The other archaeological finds suggest to us that such borrowing and attempts to use ritual vessels locally did not seem to have been successful.

Bronze yongzhong do not seem to have been independently sounding musical instruments, and were struck in unison with others. Bronze nao probably served a similar musical purpose, that of emphasizing certain notes of a melody played by other musicians. On the nao from Shiguzai, motifs of tigers or elephants were sometimes found in the center or on the sides near the lip; their positions appear to have coincided with the ‘strike points’ given in inscriptions on later bells (details of figs. 1.22 and 3.11).46 The finds at Shiguzai suggest that the Yangtze nao could have originally been used in a group defined by the inclusion of certain pieces, and that it was adherence to ritual practices which ensured that the Yangtze peoples dispersed the bells

The Musical Tones of Nao and the Notion of a Bell Set While it is generally agreed that nao were probably early forms of yongzhong, created for the purpose of playing court music, there are doubts as to whether nao were originally intended to be musical instruments. As southern nao were usually found individually, Gao Zhixi and Falkenhausen suggest that these bells were probably intended for social purposes, such as emitting signals to gather the people of the community. Much of the argument for the northern origins of nao bells rests on this supposition that southern bells did not originally serve musical purposes.42 This chapter has previously discussed the central significance of bells and music in southern ritual culture. Now, I examine a set of finds from Ningxiang Laoliangcang Shiguzai,

Huang and Wang 1997, pp. 16-27. See the concise descriptions and illustrations of the musical instruments found in the tomb in So 2000, pp. 13-45. 45 On the two-tone feature of the nao and yongzhong, see the experiments performed and reported by Ma Chengyuan in 2002, pp. 514-533 (which reprinted from the publication made in 1981); see also Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 80-96. 46 On the nao from both Anyang and southern regions, the ‘strike point’ was probably indicated by a small rectangular panel in the center of the bell lip. This panel usually has a wider thickness. On the nao from Hunan, such a ‘strike point or points’ were probably indicated by an animal motif. See, for example, the nao from Ningxiang Laoliangcang. The Laoliangcang examples are significant, because the position of the motifs on the bell lips suggest that these bells were probably played by either striking at the center or at the sides, indicating that the Hunan musicians appear to have been aware of the relationship between the shape of the bell and the two tones that it can supply. This is a crucial point suggesting that both bell-casting and bell music were probably more advanced in Hunan than in the north. 43 44

Rawson 1993a, pp. 67-78. Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 138-145; see also Bagley 2000, pp. 46-47. Bagley argues that the bells were transformed from signalling bells to musical instruments, and he suggests that this transformation possibly took place in southern China. 41 42

73

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC The three nao from Tomb M160 give the tunes #D5+31, #F5+2, and #C6+29 respectively. The largest two bells are a minor third apart, and they give a #D and a #F on the octave above that of the middle C of a modern piano. However, the smallest bell gives a #C on the next higher octave. The other Anyang bells also display varying sizes of musical intervals. As Falkenhausen remarks,

and buried them individually. Nevertheless, the question remains: can we be certain that these bells were used in musical performances? It is clarifying at this point to contrast southern nao with their Anyang counterparts. As the Anyang nao were usually found in a group of three bells of varying sizes, their physical appearance suggests that they were intended to provide different notes on a chromatic scale. Nevertheless, tonal test results reveal that the Anyang nao were surprisingly poor in terms of serving a musical purpose; their tunes lacked regularity. Table 3.4 lists the tunes obtained from ten sets of Anyang nao:47

‘They [the Anyang nao] fail to show a coherent pattern: no two chimes are alike, and no preference for any interval between successive tones can be detected… all tones fall within the range of a single octave… producing any sort of regular tonal pattern on bellchimes was apparently not yet a high priority for the Shang bell-casters. Perhaps, at that time, the attractive novelty consisted merely in the idea of having metallic objects “sing” at different pitches.’ 49

Table 3.4. A list of bronze nao set, as well as the tunes of each bell, found in the tombs at Anyang No

Tomb

Bronze nao

Tunes

Remarks

G5 A5 C6 E6 (?) G6

839-4 was too decayed to give a clear tune

1

Anyang Xiaotun M5 (Fu Hao)

839-1 839-2 839-3 839-4 839-5

2

Anyang Qijiazhuang M269

M269: 45 F5 +5 M269: 46 A5 -45 M269: 47 D6 -19

3

Anyang Dasikungcun M51

M51: 5 M51: 6 M51: 7

D5 -36 #G5 -28 #A5 +47

4

Anyang Western Destrict M699

M699: 4 M699: 4 M699: 4

B4+52 #F5+13 B5+50

5

Anyang Western Destrict M765

M765: 6 M765: 5 M765: 4

#D5 -5 #F5 -23 A5 -33

6

M288: 1A D5 +25 Anyang Dasikung M288: 1B E5 -40 M288 M288: 1C G5+6

7

M312:10 Anyang Dasikung M312: 9 M312 M312: 8

E5 -23 #G5 -38 #C5 -21

8

M663: 4 Anyang Dasikung M663: 1 M663 M663: 2

n/a E5 +47 C6+23

9

Anyang Guojiazhuang M160

M160: 41 #D5 +31 M160: 23 #F5 +2 M160: 22 #C6 +29

Anyang Gaoluozhuang M8

Large Small

10

#F5 -23 F6 -12

These ten bell sets were found in tombs of different dates, spanning from the beginning of the Anyang period, c. 1200 BC, to the time of the Zhou conquest in c. 1045 BC. The Anyang casters did not improve the bells’ capacity to produce melodies during this timeframe. This leaves us with questions as to why the Anyang casters continued to produce sets of three bells, if these bells could not possibly have been used together during a performance. Despite the tonal irregularity of the Anyang nao, the notion of a set is highly significant, because the later Western Zhou yongzhong appear to have inherited the practice of casting a bell set of three pieces (fig. 3.13 and compare with figs. 3.3 and 3.4). Given the fully developed form of the Anyang nao, the tradition of casting a set of three is likely to have taken shape in pre-Anyang times. It also seems likely that this tradition was developed elsewhere and was adopted by the Anyang casters, who displayed little knowledge about bell-casting. On the other hand, the ten nao excavated from Ningxiang Laoliangcang (fig. 3.12) display some musical coherence. Also taking into consideration the side tones of the Ningxiang nao, Bagley rearranges the sequence of the bells, and presents the tonal test results as in Table 3.5, in which the bolded number of nao indicates the ‘main tone’ of the bell, while the bracketed number the ‘side tone’:

M663 was broken.

by striking at the corner of the bell near the lip. Those tunes do not show regularity either. Chen Quanyou argues that the ‘side tunes’ were probably feature of later bells, and that the Anyang nao were mainly played by striking at the center of the bell lip. For further discussions of the two-tone feature of bronze bells, see the above notes. 49 Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 228-230. Falkenhausen makes this remark based on the test results obtained from five sets of Anyang nao. More tonal test results were made available later and published in Zhongguo Yinyue Wenwu Daxi, Henan Quan 中國音樂文物大系．河南卷 (The Compendium of Chinese Musical Cultural Relics, Zhengzhou: Daxiang Press, 1996). Chen Quanyou reviews the test results of twelve sets of Anyang nao, and comes to a similar conclusion that the tunes of the Anyang nao hardly display persistent regularity. See Chen Quanyou 2005, pp. 18-24.

The third bell is lost.

This table is reproduced after Chen Quanyou 2005, pp. 1920.48 Chen Quanyou 2005, pp. 19-20. The tunes listed here refers to the ‘main tunes’ in the table prepared by Chen Quanyou. The Chinese researchers also tested for ‘side tunes’

47 48

74

Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells

Figure 3.12. A group of ten bronze nao. Probably Anyang period. Changsha Ningxiang Laoliangcang Shiguzai, Hunan. Shanghai Museum 2000, p. 18–20. Table 3.5. The pitch taken from each of the ten bells excavated from Ningxiang Laoliangcang Shiguzai Nao number*

Main tone

Side tone

(6)

830

(10) 10

Pitch (100 cents = 1 semi-tone; cents above C4) 825

G#

800

(7)

745

(9)

730

(8)

625

9

610

8

F#

600

7

555

(5)

535

6

485

(4)

E

400

5

390

4

310

3

D#

300

(1)

235

(2)

D

2 1

200 130

C#

100

* The size of the bell corresponds to the number given in ascending order: bell 1 is the smallest, while bell 9 is the largest..50

This data demonstrates two important points: first, all the tunes obtained fall on the octave of the middle C of a modern piano; second, these bells supply as many as five different pitches on the same chromatic scale. These bells 50

Figure 3.13. Early bronze yongzhong. Late Anyang and early Western Zhou periods. A single yongzhong found at Liuyang Chengtan, Hunan. Gao Zhixi 1984a, pl. 7. A set of yongzhong found at Tomb M1, Baoji Ruijiazhuang, Shaanxi. Rawson 1990, p. 746.

Bagley 2004, p. 82 (Table 5).

75

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC suggest to us that the Hunan bell casters appear to have exercised far greater control over the musical intervals of the bell tunes than did the Anyang casters.

lip remains thickened and decorated with another set of spirals, while the sides of the lip carry representations of crouching tigers with their mouths open.

Robert Bagley argues that the Ningxiang bells were probably brought together, not by means of casting as were those at Anyang, but through collection and assemblage over time, as musicians hunted for the right pieces which could supply desirable tones.51 In every case, there is acoustic variation, even between the bells of the same tone. It appears, as Bagley suggests, that the Ningxiang musicians may have retained some old pieces in the set, even after they found substitutes which could supply more accurate tones, as a large set would enhance the overall visual presentation of the bells. If this hypothesis is valid, then the size of a bell set could have been, in theory, varied.

Falkenhausen notes that the adoption of the thirty-six bosses appears to have coincided with a remarkable reduction in the size of the southern bells. While the average height of the bronze nao which bore T-hooked designs is between 40 and 100 cm, those of the nao which carry thirty-bosses were reduced to 30-40 cm in average.52 Moreover, the shape of the resonating body was also altered. They appear more elongated in proportion to the width of the bell. Also, the xuan of the second type of southern nao appears on nearly all bells which carry thirtysix bosses. It is possible, as Falkenhausen argues, that the southern bell-casters sought to control the size and weight of these bells so that they could adjust the musical tones more accurately.53

Between 13th and 11th century BC, bell-casting at the Anyang workshops and at those in the Yangtze basins seems to have followed very different paths of development. At Anyang, bells were frequently cast into sets of regular size, while in the south a set was probably carefully gathered on the basis of acoustic concerns. At present, the musical qualities of bells are judged on the basis of the accuracy of the tones they produce, and also, in case of a set, of the regularity in the tonal intervals between successive bells. In these respects, the southern nao are obviously superior to the northern pieces. Further, the Ningxiang casters may have even been more aggressively productive (and concerned with the ritual significance of bells) than those in Jiangxi, Anhui, and the coastal provinces, because they produced bells in much larger size, and, more remarkably, on far greater scale. Thus, it seems that the bell-casting industries in the south must have been very active and enormously successful. Absence of evidence for a corresponding industry in the north, in combination with the Shang nao’s simplistic design and lack of musical utility, makes it highly unlikely that the southern achievements could have hardly been indebted to the Anyang traditions.

In their modern replication of the set of sixty-four yongzhong found in the tomb of the Marquis Yi of Zeng, Lin Rui and his team members found that the bulging bosses on the bell surfaces could stabilize the wavelength when the bell was struck.54 In other words, the bosses were probably added with the intention of adjusting the acoustics. We, however, still do not understand why the southern nao were consistently cast with thirty-six bosses. If indeed the pair of bosses seen on the nao from Xin’gan (fig. 3.8) was a prelude to this kind of acoustic development, there appears to have been a huge gap in bellcasting for which we still lack archaeological evidence. As the earliest example probably originated in Ningxiang and Xiangtan, the creation of the thirty-six bosses may perhaps be attributed to the workshops in northern Hunan.55 Soon after the creation of the thirty-six bosses, the division between type one and type two of the southern nao became blurred, and hybrids of both types also appeared.56 An example from Anji, Zhejiang measures 32 cm in height. It is a xuan-less piece that retains the shape and size of the type one bells, but the surfaces are covered by eighteen point-ended bosses. Similarly, another xuanless nao with thirty-six bosses was also found, not in

The Thirty-Six Bosses A milestone in this lengthy and active development of southern bell-casting was the creation of the thirty-six bosses, afterwards a standard design feature of nearly all bells produced in later ages. Fig. 1.22 is again an example from Ningxiang Laoliangcang, belonging to the set of ten bells discussed above. Here the T-hooked patterns, in broad relief on any earlier Ningxiang bell face, were replaced with eighteen bosses in spiral designs. The intaglio lines divide the bell surface into two rectangular panels, as in the decorative patterns on the type one southern nao, and inside each panel nine bosses are evenly spread out to form three rows. Loose spirals fill up the space between the bosses; they also fully cover the rest of the bell surface and extend to the shank and the xuan, like those found on the previous Ningxiang bells. In addition, the center of the

51

Indeed, this seems to have affected the Ningxiang manufacture most prominently. See Falkenhausen 1993b, p. 149. 53 Falkenhausen 1993b, p. 151. 54 Lin Rui 1980, pp. 25-30. 55 It is interesting to note that the Hunan nao mostly came from Ningxiang, but soon after the thirty-six bosses were created, more pieces were discovered from the areas of Xiangxiang and Zhuzhou, about 6 km to the south of Ningxiang. It is, of course, difficult to draw concrete conclusions about this subtle shift of production centres, although it was possibly a result of the shift in the location of copper sources. 56 Falkenhausen suggests that the southern nao of type one may belong to a slightly earlier period than those in type two, on the grounds that the xuan found on yongzhong was developed in the latter type (Falkenhausen 1993: 145-149). This seems possible, but the later examples from Zhejiang, Fujian, Hubei, and Jiangxi demonstrate that the local bell-casting workshops do not seem to have been terminated, while the workshops in northern Hunan produced some exceptional large pieces with the xuan added to support the weight of the bells. Therefore, interactions between both workshops may have still taken place even after the thirty-six bosses were created as a standard design. 52

Bagley 2004, pp. 74-83.

76

Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells obvious to the musicians.64 Thus, the inherited southern characteristics of the yongzhong are further evidence that the Yangze peoples were very concerned about the acoustic aspect of the bells.

the coastal regions or Jiangxi, but at Xiangxiang Jinshi Huangmacai in Hunan.57 That piece measures 39 cm in height and it weighs 14.65 kg. The Hunan workshops also borrowed the two-bosses design deriving from the east and produced an enlarged version, measuring 66.3 cm in height and weighing 79 kg, as shown in fig. 9b, which was found at Ningxiang Sanmoudi.58 The seven rows of neatly and evenly drawn spirals in intaglio lines suggest that this piece was probably produced later than the other conventional Ningxiang examples decorated with broad relief T-hooked patterns (fig. 3.11).59 Meanwhile, the workshops in the coastal provinces also borrowed the traits of the Hunan nao. A couple of nao found at Huzhou Changxin in Zhejiang are indistinguishable from the Ningxiang Sanmoudi and Xiangxiang examples, but the pottery molds found together with the Changxin pieces show that they were of local manufacture.60 Another similar example was also found at Nanping Jian’ao in Fujian.61 Interactions between the Hunan and the eastern workshops appears to have been on the rise. The shape and design of the type one nao in southern China gradually gave way to modifications derived from Hunan.62

Fig. 3.13a illustrates an example from Liuyang Chengtan in Hunan.65 The bosses are lengthened, and have blunt ends. In place of the intaglio lines and spirals that used to surround the bosses, small studs are evenly and densely spread out in the form of lines around the bosses. Up to this point, several prominent changes in bell designs have been discussed, but the single element which remained unchanged in the southern bells was their fashion of burial – all were similarly deposited in pits, displaying no other archaeological features. As previously discussed, it seems likely that the Hunan bells, as were other bells in southern China, were once put together to form a set and were then dispersed to be buried individually at different locations which tended to be very close to one another. These locations ranged from several meters to a few kilometers apart. In contrast, this practice is not found in the north, where bells always formed parts of the tomb furnishings. The single exception to this rule are a set of three yongzhong, the designs of which are similar to that of fig. 3.13b from Baoji, discovered at Pingdingshan in southern Henan.66

Yongzhong The transition from nao to yongzhong is not well understood, although both types differ only in the way they were mounted: nao stood on the shank, while yongzhong were mounted the other way up, with the mouth facing downwards, hung from a frame by means of a cord through a suspension loop cast on the shank. Nevertheless, it is generally agreed that transition took place in the south, possibly in northern Hunan, because more than ten early examples of yongzhong have been found in modern Changsha and Xiangtan.63 Falkenhausen points out that a suspended yongzhong is hung obliquely, and that this would certainly make the striking points of the bell more

The yongzhong spread northward in the early to middle Western Zhou.67 They were usually produced in the form of a set of three, as were the Anyang nao, and, more remarkably, the first sets appeared in the tombs of the Lords of Yu at Baoji, which lies to the west of the royal centers of the Zhou near Xi’an. They were probably imports from Hunan. Baoji was a strategic location at the western end of the Wei River which connects to the western borders of the Zhou royal domains.68 Since antiquity, travel between central Shaanxi and the strip of low lands in Hanzhong on the southern side of the Mountains Qin, and the Chengdu Basin in eastern Sichuan has been largely made through Baoji. It is also through Baoji and the east-west running Han River in Hanzhong that the connection with the middle Yangtze regions. Along with the southern sets of

This piece was published in Gao Zhixi 1984, p. 130. Another strikingly similar piece as the Ningxiang Huangcai example belongs to the collection of Jan Kleijkamp and was discussed in Kane 1974/75, pp. 89-90. 59 Falkenhausen 1993b, p. 151. 60 The Changxin examples were found a few meters apart from each other. The larger piece, measuring 51.4 cm in height, was found in 1960, while the smaller one, which is 21 cm in height, was discovered in 1973. Their strikingly similar designs suggest that they probably belonged to the same set before their burial, for which the purpose is still unknown, Zhejiang Changxing 1960, p. 48 and Zhejiang Changxing 1973, p. 62. 61 Fujian Jian’ao 1980, p. 95. 62 In Hubei a peculiar type of nao with thirty-six bosses was possibly developed and an example was found at Luotian. Measuring 44.5 cm in height and weighing 15.5 kg, this piece has an elongated resonating body and a comparably short shank (14.5 cm) with a small, rather featureless, xuan. More remarkably, the bell surfaces only carry eighteen flat-ended bosses, and are entirely free of the spirals which are conspicuous on all southern nao. Further, they also bear a human face with eyes set in circular hollows and a short, blunt nose – features which are very similar to the three-dimensional bell from Xin’gan, was depicted in the center near the lip. The striking point of the bell was not distinguished by means of a thickened section. The disproportionate body and the simple design of this piece suggest that it was probably a local imitation of the bells further south. A couple of similar examples were found in Xi’an, and they probably came from the Hubei regions. However, the production of this type of nao does not seem to have lasted very long. 63 Gao Zhixi 1984a, pp. 29-34; see also Falkenhausen 1993, pp. 153-157. 57 58

Falkenhausen also argues that in conjunction with the invention of a suspension loop, the southern bell-casters may have also discovered the side tone of the bell. It was around this time that the southern bells were engaged in musical performance, 1993b, pp. 153-154. The set of ten nao from Ningxiang Laoliangcang discussed above, however, demonstrate that the nao in Hunan had very probably served as musical instruments at much earlier times. 65 Another type of yongzhong, possibly earlier than the example shown in fig. X, retains some spiral motifs which separate the rows of bosses. The whole design appears to have become more standardized and stylized, and a vertical strip of space between the two rectangular panels on the bell faces became more prominent. This is the area later known as the zhuan-jian (the middle of the zhuan, i.e. the rectangular panels) where the inscriptions on the late Western Zhou bells were placed. For more details, see Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 151-153. 66 Henan Music 1996, p. 79. 67 This has been discussed extensively in Kane 1974/75, p. 92, Gao Zhixi 1993, pp. 52-53, Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 159-162, and Rawson 1999, pp. 427-430. 68 Jessica Rawson suggests that it is from the west that the southern features began to diffuse eastward to the rest of the Zhou domains, Rawson 1999, pp. 422-423. 64

77

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Anyang nao, why did the southerners not copy a set of three with uniform decorations like those on the Shang bells? And why did the Anyang elite members not carry on and refine the tradition of bell-using as they did for other traditions inherited from Zhengzhou? It is entirely possible, but not frequently considered, that the pre-Anyang pieces were more individual and diverse as were the southern nao. What if these predecessors did resemble the diverse southern nao? If that was the case, where did the practice of casting a set of three bells at Anyang come from?

yongzhong, several items displaying recognizable southern traits were also included in the tomb furnishings of the Zhou leaders: animal-shaped vessels, bronze versions of ceramic wares, and three-dimensional human-like figures with large grasping hands.69 The dates of the Baoji tombs range from the early to the middle Western Zhou – that is, from approximately the reign of the King Zhao (c. 977/75957 BC) to the reign King Mu (956- 918 BC). In this period of contact with the south, the yongzhong was imitated in the north, and was soon absorbed into the Zhou ritual paraphernalia. Although the ritual practices in association with the bells in southern China were not necessarily also adopted by the Zhou elite, it is certain that the southern bell-casting technology and skill in the adjustment of the musical tones in bronze pieces must have contributed significantly to the achievements of the Zhou bronzecasting workshops.

One response to these questions is to posit a southern development for the nao bells. Apart from similarity in bronze-casting techniques, and the presence of the taotie and spiral motifs, the majority of other material indicators point to a southern origin. It could be argued that local casters experimented with making bells of different sizes and shapes, assembling different pieces to form a musical set, inventing bosses to steady the bell face, and eventually succeeded in casting a set with uniform design and of graduating sizes. Although the Anyang nao demonstrate uniformity and conformity in appearance, a process of bell development appears to be entirely absent in Shang workshops.72 Thus, it makes more sense to understand the Anyang nao as an exotic type, or a type that was inspired by an exotic source, as were some other items in the Henan tombs.73 The bells may have been precious in themselves for their rarity and for their foreign connections. Although they were cast locally, they possessed a weaker attachment to Anyang traditions.

Reconsidering Bronze Bells Using Rawson’s Three Level Model Having reviewed the current archaeological evidence concerning the origins of southern and northern nao, I will now frame my conclusions using Rawson’s three-level model of material analysis. Physical Comparisons and Reversed Contribution from South to North Since the 1980s, Gao Zhixi, Robert Bagley and Lothar von Falkenhausen have carried out extensive research into the nao. 70 They agree that the southern examples were probably borrowed from the north: Gao argues that the Anyang nao were ancestors of the southern pieces, while Bagley and Falkenhausen argue that some kind of Erligang (pre-Anyang) manufacture, yet to be discovered, must have provided the prototypical form for the southern bell-casting workshops.71 The latter opinions appear more feasible, because the low-relief lines against a spiral background appearing on the early southern nao, such as those from Xin’gan and Yangxin, were features belonging to the pre-Anyang period.

The three bells found in Tomb M51 (fig. 3.14; compare with 3.8 and 1.22) at Anyang Dasikungcun are particularly interesting as evidence in support of this theory, because they lack the taotie motifs found on the other bells cast at Anyang. The tomb was dated to the Yinxu IV phase, which took place at the end of the Anyang period. Those bells display two faint rectangular panels drawn in thin, raised lines. The bells are otherwise plain and simple. However, these designs appear to refer again to the bells cast in the southern workshops, at which the casters would have either decorated the bell faces with dense spirals, circlets, and T-hooked patterns, or thirty-six bosses evenly distributed between the two rectangular panels. The bells from Tomb M51 appear to represent the bells cast in the south, even though they were cast in greatly simplified versions.

For explanation as to why the appearance and the contexts of the Anyang and southern nao are completely different, it may be useful to hypothesize what their common prototypes in Zhengzhou may have looked like. If the pre-Anyang pieces were produced as a set, similar to the

The Social and Ritual Significance of Bells in the Southern and Zhou Contexts The roles of nao in Shang rituals are very little understood. As mentioned earlier, there is sparse evidence of the nao in pre-Anyang sites. When they appear in the tombs of the elite members at Anyang, their sizes and decorations

69 These items were all found in the tombs of the Lords of Yu at Zhuyuangou (early Western Zhou) and Ruijiazhuang (middle Western Zhou) in Baoji; the vessels suggest connections with Jiangxi and Hunan, while the human-like figures were highly similar to those from the sacrificial pits at Sanxingdui in Sichuan, Rawson 1999, pp. 397-400 and 419-425; and Bagley 1999, pp. 208-219. 70 Gao Zhixi 1984a, pp. 29-34, 1984b, pp. 128-135, 1992, pp. 262-271, and 1996, pp. 83-90. ; Bagley 2000 and 2004.; Falkenhausen 1993. 71 A number of Chinese scholars also share this view. See, for example, Chen 1987: 1-18.; Robert Bagley further argues that there was a more extensive diffusion of the Shang material culture and traits during the Erligang period than that in the Anyang period.Bagley 1999 and Falkenhausen 1992.

The contribution to bell-casting from the Anyang manufacture may be the casting of a set of three bells, which remained a major trait of all early-to-middle Western Zhou bells. 73 For discussion of exoticism in Shang tombs, see Bagley 1999, pp. 196-202 and Rawson 1992, pp. 22-24. 72

78

Case Study II: Bronze Nao Bells that some southern musical concepts must have been adopted, because the bronze bells could only have been included in a musical performance by tuning the rest of the orchestra of wind and string instruments to the tones of the bells.75 It was earlier stated that bronze bells were probably related to ritual performance. In fact, most of the present knowledge about the ritual roles of bronze bells in these ancient societies comes from the later Zhou texts, such as Shijing (The Book of Poetry), composed in about the third century BC. This classic collects several hundred hymns and folksongs sung during the ancestral worship and court rituals. In the chapter for Zhijing, bells (most probably referring to the yongzhong) are mentioned: Figure 3.14. A set of three bronze nao from tomb M51 at Anyang Dasikuncun, Henan. Late Anyang period. Heights approx. 20–30 cm. Henan Music 1996, p. 73.

Terrifying and strong is Wu Wang. Is it not strong, his ardor! Greatly manifest Cheng [King Cheng] and Kang [King Kang] God on High made them sovereign.

are strikingly modest and simple. Given the small size of the Anyang nao, they hardly seem likely to feature prominently in a ritual performance. Furthermore, as the Anyang nao barely demonstrate any refinement in terms of design or musical qualities throughout the late Shang, it is unlikely that they could have become the prototype of the sophisticated bronze yongzhong found in the Zhou sites.

From the time of their achievements and peacefulness, We have extensively held onto the Four Quarters, Clear-sighted is their splendor. Bells and drums sound magnificently, Musical stones and flutes chime in;

On the other hand, bronze nao and bell music appear to be very important in southern China, given the amount of resources and technology invested in the production and improvement of bells. Robert Bagley further argues that the assembling process of bells to create a satisfying chromatic scale may even have inspired the development of transposition in Chinese musical instruments.74 Considering that most of the southern bells have been discovered in deposits located in the hills or near a river, Gao Zhixi suggests that these bells were probably buried as sacrifices to the deities of nature. For lack of further evidence about southern rituals, it is impossible to pursue the ritual roles of the nao in the Yangtze regions. Nonetheless, we can be certain that the burial of bronze bells was an important social activity in Hunan, Hubei, Jiangxi, and parts of Anhui. It must have been through such activities that the local elite materialized and distributed their ritual ideas. This ritual and social prominence of bells is expressed by the southern region’s rich and productive bell-casting tradition and the emphasis placed on musical and technological refinement, furthering the probablity that Anyang nao were likely to have been borrowed from this source.

[The former kings] send down blessings that are abundant. They send down blessings that are great; They are drunk, they are full, Blessings and happiness come again and again.76 In the Zhou rituals, bells and drums joined an orchestra to ring out and draw the attention of the deceased spirits, to whom the patrons prayed for blessings (fig. 3.15).77 Referring to the reigns of Kings Wu, Cheng, and Kang, the descriptions of the texts were most probably imagined by later authors. Despite the still ambiguous origins of bronze bells in southern contexts, bells became a persistent type of material culture produced and copied in much later times. The previous chapter demonstrated that the southerners were not passive recipients of northern culture but independent people who actively adapted vessel casting technology, and arguments were made for a certain amount of ‘reverse borrowing’ of vessels during the Anyang period. The case of both Anyang nao bells and Zhou yongzhong bells will totally rewrites history as transmitted through received texts: while bronze bells have been celebrated in art and literature since the Shijing, on the basis of archaeological evidence we must now acknowledge the southern people

When bronze bells were absorbed into the Zhou traditions, it is impossible that the Zhou were entirely ignorant of the original functions of the bells in southern contexts. Whether or not the Zhou also converted to some southern religious ideas is not known. At the very least, it is certain

74

Bagley 2004, p. 76. The translation is taken from Falkenhausen 1993b, pp. 26-27. 77 As Rawson notes, the inclusion of musical instruments in the Zhou rituals was a major departure from the Shang rituals, because bells provided an audible presentation which involved a larger audience and worked in conjunction with the decorative bronze vessels intended for visual presentation. See Rawson 1990, pp. 30-32. 75 76

Bagley 2004, p. 76.

79

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 3.15. Bronze drums. Excavated from Chongyang Wangjiazui, Hubei. H 75.5 cm. Shanghai Museum 2000, p. 15. Decorated with a figure motif in relief. Collection of Senoku Museum. H 79.4 cm. Chinese Bronzes IV 1998, no. 179. Not much is known about bronze drums. These two examples from Hubei were buried individually in a pit. Drums made of metals were not popular in the Shang and Zhou rituals. Were these the creations of the Yangtze bronze casters? It remains an open question.

as distinct from the Shang, and in fact an integral influence on this iconic symbol of ancient Chinese culture. The bellcasting refinements demonstrate that the southern peoples possessed a level of technological achievement in applied physics and mathematics unknown in the north – which would help to overturn some of the implications of inferior ‘barbarianism’ which seem to color the assumption that the Shang were culturally supreme.

80

4 Case Study III: Bronze Weapons In China, bronze weapons were important inventions of the second millennium BC. As they were more lethal than the stone weapons used in the Neolithic times, bronze weapons must have significantly enlarged the scale of warfare and increased the number of casualties. In turn, the ruling elite were likely to have entered into greater competition over control of metal resources.1 Archaeological remains evince that both the Shang and the southerners treasured bronze weapons. Both employed significant numbers of weapons in ritual performances. Some of these weapons were finely cast, with elaborate décor and inlaid stones, while the others were made entirely of jade or precious stones. These weapons are now understood as having been created ceremonial purposes, rather than having functioned in practical use. The studies of these bronze weapons of the Shang period are, therefore, almost inseparable from their ritual contexts.

One key question remains unanswered: namely, why did the elite at Anyang and those at other southern centres use weapons as ritual items? Indeed, the weapons from Henan and from the Yangtze basins show intriguing differences in the ways that ceremonial weapons were used in these respective societies. This study aims to explicate the ways in which the early Bronze Age groups in China exhibited power by the use of weapons and, in turn, what ceremonial weaponry may have meant in terms of establishing in their respective societies. In regards to the theme of the present work, the bronze weapons found at the Shang sites in Henan and at those southern ones in the Yangtze basins suggest inter-societal contact branching in multiple directions. However, these contacts have not been fully studied. Weapons were more to function against the others beyond the limits of a given society. Quite unlike vessels and bells, weapons cannot have assumed an entirely independent development within the context of a single society. As Max Loehr, Lin Yun, and William Watson point out, the Anyang casters were inspired to copy a number of weapons that probably originated in the Ordos regions. Bronze weapons are important evidence of external contact.3 The focus of this study is on the similarities and differences between the Shang and southern weapons. The connections between the Shang people and the Yangtze settlers appear to be very close, because they used very similar weapon types and most of them employed in ritual performance weapons made of jade.

In the past, scholars, including Minao Hayashi and Yang Hong, devoted effort to establishing the typology of halberds, axes, spearheads, and other major weapon types found at the Shang sites; whereas Liu Yiman and Guo Peng were concerned with the numbers and types of weapons found in the tombs at Anyang, where the Shang elite always buried certain weapon types with the deceased. Based on previous works, Huang Mingcong suggests that the bronze weapons found in the tombs of the Anyang elite possibly reflect military hierarchy and organization.2 1 As mentioned in chapter two, there were a number of copper mines in the lower and mid Yangtze basins. Liu Li and Chen Xingchen argue that the elite in Henan may have substantially expanded their territory to the mid-Yangtze regions during the Erligang period, and that the northerners may have major control over the mines in the south (Liu and Chen 2001, pp. 36-130, especially 116-130). Their arguments represent a major theory supported by most archaeologists in mainland China (see, for example, Liu Shizhong 2000, pp. 26-28; and He Jiejun 2001, pp. 7-8). But this theory is founded on many assumptions; the major one being that the strength of the Henan elite has been over estimated. Although the establishment at Panlongcheng was likely to have been related to the north, evidence is too thin to suggest large-scale expansion and domination by a northern elite. Who the Yangtze miners were remains a mystery. By now we have seen that there were several different bronze-casting groups established at Hubei, Jiangxi, and Anhui. Their competition over control of resources was likely to have been intense. 2 See the sections in Hayashi 1971 pp. 17-34 (on halberds), 104-107 (spearheads), 131-139 (axes), and 167-181 (knives).; Yang Hong 2005, pp. 34-88.; Li Yiman 2002, pp. 63-75.; Guo Peng 2004, pp. 129-173.; Huang Mingcong has published a useful account of the bronze weapons from major Anyang tombs. Providing meticulous drawings of the weapons found in each tomb, Huang points out that the numbers of sumptuary weapons are highly varied. Huang argues that halberds and spearheads were basic armaments of soldiers, and that those found in the elite tombs were probably presented as tributes by the subordinates of the tomb occupant. Following the logic of his assumptions, Huang suggests that the number of halberds and spearheads may reflect the ‘social rank’ of the tomb occupant. On the other hand, Huang suggests that the rare bronze axes and knives with an upward-pointing tip (which appeared during the Anyang period) were possibly symbols of military power,

In this chapter, I present some descriptive accounts of the weapons found at the Shang period sites in Henan, Xin’gan, and Sanxingdui. These accounts are important, partly because they are not available in the existing literature, and partly because they display important patterns. On the basis of these patterns, I argue that the elite of those three regions used similar types of weapons, but applied them very differently in order to meet their respective social and religious needs. Moreover, these elite also because they were usually found in large tombs (Huang Mingcong 2008, pp. 1-118, especially pp. 34-51; see also Valenov 2004, pp. 199-215). To a large extent I do not subscribe to the tallying approach put forward in Huang’s study. As the weapons from Anyang were highly varied in terms of types and materials (that is, bronze and jade) we cannot possibly draw a simplified inference of the social or military status of their associated people, as this chapter shall demonstrate. 3 Loehr mainly discusses daggers and knives with pommel ends. See Loehr 1949, pp. 23-103 and 1951, pp. 77-162. ; In addition to daggers and knives, the Northern Zone weapons included gongxingqi, or bow-shaped objects (defined below), and socket-axes. There were also helmets and chariots, which were probably introduced to Henan in c. 1200 BC. See Lin Yun 1987, pp. 495-519; see also Wu En 1985, pp. 135-155 and Chen Fangmei 1992, pp. 257-301.; Watson 1971, pp. 96-124.

81

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 4.1. Jade axe from M12 at Liangzhu Fanshan. Late Neolithic period. Length 17.9 cm. Liangzhu Fanshan 2005, p. 64. Jades buried in M20, Liangzhu Fanshan. Late Neolithic period. Fanshan 2005, colour pl. 780.

Liangzhu Societies and Axes

appear to have acknowledged and followed some remote traditions developed in the Neolithic societies. We shall, therefore, begin by reviewing current knowledge derived from archaeological finds about ceremonial weapons used during the Neolithic period.

The Liangzhu craftsmen produced large numbers of jade and stone axes which have been found at many sites around the Lake Taihu near Hangzhou. Fig. 4.1 illustrates a fine jade axe excavated from Pit M12 at Fanshan, which was one of the major sites of the Liangzhu culture.6 This axe measures approximately 17.9 cm long and 16.8 cm wide. The maximum thickness of its blade measures only 0.9 cm. It was probably affixed to a wooden shaft (now perished) which was ended with a decorative jade fitting.7

The Neolithic Origins of Ceremonial Weapons During the Neolithic period, a number of jade-using societies were established in different regions of presentday China. The Liangzhu societies (c. 4000- c. 3000 BC) in the east coast and the Longshan societies (c. 4000c. 2500 BC) in eastern and central China were the two major Neolithic centres that used jade weapons heavily.4 But the types of weapons used in those societies were quite different: Liangzhu jade carvers produced many axes, whereas Longshan carvers produced many blades, which included a type now known as zhang, or sceptres.5

controversial. In excavation reports, most Chinese archaeologists group zhang under the category of liqi, or ritual objects, thus denying them a function as weaponry. Such a definition is probably borrowed from the Zhou li (The Zhou Rituals) or from other received texts written much later. See Hayashi 1991, pp. 81-92 and the papers published in the colloquy on zhang (Tang Chung 1994). Here zhang are understood to be blades, as suggested in Rawson 1996, pp. 167-196. 6 Liangzhu Fanshan 2005, pp. 27-93, see particularly pp. 65-5. 7 On this axe, a small motif was carved at one corner on the axe from Fanshan. A figure in a large headdress was holding a two-eyed creature in his stretched arms. The motif was rendered in whirls of raised areas incised with very fine lines, which were typical of the Liangzhu craftsmanship. Such a motif is often found, although in slightly different versions, on many other Liangzhu jades. The meaning of these motifs

Rawson 1996, pp. 28-39. Archaeologists discovered the Liangzhu culture in 1936. The sites are distributed around the Lake Taihu near Hangzhou. The main sites are located at Fanshan and Yaoshan in the county of Yuhang, Wang and Zhang 2005, pp. 1-5.; The origins and functions of zhang are 4 5

82

Case Study III: Bronze Weapons Table 4.1. Comparisons of the numbers of bronze and jade weapons excavated from known archaeological sites in different regions of China, c. 1700─c. 1000 BC Region

Dates (BC)

Axes

Zhang

Halberds (ge)

Spearhead Arrowhead BowHelmet Crescentshaped shaped objects weapons

Erlitou M3

c.1700–1500

–

–

3

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu M1

c.1400–1300

–

4 – (spades)

–

–

6

–

–

–

1

–

–

–

Henan Xuchang 1986 tomb

c.1400–1300

1

–

–

1

2

2

–

–

17

–

–

–

–

Anyang M5

c.1200

4

11

–

–

91

39

–

3

57

–

6

–

–

Anyang M54

c.1200

7

8

–

–

73

8

78

4

881

3

6

–

–

Anyang M160

c.1100

3

2

–

2

119

5

97

–

906

–

1

–

–

Anyang M1046

c.1045

–

–

55

28

27

–

183

–

1

–

–

Northern China 1

–

–

–

Southern China Panlongcheng

c.1400–1300

2

–

–

–

1

4

1

–`

1

–

–

–

–

Xin’gan

c.1300

6

–

–

–

28

4

35

1

123

–

–

1

–

Sanxingdui Pit no. 1

c.1200

–

46

–

40

44*

45

–

–

–

–

–

–

–

Sanxingdui Pit no. 2

c.1200

–

1

1

17

17*

31

–

–

–

–

–

–

Hanzhong**

c.1400–c.1000 

X



X

X



X



X

X

X

*



Shaded areas indicate weapons made in jade/stone; while plain areas indicate weapons cast in bronze. The bronze ‘halberds’ from Sanxingdui and Hanzhong were of different shapes from those found at other sites. As the weapons from Hanzhong were scattered over a number of sites at Chenggu and Yangxian, they are otherwise listed here in qualitative terms to draw comparisons.

widely accepted.11 Subsequently, excavation reports on Miaoqian, Yaoshan, and Fanshan were published between 2003-2005 with fuller information about these burial contexts. Notably, none of the pits which held hundreds of jades contained a full human body. There were, however, consistent discoveries of either human skullcaps or teeth, or both. At Yaoshan and Miaoqian, pits containing jades were similarly buried with human skulls and teeth. Such consistencies seem to suggest that those human traces were probably not the remains of decayed human bodies interred in the pits, but were rather buried with the jades for a different purpose.12 All pits contained a few pottery vessels, which often included ding tripods, dou stemmed dishes, and guan jars.13 At Fanshan, all nine pits were found on the top of a low, artificial mound measuring about 6 m

Such axes could not have been intended for striking, as their delicate shapes would have been easily destroyed. Based on the present archaeological finds, we understand that the Liangzhu peoples buried axes in rectangular pits, along with various combinations of jade beads, tubes, discs, and fittings.8 The number of jades buried in the pits usually varied between dozens and several hundreds. In Pit M20 at Fanshan (fig. 4.1), one jade axe and twenty-four stone axes were buried with four hundred other jade or stone cong, discs, beads, tubes, and many other decorative items.9 Excavators suggest that those jades and stone objects were probably originally placed inside a wooden case, as the pits excavated to date have usually been lined with a layer of organic materials.10 When the Liangzhu sites were first excavated in the 1980s, archaeologists suggested that the jade and stone pits were probably elite burials. This suggestion has since then been

See the lists of Liangzhu tombs published in Lu Jianfang 1996, pp. 176-217. 12 Similar finds also turned up at the late Neolithic sites in Anhui: Qianshan Xuejiagang (c. 2500-2600 BC) and Jiaohu Lingjiatan (c. 3300 BC), where human skulls and teeth were buried with many jades in rectangular pits. On the other hand, some burials containing fuller human remains were excavated at Xinting Huating 新廳花廳 in Jiangsu. These bodies were buried with a few jades typical of the Liangzhu societies, as well as many more fine pottery vessels (Wang Zunguo 1996, pp. 80-119. It seems that there were possibly two different burial contexts for jades in the Liangzhu societies. Those at Huating were probably the tombs of important members of society; whereas those rich jade pits at Fanshan, Yaoshan, and Miaoqian appear to have been intended especially for ritual purposes. 13 Fanshan 2005, pp. 25-27. 11

have beem widely discussed and debated. and those discussions are often related to the taotie seen on the Shang bronzes. For further details, see the section on taotie in chapter two; Rawson 1993, pp. 67-95; and Bagley’s comments on animal designs discussed in Max Loehr’s famous article (1953) about Anyang bronze décor (2008, pp. 82-97). 8 Wang and Zhang 2005, pp. 24-27. 9 Wang and Zhang 2005, pp. 217-276, especially pp. 233-239 and 265271. 10 Wang and Zhang 2005, pp. 13-14.

83

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC tall; excavators suggest that the mound appears to have been constructed especially for ritual purposes.14 Similar low mounds were also found at Yaoshan and Miaoqian. The Liangzhu society appears to have established a tradition of using ceremonial axes in ritual contexts. These axes were, therefore, probably intended for ceremonial purposes, most likely suggesting the significance of hunting or fighting for the local society. The prestigious forms of axes seems to suggest a connection between warfare and spiritual power. The Liangzhu elite used sumptuous numbers of jades, which were later collected by the peoples of different bronze-casting societies. As we shall see, jade axes became an important category of object that displayed the social status of the elite. Longshan Culture and the Zhang Zhang were important objects used in the widespread Longshan societies of northern China (table 4.1).15 They are blades cut from a large slab of jade or precious stone. They are usually long, flat, and thin. One end was generally worked to form a narrow tang, and a hole was drilled in its centre, possibly intended to enhance the mounting of the handle that is now not preserved. Zhang are one of the most important yet mysterious categories of jade objects produced in large numbers during the Neolithic period.16 Varied suggestions have been made about the functions of zhang. Zhang blades were usually sharp and thin. At 14 Fanshan 2005, pp. 16-23. The finds at the Liangzhu sites have an interesting bearing on the site at Xin’gan. There, the elite of an early bronze-casting society buried similar categories of objects in a pit: jades; pottery dou stemmed dishes, and guan jars. Among the jades there were two cong and seven discs typical of Liangzhu carving, although no similar jade or stone axes were found (Xin’gan 1997, pp. 141-147). In addition, there were twenty-four human teeth belonging to three individuals (Xin’gan 1997, pp. 234-237). As noted earlier, the finds at Xin’gan were buried underneath an artificial mound which had been removed before the excavation took place. Such features appear to be verysimilar to those of the Fanshan finds. It may be risky to extrapolate too far and to assume a connection between the two sites which have been dated more than a millennium apart. However, the Neolithic finds may provide an alternative possibility that contributed to the cultural features of the Wucheng society, or to other bronze-casting societies in the Yangtze basins. Although initially dependent upon the Shang elite for the development of bronze-casting workshops, the peoples at Wucheng and Xin’gan may have also been dependent upon other sources of inspiration. 15 A study undertkaen by Tang Chung shows that zhang were widely distributed across a number of regions. Large numbers were found in the Longshan societies in the upper and mid Yellow River valleys, and in early Bronze Age sites in Sichuan in the upper Yangtze valley in the south. Some sporadic discoveries have also been made in Yunnan and Guangdong provinces, as well as in the late Bronze Age tombs in Vietnam. The finds from the southernmost regions probably date much later, to around the fourth century BC. Zhang appear to have been transmitted between the elite of many societies over a long period of time (Tang Chung 1994, pp. 215-218). 16 They were very widely distributed across the territory of present-day China, and they were probably still in use during the early Bronze Age. Based on the present archaeological finds, Jenny So suggests that zhang were possibly first used in the Neolithic society in the northwest of China, that is, in the areas of modern Gansu province (So 2001, pp. 157-159). The archaeological work undertaken by Dai Yingxin appears to confirm the northern origins of zhang. Shenmu (c .2500 BC) in northern Shaanxi, which borders on the Inner Mongolian Plateau, was probably a major zhang-using centre (Dai Yingxin 1977, pp. 154-157, 172 and 1988, pp. 239-250).

Figure 4.2. A group of jade zhang from Shenmu Shimou, Shaanxi. Heights approx. 35–45 cm. Tang Chung 1994, colour pl. 8. Jade blades (including zhang) excavated from Shenmu Xinhua, Shaanxi. Shenmu Xinhua 2005, p. 115.

84

Case Study III: Bronze Weapons Sanxingdui, jade carvers usually interchanged features between zhang and halberds. Although we are uncertain as to their function, they seem to be rather closely related to weapons or to tools, which were probably originally made with other materials. The zhang (fig. 4.2) from Shenmu Xinhua (c. 2000 BC) in northern Shaanxi are probably the best understood. These are also important finds, because they seem to suggest connections with the bronze-casting groups at Sanxingdui in Sichuan. At Shenmu Xinhua, Dai Yinxin excavated thirty-six jades from an earthen pit he identifies as a ‘sacrificial pit’. These jades included five reaping knives, nine axes, and two zhang. The jades in the pits were buried in an unusual way (fig. 4.1). All three types of blades were arranged in rows and buried vertically with the sharp ends cutting into the bottom of the pit. In the centre of the pit, excavators discovered a smaller pit containing ashes and fragments of bird bones. As there are signs of burning all over the large pit, it seems reasonable to suggest that the zhang were associated with sacrificial activities.17 The finds associated with the Liangzhu and Longshan societies indicate that in Neolithic China there were probably independent centres which employed weapons made in ceremonial form for ritual use. The large numbers of jades now found testify to the sophistication and wealth of those Neolithic societies. Ceremonial weapons became important ritual paraphernalia in the early Bronze Age societies. The Neolithic jade weapons survived in two ways: first, they were probably collected by the elite in Henan and in the southern regions.18 Second, copies of Neolithic jades were made in later societies.19 The elite in Henan and in the south appear to have produced new weapon types in ceremonial forms, using both bronze and jade. Thus, it seems likely that some form of continuity of Neolithic ritual practices existed. However, this continuity appears to have been realized in quite different ways.

Figure 4.3. Jade zhang excavated from Erlitou, Henan. Erlitou period. Tang Chung 1994, pl. 9.

jue cups.21 Four zhang (fig. 4.3) were excavated from three tombs dated to periods III and IV, c. 1700–c. 1500 BC.22 Those zhang are remarkably fine and large, measuring between 45-55 cm long and about 0.5 cm thick. Their craftsmanship is similar: the blades flare in the center and conclude in bifurcated ends. The sides near the tang are decorated with parallel protrusions to emphasize the shape of the zhang.

The Early Bronze-Casting Societies: The Erlitou and Erligang Periods

In these tombs, there were also found jade axes, discs, and reaping knives similar to those discovered at the Neolithic sites.23 The Erlitou elite appear to have collected and copied some Neolithic jades from the Longshan and Liangzhu societies. Moreover, there were a few jade halberds, which were possibly carved in imitation of the

Due to the limited finds discovered to date from the Erlitou and Erligang periods, we are missing information about a critical stage of contact between the peoples in the Yellow and Yangtze River basins. However, some jade weapons appear useful in attempting to document a certain amount of population movement and ritual contact. By the end of the third millennium BC, zhang were borrowed and used in the Longshan society of the mid Yellow River valleys.20 At Erlitou, archaeologists found jade axes and zhang buried in the tombs of the elite, in which there were also a small number of bronzes, including

Ke Yanfeng 2008, pp. 278-281. The excavators suggest that there was another type of jade blade, called a gui 圭, at Erlitou (Ke Yanfeng 2008, pp. 278-279). A gui is very similar to zhang in shape, only differing in having straight sides (without serrations) and a flat top. Those ‘gui’ were possibly a form of zhang. In an Anyang tomb (Tomb M303), the Henan archaeologists found similar ‘gui’ and in the archaeological report they suggest calling them zhang (Yue Zhanwei 2004, pp. 378-383). This is an example that demonstrates the inconsistency of naming different jade types from the Shang period in archaeological reportage, one which also exposes the problems of categorizing archaeological finds with reference to much later received texts. 23 See Yang and Liu 1983, pp. 201-204 and KeYanfeng 2008, pp. 276287. 21 22

Shenmu Xinhua 2005, pp. 114-123. Rawson 1996, pp. 52-59 (on Fu Hao’s jades); see also Falkenhausen 2006, pp. 199-208 (on the jades from Sangxingdui and Jinsha). 19 Ibid. Some jades made in Liangzhu forms were also found at Xin’gan. See Xin’gan 1997, pp.141-146. 20 Li Xueqin 1994, pp. 5-7. 17 18

85

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 4.4. Jade zhang excavated Guanghan Sanxingdui. Probably Anyang period. Lengths 35–50 cm. Tang Chung 1994, colour pls. 11–13.

86

Case Study III: Bronze Weapons bronze versions introduced at that time.24 We do not know whether these jade copies were similarly mounted, as were bronze halberds; those excavated from the tombs at Erlitou show impressions of textiles patterns, suggesting that they were probably wrapped for burial.25 This is a distinctively northern feature, as it is apparent that the elite in Henan also occasionally wrapped other ritual items, such as bronze vessels, in textiles for burial. As the Henan elite seem to have handled jade weapons with much care, they are likely to significantly distinguished themselves from the peoples in the south. There the southerners burnt and broke jade zhang during ritual performances.

While there were certainly connections between the people at Sanxingdui and Jinsha and those in Henan, it is difficult to understand how such contacts were established: for one thing, there is a large chronological gap of at least three to four centuries between Erlitou and Sanxingdui; for another, as Falkenhausen has noted, the two societies were several hundreds of kilometers apart, and were separated by formidably mountainous regions.30 Despite these physical considerations, Li Xueqin and many Chinese scholars have repeatedly argued that jade weapons were transmitted from north to south, and that the peoples living at Sanxingdui may have borrowed some ritual practices from Henan.31

While the bronze vessels found in the Erlitou tombs were intended to provide nourishments for ancestors and spirits, jade weapons are likely to have served the similar purpose of establishing beneficial communications with their deceased owners. While bronze weapons were effective in military terms, the jade weapons were translucent and if not functional, certainly durable, and were probably admired for these qualities. As a result of these attributes, the value of jade weapons appears not only to have stemmed from the precious nature of the stone materials, but also from the symbolic meaning associated with owning and displaying such unusual armaments during ritual performance. These weapons probably represented symbolic power over the unseen, spiritual world.

Nonetheless, the establishment of contact and the direction of material exchange appears to be rather complicated. Indeed, the prolonged use of jade zhang in the Sanxingdui society suggests that those ritual types probably possessed greater significance in the south than in the Henan societies, as we shall see. Considering the evidence provided by the jade zhang from Shenmu, it is possible to suggest that that some Sanxingdui features were borrowed directly from the late Neolithic peoples in the north. There was frequent inter-societal contact along the route that connected the Wei River valley, and Hanzhong, and Sichuan in the south. As has been demonstrated in the previous chapters, this route appears to have facilitated the transmission of bronze faces (fig. 1.12), bronze zhang, (fig. 1.14), and bronze figures between the peoples at Laoniupo; Chenggu and Yangxian; and Sanxingdui.32

The finds excavated from Sanxingdui and Jinsha contained a number of jades remarkably similar to those originating from Erlitou.26 In Falkenhausen’s illustration of the connections between societies in those two regions, he points out that some jade zhang from Sanxingdui were carved with similar serrated protrusions on the sides and were bifurcated towards the end of the blade (fig. 4.4). Moreover, some jade halberds at Snaxingdui were similarly decorated with straight or cross-hatched incised lines in imitation of mounting, as were those excavated at Erlitou (fig. 4.3).27 In addition to jades, the Sanxingdui people appear also to have borrowed some bronze casting practices from Erlitou. They cast small bronze clapper bells (fig. 3.7) that loosely resembled the simple forms cast at Erlitou. At Zhenwu Caobaobao a couple of bronze plaques were decorated with an animal face rendered in mosaic of turquoise. These kind of plaques are parallels of those found at Erlitou.28 Using these these very similar bronzes and jades as evidence, it is possible to suggest that some of those from Sanxingdui may have been acquired directly from the jade-carving and bronze-casting workshops in the north.29

In the following centuries during the Erligang period, there were two notable changes in Henan: first, there was an increase in the number of bronze weapons in burials. While archaeological records of major tombs are at this time lacking for Zhengzhou, there was a notable tomb excavated at Xuchang Dalu Chencun, which is near Zhengzhou. The tomb occupant was buried with three bronze ding, two jia, and two jue. The shapes and decorations of these bronze vessels were similar to those found at Panlongcheng. In the same tomb were also a number of bronze weapons: one axe, two halberds, and seventeen arrowheads.33 In contrast, the tombs excavated at Bei’erqilu, which were slightly earlier, contained only jade or stone weapons.34 It appears that at some point during the Erligang period, the Shang elite began to include larger numbers of bronze weapons than they had previously done. Panlongcheng was probably established in the south at about the same time as this change took place at Zhengzhou. Secondly, the elite at Zhengzhou appear to have employed different jade blades for ceremonial purposes. At this time,

24 Jade halberds first appeared at Erlitou in Henan, see Rawson 1996, pp. 192-193. 25 See the descriptions of jade zhang and halberds in Ke Yanfeng 2008, pp. 278-281. 26 See the examples illustrated in Xu 2008, pp. 197-201, 27 Falkenhausen 2006, pp. 203-210. 28 Falkenhausen 2006, pp. 210-212. 29 Jenny So, Jay Xu, and Falkenhausen are inclined to consider the jades at Sanxingdui to have been locally made, probably in imitation of the forms similar to those found at Erlitou. See So 2001, pp. 153-155, Falkenhausen 2006, pp. 210 and Xu 2008, pp. 209-214.

Falkenhausen 2006, pp. 218-220. Li Xueqin 1994, pp. 5-7 and Zheng Guang 1994, pp. 11-16; also see other papers on zhang published in the same volume (Tang Chung 1994). 32 Rawson 1996, pp. 60─63. 33 Hu and Zhang 1988, pp. 24-25 34 Yang and Guo 1983, pp. 60-77. 30 31

87

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 4.5. Jade halberds. Drawing of a stone halberd from tomb M1, Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu, Henan. Upper Erligang period. Length 37 cm. Yang and Guo 1983, pp. 71 and 73. Drawings of jade halberds from tomb M2, Panlongcheng Lijiazui, Hubei. Upper Erligang period. Largest blade measures 44 cm long. Panlongcheng 2001, p. 180. Jade halberds excavated from Xin’gan Dayangzhou, Jiangxi. Length approx. 35–44 cm. Xin’gan 1997, colour pl. 41.

the numbers of zhang significantly diminished.35 However, there simultaneously appeared an increasing number of jade halberds, known as the ge. Referenced in oracle bone inscriptions, bronze halberds were probably the basic armaments used in the military units of Shang society.36 The Erligang bronze ge usually measured around 20 cm long.37 However, the Erlitang jade halberds were much longer. There were three jade and three stone halberds (fig. 4.5a) in the medium-sized tomb, M1, at Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu. Their lengths vary between 28 and 48.8 cm long, which is double the length of an ordinary bronze halberd.38 The sides of those halberds were beveled to form sharp blades, and their ends were usually worked to form a tang and a small hole was drilled in the center of the tang. In addition to halberds, three jade axes and one stone axe were also buried in the tomb.39

Figure 4.6. Comparisons of two types of jade or stone halberds excavated from pit number two, Guanghan Sanxingdui. Probably Anyang period. Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 384–385 and 378–379. Longest blade measures 55 cm.

35 There only a few zhang found near Zhengzhou, see, for example, Hu and Zhang 1988, pp. 23-26. 36 Huang Mingcong 2008, pp. 34-40; the character of ge is the root word of fa, meaning attack; yong meaning warfare, etc. See also the examples illustrated in Huang Mingcong 2008, p. 107. 37 Yang Hong 2005, pp. 65-69 38 Yang and Guo 1983, pp. 71-73. 39 Ibid; the axes measure around 20 cm long and 1.2 cm thick.

At Panlongcheng were discovered some very similar jade halberds (fig. 4.5b). Four large jade halberds made of serpentine stone were buried in Tomb M2 at Lijiazui. They measure 70 cm, 61.6 cm, 45.6 cm, and 29.6 cm long

88

Case Study III: Bronze Weapons respectively (their widths measure less than 10 cm).40 The blades were all similarly sharpened and ended with a tilted pointing tip. The jade halberds at Panlongcheng were possibly local copies of those made at Zhengzhou, or were sent from there. On the other hand, the finds from both Xin’gan Dayangzhou and Sanxingdui suggest that the direction of contacts appears to be complicated. At Xin’gan, there were found four very similar jade halberds, which were all sharpened and ended with a slanted, pointing tip (fig. 4.5c), while the two sacrificial pits excavated at Sanxingdui contained at least two dozen of this kind of halberds made in either jade or stone.41 Those at Sanxingdui were even more finely carved, with lengths measuring between 35.5 and 60 cm and widths of 0.5 and 0.8 cm (fig. 4.6).42 Because a number of jade-working areas were excavated at Yueliangwan and Jinsha, it seems possible to suggest that those halberds buried with the elite at Panlongcheng were acquired directly from the societies at Sanxingdui.43 The similarity of halberds in the four areas of Henan, Panlongcheng, Xin’gan, and Sanxingdui suggests that among the elite of different areas, fine weapons were probably an important category of items to exchange. Figure 4.7. Rubbings of some jade halberds excavated from tomb M5 (Fu Hao) at Anyang Xiaotun. Anyang period. Lengths 30–35 cm. Fu Hao 1980, p. 133.

Although jade ceremonial weapons probably represented power, it is not possible to argue that the peoples of those different societies performed the same rituals using these halberds. In their tombs, the Shang elite at both Zhengzhou and Panlongcheng usually broke a halberd into two to three pieces, and buried them together with a sacrificed human or dog in a pit, known as the yaokeng the waistpit, at the bottom of the tomb.44 This practice was widely followed by the elite at Anyang.45 Some halberds from Xin’gan were probably similarly broken and buried, but the site does not appear to have been a burial.46 Halberds and other blades at Sanxingdui were fired, and so were other finds in the pits.47

between the Shang elite and those living in the south during the Erligang period. The Weapons Found in the Tombs at Anyang During the Anyang period, the Shang elite in Henan buried large numbers of weapons in tombs. Liu Yiman and Guo Peng estimate that more than 3000 bronze weapons have been excavated from about 233 tombs.48 These numbers suggest that the Anyang elite were probably more concerned with warfare and weaponry than were their predecessors, suggesting that they were probably under constant threats from their neighbours, as is made clear in oracle bone inscriptions. I am inclined to argue that the bronze and jade weapons from Anyang appear to indicate very complicated sets of associated rituals and social relationships. I shall illustrate these views by the use of two well-published examples: Tomb M5 of Fu Hao at Xiao’tun (c. 1200 BC); and Tomb M54 of Ya Chang at Huayuanzhuang (c. 1200 BC).

Because of these different practices, we can argue that the Shang and various groups of southerners had by this point established quite different understandings concerning weaponry. The jades at Zhengzhou and Panlongcheng suggest that some close links were already firmly in place

40 Panlongcheng 2001, pp. 179-180; there was also one bronze halberd, about 26.8 cm long, which was possibly cast in imitation of the jade versions, see Panlongcheng 2001, p. 176. 41 Xin’gan 1997, pp. 146-148. 42 Excavators classified such halberds as Types B and C in the report. See Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 93 and 121-127 (pit no. 1); and 378-384 (pit no. 2). 43 See Xu 2008, pp. 11-15.; At Jinsha Meiyuan, excavators revealed an area of about 300 square metres, containing half-finished jade or stone discs and zhang; but the full report has not been made available, see Zhu Zhangyi 2006, pp. 255-258 44 See, for example, tomb M2 at Zhengzhou Beieriqilu Yang and Guo 1983, p. 67-69; and Panlongcheng 2001, p. 155. 45 See, for example, Tomb M160 at Anyang Guojiazhuang, Guojiazhuang 1998, p. 72. 46 Xin’gan 1997, p. 146. However, the excavators argue that the Xin’gan halberds were possibly broken in imitation of the practices in Henan. 47 Most Sanxingdui zhang and halberds had been discoloured and destroyed from firing, before they were buried, Sanxingdui 1999.

The tomb of Fu Hao had been flooded when it was excavated in 1979. From the pit excavators salvaged sixteen human skeletons, bronzes, jades, ivories, and other finds. The body of the tomb occupant, Fu Hao, had decayed when they opened the inner coffin. Most of the bronzes and jades in the tomb were, therefore, not found in situ. Liu Yiman studied the finds from 187 tombs at Anyang (2002, pp. 72-75); while Guo Peng studied the finds from 233 tombs, incorporating the finds excavated between 2002-2004 and the sundry weapons found at Anyang (2004, pp. 131-132). 48

89

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 4.8. Some bronze weapons excavated from tomb M5 (Fu Hao) at Anyang Xiaotun. Anyang period. Fu Hao 1980, p. 169–175.

three spearheads. Their forms were similar to those made during the Erligang period, except that the halberds were shortened to about 25-35 cm long (fig. 4.7). Moreover, jade zhang were absent.

The bronze weapons buried with Fu Hao included four bronze axes; ninety-one halberds; fifty-seven arrowheads; and six bow-shaped objects, known as gongxingqi (fig. 4.8), which appeared in Henan during the Anyang period and the function of which remains undetermined.49 As their ends were usually decorated with openwork pommels, they appear to be closely related to the seminomadic groups who lived in the areas north of Anyang, or known as the Northern Zone.50 In addition to the Northern Zone weapons, the Anyang elite also adopted fine weapons made in jade forms. In the tomb of Fu Hao, there were eleven jade axes, thirty-nine halberds, and

The appearance of gongxingqi coincided with the introduction of horses and chariots to Anyang in c. 1200 BC. From that time onwards, curved daggers, halberds with shaft tubes, and long knives with curling ends (fig. 4.8), borrowed from peoples in the north, were often found in tombs excavated at Anyang, suggesting that frequent contact between the Anyang elite and the Northern peoples occured. As a result of this contact, William Watson argues that there an exchange of weapon types took place between the bronze casters at Anyang and those living in the north.51 Wu Hsiao-yun suggests that there were probably some northerners living at Anyang who helped transmit skills in horse breeding and in chariot driving (fig. 1.11).52 Anyang society was likely to have been more metropolitan that that of Zhengzhou. By burying some Northern weapons in the tombs, the Anyang elite appear to have intended to associate themselves with the northern peoples, and hence with advanced military techniques. Such an association must have contributed to the power and status of the Anyang elite. Nonetheless, the forms of those weapons were very different from the axes, halberds and spearheads cast locally, and they do not seem to have been fully incorporated into local usage. The possession of novel weapons appears to have emphasized exotic connections, and possibly also the desire to subdue the northern peoples.53

49 Fu Hao 1980, pp. 1-14. The tomb plans of M5 illustrated in the report (pp. 8-14) have considerably simplified the possible views, and the number of finds shown has been greatly reduced. While there were more than 1000 objects in the tomb, only twenty are shown. These plans do not reflect the original provenience of the finds; they appear to have been imagined by the excavators on the basis of their archaeological experiences at Anyang. See, for example, the tomb plans of M54 at Huayuanzhuang, which was far more accurately documented than those of Fu Hao (Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. figs. 62-80).; Shi Zhangru and Tang Lan suggest that gongxingqi were probably bronze fittings intended to enhance the shooting power of bows; for Tang’s suggestion, see Sun Ji 2001). Conversely, Sun Ji suggests strong archaeological evidence to refute the suggestion by Shi and Tang, and argues with Lin Yun that gongxingqi were probably parts of the charioteers’ attire, worn at waistlevel. See Sun Ji 2001. Sun’s suggestion seems likely to have been the case. Moreover, his illustrations taken from the horse pit, M164, at Xiaotun, suggest that gongxingqi were closely related to people who were probably familiar with the Ordos societies, from which the Anyang elite acquired horses and engineering skills in making and driving a chariot. For further literature on Anyang horses and chariots, see Shi Zhangru 1987 (on the Anyang finds excavated between 1928-1937); Shaughnessy 1988, pp. 213-221 (on the oracle bone inscriptions about chariots); and Wu Hsiao-yun 2005, pp. 1-30 (on terminology and social significance of chariots during the Shang and Western Zhou periods). 50 The Northern Zone extends from the plateaus in northern Shaanxi and Shanxi to the areas of northern Hebei and Liaoning provinces. For definitions of the Northern Zone in archaeological literature and the bronzes found in that region, see Wu En 1985, pp. 135-155. There is a large amount of research on the Northern Zone weapons found at Anyang, see Loehr 1949, pp. 23-103 and 1951, pp. 77-162; Lin Yun 2003, pp. 495-519 ; and Chen Fangmei 1992, pp. 263-301.

Watson 1971, pp. 38-66 Wu Hsiao-yun is currently undertaking doctoral research on this topic. This point is noted in her paper submitted for review at the upgrading examination at the School of Archaeology, Oxford, 2009. 53 We know from oracle bone inscriptions that the Anyang kings were engaged in battles with many different groups, and we can confidently 51 52

90

Case Study III: Bronze Weapons inscribed, and were either wrapped in textiles or boxed in a wooden or lacquer case, before burial.59 The fact that they were cast with half the normal amount of bronze materials suggests that they were probably imitations of the real halberds used for fighting and were intended for ceremonial uses. This is an exceptional feature of the finds in the north, as none of the southern peoples seem to have cast this kind of bronze weapons.

Two of the four bronze axes buried with Fu Hao (fig. 4.8) were decorated with the unusual tiger-and-man motifs similar to those seen on the bronze zun (fig. 2.2) from Funan in Anhui. Mouths wide open, two upright tigers are flanking a human face; whereas the zun found at Funan probably bears a fully-fledged version that depicts the whole frontal view of the human. The ‘Fu Hao’ inscriptions below the motifs suggest that the axes were probably locally cast; however, the contents of the motifs appears to be southern in origin.54 Similar motifs (fig. 2.2) were also found on the upright handles of a large fangding, more than 220 kg, found in the tomb of Si Mu Mu, who was probably a contemporary of Fu Hao’s. These two examples suggest that the Shang elite probably adopted tiger-andman motifs primarily as an exotic décor, intended to evoke an association with the Yangtze peoples. The particular positions of the tigers and the human suggest that someone at Anyang must have understood the symbolic meanings of the motifs. Nonetheless, such motifs did not survive in the later casting of the Anyang workshops. The appearance of human faces on bronze objects was a very rare occurence in the north.55

Fu Hao was buried with one of the largest collections of jade weapons discovered at Anyang (fig. 4.7). Her jade halberds were similarly decorated with parallel striations or cross-hatched lines, in accordance with the designs used during the Erlitou and Erligang periods. While the Anyang casters had significantly altered the forms of bronze halberds to secure mounting, the forms of jade halberds appear to have intentionally remained old-fashioned.60 One of Fu Hao’s halberds carried a short inscription of six characters, written in red pigment. They read as ‘XX sent in X number of jades’.61 This is a rare example of jade inscriptions.62 Although we are short of further information to understand the meanings of such transactions recorded, we can argue that jade halberds seemed to have functioned as social tokens, possibly signifying submission of the gift donors.

Apart from the northern types and the bronze axes, the rest of the bronze weapons included only halberds and arrowheads. They were a rather sparse collection that did not seem to have corresponded with Fu Hao’s exceptional status as both a royal member and a military commander.56 In the report, excavators note that twelve of the ninety-one halberds found were thinner and lighter than the others. They measure about half of the average weight of a halberd, which is about 30 g, although they do not look any different from standard halberds (see fig. 4.8).57 The excavations of other large Anyang tombs also revealed similar lightweight bronze halberds, and also spearheads; they appear to have been in use until the very end of the Anyang period.58 Those found in Tomb M269 at Qijiazhuang were

Compared with Fu Hao, Ya Chang of Tomb M54 was a lesser member of the elite. As his tomb was found undisturbed, and because his tomb was better documented than that of Fu Hao, there is greater information regarding the weapons buried. Ya Chang’s collection of jade weapons included eight jade axes; eight halberds; four spearheads; three arrowheads; and one knife with an upward-pointing tip, which was rare and which was also found in the tomb of Fu Hao.63 Ya Chang was buried with an extensive jade See Meng Xianwu 1991, pp. 342-345. Referring to the text, Zhouli of the third century BC, Meng Xianwu and other Anyang archaeologists suggest classifying those light-weighted halberds as mingqi – the utensils for the underworld, which is a term used in much later texts that describes only goods made especially for burial. Such a term is, therefore, inappropriate to apply to the finds of the Anyang period. 60 Most of the jade halberds belonging to Fu Hao were carved with straight tangs of similar widths to those of the blades. One piece (M5: 476) was decorated with lightly serrated protrusions reminiscent of the shapes of the zhang, which were fallen out of use at Anyang (see Fu Hao 1980, p. 133). In contrast, the up-to-date bronze halberds cast at Anyang, such as those found in M54 at Huayuanzhuang were cast with either tube shafts or narrow and extended tangs, which appear to have given more security to the mounting of the wooden shafts (see Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 152-153). The Anyang jade carvers seem likely to have worked independently of the designs used in their contemporary bronzecasting workshops. In other words, the jade weapons were probably commissioned to draw links with antiquity. 61 Fu Hao 1980, p. 131. 62 As far as I am concerned, another tomb at Anyang containing inscribed jades is Tomb M1046 at Liujiazhuang, which was dated to the very end of the Anyang period. This tomb is very important, because in it were fifty-five stone zhang, and eighteen of these were inscribed with a few characters. As zhang were rare at Anyang, the finds in that tomb suggest that some major changes must have taken place in the north prior to the Zhou conquest in c. 1045 BC. I shall return to this theory in the last section of this chapter. 63 Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 184-193. Guo Yanli presents a thorough study of the bronze weaponry found in the tombs, which were mostly located at Anyang, 2014, pp. 141-162. In such, Guo indicates that the ge blades were most popularly used in the burial contexts. 59

understand some of them as non-Shang peoples, who were probably independent from the Anyang kings in both political and economic terms (see Chen Mengjia 1988 for details; and the brief notes in Keightley 2000, pp. 56-79). Chen Mengjia suggests that the peoples who lived in the north and the northwest in present-day Shanxi and Shaanxi provinces were possibly the major threats to Anyang. A large number of records show that the Anyang kings usually took the peoples whom they called Jiang as captives, and executed them as sacrifices presented to the ancestors (Chen Mengjia 1988). These records seem to correspond with the large numbers of human heads and headless bodies found in the large tombs at Anyang, although the ethnicities of those people remained undetermined. The northern borders, therefore, appear to have been major issues that concerned the ruling elite at Anyang. 54 Those axes were likely to have been quite important, because they each measure 39.5 cm long and 9 kg in weight. See the section ‘The Taotie’ in Chapter 2, where I contrast the taotie of the Shang with the realistic animal motifs used in Anhui and Xin’gan. 55 Rawson 1998b, pp. 131-145. 56 In terms of material value, Fu Hao’s bronze weapons appear unimportant too, as the amount of bronzes used on weapons assumed less than 10% of the total weight of all bronzes found in the tomb, which was about 800 kg. For the description of Fu Hao in oracle bone records, see Wang Yuxin 1977, pp. 1-21. 57 The authors of the report, however, did not indicate in the illustrations which weapons are of half standard weights, see Fu Hao 1980, pp. 105110. 58 See, for example, Yue Hungbin 2008, pp. 378-381 (tomb M303 at Dasikung, dated to the very end of the Anyang period).

91

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 4.9. Drawings of some bronze weapons excavated from tomb M54 (Ya Chang) at Anyang Huayuanzhuang. Anyang period. Lengths of halberds: 25–30 cm. Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 137–160.

92

Case Study III: Bronze Weapons large and elaborately decorated, they were rarely buried inside the coffins, near the tomb owners. The axes discovered in M54, were found outside the coffins, buried next to the animal sacrifices and the decapitated or dismembered individuals, who were likely to have been executed during the funeral.67 The finds in the large tombs at Yidu Sufutun provide further evidence. In these tombs were a pair of large bronze axes, decorated with openwork motifs of sharp teeth similar to those found on the bronze axe from Xin’gan. The Sufutun axes were found in the earth fill of one passageway, while three layers of human skulls and headless bodies were found in another.68 Those sacrificed individuals appear to have close association with the bronze axes. Indeed, bronze axes were usually found in the tombs containing sacrificed individuals. If such an association indeed existed, these axes were likely to have been used on the spot to perform the executions, as part of the programme of the funeral. Such a practice appears very likely to have reinforced the belief of the Shang elite that deceased ancestors were still in charge of the living world and that the elite had power over life and death.

collection, but the hierarchical difference between him and Fu Hao was probably reflected in the smaller numbers of jades and in the smaller sizes of his axes and halberds. Most jade axes and halberds were found inside the inner coffin, buried on either side of Ya Chang.64 The position of these jade weapons probably indicates that they were important personal items of the owner. As these arrangements suggest, jade weapons were probably intended to avert evil and to protect their owners. As can be understand from the records preserved in oracle bone inscriptions, the Anyang elite considered that the spiritual world to be full of danger, and their kings constantly divined about natural calamities, harvests, and warfare. It is surprising, however, that they seem to have preferred to use weapons made of stone materials against the spirits of the unseen world rather than using advanced weapons cast in metal. On the other hand, bronze weapons appear to be more diverse than those crafted in jade (fig. 4.9). Ya Chang was buried with more bronze weapons than was Fu Hao. He possessed seven bronze axes which were heavily decorated; seventy-three halberds; seventy-eight spearheads; six gongxingqi; three knives with upward-pointing tips, which were absent in the collection of Fu Hao; and 881 arrowheads which significantly outnumbered those of Fu Hao.65 The remarkable differences in the numbers of bronze weapons probably suggest that there was a gender bearing. While Fu Hao was buried with few bronze weapons, she possessed around five hundred ivory hairpins and many more small jade ornaments.66

The Anyang elite appear to have been very concerned with weapons, as suggested by the large numbers and diverse types found in their tombs. Their jade weapons seem to have provided links with earlier societies, and therefore with the past; these links probably reinforced their beliefs that the spirits and deceased ancestors continued to participate in worldly affairs of kingship and power. On the other hand, Anyang elite appear to be also concerned with the weapons that referred to neighboring societies. These included weapons from the Northern Zone and also to experimentation with subjects that referred to the south. The Anyang elite appear to have developed several parallel traditions the use of ceremonial objects made in weapon forms. It is surprising that jade and bronze weapons seem to have been developed quite independently.

The excavators did not find anything resembling the light-weight weapons associated with Fu Hao. However, many of the halberds belonging to Ya Chang were likely to have been ceremonial weapons, as they were decorated with inlaid turquoise. Those weapons probably functioned differently from those intended for fighting. While the finds in Tomb M54 are not so clear in their implications, the attendants buried in Tomb M303 at Dasikung were each found with a shafted halberd. It seems that the large tombs at Anyang contained two different kinds of bronze weapons. One of them was buried together with the deceased for purposes unknown. whereas the other type was utilized as the armaments of the attendants. On the basis of this observation, we can probably suggest that bronze weapons functioned to signify the role of the attendants. Copies of bronze weapons were also cast for burial.

Bronzes and Rituals in the Society at Xin’gan The bronze weapons and tools found at Xin’gan are very important. In regards to Xin’gan, this work has previously discussed the existence of an incomplete set of ritual vessels which represented only some types cast in the north; at Xin’gan were also a group of three bronze nao, which were probably gathered from different southern workshops, suggesting that the elite there probably shared a certain number of ideas about music and rituals with other southern groups. These bronzes indicate that the elite at Xin’gan were quite familiar with the ritual practices performed by the elite of the neighboring societies. The weapons and tools suggest some even more interesting possibilities, as they indicate that the Xin’gan elite appear to have established different performances in relation to warfare and agriculture.

The positions of the bronze axes found in M54 are also interesting. Although the axes from Anyang are usually 64 Moreover, a group jade slit rings and small slabs of animals were found on top of the body, whereas there were 153 jade tube beads underneath. Those jades were probably worn as ornaments. A jade was found in the mouth of Ya Chang. The Anyang elite appear to have believed that jades possessed mysterious qualities that could probably invoke spiritual powers in favor of the living and the deceased. 65 Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 135-168. Most halberds and spearheads from M54 were mounted to wooden staffs. They were bundled in groups and wrapped in textiles, then buried outside the inner coffin. 66 Fu Hao 1980, pp. 156─188 and 208-213.

See the descriptions of the finds in the tomb in Huayuanzhuang 2007, pp. 88-93. 68 Yidu Sufutun 1972, pp. 17-21. 67

93

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC

Figure 4.10. Drawings of some bronze weapons excavated from Xin’gan Dayangzhou. Transition period. Xin’gan 1997, pp. 91–116.

94

Case Study III: Bronze Weapons

Figure 4.12. Drawings of some stone zhang excavated from tomb M1046 at Anyang Liujiazhuang. Inscribed. Late Anyang period. Yue Zhanwei 2004, p. 381.

with the bronze weapons found in Tomb M54 at Anyang, the size of the weapon collection at Xin’gan was equally striking. What appears to be more important is that the Xin’gan weapons included a wide variety of forms.70 As illustrated in fig. 4.10, the spearheads feature many different blade types. Some were cast with a long tube shaft, while others were cast with a short one; some were cast with a leaf-shaped blade, while a few others were cast with a bullet-shaped blade. Still more remarkable is that a few were cast with two loops on either sides to secure the mounting, while some were only cast with one loop and others had none. The halberds and arrowheads also display a wide variety of forms (fig. 4.10).71 Such variety suggests that the weapons buried at Xin’gan were unlikely to have been cast in the same workshop. This is a rare example, because the weapons buried in the tombs of the elite in Henan seem most probable to have been cast locally. In contrast, the elite at Xin’gan appear to have established a collection by means of gathering individual pieces. Each category of halberds, spearheads, and arrowheads comprises at least four or five different

Figure 4.11. Drawing of some bronze tools excavated from Xin’gan Dayangzhou. Transition period. Xin’gan 1997, pp. 117–124.

There were 213 bronze weapons at the Xin’gan site. Those weapons included twenty-eight halberds, thirty-five spearheads, and 123 arrowheads (fig. 4.10).69 Compared

blades would have come from workshops other than those in Henan, see Jin Zhongwei 2011, pp. 142-156. 70 Zhan Kanxun and Liu Lin, the Jiangxi archaeologists, briefly note the many different weapons buried at Xin’gan (Zhan and Liu 1994, pp. 4445). Nonetheless, they did not further discuss their significance. 71 For brief discussions on the Xin’gan halberds and arrowheads, see Bagley 1993, pp. 32-34. Bagley points out that the bronze axes and a few halberds were probably imports from Henan, as similar finds were excavated in the tombs at Zhengzhou and Anyang.

69 Xin’gan 1997, pp. 87-115. The number of bronze weapons found in the middle and upper Yangtze regions is relatively small. From what has been found at Xin’gan and elsewhere in Sichuan, the casting of bronze ge

95

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC weapons, although there were more than seven hundred jade beads, tubes, and other personal ornaments excavated. In both Jiangxi and Hunan provinces, jade halberds and zhang are very rare.76 The few pieces found at Xin’gan appear to be part of an unusual collection. Also discovered were four halberds and one spearhead (fig. 4.5). As discussed above, those jade halberds were very similar to those found at Zhengzhou and Panlongcheng, and some similar pieces have also been found at Sanxingdui (fig. 4.4). Those jade halberds at Xin’gan were likely to have been imported from elsewhere.

types. Moreover, the collection includes six bronze axes and one helmet, which probably came from Henan. In addition, there were thirteen upward-pointing knives, a sword-like blade, and a few other rare weapons of unknown origin (fig. 4.10). The elite at Xin’gan seem to have established very interesting links with the peoples of other societies. The bronze gouji (fig. 4.10) is a unique weapon at Xin’gan. The gouji was an advanced form of halberd. It was cast with a vertical extension perpendicular to the blade; in addition, its top was cast with a backward-pointing tip, forming a hook (hence its name, gou-ji, meaning hookedhalberd.) Other than this piece found at Xin’gan, the earliest gouji to be excavated came from a Western Zhou tomb at Changping, Hebei province, near Beijing.72 The ji found at Xin’gan, therefore, suggest that some bronzecasting peoples had already developed this advanced form of halberd prior to the Zhou conquest. Indeed, gouji were widely cast and used in northern China during the Western Zhou period. The gouji at Xin’gan appear to suggest some significance in the military development in the south.

Another important feature of Xin’gan is its finds comprised more than one hundred bronze agricultural tools. There were 143 tools of four major types: ploughshares, two-pronged digging tools, sickle blades, and reaping knives.77 This collection includes most of the necessary implements for agricultural activities: ploughing soil, digging soil, removing wild grasses, and harvesting. A few ploughshares and reaping knives were decorated with simple motifs rendered in relief lines (fig. 4.11), while others were undecorated. In either case, it is clear that all tools were well cast, and they functioned in practical use.

Indeed, the Xin’gan elite appear to have possessed some connection to the peoples in Hanzhong and to those living further north. The large Xin’gan bronze face, 53 cm tall, shares the exact facial features found on the small bronze masks (fig. 1.12), 10-12 cm tall, discovered at Chenggu and Laoniupo.73 Bagley suggests that some weapons cast in the Wei River valley in the north – that is, the areas to the west of the Shang metropolitan regions – appear to have been derived from Xin’gan.74 The same face was also found on a tiny chariot fitting (fig. 1.12), 6.8 cm tall, excavated at Yidu Sufutun in Shandong, east of Henan.75 This face looks like a miniature version of that which was found at Xin’gan, having the same C-shaped horns extending from the top of the head, broad ears, round eyes, and grinning mouth and teeth. As this face was found on a chariot piece, it seems related to the peoples in the Northern Zone.

The practice of collecting and burying bronze tools observed at Xin’gan is so far a unique archaeological case. The elite at Xin’gan appear to have taken great care to feature the most important tool types representing various stages of agrarian production. As suggested by the ritual vessels and bells found at the same site, those agricultural tools seemlikely to have been intended for ritual purposes. This is a rather rare practice among the bronze-casting peoples. While the Neolithic peoples at Liangzhu and Longshan made reaping knives and other tools in jade forms for ceremonial use, many bronze-casting groups, including the Shang people in Henan, appear to have removed agricultural tools from their respective religious contexts.78 Nonetheless, the people at Xin’gan seem to have continued Neolithic practices.

While the elite in Henan displayed power by exhibiting ownership of weapons, it seems apparent that those at Xin’gan displayed their power by means of large and diverse collections of weapons. The Xin’gan finds are in this respect a unique example. The excavators at the Xin’gan site note that most of the bronze halberds appear to have been broken before they were buried. Moreover, the Xin’gan elite do not seem to have used many jade

The finds from Xin’gan suggest some challenges to previous understandings of the southern societies. Many scholars, including the principal excavators of the Xin’gan site, propose that the southern societies were probably secondary to the Shang people in terms of social organization, military technology, and even cultural developments.79 The bronze weapons from Xin’gan, nevertheless, provide a contrasting account. They indicate that the people at Xin’gan were clearly in control of a diverse variety of advanced weapons. These tools suggest that agricultural activities must have provided the major

Yang Hong 2005, pp. 65-71. The bronze faces in Hanzhong were buried with ritual vessels, halberds, and other bronzes, see Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 88-96; while those bronze faces at Laoniupo came from burial contexts, see Laoniupo 2000, pp. 296. 74 Bagley 1999, pp. 179-180. 75 The tombs excavated at Yidu Sufutun were looted before excavations. But there were important finds, because the sizes of some large tombs there were similar to those excavated at the royal cemetery at Anyang. The dates of the Sufutun tombs fall within the Anyang period. The chariot piece with a human face was retrieved by archaeologists at Qingzhou, together with a number of other chariot fittings; their original provenience is, therefore, unknown, see Xia and Liu 1996, pp. 21-28. 72 73

See the distribution of jade zhang on the map in Tang Chung 1994, back cover. 77 Xin’gan 1997, pp. 115-131. 78 In addition, bronze agricultural tools were very rare at most Shang and Western Zhou sites in the north. The collection at Xin’gan is a highly unusual case. See the descriptions of agricultural tools in Chen Zhenzhong, 1980, pp. 61-66; and Zhan and Liu 1993, pp. 27-32, 18. 79 See, for example, Peng and Peng 1999, pp. 575-584 and Zhan and Liu 1994, pp. 42-53. 76

96

Case Study III: Bronze Weapons slender halberds of more than 40 cm long are similar to those found in the tombs at Zhengzhou and Panlongcheng. They share a similarly tilted blade with a pointing tip. In the pits were also some shorter and wider halberds, which resemble those found in the tomb of Fu Hao (compare fig. 4.NEW and fig. 4.7). Those pieces were similarly decorated with cross-hatched incised lines. If the finds in Henan can serve as a chronological reference, the pieces buried at Sanxingdui may possibly have spanned more than a century. The long and slender pieces must have been passed down through living generations for decades before they were eventually burnt, broken, and buried in the pits.

source of wealth for the society. Supported by technology and stable provisions, the people at Xin’gan could not have been greatly dependent on the Shang. Indeed, their tradition of employing weaponry and agricultural tools for ritual purposes suggests that they held certain beliefs which must have been very different from those held by the Shang elite. While the Shang considered the supernatural world to be to an extent uncertain and harmful, the people at Xin’gan appear to have taken a more practical approach and to have benefited from natural resources obtained by practicing agriculture. The Ceremonial Blades from Sanxingdui

We must note an incised drawing found on a jade zhang discovered in pit no. 2 (fig. 1.14).87 It measures 54.2 cm long and about 8.8 cm wide. This zhang has straight sides and tilted ends. Two main registers of carving are found at the top and are repeated in reverse direction at the other end. In each register there is a row of three figures wearing headdresses and robes very similar to those of the sculptural bronze figures buried. The figures are either standing or kneeling, hands stretched out, getting ready to clasp a ritual object. In the register below, two zhang are erected upright between two triangular drawings, which probably represent the undulating mountains.88 This looks like a scene taken from a local ritual performance. The drawing might suggest that the figure, the zhang, and the mountains were related in the conception of the Sanxingdui people.

The Neolithic people produced blades with jade and other precious stones in imitation of their everyday tools or weapons. As noted above, those ceremonial blades became rare in the early Bronze Age societies. At Sanxingdui, however, there were discovered a surprisingly large number of jade and stone blades (figs. 4.4 and 4.5). In pit no. 1, the Sanxingdui people buried forty jade zhang; as well as eighteen jade halberds and twenty-seven stone halberds. In pit no. 2, they buried seventeen jade zhang; as well as twenty-one jade halberds and ten stone halberds (table 4.1).80 Most of the jade and stone blades were enormous in size. The largest blade, K1: 81 and 97, from pit no. 1 measures 162 cm long and 22 cm wide. Many others measure between 40 and 80 cm in length.81 Given their long lengths, the blades were all broken before they were buried. Some of them were apparently burnt. This feature reminds us of the state of some of the blades buried at the Neolithic site at Shenmu Xinhua (fig. 4.2). More important;y, the close connection between Sanxingdui and late Neolithic traditions indicate that the local bronzecasting people were quite unlike those we discussed above.

The halberds and zhang at Sanxingdui, however, display little reference to the practices in Henan. The blades were not buried in elite tombs; instead, they were burnt and destroyed before burial for purposes now unknown. Moreover, those blades at Sanxingdui spanned a broad chronological range, from the Erlitou to Anyang period, suggesting that some may have been in use for a long time. In contrast, the blades in Henan appear less spectacular in significance. They were rare, because they were only associated with the most high-ranking elites, and the types represented in each tomb are comparatively limited. The inscription found on Fu Hao’s jade halberd strongly suggests that ceremonial blades were probably imports. The strikingly large number of blades found at Sanxingdui, thus, suggests the possibility of distribution in a reversed direction – that is, that the ceremonial blades in Henan possibly came from Sanxingdui, or from elsewhere.

The blades from Sanxingdui were probably made in local workshops.82 The Sanxingdui craftsmen refined the blades by producing many exquisite designs. The notched sides of the zhang were rendered symmetrically, and openwork carving was also found in some rare pieces. Some zhang were probably coated with a thin layer of gold.83 Such a technique was probably borrowed from the peoples of the Northern Zone.84 The gold foil appears to have been used to emphasize the significance of the zhang, which were otherwise made in more durable material, jade or stone. In addition, the Sanxingdui people also cast zhang in bronze, although the metal versions now found are tiny and appear in small numbers only.85

Indeed, the blades at Sanxingdui suggest a connection with the late Neolithic society in Shaanxi further north. They shared the use of various blade types: zhang, halberds, axes, and reaping knives; and also the practice of burying blades as an accompaniment to burnt sacrifices. The people

Indeed, the blades from both pits at Sanxingdui probably indicate a lengthy development of craftsmanship.86 The Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 82-96;121-127; 368-385; and 411-413. Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 63-65; see also So 2001, pp. 154-157. 82 So 2001, pp. 153-155 and Xu 2008, pp. 211-214. 83 Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 352-354. 84 Xu 2008, pp. 214-218. 85 Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 283-285. 86 For further writing on the typology of the jade and stone halberds from Sanxingdui, see Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 433-437 and Chen Dean 1994, pp. 80 81

87-99. 87 We do not know who were the intended audience for these images. They were all rendered in lightly incised lines. As a result of the small space, the figures are tiny. 88 See also the descriptions of this zhang given in So 2001, pp. 162-163.

97

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Reconsidering Bronze and Jade Weapons in the Scheme of Three Levels Shared Types, Contrasting Practices Weapons appear to have been very important in the lives of the elite of the early bronze-casting societies. We know very little about the peoples of southern China during preAnyang times. The finds at Erlitou and Zhengzhou suggest that the peoples of the Yellow River regions were likely to have established frequent contact with those living in the south. The transmission of jade weapons from the Neolithic to the bronze-casting societies is an even more complicated issue. Nonetheless, the finds dating to before the Anyang period suggest that there was not a single source of origin in the use of ceremonial weapons. It appears as though the people of different societies simultaneously developed a similar interest in weaponry and in representing weapons within ritual contexts. More weapons have been found at Anyang. Some patterns present themselves: first, that there were parallel traditions in the use of jade and bronze weapons. Although jades were relatively rare, they were central in establishing and expressing the status of the great elite. Secondly, Anyang elite commissioned the casting of what can be understood to be replicas of weapons, and buried these with the deceased. These bronze weapons included halberds and spearheads, and they weigh half the normal size of their respective types. These weapons appear to have represented some symbolic meaning, drawing a connection between martial power and the spiritual world that remains unclear to us. Thirdly, some bronze weapons found in these burial contexts seem to have performed the function of executing human sacrifices during the funeral. The large, heavy, and usually decorative bronze axes found in the Anyang tombs suggest that some weapon types were probably intended to emphasize the power of the elite over their subjects and their control over life and death. Fourthly, the appearance of increasing numbers of weapons, horses, and chariots borrowed from the peoples of the Northern Zone appear to have given the Anyang elite new ideas regarding ways to express wealth and status. These observations suggest that the Anyang elite were concerned with both the number and variety of weapons in their tombs. It is clear that there existed a close association between ownership of weapons and the status of the elite.

Figure 4.13. Bronze halberds excavated from Guanghan Sanxingdui. Jade halberd from the same site. Possibly an imitation of the bronze versions. So 2001, pp. 170–171.

at Sanxingdui, in turn, may have been a significant group in facilitating the distribution of ceremonial blades. Some blades were found in late Bronze Age sites in southernmost China and in Southeast Asia. A few sporadic discoveries of zhang were also made in the lower Yangtze reaches.89 Ceremonial blades may have been precious items used in trade and exchange. In additional to the large number of jade and stone blades, the pits at Sanxingdui also included a small number of bronze weapons, which are now identified as halberds (fig. 4.13). These halberds look very different from those cast in Henan, and they were quite rare. They were probably mounted perpendicular to a wooden shaft. Their blades are thin and narrow and the sides are scalloped. Many of them were warped and destroyed by firing. There were fortyfour pieces in pit no. 1, and seventeen in pit no. 2.90 In addition to these, there were also a few jade halberds with chipped, scalloped sides (fig. 4.13), which were probably made in imitation of the bronze halberds.91 However, those jades were also rare. Bronze weapons do not appear to have been very important in the rituals performed at Sanxingdui.

To a large extent the weapon types and forms discovered at Xin’gan and Sanxingdui were very similar to those found at Anyang. At both Xin’gan and Sangxingdui, however, there appear some strikingly different patterns. The elite at Xin’gan were extremely interested in bronze halberds, spearheads, and arrowheads cast in diverse forms. Indeed, the collections found at Xin’gan were likely to have been gathered from a range of different bronze-casting workshops. This kind of activity suggests that the local elite had a keen interest in developing and refining the shapes and efficiency of bronze weapons cast locally. Moreover, the collection of diverse weapons was

Tang Chung 1994, figs. a-d, which gather the images of zhang found at different archaeological sites in China and Vietnam. 90 Sanxingdui 1999, pp. 54-60 and 283-291. 91 See, for example, So 2001, pp. 170-171. Similar scalloped jade halberds were also found at Jinsha, Jinsha 2005, p. 73. 89

98

Case Study III: Bronze Weapons pieces; all of them were made of stone, but the brief report published does not state what kind of stone was used. Many of them have a small hole drilled on one end. The craftsmanship seems rough; the blades are asymmetrically terminated with a tilted side and a sharp, pointing tip (fig. 4.12). These shapes are unusual in the context of Henan. However similar blades, which were more carefully polished and decorated with notched sides, have been found at Sanxingdui.

probably intended to exhibit the power of the elite through access to resources. Conversely, the elite at Sanxingdui displayed limited interest in representing bronze weaponry during ritual performance. They instead developed an independent set of rituals which required significant numbers of jades alongside bronze figures and trees. In sum, the southern contexts of bronze and jade were quite unlike those observed in the Anyang burials, suggesting that the Xin’gan and Sanxgindui elite developed very different practices and ideas regarding weaponry.

Despite the poor quality of its artefacts, Tomb M1046 contained probably the greatest number of stone weapons found at Anyang. Fu Hao In M1046, moreover, eighteen zhang dore different short inscriptions in ink, comprising between one and a few characters. The excavators reported that one of the zhang reads, “X (possibly a person) presented to Yi, the ancestor’; and another one reads, ‘X (the same person mentioned above) presented to Ding, the ancestor’. The inscriptions suggest that the zhang were buried as sacrifices made to deceased ancestors. It was highly unusual for a member of the elite to use ceremonial weapons made of stone material.

Social Changes at the End of the Anyang Period In 2004, some weapons excavated from Tomb M1046 at Anyang contrast significantly with those contemporary in the local tradition. The tomb was dated to the very end of the Anyang period, probably around c. 1000-c. 1045 BC.92 In the tomb, the excavators found fifty-five stone zhang – a type that had by this point been abandoned by the Anyang elite. The tomb suggests that some significant social changes may have taken place a short time before the founders of the Zhou took over Shang territory.

The finds from M1046 suggest that there was possibly a revival in the use of archaic material culture, since it was previously rare for the lesser elite at Anyang to use large numbers of jades or stone ceremonial items. The collection of zhang buried with this person suggests that there was possibly some alteration of the social structure of Anyang society. This kind of exchange in indicators of social status is remarkable, as M1046 indicates the use of stone and jade burial items was in this case no longer exclusively limited to the members of the royal family. The discovery of the tomb appears to be consistent with what I have suggested in the chapters on vessels and bells: it suggests that the Shang elite began to adopt some southern material features and practices towards the end of the Anyang period.

Tomb M1046 was located at Liujiazhuang, in the southern part of the Anyang sites. It was approximately 1 km away from Tomb M160 at Guojiazhuang to the northeast, and 3 km away from the tomb of Fu Hao in the north. Yang Xizhang and his excavation team members revealed 1200 large and small tombs at Liujiazhuang. Tomb M1046 is the richest intact tomb discovered to date.93 It was a fairly large tomb measuring 4.25 m long and 2.16 m wide. The tomb occupant was buried with thirty-three bronze ritual vessels, suggesting that he or she was an important person. In addition, the excavators found twenty-eight bronze ge, twenty-seven bronze spearheads, and 184 arrowheads. The arrowheads were buried in clusters of varying numbers beside the six sacrificed individuals in the tomb.94 On the other hand, the bronze halberds and spearheads were buried outside the inner coffin. Those halberds and spearheads are thin and light, weighting around 150 g each.95 Clearly, they were not practical weapons; they were probably specially cast for burial, as were those found in the other Anyang tombs discussed above.

Ideas about Weaponry in Other Societies Conversely, the peoples in Hunan and Hanzhong shared little of this interest in using weapons for ceremonial purposes. There hardly any weapons have been found to date in Hunan, despite the large number of discoveries of heavy bronze bells and vessels. Jade weapons are rare as well. Although future excavations may alter our present understanding about the Hunan societies, the finds at Hanzhong present an even more puzzling case.

All stone zhang were buried outside the inner coffin, next to the bronze vessels and weapons. Most of them were found damaged at the time of excavation. They were probably broken by the weight of the earth, when the wooden structure of the tomb collapsed.96 They were unlikely to have been destroyed intentionally like those found at Sanxingdui. The excavators identified fifty-five

As Hanzhong is a crucial geographical region that connected the Yangtze basins with the Wei River valley, the present finds, however scattered they appear, already suggest frequent contact between the peoples of Sanxingdui, Xin’gan, and also Baoji (the Baoji society existing slightly later in time.) Future excavations in this region will most probably stimulate new ideas regarding the weaponry of the Yangtze peoples and their interactions with the people of Shaanxi, the possible metropolitan areas of the Zhou founders.

Yue Zhanwei 2004, pp. 359-389. Yue Zhanwei 2004, p. 359. 94 Similarly, t Tomb M54 at Huayuangzhuang features the burial of some attendants of the tomb occupant and some people who were probably executed during the time of the burial. One of those six individuals was executed before burial, and his head was found in a bronze vessel buried next to his body. The others were buried with varying numbers of halberds, spears, and arrows. See Yue Zhanwei 2004, pp. 360-361. 95 Yue Zhanwei 2004, pp. 375-376. 96 Yue Zhanwei 2004, pp. 378-383. 92 93

99

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC As I have described in Chapter One, the bronze vessels at Hanzhong were most likely to have been collected from workshops in Henan and in the south. However, at Hanzhong were also discovered very fine weapons, which do not resemble any others discovered to date. They are crescent-shaped, and their sides were sharp with even serrations (fig. 1.13), usually between 35 and 50 cm long. They appear to be a version of a halberd, and were most probably locally cast. The peoples in Hanzhong buried these ‘halberds’ together with ritual vessels and with small disc-shaped objects (that the excavators called the pao), which were probably the central fitting of shields made in wood. In Hanzhong, bronze casters also followed, or shared the same practice as did the Sanxingdui peoples in their production of small zhang in bronze. These finds seem to suggest that the Hanzhong people were relatively advanced in military technology. As suggested by the contexts of the Hanzhong weapons, local elite appear to have valued bronze weapons in ways which contrast strikingly with the treatment of weapons elsewhere. There probably existed a cultural centre where weaponry was understood differently.

100

5 Conclusion Recent archaeological finds in South China reveal the fact that a number of settled, bronze-casting societies were developed in the Yangtze regions during a period more or less contemporaneous with that of the Shang people, who had established a highly organized and technologically sophisticated society in Henan during the latter half of the second millennium BC.

result overthrew both the Shang and the peoples of the south – i.e., the dispersal of bronze casting techniques without corresponding transmission of ritual practices or sacred genealogical authority which would ensure loyalty to the Shang (established in chapter two), created an environment in which the southern peoples refined superior casting techniques (presumably established through the analysis of superior nao bells in chapter three) and that in turn led the south to innovate new weapons provided to the Zhou which were factors in the conquest of the Shang (chapter four).

This work does not attempt to refute long-established understanding of the significance and power of the Shang elite. However, it argues that many southern societies were, nonetheless, likely to have engaged in ritual practices and to have held ideas which differed greatly from those established in Henan, suggesting that the southern groups were probably independent of Shang power, in both political and cultural terms. Incidentally, this work contributes to the field of Shang archaeology, which is defined in a chronological sense, by incorporating all available published bronzes and related archaeological materials found in most southern provinces to interpret the origins, technological development, and cultural interactions of the Yangtze societies.

This popular understanding of a one-way transmission of ritual culture from the Shang to the south is largely derived from an analysis of bronze vessels, which do superficially appear to bear out a basic Shang to the south trajectory, as these vessel types and associated casting technology were undeniably borrowed from the Shang and transmitted from Panlongcheng. However, ritual use of bronze objects and its bearing on social and cultural differences demonstrate that the case was not as simple as that. Even though the southern peoples borrowed and used bronze vessels, their adaptation of these vessels—in a wide variety of ways, including alternation of materials, addition of animalian ornamentation, distorted taotie, differing groupings of vessels, use of these vessels in diverse burial contexts— all indicate that none of these people could have had the same conception of the ritual meaning of these vessels. Far from being a simple north to south transfer of culture, the material evidence suggests many difference cultures which altered elements of Shang technology to meet their own needs, and in the case of Xin’gan, may even have influenced the Shang in turn. So from the very beginning you’ve destabilised one of the core assumptions and bodies of supposed evidence used in support of the popular reductive understanding of the Shang and the south.

The work adopted a materialist approach, which is based on the form and contexts of objects, to discuss the cultural values of their producers. These objects in turn reinforce those values by shaping the intentions of those who used them. Specifically, Rawson’s three-level model of material analysis is applied to assess how bronze vessels, bells and weapons were used in the south and from this to make inferences about how cultural understandings of these objects differed between these societies, and contrasted with that of the Shang. Among all bronzes excavated, ritual vessels were first cast in Henan, whereas the southern sites included both imports from Henan and those which were cast locally in the Yangtze workshops. The variety of southern borrowing patterns, such as reproducing some elements typical of Shang bronze sets but not others, is evidence that these societies did adopt the underlying ritual and religious concepts these bronzes were originally created to represent. However, dynamic, mutual influence of the south upon the Shang is also noted in the analysis of the sites at Baoji and Luyi Taiqinggong.

The recurring discoveries of zun, lei, and pou suggest the independent southern peoples had their own complex network of interactions. It is in this background that a revised understanding of nao bells is necessary. They were not only culturally distinct from those of the Shang, but were also in some respects technologically more advanced – and most importantly of all, were more likely than the Shang to be the progenitor of Zhou yongzhong bells. Based on those observations, these southern peoples were actually keys to the development of musical bronze bells, one of the most iconic and celebrated technologies of ancient China.

Altogether the three case studies suggest that diverse, culturally southern societies which adopted Shang bronze casting technology but did not share Shang genealogical loyalties, ended up refining and improving that technology, making contact with the Northern Zone and becoming a source of superior weapon types for the Zhou, who as a

Weapons present a more difficult case for study, because they came in rather different form and materials, i.e. stone 101

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC and bronze. Southern ritual weapons, as found in the case of Sanxingdui, were used differently from that of the Shang, indicating different ritual concepts. Because of the fact that the Anyang weapon types were influenced by contact with the Northern Zone, the argument may be taken further to dismantle the idea that the Shang were culturally monolithic and simplistically dominated the region. In contrast, the stone weapons of the Sanxingdui culture demonstrate continuity with Neolithic traditions, which was then likely re-injected into Chinese society through late Anyang borrowing. In other words, the Sanxingdui people were responsible for the preservation and transmission through the Shang of some of Chinese culture’s most ancient elements. The present idea of an essential ‘Chineseness’ based on the dominion of a single group ought to be revised. In fact, the rich heterogeneous nature of the culture was most probably its earliest origins. Even though this conclusion may appear more speculative than the convincing case about nao bells, it is still a worthy remark about the cultural and technological independence of the south.

Weapons discovered to date suggest that some contact between the peoples in the Yellow and Yangtze River regions was likely to have been established as early as the Erlitou period, before bronze-casting became a widespread and well-developed technique. These contacts were rather important. The Shang and the Sanxingdui elite not only shared similar jade forms, but also shared similar practices in using jades to perform ritual activities. To some extent it is possible to argue that Shang and the Sanxingdui elite shared similar ritual ideas that were otherwise not wellreceived or developed in other Yangtze societies, where ritual jades were nearly absent. This contrast in ritual activity suggests that each of the bronze-casting societies of the Shang period developed quite independently of one another. Some groups sought power by acknowledging a genealogical lineage or cultural past; whereas others negotiated their privileged identifies by developing new material forms or by reproducing exotic features in their respective systems of material culture. The bronzes cast in the southern workshops evince an unprecedented level of cultural diversity, which soon faded after the Zhou conquest of the Shang. My arguments therefore echo the statement by which Bagley concludes his chapter on Shang archaeology: ‘…at the time of the [Zhou] conquest civilized communities must have existed at many places in the Yangtze valley, from Sichuan to the sea, while simpler bronze-using societies occupied the Wei River valley and the vast expanses of the Northern Zhou. The Anyang kings had dealings with many of these areas, and they had powerful neighbours in Shandong as well. The civilized world on the eve of the Zhou conquest was large, diverse, and intricately interconnected.’1 While the received texts impel us to think that the Shang people were the only unique civilized group on the vast territory of ‘China’, examination of the southern bronzes instead allows us to consider different groups possessing distinct material culture, social practices, and ritual ideas. Those differences will certainly stimulate further thought and research into the new, central theme of ‘Shang archaeology’ when archaeological work takes place in the Yangtze areas in the future.

In fact, bronze bells are one of the most important southern casting traditions, as they developed entirely independently of the Henan workshops. The technological superiority of southern bronze bells suggests that the southern societies were organized significantly differently from their Shang counterparts. The elite in Hunan and in some other southern centres commissioned the casting of bronze bells for musical performances. Some people in those societies must have acquired sophisticated knowledge in musicology, and in the practical principles of mathematics and physics necessary for controlling the sizes and melodic capacity of bells. Moreover, they established a strikingly different set of actions by which to materialize the ritual performance; these actions must have included musical performance, the musical set up which included other instruments alongside the bells, as well as the burial of individual bells in the wilderness. Contrary to their Hunan contemporaries, bronze bells were remarkably minor components of Shang rituals. The peoples in Hanzhong and Sanxingdui were unlikely to have locally cast either nao or yongzhong. Despite some exchange of bronzes and jades, it appears that the elite at Sanxingdui posssessed very limited ritual contact with the Shang or with other Yangtze peoples.

As far as archaeological finds suggest, the geographical extent of the Yangtze societies appears to have been relatively small when compared to the Shang n. As argued by this work, however, these societies demonstrate closely, if not equally, sophisticated development. At this point the reason this work is entitled resemblance and resistance become clear: the title refers to the complicated and multidirectional contact in this period that resulted in borrowing, sharing, or resisting of forms and designs from neighbouring societies.

The case of weapons emphasizes the complex network of contacts established among the Shang and the southern societies. On one hand, the juxtaposition of bronze and jade ceremonial weapons in the Shang and some southern societies appears to have represented different forms of continuity of some late Neolithic practices. The elite at Sanxingdui probably acknowledged Neolithic practices and shared some ideas about using weapons made in jade form. In contrast, the peoples in Hanzhong, and those in the mid and lower Yangtze valleys rarely employed jade weapons for ritual purposes. In this aspect the peoples at Sangxingdui appear to be most unique among all southern groups now known.

The Yangtze peoples did not entirely fade out of archaeological records. Some southerners appear to have been active in the north during the late Shang and

1

102

Bagley 1999, p. 230.

Conclusion early Western Zhou periods. Bronze bells from Hunan were accurately copied in Shaanxi workshops; highfired ceramics began to appear in significant number in southern Henan; and jade and stone zhang appeared again in northern burials. We still know very little about the roles of the southerners during the Zhou conquest of the Shang, however. However, it becomes clear that the world of the Shang and Zhou peoples was far more complicated and dynamic than in the impression provided by received texts. This work has discussed the intricate relationships between the Shang and the south during different phases. The relationship between the Zhou founders and the peoples of the Yangtze supply another rich topic for future research.

103

Bibliography Bagley 1980 Bagley, Robert. ‘The Zhengzhou phase (Erligang Period)’ and ‘The appearance and growth of regional bronze-using cultures’ in Wen Fong (ed.) The Great Bronze Age of China, New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980, pp. 95–133.

Allan 2005 Allan, Sarah (ed.). The Formation of Chinese Civilization: an Archaeological Perspective, Yale University Press and New World Press: New Haven and London, 2005. Allan 2007 Allan, Sarah. ‘Erlitou and the formation of Chinese civilization: toward a new paradigm’, Journal of Asian Studies, 2007, vol. 66, no. 2, pp. 461–496.

Bagley 1987 Bagley, Robert. Shang Ritual Bronzes in the Arthur M. Sackler Collections, Cambridge, Mass.: Arthur Sackler Foundation and Arthur M. Sackler Museum, 1987.

Anhui 1987 Anhui Provincial Museum. Anhui sheng bowuguan cang qingtongqi 安徽省博物館藏青銅器, Shanghai: Shanghai Renmin Meishu, 1987. Anhui

Bagley 1988 Bagley, Robert. ‘Sacrificial pits of the Shang period at Sanxingdui in Guanghan county, Sichuan Province’, Arts Asiatiques, no. XLIII, 1988, pp. 78–86.

Anyang 1994 Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Yinxu de Faxian yu Yanjiu 殷墟的發現與研究, Beijing: Science Press, 1994.

Bagley 1990a Bagley, Robert. ‘A Shang City in Sichuan Province’, Orientations, 1990, no. 11, pp. 52–67.

Anhui 1994 Anhui Provincial Museum. Provincial Museum, Beijing: Wenwu, 1994.

Bagley 1990b Bagley, Robert. ‘Shang Ritual Bronzes: Casting Technique and Vessel Design’, Archives of Asian Arts, 1990, no. 43, pp. 7–20.

Anyang Dasikungcun 1958 Excavation Team for Anyang, Institute of Archaeology, CASS. ‘1958 lian chun Henan Anyang shi Dasikungcun Yin dai muzhang fajue jianbao’ 1958年春河南安陽大司空村發掘簡報, Kaogu tongxun, 1958. 10, p.56.

Bagley 1992 Bagley, Robert. ‘Changjiang bronzes and Shang archaeology’ in Proceedings: International Colloquium on Chinese Art History, 1991, Antiquities, Part I, Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1992, pp. 209– 255.

Anyang Dasikungcun 1988 Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. ‘Anyang Dasikungcun dongnan de yizhuo Yin mu’ 安陽大司空 村東南的一座殷墓, Kaogu, 1988.10, pp. 865–874.

Bagley 1993 Bagley, Robert. ‘An early Bronze Age Tomb in Jiangxi Province’, Orientations, 1993, vol. 24, no. 7, pp. 20–36.

Anyang Liujiazhuang 2004 Excavation Team for Anyang, Institute of Archaeology, CASS. ‘Anyang Yinxu Liujiazhuang bei 1046 hao mu’ 安陽殷墟劉 家莊北1046號墓, Kaoguxue jikan, 2004, no. 15, pp. 359–389.

Bagley 1999 Bagley, Robert. ‘Shang archaeology’, in The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., edited by Michael Loewe and Edward Shaughnessy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999, pp. 124–231.

Anyang Qijiazhuang 1991 Excavation Team for Anyang 安陽文物工作隊. ‘Yinxu Qijiazhuang dong 269 haomu’ 殷墟戚家莊東269號墓, Kaogu xuebao, 1991.3, pp. 325–352.

Bagley 2000 Bagley, Robert. ‘Percussion’, in Music in the Age of Confucius, edited by Jenny So, Washington, D.C.: Freer Gallery of Art and Arthur Sackler Gallery, 2000, pp. 35–63.

Anyang Xiqu 1979 Excavation Team for Anyang, Institute of Archaeology, CASS中國社會科學院考 古研究所安陽工作隊. ‘1969–1977 lian Yinxu xiqu muzhang fajue baogao’ 1969–1977年殷墟西區墓葬發 掘報告, Kaogu xuebao, 1979.1, pp. 27–146.

Bagley 2001 Bagley, Robert (ed.). Ancient Sichuan: Treasures from a Lost Civilisation, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2001.

Ao and Shao 1985 Ao Yousheng 敖有勝 and Shao Yiting 蕭一亭. ‘Pingxiang xian you chutu xi Zhou yongzhong’ 萍鄉縣又出土西周甬鐘, Jiangxi lishi wenwu, 1985.2, p.18.

Bagley 2004 Bagley, Robert. ‘Anyang writing and origin of the Chinese writing system’, in The First Writing, edited by Stephen D. Houston, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004, pp. 190–249.

Bagley 1977 Bagley, Robert. ‘P’an-lung-ch’eng: a Shang city in Hupei’, Artibus Asiae, 1977.24, pp. 165– 213. .

Bagley 2005 Bagley, Robert. ‘The Prehistory of Chinese Music Theory’, Proceedings of British Academy, 2005, no. 131, pp. 41–90.

105

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Bureau. Luyi Taiqinggong Changzikou mu 鹿邑太清 宮長子口墓, Zhengzhou: Zhongzhou guzhi, 2000.

Bagley 2008 Bagley, Robert. Max Loehr and the Study of Chinese Bronzes: Style and Classification in the History of Art, New York: East Asian Program, Cornell University, 2008.

Chen and Yang 1984 Chen Xu 陳旭 and Yang Xinping 楊新平. ‘Shang Zhou qingtong yue’ 商周青銅鉞, Zhongyuan wenwu, 1984.4, pp. 71–5, 30.

Barnard 1961 Barnard, Noel. Bronze Casting and Bronze Alloys in Ancient China. Tokyo, 1961.

Chen Dean 1994 Chen Dean 陳德安. ‘Shi lun Sanxingdui yu zhang de zhonglei, yuanyuan ji ji zhongjiao yiyi’ 試論三星堆玉璋的種類, in Tang Chung 1994, pp. 87–99.

Bo Quan 1981 Bo Quan 保全. ‘Xi’an Laoniupo chutu Shang dai zaoqi wenwu’ 西安老牛坡出土商代早期文 物, Kaogu yu wenwu, 1981.2, pp. 17–18.

Chen Dean 1998 Chen Dean; Wei Xuefeng 魏學峰; and Li Weigang 李偉綱. Sanxingdui: Changjiang Shang You Wenming Zhongxing Tan Suo 三星堆︰長江上游 文明中心探索, Chengdu: Sichuan Renmin, 1998.

Buchli 2002a Buchli, Victor (ed.). The Material Culture Reader, Oxford and New York: Berg, 2002. Buchli 2002b Buchli, Victor. ‘Introduction’, in Buchli 2002a, pp. 1–22.

Chen Fangmei 1987 Chen Fangmei 陳芳妹. ‘The stylistic development of Shang and Zhou bronze bells’ (translated by Rob Linrothe), in Rosemary Scott and Graham Hutt (eds). Style in the East Asian Tradition: Colloquies on Art & Archaeology in Asia No. 14. London: SOAS, 1987, pp. 19–37.

Cai Jishang 1960 Cai Jishang 蔡季襄. ‘Jie shao jijian cong fei tong zhong jianxuan chulai de zhongyao wenwu’ 介紹幾件從廢銅中檢選出來的重要文物, Wenwu, 1960.3, pp. 75–76. Campbell 2014 Campbell, Roderick. Archaeology of the Chinese Bronze Age: from Erlitou to Anyang, Los Angeles: The Costen Institute of Archaeology, UCLA, 2014.

Chen Fangmei 1992 Chen Fengmei. ‘Palace Museum collection of alien-style weapons from Late Yin to early Chou dynasty—and inter-cultural relations in early China, part II of “bronze weapons of the Shang and Chou dynasties”’ 故宮所藏殷至周初的異形兵器及其 所反映的文化關係問題－商周青銅兵器研究之二, in Proceedings: International Colloquium on Chinese Art History, 1991, Antiquities, Part I, Taipei: National Palace Museum, 1992, pp. 257–301.

Cao Jinyan 1989 Cao Jinyan 曹錦炎. ‘Zhejiang chutu Shang Zhou qingtongqi chu lun’ 浙江出土商周青銅器 初論, Dongnan wenhua, 1989. 6, 1989, pp. 104–112. Cao Wei 2006 Cao Wei 曹瑋 (ed.). Hanzhong Chutu Shang Dai Qingtongqi, Volumes 1–3. 漢中出土商代 青銅器 (卷1–3), Chengdu: Bashu Shu She, 2006.

Chen Fangmei 2000 Chen Fangmei. ‘Bronze weapons from the south: the Xin’gan case’ in Whitfield and Wang 2000, pp. 125–136.

Chai Fulin 2005 Chai Fulin 柴福林; He Taotao 何滔滔 and Gong Chun龔春. ‘Shaanxi Chenggu xian xin chutu Shang dai qingtongqi’ 陝西省城固縣新出土商代青銅 器, Kaogu yu wenwu, 2005. 6, pp. 3–4.

Chen Fangmei 2005 Chen Fangmei. ‘Shang Zhou “xi you” qilei de wenhua yihan—suo wei “bian yuan” wenhua yanjiu de yiyi’ 商周「稀有」青銅器類的文 化意涵—所謂「邊緣」文化研究的意義, Meishushi yanjiu jikan, 2005, no. 19, pp. 1–62.

Chang 1980 Chang Kwang-chih. Shang Civilization, New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1980. Chang 1983 Chang, Kwang-chih. Art, Myth, and Ritual: the Path to Political Authority in Ancient China, Cambridge, Mass. And London: Harvard University Press, 1983.

Chen Guoan 1983 Chen Guoan 陳國安. ‘Hunan Taojiang xian chutu Sima fangzuo gui’ 湖南桃江縣出 土四馬方座銅簋, Kaogu,1983.9, pp. 842–843.

Chang 1986 Chang, Kwang-chih. The Archaeology of Ancient China, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1986.

Chen Guoliang 2008 Chen Guoliang 陳國梁. ‘Erlitou wenhua tongqi yanjiu’ 二里頭文化銅器研究, in Erlitou 2008, pp. 124–274.

Chang and Yang 2001 Chang Huaitao 張懷瑫 and Yang Yutian 楊玉田. ‘1986 lian chuan Laoniupo Shang dai muzang bufen rengu de jian ding’ 1986年春老牛 坡商代墓葬部份人骨的鑒定, in Liu Shi’ao 2001, pp. 428–429.

Chen Jianming 2004 Chen Jianming 陳建明 (ed.). Hunan Sheng Bowuguan: Hunan Shang Zhou Qingtongqi Chenlie湖南省博物館：湖南商周青銅器 陳列, Changsha: Hunan Provincial Museum, 2004. Chen Mengjia 1988 Chen Mengjia 陳夢家. Yinxu Boci Zhong Shu 殷墟卜辭綜述, Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1988.

Chang Jiacheng 1974 Chang, Jiacheng 張家誠; Zhu Mingtao 朱明道; and Chang Xiangong張先恭. ‘Wo Guo Qihou Bianqian di Chubu Tantao’ 我國氣候變遷 的初步探討, Kexue tongbao, no. 4, 1974, pp. 168–175.

Chen Peifen 1998 Chen Peifen 陳佩芬. ‘Yinxu yi wai de Shang dai wanqi qingtongqi’ 殷墟以外的商代晚期 青銅器, in Zhongguo Qingtongqi Quanji—Shang 4, ed by Duan Shuan, Beijing: Wenwu, 1998, pp. 2–25.

Changzikou 2000 Henan Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology and Zhoukou Municipal Cultural

106

Bibliography Chen Quanyou 2005 Chen Quanyou 陳荃有. Zhongguo Qingtong Yuezhong Yanjiu 中國青銅樂鐘研 究 (Research on the Musical Bells of China), Shanghai: Shanghai Musical Institute Press, 2005.

Dong Chuping 1990 Dong Chuping 董楚平. ‘Yue, qi kaobian—guan yu Liangzhu wenhua yuji fuxing liqi de mingming wenti’ 鉞、戚考辨—關於良渚文化玉質斧 形禮器的命名問題,

Chen Xianyi 1983 Chen Xianyi 陳賢一. ‘Panlongcheng Shang dai Erligang qi muzang taoqi chu tan’ 盤龍城商 代二里崗期墓葬初探, in Zhongguo kaogu xue hui di si ci nian hui lunwenji, 1983, pp. 48–56.

Du and Tang 2005 Du Xiurong 杜秀榮 and Tang Jianjun 唐建軍. Zhongguo Ditu Ji中國地圖集 (The Atlas of China), Hong Kong: Kunyu Publishing Co. Ltd., 2005.

Chen Xu 2001 Chen Xu 陳旭. Xia Shang kaogu 夏商考 古, Beijing: Wenwu, 2001.

Du Jinpeng 2005 Du Jinpeng 杜金鵬. ‘Panlongcheng Shang dai gongdian jizhi taolun’ 盤龍城商代宮殿基址 討論, Kaogu xuebao, 2005.2, pp. 161–183.

Chen Zhenzhong 1980 Chen Zhenzhong 陳振中. ‘Yin Zhou de feng si’ 殷周的耒耜, Wenwu, 1980.12, pp. 61–66.

Duan Shaojia 1963 Duan Shaojia 段紹嘉. ‘Jieshao Shaanxi sheng bowuguan de ji jian qingtongqi’ 介紹 陝西省博物館的幾件青銅器, Wenwu, 1963. 3, pp. 43–45.

Chen Zhongyuan 2005 Chen, Zhongyuan; Wang, Zhanghua; Schneiderman, Jill; Tao, Jin; and Cai, Yongli. ‘Holocene Climate Fluctuations in the Yangtze Delta of Eastern China and the Neolithic Responses’, The Holocene, 2005, no.15 (6), pp. 915–924.

Erlitou 1999 The Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Yanshi Erlitou: 1959– 1978 nian kaogu fajue baogao 偃師二里頭︰1959– 1978年考古發掘報告, Beijing: Zhongguo Dai Baikechuanshu, 1999.

Cheng and Wang 1986 Cheng Dingguo 盛定國 and Wang Ziming 王自明. ‘Ningxiang Yueshanpu faxian Shang dai da tong nao’ 寧鄉月山舖發現商代大銅鐃, Wenwu, 1986.2, pp. 44–45.

Erlitou 2008 Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (ed.). Zhongguo zaoqi qingtong wenhua: Erlitou wenhua quanti yanjiu 中 國早期青銅文化︰二里頭文化專題研究, Beijing: Kexue, 2008.

Chinese Bronzes II 1997 Ma Chengyuan 馬承源 (ed.). Zhongguo qingtongqi quanji si Shang中國青銅器全 集 商 (The compendium of Chinese Bronzes, vol. 2 Shang), Beijing: Wenwu, 1998.

Fairbank 1962 Fairbank, Wilma. ‘Piece-mold craftsmanship and Shang bronze design’, Archives of Chinese Art Society of America, 1962, no. 16, pp. 8–15.

Chinese Bronzes III 1997 Ma Chengyuan (ed.). Zhongguo qingtongqi quanji san Shang中國青銅器 全集 商 (The compendium of Chinese Bronzes, vol. 3 Shang), Beijing: Wenwu, 1998.

Falkenhausen (Luo Tai) 1991 Falkenhausen, Lothar von. ‘Lun Jiangxi Xin’gan Dayangzhou Chutu de Qingtong Yueqi’ 論江西新干大洲出土的青銅樂器, Nanfang wenwu, 1991. 3, pp. 15–20, 6.

Chinese Bronzes IV 1998 Ma Chengyuan (ed.). Zhongguo qingtongqi quanji si Shang 中國青銅器全 集 四 商 (The compendium of Chinese Bronzes, vol. 4 Shang), Beijing: Wenwu, 1998.

Falkenhausen 1993a Falkenhausen, Lothar von. ‘On the historiographical orientation of Chinese archaeology’, Antiquity, 1993, no. 67 (257), pp. 839–49.

Dai Jingbiao 1982 Dai Jingbiao 戴敬標. ‘Xiaoyuan xian Zhongyuan gongshe faxian Xi Zhou tong ding’ 婺源縣中雲公社發現西周銅鼎, Jiangxi lishi wenwu, 1982. 2, p. 34.

Falkenhausen 1993b Falkenhausen, Lothar von. Suspended Music: Chime-bells in the Culture of Bronze Age China, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1993.

Dai Xiaobo 1996 Dai Xiaobo 戴小波. ‘Lianyuan shi chutu yi jian Shang dai tong you’ 蓮源市出土一件商 代銅卣, Wenwu, 1996.4, p. 85.

Falkenhausen 1995 Falkenhausen, Lothar von. ‘The regionalist paradigm in Chinese archaeology’ in Nationalism, Politics, and the Practice of Archaeology, edited by Philip L. Kohl and Clare Fawiett, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995, pp. 198–217.

Dai Xiuzheng 2000 Dai Xiuzheng 戴修政. ‘Hubei Shishao chutu Shang dai qingtongqi’ 湖北石首出土商 代青銅器, Wenwu, 2000. 11, pp. 57–59.

Falkenhausen 2002a Falkenhausen, Lothar von. ‘Some reflections on Sanxingdui’, in “Third International Conference on Sinology Academia Sinica. History: Regionalism in Ancient Art”. Taipei, Academia Sinica, 2002, pp. 1–33.

Dai Yingxin 1977 Dai Yingxin 戴應新. ‘Shaanxi Shenmu xian Shimao Longshan wenhua yizhi diaocha’ 陝西神木縣石卯龍山文化遺址調查, Kaogu, 1977.3, pp.154–157, 172. Dai Yingxin 1983 Dai Yingxin. ‘Shaanxi Shenmu Shimao yizhi diaocha shijue jianbao’ 陝西神木石卯遺 址調查試掘簡報, Shiqian yanjiu, 1983.2, pp.92–100.

Falkenhausen 2002b Falkenhausen, Lothar von. ‘The use and significance of ritual bronzes in the Lingnan region during the Eastern Zhou period’, Journal of East Asian Archaeology, 2002, no. 3 (1–2), pp. 194–236.

Dant 2005 Dant, Tim. Materiality and Society, New York: Open University Press, 2005. 107

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Gao Zhixi 1986 Gao Zhixi. ‘Lun Shang-Zhou tong bo’ 論商周銅鎛, Hunan kaogu jikan 1986.3, pp. 209–214, 109.

Falkenhausen 2006a Falkenhausen, Lothar von. Chinese Society in the Age of Confucius (1000– 250B.C.), Los Angeles: Costen Institute of Archaeology, UCLA, 2006.

Gao Zhixi 1992 Gao, Zhixi 高至喜. Lun Zhongguo nanfang chutu de Shang dai qingtongqi 論商代南方出 土的商代青銅器, in Zhongguo Kaoguxuehui Di Qi Ci Lianhui Lunwenji 中國考古學會第七次年會論文集, Beijing: Wenwu, 1992, pp. 76–88.

Falkenhausen 2006b Falkenhausen, Lothar von. ‘The external connections of Sanxingui’, Journal of East Asian Archaeology, 2006, no. 5 (1–4), pp.191–245. Fang Jianjun 2006 Fang Jianjun 方建軍. Shang Zhou yueqi wenhua jiegou yu shehui gongneng yanjiu 商周 音樂文化結構與社會功能研究, Shanghai: Shanghai College of Music, 2006.

Gao Zhixi 1992 Gao Zhixi. ‘Shang and Zhou Period Bronze Musical Instruments from South China’, Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, 1992, no. 55.2, pp. 262–271.

Feng Yuhui 1978 Feng Yuhui 馮玉輝. ‘Hunan Hangyang shijiao faxian qingtong sheng zun’ 湖南衡 陽市郊發現青銅牲尊, Wenwu 1978.7, p. 88.

Gao Zhixi 1993 Gao Zhixi. ‘Lun Zhongguo nanfang Shang-Zhou shiqi tong nao de xingshi, yanbian yu liandai’ 論中國南方商周時期銅鐃的型式、演變與 年代, Nanfang wenwu, 1993.2, pp. 45–53.

Feng Yuhui 1980 Feng Yuhui. ‘Hangyang bowuguan shoucang san jian Zhou dai tongqi’ 衡陽博物館收藏 三件周代銅器, Wenwu 1980.11, pp. 95–96.

Gao Zhixi 1997 Gao Zhixi. ‘Hunan xinchutu yuezu mingqi de niandai yu tedian 湖南新出越族銘器的年 代與特點’, in Ma Chengyuan 1997, pp. 83–90.

Fitzgerald-Huber 1995 Fitzgerald-Huber, Louisa G. ‘Qijia and Erlitou: the question of contacts with distant cultures’, Early China, 1995, no. 20, pp. 17–67.

Gao and Yasuda 2002 Gao Zhongwen 高崇文 and Yasuda, Yoshinori 安田喜憲. Changjiang liuyu qingtong wenhua yanjiu 長江流域青銅文化研 究 (Studies on the Bronze Age cultures found in the Yangtze River regions). Beijing: Science Press.

Fu Hao 1977 Zheng Zhenxiang 鄭振香 and Chen Zhida 陳志達. ‘Anyang Yinxu wu hao mu de fajue’ 安陽殷 墟五號墓的發掘, Kaogu xuebao, 1977.2, pp. 57–97. Fu Hao 1980 Zhang Tunsheng 張囤生 (ed.). Yinxu Fu Hao mu 殷墟婦好墓, Beijing: Wenwu, 1980.

Ge 1997 Ge, Yan. The Coexistence of Artistic Styles and the Pattern of Interaction: Sanxingdui during the Second millennium B.C. PhD dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, 1997.

Fujian Jian’ao 1980 Wang Zhenyong 王振鏞. ‘Fujian Jian’ao xian chutu xi Zhou tongzhong’ 福建建甌縣出 土西周銅鐘, Wenwu, 1980.11, p. 95.

Ge Jieping 1959 Ge, Jieping 葛介屏. ‘Anhui Funan faxian Yin-Shang shidai de qingtongqi’ 安徽阜陽發現 殷商時代的青銅器, Wenwu, 1959.1, p. 1.

Gao and Zhou 1966 Gao Zhixi 高至喜 and Zhou Shirong 周世榮. ‘Hunan sheng bowuguan xin faxian de jijian tongqi’ 湖南省博物館新發現的幾件銅器, Wenwu, 1966.4, pp. 1–6.

Ge Zhigong 1965 Ge, Zhigong 葛治功. ‘Anhui Jiashan xian Pogang Yinhe chutu de si jian Shang dai tongqi’ 安徵嘉山縣泊崗引河出土的四件商代銅器, Wenwu, 1965. 7, pp. 23–25.

Gao Xisheng 1996 Gao Xisheng 高西省. ‘Guanyu Shang-Zhou Zhong yixie wenti di tanta’ 關於商周鐘 一些問題的探討, Wenwu, 1996.1, pp.41–46.

Gong Xicheng 2005 Gong Xicheng 宮希成. ‘Wan’nan Shang Zhou qingtongqi faxian yu yanjiu’ 皖南商周青 銅器發現與研究, in Lu and Yang 2005, pp. 1–4.

Gao Zhixi 1960 Gao Zhixi 高至喜. ‘Shang dai renmian fangding’ 商代人面方鼎, Wenwu, 1960.10, pp. 57–58.

Gosden 2004 Gosden, Chris. Archaeology and Colonialism: Cultural Contact from 5000 B.C. to the Present. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Gao Zhixi 1963 Gao Zhixi. ‘Hunan Ningxiang Huangcai faxian Shang dai tongqi he yizhi’ 湖南寧鄉黃材發 現商代銅器和遺址 (The Shang bronzes and sites discovered at Hunan Ningxiang Hunangcai), Kaogu, 1963.12, pp. 646–648.

Gou, Baoping 1996 Gou Baoping 苟保平. ‘Chenggu Xian Wenhua Guan shoucang de qingtongqi’ 城固縣文 化館收藏的青銅器, Wenbo, 1996. 6, 1996, pp. 80–81.

Gao Zhixi 1984a Gao Zhixi. ‘Hunan sheng bowuguan cang Xizhou qingtong yueqi’ 湖南省博物館藏西周青 銅樂器, Hunan kaogu jikan 1984.2, pp. 29–37.

Guo Lixin 2004 Guo Lixin 郭立新. ‘Changjiang zhongyou diqu xin shiqi shidai zirang huanjing bianjian yanjiu’ 長江中游地區新石器時代自然環境變遷研 究, Zhongguo lishi dili luncong, 2004, vol.19, no.2, pp. 5–16.

Gao Zhixi 1984b Gao Zhixi. ‘Zhongguo nanfang chutu Shang-Zhou tongnao gailun’ 中國南方出土商周銅鐃 概論’, Hunan kaogu jikan 1984.2, pp. 128–135. Gao Zhixi 1984c Gao Zhixi 高至喜. ‘Lun Hunan chutu de Xizhou tongqi’ 論湖南出土的西周銅器, Jianghan kaogu 1984.3, pp. 59–68.

Guo Peng 2004 Guo Peng 郭鵬. ‘Yinxu qingtong bingqi yanjiu’ 殷墟青銅兵器研究, Kaoguxue jikan, 2004, no. 15, pp. 129–173. 108

Bibliography Guo Yanli 2006 Guo Yanli 郭妍利. ‘Cheng Yang bingqi yanjiu’ 城洋兵器研究 in Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 260–280.

Hu Houxuan 1974a Hu Houxuan. ‘Zhongguo nuli shehui de ren xuan he ren ji (shang bian)’ 中國奴隸社 會的人殉和人祭 (上篇), Wenwu, 1974.7, pp. 74–84.

Guo Yanli 2014 Guo Yanli 郭妍利. Shang dai qingtong bingqi yanjiu 商代青銅兵器研究, Beijing: Social Sciences Academic Press, 2014.

Hu Houxuan 1974b Hu Houxuan. ‘Zhongguo nuli shehui de ren xuan he ren ji (xia bian)’ 中國奴隸社會 的人殉和人祭 (下篇), Wenwu, 1974.8, pp. 56–67, 72.

Guo Yuanwei 1965 Guo Yuanwei 郭遠謂. ‘Jiangxi jin liang nian chutu de qingtongqi’ 江西近兩年出土的青 銅器, Kaogu, 1965. 7, pp. 372–373.

Hu Shaoren 1985 Hu Shaoren. ‘Yinfeng xian chutu Shang dai tong nao’ 宜縣出土商代銅鐃, Jiangxi lishi wenwu, 1985.1, p. 12.

Guojiazhuang 1998 Yang Xizhang 楊鍚璋 and Liu Yiman 劉一曼. Anyang Yinxu Guojiazhuang Shang dai muzang 安陽殷墟郭家莊商代墓葬, Beijing: The Encyclopedia of China Publishing House, 1998.

Huang and Cai 1986 Huang Gangzheng 黃綱正 and Cai Musong 蔡慕松. ‘Liuyang Shuangfeng chutu Shang Zhou qingtongqi’ 瀏陽雙峰出土商周青銅器, Hunan wenwu 1986.1, pp. 56–57.

Han Kangxin 1997 Han Kangxin 韓康信. ‘Xin’gan Shang dai da mu renya jianding’ 新干商代大墓人牙鑒 定 in Xin’gan 1997, pp. 234–237.

Huang and Li 2004 Huang Shuigeng 黃水根 and Li Kun 李昆. ‘Lue lun Wucheng yizhi Shang dai cheng chang de xinji’ 略論吳城遺址商代城牆的性質, paper delivered at 2004 conference, www.xianqin.org/xr_ html/articles/yshwhxh/195.html.

Han Yongxiang 2007 Han Yongxiang 韓用祥. ‘Hubei Huangpi Panlongcheng Lijiazui erhao mu fajue de buzhong ziliao’ 湖北黃陂盤龍城李家嘴二號墓發掘 的補充資料, Wenwu, 2007.8, pp. 93–94.

Huang and Wang 1997 Huang Gangzheng 黃綱正 and Wang Ziming 王自明. ‘Hunan Ningxiang Laoliangcang chutu Shang dai tong biannao’ 湖南寧鄉老糧倉出土 商代銅編鐃, Wenwu, 1997.12, pp.16–27.

Hayashi 1991 Hayashi, Minao 林巳奈夫. Chūgoku kogyoku no kenkyū 中國古玉の研究, Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kobukan, 1991.

Huang Mingcong 2008 Huang Mingcong 黃銘崇. ‘Shang wangchao wanqi de zhengzhi dijing’ 商王朝 晚期的政治地景, delivered at Zhongyang yanjiuyuan lishi yuyan yanjiusuo bashi zhounian suo qin xueshu yantaohui 中央研究院歷史語言研究所八十周年所 慶學術研討會, held at Taipei, 22nd–23rd October, 2008, pp. 1–118.

Hayashi Minao 1981 Hayashi Minao 林巳奈夫. ‘YinZhou jitai no chihou kata seidouki’ 殷, 西周時代の 地方型青銅器, 考古學メモワール 1980, Kyoto: Department of Archaeology, Kyoto Univeristy, 1980, pp. 17–58. Hayashi Minao 1997 Hayashi Minao. ‘Guanyu Changjiang zhongxiayou qingtongqi de ruogan wenti 關於長江中下游青銅器的若干問題, in Ma Chengyuan 1997a, pp.

Huang Yongchuan 1996 Huang Yongchuan 黃永川 (ed.). Shang Zhou qingtong bingqi ji Fu Chai jian tezhan lunwenji 商周青銅兵器暨夫差劍特展論文集, Taipei: National Museum of History, 1996.

He Jiejun 1982 He Jiejun何介鈞. ‘Xiangtan xian chutu Shang dai duan zun’ 湘潭縣出土商代豕尊, Hunan kaogu jikan, 1982.1, pp. 19–20.

Huayuanzhuang 2007 Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (ed.). Anyang Yinxu Huayuanzhuang dongdi Shang dai muzang 安陽 殷墟花園莊東地商代墓葬, Beijing: Kexue, 2007.

He Jiejun 2001 He Jiejun. ‘Hunan kaogu de shiji huimao’ 湖南考古的世紀回眸, Kaogu, 2001.4, pp.3– 12.

Hubei Music 1999 Editorial Board for Zhongguo Yinyue Wenwu Daxi 《中國音樂文物大系》總編輯 部. Zhongguo Yinyue Wenwu Daxi (Hubei) 中國音 樂文物大系 (湖北卷) (A Complete Volume on the Chinese Musical Relics: Hubei), Zhengzhou: Da Xiang Press, 1999.

Henan Music 1996 Editorial Board for Zhongguo Yinyue Wenwu Daxi 《中國音樂文物大系》總編輯 部. Zhongguo Yinyue Wenwu Daxi (Henan) 中國音 樂文物大系 (河南卷) (A Complete Volume on the Chinese Musical Relics: Henan), Zhengzhou: Da Xiang Press, 1996.

Hunan 1972 Hunan Provincial Museum. ‘Hunan sheng gong nong bing qunzong rui ai juguo wenhua yizhan’ 湖南省工農兵群眾熱愛祖國文化遺產, Wenwu, 1972.1, pp. 6–7.

Higham 1996 Higham, Charles. The Bronze Age of Southeast Asia, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.

Hunan 1983 Hunan Provincal Museum. Provincial Museum, Beijing: Wenwu, 1983.

Hsu 1999 Hsu, Cho-yun. ‘The Spring and Autumn Period’ in Loewe and Shaughnessy 1999, pp. 545–586.

Hunan

Hunan 2007 Hunan Provincial Museum. Hunan chutu Yin-Shang Xi-Zhou qingtongqi 湖南出土殷商西周青 銅器, Changsha: Yuelu, 2007.

Hu and Zhang 1988 Hu Yongqin 胡永慶 and Zhang Yushi 張玉石. ‘Xuchang xian Dalu Chencun faxian Shang dai mu’ 許昌縣大路陳村發現商代墓, Huaxia kaogu, 1988.1, pp. 23–26, 85. 109

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Shaughnessy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999, pp. 232–291.

Huo and Huang 1989 Huo Wei 霍巍 and Huang Wei 黃 偉. ‘Shilun wuhu Shu shi ge de jige wenti’ 試論無胡蜀 式戈的幾個問題, Kaogu, 1989.3, pp. 251–259.

Keightley 2000 Keightley, David N. The Ancestral Landscape: Time, Space, and Community in Late Shang China (ca. 1200–1045B.C.), Berkeley, The Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, 2000.

Institute of Archaeology 1998 The Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (ed.). Zhongguo Shang wenhua guoji xueshu taolunhui lunwenji 中國商文化國際學術討論會論文集, Beijing: Zhongguo da baike zhuanshu, 1998.

Kerr and Wood 2004 Kerr, Rose and Nigel Wood. Science & Civilisation in China, Chemistry and Chemical Technology, Volume 5, Part 12, Ceramic Technology, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004.

Jiang and Piperno 1999 Jiang, Qinhua and Dolores R. Piperno. ‘Environmental and archaeological implications of a late Quaternary palynological sequence, Poyang Lake, Southern China, Quaternary Research, 1999, vol. 52, pp. 250–258.

Kristiansen and Larsson 2005 Kristiansen, Kristian and Larsson, Thomas B. The Rise of Bronze Age Society: Travels, Transmissions and Transformations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005.

Jiang Hong 1976 Jiang Hong 江鴻. ‘Panlongcheng yu Shang zhao de nantu’ 盤龍城與商朝的南土, Wenwu, 1976.2, pp. 42–46.

Li and Gu 2000 Li Yong 李勇 and Gu Yan 顧岩. ‘Anhui Liu’an chutu yi jian daxing Shang dai tong zun’ 安徵 六安出土一件大型銅尊, Wenwu, 2000.12, pp. 65–68.

Jin Zhengyao 1994 Jin Zhengyao 金正耀 (et al). ‘Jiangxi Xin’gan Dayangzhou Shang mu qingtongqi de qian tongweisu bizhi yanjiu’ 江西新干大洋洲商 墓青銅器的鉛同位素比值研究, Kaogu, 1994.8, pp. 744–747, 735.

Li and Wu 1991 Li Jianmin and Wu Jia’an. ‘Zhongguo gudai qingtong ge’ 中國古代青銅戈, Kaoguxue jikan, 1991, no. 7, pp. 104–46.

Jin Zhengyao 1999 Jin Zhengyao et al. ‘Guanghan Sanxingdui jisi keng qingtonqi de huaxue zhucheng he yuan tongweisu bizhi yanjiu’ 廣漢三星堆祭祀坑青 銅器的化學組成和鉛同位素比值研究 in Sanxingdui Jisi Keng, ed by Sichuan Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology.

Li and Zhang 1996 Li Ye 李燁 and Zhang Liwen 張歷 文. ‘Yangxian chutu Yi Shang tongqi jianbao’ 洋縣出 土殷商銅器簡報, Wenbo, 1996. 6, pp. 73–75. Li Boqian 1981 Li Boqian 李伯謙. ‘Shilun Wucheng wenhua’ 試論吳城文化, Wenwu jikan, 1981.3, pp.

Jin Zhongwei 2011 Jin Zhongwei 井中偉. Zaoqi Zhongguo qington ge, ji yanjiu 早期中國青銅戈、戟 研究, Beijing: Kexue, 2011.

Li Boqian 1998 Li Boqian. Zhongguo qingtong wenhua jiegou tixi yanjiu 中國青銅文化結構體系研究, Beijing: Kexue, 1998.

Jinsha 2002 Chengdu Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology and Department of Archaeology, Peking University. Jinsha tao zheng—Chengdu shi Jinsha cun yizhi chutu wenwu 金沙淘珍—成都市金沙村遺址出 土文物, Beijing: Wenwu, 2002.

Li Chaoyuan 2002 Li Chaoyuan 李朝遠. ‘Jiangxi Xin’gan Zhongling qingtongqi de zai ren shi’ 江西新 干中棱青銅器的再認識, in Gao and Yasuda 2002, pp. 216–225. Li Chunyi 1957 Li Chunyi. ‘Guanyu Yin zhong de yanjiu’ 關於殷鐘的研究, Kaogu xuebao, 1957.3, pp. 41–50.

Jinsha 2005 Chengdu Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology. Jinsha: zai xian huihuang de gu Shu wangdu 金沙︰再現輝煌的古蜀王都, Chengdu: Sichuan renmin, 2005.

Li Chunyi 1996 Li Chunyi 李純一, Zhongguo Shanggu Chutu Yueqi Tonglun中國上古出土樂器通論, Beijing: Wenwu, 1996.

Kane 1974/75 Kane, Virginia. ‘The independent bronze industries in the south of China contemporary with Shang and Western Chou dynasties’, Archives of Asian Arts, 1974/75, no. 28, pp. 77–107.

Li Guoliang 1988 Li Guoliang. ‘Wan’nan chutu de qingtongqi’ 皖南出土的青銅器, Wenwu yanjiu, 1988.4, pp. 161–186.

Ke Yanfeng 2008 Ke Yanfeng 郝炎峰. ‘Erlitou wenhua yuqi de kaoguxue yanjiu’ 二里頭文化玉器的考古學 研究, in Erlitou 2008, pp. 275–354.

Li Guoliang 1994 Li Guoliang 李國梁. ‘Qingtongqi’ 青 銅器 in Anhui 1994, pp. 153–165. Li Ji 1977 Li Ji. Anyang, Washing D. C.: The University of Washington Press, 1977.

Keightley 1978 Keightley, David N. Sources of Shang History: the Oracle Bone Inscriptions of Bronze Age China, Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of California Press, 1978.

Li Jiahe 1977 Li Jiahe 李家和, Tang Changpo 唐昌朴 and Pang Shifen 彭適凡. ‘Jin nian Jiangxi chutu de Shang dai qingtongqi’ 近年江西出土的商代青銅器, Wenwu, 1977 9, pp. 58–63.

Keightley 1999 Keightley, David N. ‘The Shang: China’s First Historical Dynasty’ in The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., edited by Michael Loewe and Edward

Li Jiahe 1989 Li Jiahe 李家和, Yang Juyuan 楊巨源 and Wang Bingwan 王炳萬. ‘Jiangxi Wannian liexing 110

Bibliography Lingjiatan 2006 Anhui Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology. Lingjiatan 凌家灘, Beijing: Wenwu, 2006.

Shang wenhua yizhi diaochao’ 江西萬年類型商文化 遺址調查, Dongnan wenhua, 1989.5, pp. 26–37. Li Jian 1963 Li Jian 李健. ‘Hubei Jiangling Wancheng chutu Xi Zhou tongqi’ 湖北江陵萬城出土西周銅器, Kaogu, 1963. 4, pp. 224–225.

Liu and Chen 2012 Liu, Li and Chen Xingcan. The Archaeology of China: From the Late Paleolithic to the Early Bronze Age, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.

Li Jianmin 1997 Li Jianmin 李健民. ‘Xi Zhou shiqi de qingtong mao’ 西周時期的青銅矛, Kaogu, 1997.3, pp. 70–76, 79.

Liu and Lu 1998 Liu Shizhong 劉詩中 and Lu Benshan 盧本珊. ‘Jiangxi Tongling tong guang yizhi de fajue yu yanjiu’ 江西銅岭銅磺遺址的發掘與研究, Kaogu xuebao, 1998.4, pp. 465–496.

Li Qiaosheng 1999 Li Qiaosheng 李喬生. ‘Hunan Ningxiang xian Hengshizhen chutu yi jian Shang dai tiliang you’ 湖南寧鄉縣橫市鎮出土一件商代提梁卣, Kaogu, 1999.11, p. 27.

Liu and Song 1988 Liu Shi’e and Song Xinchao. ‘Xi’an Laoniupo Shang dai muzang de fajue’ 西安老牛坡商 代墓葬的發掘, Wenwu, 1988.6, pp. 1–22.

Li Taoyuan 2002 Li Taoyuan 李桃元, He Changyi 何昌 義 and Zhang Hanjun 張漢軍. Panlongcheng qingtong wenhua 盤龍城青銅文化, Wuhan: Hubei Meishu, 2002.

Liu Haichao 1985 Liu Haichao 劉海超. ‘Anhui Yinshang Wanggang, Zhaoji faxian Shang dai wenwu’ 安徽穎上王崗、趙集發現商代文物, Wenwu 1985.10, pp. 36–41.

Li Tianyuan 1988 Li Tianyuan 李天元. ‘Hubei Yangxin Gangxia gu guangjin yizhi fajue jianbao’ 湖北陽新港 下古礦井遺址發掘簡報, Kaogu, 1988.1, pp. 30–42.

Liu Jian 1984 Liu Jian 劉健, Huang Yinghao 黃英豪, and Wang Lian 王煉. ‘Wanzhai xian chutu xi Zhou yongzhong’ 萬載縣出土西周甬鐘 (A Western Zhou yongzhong unearthed from Wanzhai County), Jiangxi lishi wenwu, 1984.1, p. 3.

Li Xueqin 1991 Li Xueqin. ‘Xin’gan Dayangzhou Shang mu de ruo gan wenti’ 新干大洋洲商墓若干問 題, Wenwu, 1991.10, pp. 33–38. Li Xueqin 1994 Li Xueqin. ‘Shilun yazhang ji ji wenhua beijing’ 試論牙璋及其文化背景, in Tang Chung 1994, pp. 5–7.

Liu Shi’e 1988 Liu Shi’e 劉士峩. ‘Xi’an Laoniupo Shang dai mudi chu lun’ 西安老牛坡商代墓地初論, Wenwu, 1988.6, pp. 23–27.

Li Xueqin 1997 Li Xueqin. ‘Lun Yangxian Fanba tong yazhang deng wenti’ 論洋縣范霸銅牙璋等問題, Wenbo, pp.

Liu Shi’e 2001 Liu Shi’e (ed.). Laoniupo老牛坡, Xi’an: Shaanxi Renmin, 2001. Liu Shizhong 2000 Liu Shizhong 劉詩中. ‘Jiangxi kaogu de shiji huigu yu sikao’ 江西考古的世紀回顧 與思考, Kaogu, 2000.12, pp. 24–34.

Liang Deguang 1993 Liang, Deguang 梁德光. ‘Jiangxi Suichuan chutu de qingtongqi’ 江西遂川出土的青銅 器, Nanfang wenwu, no. 3, 1993, pp. 123–124.

Liu Shizhong 2003 Liu Shizhong. Zhongguo xian-Qin tongguang 中國先秦銅鑛, Nanchang: Jiangxi Renmin, 2003.

Liangzhu Fanshan 2005 Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology. Fanshan 反山, vols I & II, Beijing: Wenwu, 2005. Liangzhu Yaoshan 2003 Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology. Yaoshan 瑤山, Beijing: Wenwu, 2003.

Liu Xinhung 2006 Liu Xinhung 劉新紅. ‘Dui Huayuanzhuang M54 chutu pian nao, shi qin de kaocha baogao’ 對花園莊M54出土編鐃,石磬的考察報告, Huangzhong, 2006.2, pp. 91–94.

Lin Rui 1981 Lin Rui 林瑞 (et al.) ‘Dui Zeng Hou Yi bianzhong de jiegou tantao’ 對曾侯乙編鐘的結構探 討. Jianghan kaogu, 1980.3, pp. 20–25.

Liu Yiman 1993 Liu Yiman 劉一曼. ‘Yinxu qingtong dao’ 殷墟青銅刀, Kaogu, 1993.2, pp. 150–166. Liu Yiman 2002 Liu Yiman 劉一曼. ‘Lun Anyang Yinxu muzang qingtong wuqi de juhe’ 論安陽殷墟青 銅武器的組合, Kaogu, 2002.3, pp. 63–75.

Lin Xiang 1989 Lin Xiang. ‘Sanxingdui yizhi yu YinShang de xi-tu—jian lun Yinxu boci zhong de ‘Shu’ de dili weizhi’ 三星堆遺址與殷商的西土—兼論殷商 卜辭中的「蜀」的地理位置, Sichuan wenwu, 1989 (Special issue on the studies of Sanxingdui), pp. 23–30.

Liu Yonghua 2002 Liu Yonghua 劉永華. Zhongguo gudai cheyu maju 中國古代車輿馬具, Shanghai: Shanghai Cishu, 2002.

Lin Yun 1987 Lin Yun 林沄. ‘Shang wenhua qingtongqi yu beifang diqu qingtongqi guanxi zhi zai yanjiu’ 商 文化青銅器與北方地區青銅器關係之再研究’ in Kaoguxue wenhua lunji考古學文化論集, Beijing: Wenwu, 1987, pp.

Liulihe 1990 Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and Archaeological team for Liulihe, Beijing Institute of Cultural Relics,. ‘Beijing Liulihe 1193 hao da mu fajue jianbao’ 北京琉璃河1193號墓 大墓的發掘簡報, Kaogu 1990.1, pp. 20–31.

111

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC 大洋洲出土的青銅器, in Ma Chengyuan 1997a, pp. 3–24.

Loehr 1949 Loehr, Max. ‘Ordos daggers and knives: new material, classification and chronology, first part: daggers’, Artibus Asiae, 1949, vol. XII, pp. 23–103.

Ma Chengyuan 2002 Ma Chengyuan. ‘Shang Zhou qingtong xuangyin zhong’ 商周青銅雙音鐘 in Zhongguo Qingtongqi Yanjiu 中國青銅器研究, Shanghai Guzhi, 2002 (reprinted from Kaogu xuebao 1981.1), pp. 514–533.

Loehr 1951 Loehr, Max. ‘Ordos daggers and knives: new material, classification and chronology, second part: knives’, Artibus Asiae, 1951, vol. XIV, pp. 77– 162.

Ma Daming 1986 Ma Daming 馬大明, Zhou Xianpo 周 賢朴, and Wu Mingsheng 吳銘生. ‘Xinshao Liuyang Zhuzhou Zixing chutu Shang Zhou Qingtongqi’ 新 邵、瀏陽、株州、資興出土商周青銅器, Hunan kaogu jikan, 1986. 3, pp. 27–30.

Loehr 1953 Loehr, Max. ‘The bronze styles of the Anyang period’, Archives of the Chinese Art Society of America, 1953, no. 7, pp. 42–53. Loewe 1993 Loewe, Michael (editor). Early Chinese Texts: A Bibliographical Guide, Berkeley: The Society for the Study of Early China and The Institute of East Asian Studies, University of California, Berkeley, 1993.

Ma Dezhi 1955 Ma Dezhi 馬得志, Zhou Yongzhen 周 永珍, and Chang Yunpang 張雲鵬. ‘1953 lian Anyang Dasikungcun fajue baogao’ 1953年安陽大司空村發 掘報告 (Report on the excavation at Anyang Dasikung village in 1953), Kaogu xuebao, 1955.9, pp. 25–79.

Loewe 1993 Loewe, Michael. ‘Shih ching’ in Loewe 1993, pp. 415–423.

MacKenzie 1999 Mackenzie, Colin. ‘The influence of textile designs on bronze, lacquer and ceramic decorative style during the Warring States period, Orientaitons, September, 1999, pp. 82–91.

Loewe and Shaughnessy 1999 Loewe, Michael and Edward Shaughnessy (eds.). The Cambridge History of Ancient China: from the Origins of Civilization to 221 B.C., Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Meng Xianwu 1991 Meng Xianwu. ‘Yinxu Qijiazhuang dong 269 hao mu’ 殷墟戚家莊東269號墓, Kaogu xuebao, 1991.3, pp. 325–352.

Lu and Hu 1983 Lu, Liancheng 盧連成 and Hu Zhisheng 胡智生. ‘Baoji Ruijiazhuang, Zhuyuangou mudi chutu bingqi de chubu yanjiu—jian lun Shu shi bingqi de yuanyuan he fazhan’ 寶雞茹家莊、竹園溝 墓地出土兵器的初步研究—兼論蜀式兵器的淵源 和發展, Kaogu yu wenwu, 1983.5, pp. 50–65.

Meskell 2005 Meskell, Lynn (ed.). Archaeologies of Materiality, Oxford: Blackwells, 2005. Miller 2005a Miller, Daniel (ed.). Materiality, Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2005.

Lu and Wu 1988 Lu, Liancheng and Wu Zhisheng. Baoji Yuguo Mudi 寶雞弓魚國墓地, Beijing: Wenwu, 1988.

Miller 2005b Miller, Daniel. ‘Materiality: introduction’, in Miller 2005a, pp. 1–50.

Lu and Yang 2005 Lu Qinyi 陸勤毅 and Yang Lixin 楊 立新 (eds.) Wannan Shang Zhou Qingtongqi 皖南商周 青銅器, Beijing: Wendwu, 2005.

an

Min Zhenguo 1983 Min Zhenguo 閔振國. ‘Wuling xian chutu xi Zhou yongzhong’ 武寧縣出土西周甬鐘 (A Western Zhou yongzhong unearthed from Wuling County), Jiangxi lishi wenwu, 1983.3, p.10.

Lu Dalin 1987 Lu Dalin 呂大臨 and Zhao Jinchang 趙 九城. Kaogu tu, Xu kaogu tu, Kaogu tu xiwen 考古 圖, 續考古圖, 考古圖釋文, Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1987.

Minao 1981 ‘Yin-Zhou jitai no chihou kata seidouki’ 殷, 西周時代の地方型青銅器 (The local styled bronzes from the late Shang and Western Zhou). 考古 學メモワール 1980. 17–58.

Lu Jianfang 1996 Lu Jianfang 陸建方. ‘Liangzhu wenhua muzang yanjiu’ 良渚文化墓葬研究, in Xu Huping 1996, pp. 176–217.

Minao 1997 Minao, Hayashi. ‘Guanyu Changjiang zhongxiayou qingtongqi de ruogan wenti 關於長江 中下游青銅器的若干問題 (Several questions related to the bronzes from the middle Yangtze River), in Ma Chengyuan 1997, pp. 107–124.

Lu Wenbao 1996 Lu Wenbao. ‘Zhejiang Yuhang Huangshan Liangzhu wenhua muzang qingli jianbao’ 浙江余杭橫山良渚文化墓葬清理簡報, in Xu Huping 1996, pp. 69–77.

Mou Yongkang 1989 Mou Yongkang 牟永抗. ‘Liangzhu yuqi san tan’ 良渚玉器散談, Wenwu, 1989.5, pp. 64–8, 74.

Luo Xiao’an 1989 Luo, Xiao’an 羅小安. ‘Guangfeng faxian Xi Zhou qingtong tiliang you’ 廣豐發現青銅提 梁卣, Jiangxi wenwu, 1989.1, p. 66. Ma Chengyuan 1997a Ma Chengyuan (ed.). Wu-Yue diqu Qingtongqi Yanjiu Lunwenji 吳越地區青銅器研 究論文集, Hong Kong: Tai Yip, 1997.

Nanba 2000 Nanba, Junko 難波純子. ‘Huazhong xing Qingtong Yiqi de Fada’ 華中型青銅彝器的發達, translated by Xiang Chutao, Nanfang wenwu, 2000.3, pp. 26–44.

Ma Chengyuan 1997b Ma Chengyuan. ‘Wu-Yue wenhua qingtongqi de yanjiu—jian lun Dayangzhou chutu de qingtongqi’ 吳越文化青銅器的研究—兼論

Niucheng 1991 Jiangxi Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology and Xin’gan Municipal Museum. ‘Xin’gan xian Huxi, Niucheng yizhi shijue yu 112

Bibliography Peng Shifen 1987 Peng Shifen. Zhongguo Nanfang Gudai Yiwentao 中國古代南方印紋陶, Beijing: Wenwu, 1987.

fucha’ 新干縣牛城遺址試掘與複查, Jiangxi wenwu, 1991.3, pp. 68–74. Pan Mouhui 2001 Pan Mouhui 潘荿輝, Cheng Dingguo 盛定國 and Cai Wei 曹偉. ‘Hunan Yiyang chutu Shang dai tongnao’ 湖南益陽出土商代銅鐃, Wenwu, 2001.8, pp. 66–70.

Qianshan Xuejiagang 2004 Anhui Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology. Qianshan Xuejiagang 潛山薛 家港, Beijing: Wenwu, 2004. Qin Jianming 1995 Qin Jianming 秦建明. ‘Shang Zhou “gongxing qi” wei “xin ling” suo’ 商周「弓形器」為 「旂鈴」說, Kaogu, 1995. 3, pp. 256–258.

Panlongcheng 1976a Hubei Provincial Museum and Department of Archaeology, Peking University. ‘Panlongcheng 1974 niandu tian ye kaogu ji yao’ 盤龍 城1974年度田野考古紀要, Wenwu, 1976.2, pp. 5–15.

Qiu Shijing 2004 Qiu Shijing 裘士京. Jiangnan tong yanjiu: Zhongguo gu dai tong yuan de tan suo 江南 銅研究: 中國古代銅源的研究, Hefei: Huangshan shu she, 2004.

Panlongcheng 1976b Hubei Provincial Museum. ‘Panlongcheng Shang dai Erligang qi de qingtongqi’ 盤龍城商代二里崗期的青銅器, Wenwu, 1976.2, pp. 26–41.

Rawson 1983 Rawson, Jessica. ‘Foreword’, in The Chinese Bronzes of Yunnan, London: Sidgwick and Jackson Limited, 1983, pp. 7–9.

Panlongcheng 2001 Hubei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology. Panlongcheng—1963–1994 nian kaogu fajue baogao (shang, xia) 盤龍城—1963– 1994年考古發掘報告 (上、下), Beijing: Wenwu, 2001.

Rawson 1989 Rawson, Jessica M. ‘Statesmen or barbarians? The Western Zhou as Seen through Their Bronzes’ in Proceedings of the British Academy, 1989, vol. LXXV, pp.71–95.

Peng and Li 1975 Peng Shifen 彭適凡 and Li Keyou 李 科友. ‘Lue lun Wucheng Shang dai yuanshi qiqi’ 略論 吳城商代原始瓷器, Wenwu, 1975.7, pp. 77–83.

Rawson 1990 Rawson, Jessica. ‘Ancient Chinese bronzes’ in Rawson and Bunker 1990, pp. 17–61.

Peng and Li 1983 Peng, Shifen and Li, Yulin 李玉林. ‘Jiangxi Xin’gan xian de Xi Zhou muzang’ 西周新干 縣的西周墓葬, Wenwu, 1983.6, p.93.

Rawson 1992 Rawson, Jessica (ed.). The British Museum Book of Chinese Art, London: British Museum Press, 1992.

Peng and Peng 1992 Peng Shifan and Peng Minghan 彭 明瀚. ‘Xin’gan Shang mu yu Yinxu Fu Hao mu de bijia yanjiu—jian lun Xin’gan Shang dai da mu de wenhua xingji’ 新干商墓與殷墟婦好墓的比較研究—兼論新 干商代大墓的文化性質, Nanfang wenwu, 1992.2, pp.

Rawson 1992 Rawson, Jessica. ‘Shang and Western Zhou designs in jade and bronze’, in International Colloquium on Chinese Art History: 1991. Antiquity, Part I. Taipei: National Palace Museum. Rawson 1993a Rawson, Jessica. ‘Late Shang bronze design: meaning and purpose’, in Roderick Wilfield (ed.) The Problem of Meaning, London: Percival David Foundation, 1993, pp. 67–95.

Peng and Peng 1999 Peng Shifen and Peng Minhan. ‘Xin’gan Shang mu yu Yinxu Fu Hao mu de biqiao yanjiu’ 新干商墓與殷墟婦好墓的比較研究, in Shang wenhua lunji 商文化論集, Beijing: Wenwu (reprinted from 1992 publication), 1999, pp. 575–584.

Rawson 1993b Rawson, Jessica M. ‘Ancient Chinese ritual bronzes: the evidence from tombs and hoards of the Shang (c. 1500–1050BC) and Western Zhou (c. 1050–771BC) periods’, Antiquity, no. 67, 1993, pp. 805–823.

Peng Minghan 1994 Peng Minghan. ‘Jiangxi Xin’gan Dayangzhou Shang dai yicuan shiji xintan—jian yu muzang shuo shang jue’ 江西新干大洋洲商代遺存 性質新探—兼與墓葬說商確, Zhongyuan wenwu, 1994.1, pp. 16–19.

Rawson 1994 Rawson, Jessica M. ‘Contact between Southern China and Henan during the Shang Period’ in Transactions of the Oriental Ceramics Society, no. 57 (1992–1993), pp. 1–24.

Peng Minghan 2005 Peng Minghan. Wucheng Wenhua Yanjiu. 吳城文化研究, Beijing: Wenwu, 2005. Peng Shifan 1997 Peng Shifen. ‘You guan Xin’gan Shang dai da mu de liang ge wenti’ 有關新干商代大 墓的兩個問題, in Ma Chengyuan 1997a, pp. 137–146.

Rawson 1996 Rawson, Jessica (editor). Mysteries of Ancient China: New Discoveries from the Early Dynasties, London: British Museum, 1996.

Peng Shifan 1998 Peng Shifan. ‘Gan jiang liuyu chutu Shang Zhou tong nao he yongzhong kaisu’ 江流域出 土商周銅鐃和甬鐘概述, Nanfang wenwu, 1998.1, pp. 43–57.

Rawson 1998a Rawson, Jessica M. ‘Chinese Burial Patterns: Sources of Information on Thought and Belief’ in C. Renfrew and C. Scarre (eds) Cognition and Material Culture: the Archaeology of Symbolic Storage, Cambridge: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research, 1998, pp. 107–133.

Peng Shifen 1981 Peng Shifen 彭適凡. ‘Jiangxi dichu xinshiqi shidai wenhua gaishu’ 江西地區新石器時代 文化概述, Jiangxi daxue xuebao, 1981.4, pp. 95–108.

Rawson 1998b Rawson, Jessica. ‘Some examples of human or human-like faces on Shang and Western 113

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Zhou bronzes’, in Department of Archaeology, Peking University (ed.) Proceedings of the International Conference on “Chinese Archaeology Enters the Twentieth-first Century”, Beijing: Science Press, 1998, pp. 124–148.

China’, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 1988, vol. 48, no. 1, pp. 189–237. Shaughnessy 1993 Shaughnessy, Edward L. ‘Shang shu’, in Loewe 1993, pp. 376–389. Shaughnessy 1997 Shaughnessy, Edward L. ‘Introduction’, in Edward Shaughnessy (ed.) New Sources of Early Chinese History: An Introduction to the Reading of Inscriptions and Manuscripts, Berkeley: The Society for the Study of Early China, 1997, pp. 1–14.

Rawson 1999 Rawson, Jessica M. ‘Western Zhou Archaeology’, in Loewe and Shaughnessy 1999, pp. 352–449. Rawson 2008 Rawson, Jessica. ‘Han dynasty tomb planning and design’, Cang Jie, 2008, special issue no. 2 (Proceedings of the International Symposiums: the Visual World of China), pp. 105–116.

Shaughnessy 1999 Shaughnessy, Edward L. ‘Western Zhou History’ in Loewe and Shaughnessy 1999, pp. 292–351.

Rawson 2009 Rawson, Jessica. ‘Reviving ancient ornament and the presence of the past: examples from Shang and Zhou bronze vessels’, in forthcoming book, Chicago, 2009.

Shelach-Lavi 2015 Shelach-Lavi, Gideon. The Archaeology of Early China: From Prehistory to the Han Dynasty, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015.

Rawson and Bunker 1990 Rawson, Jessica and Emma Bunker. Ancient Chinese and Ordos Bronzes, Hong Kong: The Oriental Ceramic Society of Hong Kong, 1990.

Sheng and Wang 1986 Sheng Dingguo 盛定國 and Wang Ziming 王自明. ‘Ningxiang Yueshanpu faxian Shang dai da tong nao’ 寧鄉月山舖發掘商代大銅鐃, Wenwu 1986.2, pp. 44–45.

Rawson forthcoming Rawson, Jessica M. ‘Ornament and Territory: the Case of the Bronzes from Hanzhong’.

Shenmu Xinhua 2005 Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology. Shenmu Xinhua 神木 新華, Beijing: Science Press, 2005.

Rowlands 1998 Rowlands, Michael. ‘The archaeology of colonialism’ in Social Transformations in Archaeology: Global and Local Perspectives, ed by Kristian Kristiansen and Michael Rowlands. London; New York, Routledge, 1998, pp. 327–33.

Shi Jinxiong 1997 Shi Jinxiong 施勁松. ‘Wo guo nanfang chutu tong nao ji yongzhong yanjiu’ 我國南方 出土銅鐃及甬鐘研究, Kaogu, 1997.10, pp. 73–80, 86.

Sanxingdui 1987 Wang Youpeng (et al) 王有鵬. ‘Guanghan Sanxingdui yizhi’ 廣漢三星堆遺址, Kaogu xuebao, 1987. 2, pp. 227–254.

Shi Jinxiong 2005 Shi Jingxiong. Changjiang Liuyu Qingtongqi Yanjiu 長江流域青銅器研究, Beijing: Wenwu, 2005.

Sanxingdui 1999 Sichuan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (ed.). Sanxingdui Jisi Keng 三星堆祭祀坑, Beijing: Wenwu, 1999.

Shi Zhangru 1987 Shi Zhangru. ‘Yin che fuyuan shuoming’ 殷車復原說明, Institute of History and Philology, 1987, no. 58, vol. 2, pp.

Shaanxi 2001 Shaanxi Historical Museum. Selected Treasures of the Past Dynasties: the Rare Gems of the New Archaeological Discoveries in Shaanxi Province, Xi’an: Shaanxi Fine Arts, 2001.

So 2001 So, Jenny. ‘Jade and stone at Sanxingdui’, in Bagley 2001, pp. 153–175. Song Xinchao 1991 Song Xinchao 宋新潮. Yin-Shang Wenhua Quyu Yanjiu 殷商文化區域研究, Xi’an, Shaanxi Renmin, 1991.

Shaanxi Music 1999 Editorial Board for Zhongguo Yinyue Wenwu Daxi 《中國音樂文物大系》總編輯 部. Zhongguo Yinyue Wenwu Daxi (Shaanxi) 中國音 樂文物大系 (陝西卷) (A Complete Volume on the Chinese Musical Relics: Shaanxi), Zhengzhou: Da Xiang Press, 1999.

Sun and Su 2003 Sun Hua 孫華 and Su Rongyu 蘇榮 譽. Shenmi de wangguo: dui Sanxingdui wenming de zhubu lijie he jiexi神秘的王國: 對三星堆文明的初步 理解和解釋, Chengdu: Bashu shushe, 2003.

Shang Songquan 1980 Shang Songquan 尚松泉. ‘Yincheng faxian Yin dai jia, jue’ 應城發現殷代斝、 爵, Jianghan kaogu, 1980.2, p. 12.

Tan Lan 1975 Tan Lan 唐蘭. ‘Guanyu Jiangxi Wucheng wenhua yizhi yu wenzi de chubu tan suo’ 關於江西吳 城文化遺址與文字的初步探索, Wenwu, 1975.7, pp. 72–76.

Shanghai Museum 2000 Shanghai Museum. Special Bronze Treasure Exhibition: A New Voice for Old Instruments. Shanghai: Shanghai Renmin meishu chubanshe, 2000

Tan Yuanhui 1993 Tan Yuanhui 譚遠輝. ‘Hunan Cendan nongchang faxian Shang dai tongqi mu’ 湖南 涔澹農場發現商代銅器墓, Huaxia kaogu, 1993.2, pp. 54–56.

Shaughnessy 1988 Shaughnessy, Edward. ‘Historica perspectives on the introduction of the chariot into

114

Bibliography 記浙江發現的銅鐃、釉陶鐘和越王石矛 (A report on the bronze nao, glazed pottery zhong and the stone spears of the King of Yue discovered in Zhejiang), Kaogu, 1965.5, pp. 256–257.

Tang Chung 1994a Tang Chung (ed). Ancient Cultures of South China and Neighbouring Regions, Hong Kong: Chinese University of Hong Kong, 1994. Tang Chung 1994b Tang Chung. ‘Yuenan Fengyuan yizhi yu Xianggang Dawan yizhi yushiqi dui bi shi shi’ 越南馮原遺址與香港大灣遺址玉石器對比試析, in Tang Chung 1994a, pp.215–218.

Wang Shizhen 1981 Wang Shizhen 王世振. ‘Hubei Suixian faxian Shang dai qingtongqi’ 湖北隨縣發現商 代青銅器, Wenwu, 1981.8, pp. 48–50. Wang Shouzhi 1988 Wang, Shouzhi 王壽芝. ‘Shaanxi Chenggu chutu de Shang dai qintongqi’ 陝西城固出土 的商代青銅器, Wenbo, 1988.6, pp. 3–9.

Tang Jinyu 1980 Tang Jinyu唐金裕, Wang Shouzhi 王壽芝and Guo Changjiang郭長江. ‘Shaanxi sheng Chenggu xian chutu Yin Shang tongqi zhengli baogao’ 陝西省城固縣出土殷商銅器整理報告, Kaogu, 1980.3, pp. 211–218.

Wang Wei 1998 Wang Wei 王巍. ‘Shang dai mache yuanyuan tuoze’ 商代馬車淵源蠡測, in Institute of Archaeology, CASS (ed.) 1998, pp. 380–388.

Thorp 1985 Thorp, Robert. ‘The growth of early Shang civilization: new data from ritual vessels’, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 1985, vol. 45, no. 1, pp. 5–75.

Wang Yuxin 1977 Wang Yuxin 王宇信, Zhang Yongshan 張永山 and Yang Shengnan 楊升南. ‘Shi lun Yinxu wu hao mu de “Fu Hao”’, Kaogu xuebao, 1977.2, pp. 1–21.

Thorp 2006 Thorp, Robert L. China in the Early Bronze Age: Shang Civilization, Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006.

Wang Zhenhua 1996 Wang Zhenhua 王振華. ‘Zhongguo Shang Zhou qingtong bingqi gan shu’ 中 國商周青銅兵器概述, in Huang Yongchuan 1996, pp. 213–258.

Tong Enzheng 1977 Tong Enzheng 童恩正. ‘Wo guo xinan diqu qingtong jian de yanjiu’ 我國西南地區青銅 劍的研究, Kaogu xuebao, 1977.2, pp. 35–55.

Wang Zhenyong 1980 Wang Zhenyong 王振鏞. ‘Fujian Jian’ao xian chutu xi Zhou tongzhong’ 福建建甌縣出 土西周銅鐘, Wenwu, 1980.11, p. 95.

Tong Enzheng 1986 Tong Enzheng. ‘Shi lun wo guo cong dongbei zhi xinan de biandi banyuexing wenhua chuanbo da’ 試論我國從東北至西南的邊地半月形 文化傳播帶, in Wenwu kaogu lunji 文物考古論集, Beijing: Wenwu, 1986, pp. 17–43.

Wang Zhiyou 2006 Wang Zhiyou 王志友. ‘Cheng Yang tongqi qu zhong qingtong pao yongtu shi tan—jian ji renmian shi yu shoumian shi de yongtu’ 城洋銅器群 中青銅泡用途試探—兼談人面飾與獸面飾的用途in Zhao Congcang 2006, pp. 281–299.

Tong Kin-woon 1983 Tong Kin-woon. Shang Musical Instrument, PhD. Thesis, Wesleyan University, 1983.

Wang Zunguo 1996 Wang Zunguo 汪遵國, Qian Feng 錢鋒, and Li Minchang 李民昌. ‘1989 nian Jiangsu Xinting Huating yizhi de fajue’ 1989年江蘇新廳花廳 遺址的發掘, in Xu Huping 1996, pp. 80–119.

Tonglushan 1999 Gu Yanxue (ed.). Tonglushan: Gu Guangye Yizhi 銅綠山︰古礦冶遺址, Beijing: Wenwu, 1999. Valenov 2004 Valenov, A. B. ‘Cong kaogu fajue jiliao kan Shang jun fendui de rensu he jiekou’ 從考古發掘 資料看商軍分隊的人數和結構, translated by Chen Chunsheng 陳春生and edited by Mo Runxian 莫潤先, Kaoguxu jikan, 2004, no. 15, pp. 199–215.

Wen Fong 1980 Wen Fong (ed.). The Great Bronze Age of China: An Exhibition from the People’s Republic of China, New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980. Whitfield and Wang 2000 Whitfiled, Roderick and Wang Tao (eds.). Exploring China’s Past: New Discoveries and Studies in Archaeology and Art, London: Saffron, 2000.

Waley 1954 Waley, Arthur. The Book of Song, London: George Allen & Unwin Ltd, 1954. Wan Quanwen 1996 Wan Quanwen. ‘Jianghan diqu chutu qingtongqi le lun’ 江漢地區出土青銅器略論, Gugong wenwu yuekan, 1996, vol. 14, no. 4, pp. 88– 101.

Wu 2010 Wu Hung. The Art of the Yellow Springs: Understanding Chinese Tombs, Honolulu, University of Hawaii Press, 2010.

Wang 1997 Wang, Tao. ‘Establishing the Chinese archaeological school: Su Bingqi and contemporary Chinese archaeology’, Antiquity, 1997, no. 7 (271), pp. 31–9.

Wu Chao 1999 Wu Chao. Zhuixun shiqu de yinyue zongji—tu shuo zhongguo yinyue shi (Retracing the Lost Footprints of Music—a Diagrammatic History of Chinese Music), Beijing: Dongfang Press, 1999.

Wang Changqi 2001 Wang Changqi. ‘Jianguo yi lai Laoniupo yizhi san chu de Shang dai lishi wenwu’ 建國 以來老牛坡遺址散出的商代歷史文物, in Liu Shi’e 2001, pp. 415–428.

Wu En 1985 Wu En 烏恩. ‘Yin zhi Zhou chu de beifang qingtongqi’ 殷至周初的北方青銅器, Kaogu xuebao, 1985.2, pp. 135–156. Wu Hsiao-yun 2005 Wu Hsiao-yun 吳曉荺. ‘The ritual meaning of chariot burials in the Western Zhou’, The

Wang Shilun 1965 Wang Shilun 王士倫. ‘Ji Zhejiang faxian de tong nao, youtaozhong, and Yuewang shimao’ 115

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC National Palace Museum Research Quarterly, 2005, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 1–30.

faxian 中國年度十大考古新發現, Beijing: Wenwu, 2005, pp. 68–94.

Wu Shaoren 1985 Wu Shaoren 胡紹仁. ‘Yifeng xian chutu Shang dai tong nao’ 宜豐縣出土商代銅鐃 (A bronze nao unearthed from Yifeng county), Jiangxi lishi wenwu, 1985.1, p.12.

Xiang Taochu 2006a Xiang Taochu. ‘Xiang jiang liuyu Shang Zhou qingtong wenming yanjiu de zhongyao tupo’ 湘江流域商周青銅文明研究的重要突破, Nanfang wenwu, 2006.2, pp. 68–80, 67.

Wucheng 1975 Peng Shifan and Li Jiahe. ‘Jiangxi Qingjiang Wucheng Shangdai yizhi fajue jianbao’ 江 西清江吳城商代遺址發掘簡報, Wenwu, 1975.7, pp. 51–71.

Xiang Taochu 2006b Xiang Taochu. ‘Tanheli chengzhi de faxian yu Ningxiang tongqi qu zai yanjiu’ 炭河里城 址的發現與寧鄉銅器群再研究, Wenwu, 2006.8, pp. 35–44.

Wucheng 1978 Xu Zhifan 許智范 (et al). ‘Jiangxi Qingjiang Wucheng Shangdai yizhi di si ci fajue di zhuyao di zhuyao shaohuo’ 江西清江吳城商代遺址第 四次發掘的主要收穫, Wenwu ziliao congkan, 1978.2, pp. 1–13.

Xiang Taochu 2006c Xiang Taochu. ‘Nanfang Shang Zhou tong nao de fenlei xulie he nian dai wenti’ 南 方商周銅鐃的分類序列和年代問題, Hunan sheng bowuguan guankan, 2006.3, pp. 35–66. Xia-Shang 2003 Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Institute of Archaeology. Zhongguo Kaoguxue Xia Shang Quan 中國考古學 夏商卷, Beijing: Chinese Social Sciences Press, 2003.

Wucheng 1987 Zhou Guangming 周廣明, Wu Shici 吳 詩池and Li Jiahe李家和. ‘Qingjiang Wucheng yizhi di liu ci fajue di zhuyao shaohuo’ 清江吳城遺址第六 次發掘的主要收穫, Jiangxi lishi wenwu, 1987.2, pp. 20–31.

Xin’gan 1991 Jiangxi Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology and Xin’gan County Museum. ‘Jiangxi Xin’gan Dayangzhou Shang mu fajue jianbao’ 江西新 干大洋洲商墓發掘簡報, Wenwu, 1991.10, pp. 1–26.

Wucheng 1993 Jiangxi Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Department of Archaeology Sun Yatsen University and Zhangshu Municipal Museum. ‘Zhangshu Wucheng yizhi di qi ci fajue jianbao’ 樟樹 吳城遺址第七次發掘簡報, Wenwu, 1993.7, pp. 1–32, 18.

Xin’gan 1997 Jiangxi Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Jiangxi Provincial Museum, and Xin’gan Municipal Museum. Xin’gan Shang dai dawu 新干商代大墓, Beijing: Wenwu, 1997.

Wucheng 1995 Zhan Kaixun 詹開遜. ‘Jiangxi Zhangshu Wucheng Shangdai yizhi di ba ci fajue jianbao 江西樟 樹吳城商代遺址第八次發掘簡報, Nanfang wenwu, 1995.1, pp. 5–23.

Xin’gan 2006 National History Museum and Jiangxi Provincial Museum (eds). Shangdai Jiangnan: Jiangxi Xin’gan Dayangzhou chutu wenwu jizui 商代江南–– 江西新干大洋洲出土文物輯粹. Beijing: Zhongguo shehui kexue chubanshe, Beijing: National History Museum, 2006.

Wucheng 2005 Jiangxi Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology and Zhangshu Municipal Museum. Wucheng: 1973–2002 nian kaogu fajue baogao 吳城: 1973–2002年考古發掘報告, Beijing: Kexue, 2005.

Xiong and Bao 1986 Xiong, Bufa 熊卜發 and Bao, Fangdu 鮑方鐸. ‘Huangpo chutu de Shang dai wanqi qingtongqi’ 黃陂出土的商代晚期青銅器, Jianghan kaogu, 1986.4, pp. 27–28.

Xia and Liu 1996 Xia Mingcai 夏名采 and Liu Huaguo 劉建國. ‘Shandong Qingzhou shi Sufutun mujun chutu de qingtongqi’ 山東青州市蘇埠屯墓群出土的青銅 器, Kaogu, 1996.5, pp. 21–28.

Xiong Chuanxin 1981 Xiong Chuanxin 熊傳新. ‘Hunan xin faxian de qingtongqi’ 湖南新發現的青銅 器, Wenwu ziliao congkan, 1981.5, pp. 103–105.

Xian Bo 1981 Xian Bo 咸博. ‘Hubei sheng Yangxin xian chutu liang jian qingtong nao’ 湖北省陽新縣出土 兩件青銅鐃, Wenwu, 1981.1, p. 93.

Xiong Chuanxin 1983 Xiong Chuanxin. ‘Hunan Ningxiang xin faxian yibi Shang Zhou qingtongqi’ 湖 南寧鄉新發現一批商周青銅器, Wenwu, 1983.10, pp. 72–74.

Xiang Taochu 2001 Xiang Taochu. ‘Hunan Wangcheng xian Gaoshazhi Shang Zhou yizhi de fajue’ 湖南望城 高沙脊商周遺址的發掘, Kaogu, 2001.4, pp. 27–44.

Xiong Jianhua 1987 Xiong Jianhua 熊建華. ‘Xiangtan xian chutu Zhou dai qingtong tiliang you’ 湘潭縣出 土周代青銅提梁卣, Hunan kaogu jikan, 1987.4, pp. 19–21.

Xiang Taochu 2002 Xiang Taochun. ‘Hunan Shang Zhou kaogu he qingtongqi yanjiu de xin jinzhan’ 湖南 商周考古和青銅器研究的新進展, in Gao and Yasuda 2002, pp. 183–203.

Xiu Weihua 2004 Xiu Weihua 胥衛華. ‘Yueyang shi shijiao Tonggushan yizhi xin chutu de qingtongqi’ 岳 陽市市效銅鼓山遺址新出土的青銅器, Hunan kaogu 2002, 2004, pp. 455–459.

Xiang Taochu 2005 Xiang Taochu. ‘Jiekai Jiangnan qingtong wangguo de shenmi miansha—Hunan Ningxiang Tanheli Xi Zhou cheng zhi’ 揭開江南青 銅王國的神秘面紗—湖南寧鄉炭河里西周城址 in Zhongguo Wenwu Press and The Soceity for Chinese Archaeology (ed.) Zhongguo niandu shi da kaogu xin

Xu 2001a 21–37. 116

Xu, Jay. ‘Introduction’ in Bagley 2001, pp.

Bibliography Xu 2001b Xu, Jay. ‘Bronzes at Sanxingdui’, in Bagley 2001, pp. 59–151.

Yang Hong 1998 Yang Hung 楊泓. ‘Shang dai de bingqi yu zhanche’ 商代的兵器與戰車, in Institute of Archaeology, CASS (ed.) 1998, pp. 358–365.

Xu 2006 Xu, Jay. ‘Defining the archaeological cultures at the Sanxingdui site’, Journal of East Asian Archaeology, 2006, no. 5 (1–4), pp. 149–190.

Yang Hong 2002 Yang Hong. ‘Zhongguo gu bingqi kaogu ji youguan wenti’ 中國古兵器考古及有關問 題, in Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (ed.) Ershiyi shiji kaoguxue yu shijie kaoguxue 二十一世紀考古學與世界考古學, Beijing: Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, 2002, pp. 82–88.

Xu 2008 Xu, Jay Jie. The Sanxingdui Site: Art and Archaeology, PhD. dissertation, Princeton University, 2008. Xu and He 2004 Xu Guangde 徐廣德 and He Yuling 何毓靈. ‘Henan Anyang shi Huayuanzhuang 54 hao Shang dai muzang’ 河南安陽市花園莊54號商代墓 葬, Kaogu, 2004.1, pp. 7–19.

Yang Hong 2005 Yang Hong. Gudai bingqi tonglun 古代兵器通論, Beijing: Forbidden City Publishing House, 2005. Yang Hongxuan 1976 Yang Hongxuan 楊鴻勛. ‘Cong Panlongcheng Shang dai gongdian yizhi tan Zhongguo gongting jianzhu fazhan de ji ge wenti’ 從盤龍城商代 宮殿遺址談中國宮殿建築發掘的幾個問題, Wenwu, 1976.2, pp. 16–25.

Xu and Shao 2005 Xu Zhifan 許智范 and Shao Minghua 蕭明華. Nanfang Wenhua Yu Baiyue-Dianyue Wenming 南方文化與百越滇越文明 (Southern Cultures and the Baiyue and Dianyue Civilizations), Nanjing: Jiangsu Education Press. 2005. Xu Guosheng 1982 Xu Guosheng 徐國勝. ‘Jieshao Ercheng chutu de ji jian wenwu’ 介紹鄂城出土的幾 件, Wenwu, 1982.1, pp. 77–78.

Yidu Sufutun 1972 Shandong Provincial Museum. ‘Shandong Yidu Sufutun di yi hao nuli xunzang mu’ 山東益都蘇阜屯的一號奴隸殉葬墓, Wenwu, 1972.8, pp. 17–30.

Xu Huping 1996 Xu Huping (ed.). Dongfang wenming zhi guang—Liangzhu wenhua faxian liushi zhounian jilian wenji 東方文明之光－良渚文化發掘六十周 年紀念文集, Haikou: Hainan guoji xinwen chuban zhongxin, 1996.

Yinxu 1979 Excavation Team for Anyang, Institute of Archaeology, CASS. ‘1969–1977 nian Yinxu xiqu muzhang fajue baogao’ 1969–1977年殷墟西區墓葬發 掘報告, Kaogu xuebao, 1979.1, pp. 27–146. Yu Jiadong 1981 Yu Jiadong 余家棟. ‘Xinyu xian faxian xi Zhou yongzhong’ 新余縣發現西周甬鐘, Jiangxi lishi wenwu, 1981.2, pp. 36–37.

Xu Qing 1992 Xu Qing 徐青. ‘Cong Xin’gan Shang mu chutu tong yue kan yue de lishi guizi’ 從新干商墓出 土銅鉞看鉞的歷史軌跡, Nanfang wenwu, 1992.2, pp. 55–61.

Yu Weichao 2002 Yu Weichao 俞偉超. ‘Changjiang liuyu qingtong wenhua fazhan Beijing de xin sikao’ 長江流域青銅文化發展背景的新思考, in Gao and Yasuda 2002, pp. 1–7.

Xue Rao 1963 Xue Rao 薛堯. ‘Jiangxi chutu de jijian qingtongqi’ 江西出土的幾件青銅器, Kaogu, 1963.8, pp. 416–418, 422.

Yuan Jiarong 1982 Yuan Jiarong 袁家榮. ‘Xaingtan Qingshan qiao jiaocang Shang Zhou qingtongqi’ 湘 潭青山橋出土窖藏商周青銅器, Hunan kaogu jikan, 1982.1, pp. 21–24.

Yan Xiafeng 1984 Yan Xiafeng 嚴霞峰. ‘Jiangxi Jing’an chutu xi Zhou yongzhong’ 江西靖安出土西 周甬鐘 (A Western Zhou yongzhong unearthed from Jing’an, Jiangxi), Kaogu, 1984.4, p.375. Yang 2000 Yang, Xiaoneng. Reflections of Early China: Décor, Pictographs, and Pictoral Inscriptions, Seattle and London: The Nelson-Atkins Museum of Art, 2000.

Yue Hongbin 2008 Yue Hongbin 岳洪彬, Yue Zhanwei 岳占偉, and He Yuling 何毓靈. ‘Yinxu Dasikung M303 fajue baogao’ 殷墟大司空M303發掘報告, Kaogu xuebao, 2008.3, pp. 353–94.

Yang 2004 Yang Xiaoneng (ed.). New Perspectives on China’s Past: Chinese Archaeology in the Twentieth Century, Vols.1&2, New Havena and London: Yale University Press, 2004.

Yue Zhanwei 2004 Yue Zhanwei. ‘Anyang Yinxu Liujiazhuang bei 1046 hao mu’ 安陽殷墟北1046號墓, Kaoguxue jikan, 2004, no. 15, pp. 359–389. Zhan and Liu 1993 Zhan Kaixun 詹開遜 and Liu Lin 劉林. ‘Tan Xin’gan Shang mu chutu de qingtong nongqu’, Wenwu, 1993.7, pp. 27–32, 18.

Yang and Guo 1983 Yang Yubin 楊育彬 and Guo Peiyu 郭培育. ‘Zhengzhou Bei’erqilu xin faxian san zuo Shang mu’ 鄭州北二七路新發現三座商墓, Wenwu, 1983.3, pp. 60–77.

Zhan and Liu 1994 Zhan Kaixunand Liu Lin. ‘Chu lun Xin’gan qingtongqi de difang teshe’ 初論新干青銅器 的地方特色, Nanfang wenwu, 1994.2, pp. 42–50.

Yang and Liu 1983 Yang Guozhong 楊國忠 and Liu Zhongfu 劉忠伏. ‘1980 nian jiu Henan Yanshi Erlitou yizhi fajue jianbao’1980年秋河南偃師二里頭遺址發 掘簡報, Kaogu, 1983.3 pp. 199–205, 219.

Zhang and Fu 1984 Zhang, Jinghui 張經輝 and Fu, Xuan 符炫. ‘Yueyang shi xin chutu de Shang Zhou qingtongqi’ 岳陽市新出土的商周青銅器, Hunan kaogu jikan, 1984.4, pp. 26–28.

Yang Hong 1980 Yang Hong 楊泓. Zhongguo gu bingqi luncong中國古兵器論叢, Beijing: Wenwu, 1980. 117

Contacts Between the Shang and the South c. 1300–1045 BC Zhou qingtong yan’ 浙江省海鹽縣出土商周青銅甗, Kaogu, no. 1, 1981, p. 90.

Zhang Changping 2002 Zhang Changping 張昌平. ‘Shang dai tong pou kailun’ 商代銅瓿概論, in Gao and Yasuda 2002, pp. 99–114.

Zheng and Tang 2000 Zheng Junsheng 鄭均生 and Tang Xianhua 唐先華. ‘Hunan Hangyang faxian Shang dai tong you’ 湖南衡陽發現商代銅卣, Wenwu, 2000.10, pp. 58–60.

Zhang Changping 2004 Zhang Changping. ‘Lun Yinxu shiqi nanfang de zun he lei’ 論殷墟時期南方的尊和 罍, Kaoguxue jikan, 2004, no. 15, pp. 116–127.

Zhengzhou 1989 Henan Institute of Cultural Relics. ‘Zhengzhou Shang dai Erligang qi zhutong jizhi’ 鄭州 商代二里崗期鑄銅基址, Kaoguxue jikan, 1989, no. 6, pp. 100–122.

Zhang Changping 2016 Zhang Changping. Shang Zhou shiqi nanfang qingtongqi yanjiu 商周時期南方 青銅器研究, Beijing: Commerical Press, 2016. Zhang Changshou 2000 Zhang Changshou. ‘A comparative study of the ding bronze vessels from Xin’gan’, Journal of East Asian Archaeology, 2000, no. 2 (1–2), pp. 251–272.

Zhengzhou 2001 Henan Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology. Zhengzhou Shangcheng—1953–1985 Nian Kaogu Fajue Baogao(xiang, zhong, xia) 鄭州 商城—1953–1985年考古發掘報告 (上、中、下), Beijing: Wenwu, 2001.

Zhang Guomao 1988 Zhang Guomao 張國茂. ‘Anhui Tongling dichu gu guang ye yizhi diaocha baogao’ 安 徽銅陵地區古礦冶遺址調查報告, Dongnan wenhua, 1988.6, pp. 77–79.

Zhengzhou Jiaocang 1999 Henan Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology and Zhengzhou Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology. Zhengzhou Shang Dai Tongqi Jiaocang鄭州商代銅器窖藏, Beijing: Science Press, 1999.

Zhang Tinghao 2001 Zhang Tinghao (ed.). San Qin gui bao 三秦瑰寶, Xi’an: Shaanxi Renmin, 2001. Zhang Xuewu 1980 Zhang Xuewu 張學武. ‘Yinshan xian faxian Shang dai tong ding’ 應山縣發現商代銅 鼎, Jianghan kaogu, no. 1, 1980, p. 58.

Zhongguo qingtongqi quanji 1998 Zhongguo qingtongqi quanji vol. 4 Shang (si) 中國青銅器全集 第4卷．商 (四), Beijing: Wenwu, 1998.

Zhang Yongshan 1994 Zhang Yongshan 張永山. ‘Wuding nan zheng yu Jiangnan tonglu’ 武丁南征與江 南銅路, Nanfang wenwu, 1994.1, pp. 42–48.

Zhu and Lü 1994 Zhu Wenwai 朱文瑋 and Lü Qichang 呂琪. Xian Qin Yue Zhong zhi Yanjiu 先秦樂鐘之研究, Taipei: SMC, 1994

Zhang Zengqi 1997 Zhang Zengqi. Dian Guo yu Dian Wenhua 滇國與滇文化. Kunming: Yunnan Meishu, 1997.

Zhu Fenghan 1995 Zhu Fenghan 朱鳳瀚. Gudai Zhongguo qingtongqi 古代中國青銅器, Tianjin: Nankai University Press, 1995.

Zhao Congcang 1996 Zhao Congcang 趙叢蒼. ‘Chenggu Yangxian tongqi qu zhonghe yan jiu’ 城固洋 縣銅器群綜合研究, Wenbo, 1996.4, pp. 3–26.

Zhu Fenghan 2009 Zhu Fenghan 朱鳳瀚. Zhongguo gudai qingtongqi zhonglun. 中國古代青銅器綜論, Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 2009.

Zhao Congcang 2006 Zhao Congcang 趙叢蒼 (ed.). Cheng Yang qingtongqi城洋青銅器, Beijing: Kexue, 2006.

Zhu Fusheng 2005 Zhu Fusheng 朱福生. ‘Jiangxi Xin’gan Niucheng yizhi diaocha’ 江西新干牛城遺址 調查, Nanfang wenwu, 2005.4, pp. 4–6.

Zhao Dianzheng 1994 Zhao Dianzheng 趙殿增. ‘Ba-Shu qingtongqi gan lun’ 巴蜀青銅器概論, in Zhongguo Qingtongqi Quan Ji 13—Ba Shu 中國青 銅器卷之13—巴蜀, ed. by Duan Shu’an 段書安, Beijing: Wenwu, 1994, pp. 1–31.

Zhu Peizhang 1966 Zhu Peizhang 祝培章, Pu Zhemin 卜哲民 and Cheng Xuehua 程學華. ‘Shaanxi sheng Chenggu, Baoji, Nantian chutu he shouji de qingtongqi’ 陝西省城固、寶雞、藍田出土和收集的青銅器, Wenwu, 1966.1, pp. 1–3.

Zhao Yixin 1987 Zhao Yixin 趙一新. ‘Zhejiang Pan’an Shenze chutu yijian yunwen nao’ 浙江盤安深澤出土 一件雲紋鐃, Kaogu, 1987.8, p.727.

Zhu Zhangyi 2006 Zhu Zhangyi, Chang Qin and Wang Fang. ‘The Jinsha site: an introduction’, Journal of East Asian Archaeology, 2006, no. 5 (1–4), pp. 247–276.

Zhejiang Changxing 1960 Zhejiang Provincial Museum. ‘Zhejiang Changxing xian chutu de liangjian tongq’ 浙江長興縣出土的兩件銅器, Wenwu, 1960.7, pp. 48−49. Zhejiang Changxing 1973 Trustee for the Cultural Relics of Changxing County 長興縣文化館. ‘Zhejiang Changxing xian de liangjian qingtongqi’ 浙江長興縣 的兩件青銅器, Wenwu, 1973.1, p. 62. Zhejiang Haiyan 1981 Haiyan Municipal Cultural Gallery. ‘Zhejiang sheng Haiyan xian chutu Shang 118