The Making of the Chinese Civilization 9819942128, 9789819942121

Citation preview

The Making of the Chinese Civilization Jianye Han

The Making of the Chinese Civilization

Jianye Han

The Making of the Chinese Civilization

Jianye Han Department of Archaeology and Museology, School of History Renmin University of China Beijing, China Translated by Zequan Liu School of Foreign Languages Henan University Kaifeng, China Bing Mei School of Foreign Languages Henan University Kaifeng, China

Jian Hou School of Foreign Languages Henan University Kaifeng, China Siping Qiu Department of Archaeology and Museology, School of History Remin University of China Beijing, China

Proofread and Revised by Teurbert Wolfgang Department of English and Linguistics University of Birmingham Birmingham, UK ISBN 978-981-99-4212-1 ISBN 978-981-99-4213-8 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8 Jointly published with China Social Sciences Press The print edition is not for sale in China (Mainland). Customers from China (Mainland) please order the print book from: China Social Sciences Press. ISBN of the Chinese edition: 978-7-5203-7939-7 © China Social Sciences Press 2023 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publishers, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publishers nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publishers remain neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Palgrave Macmillan imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. The registered company address is: 152 Beach Road, #21-01/04 Gateway East, Singapore 189721, Singapore

Contents

1

Preface 1.1 The Origin, Formation and Early Evolution of Chinese Civilization 1.2 The Three Regional Patterns in the Genesis of the Chinese Civilization 1.3 Environmental Evolution, War and Conflict, and the Evolving Mechanism of Civilizations 1.4 Origin of the Chinese Culture and Its Outbound Interactions 1.5 Culture Genes and Historical Memory

1 3 4 5 7 8

Part I The Origin, Formation and Early Development of Chinese Civilization 2

In Search of the Cultural “Early China” from Prehistoric Relics 2.1 Introduction 2.2 Budding of the Early China: First Step of Its Civilization 2.3 Formation of the Early China: Second Step of the Genesis of Its Civilization 2.4 The Guguo or Ancient State of the “Early China” and the Formation of Its Wenming Civilization 2.5 Concluding Remarks

13 13 14 20 23 28 v

vi

3

4

5

6

7

CONTENTS

The Earliest China: The Makings of a Pluralistic Unity 3.1 Research into the Earliest China 3.2 Formation of the Earliest China 3.3 The Geographical Scope and Structure of the Earliest China 3.4 The Cultural Traits of the Earliest China

31 31 34

The Peiligang Era and the Origin of Chinese Wenming 4.1 Definition of Wenming and the Research into the Origin of Chinese Wenming 4.2 The Proper Zone of “ The Peiligang China” 4.3 The Peripheral Zone of “The Peiligang China” 4.4 The Characteristics of “The Peiligang China”

47

41 44

47 52 59 63

The Migration Influence of the Peiligang Culture and the Rudiments of Early Chinese Cultural Sphere 5.1 The Peiligang Culture 5.2 The Baijia Culture 5.3 The Cishan Culture 5.4 The Beixin Culture 5.5 A Few Concluding Remarks

65 66 70 74 76 78

Clan Era 6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4

81 81 83 89 92

Burial and Ancestral Veneration of the Peiligang Introduction Zuzang in the Peiligang Era Burial Customs in Other Cultures An “Idol-Free Ancestral Veneration” Culture

The Miaodigou Era and “the Early China” 7.1 The Dongzhuang and Miaodigou Types 7.2 The Dongzhuang Type: The “ Miaodigouization” of the Yangshao Culture 7.3 Impact of the Dongzhuang and Miadigou Types on Other Parts of the Country 7.3.1 The Northeast Region 7.3.2 The Eastern Coastal Region 7.3.3 The Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River 7.4 The Formation of the “Early China”

95 96 104 112 112 115 117 119

CONTENTS

8

9

10

An Analysis of the Dawenkou Cemetery 8.1 Introduction 8.2 Scope of the Cemetery 8.3 Periodization of the Cemetery 8.3.1 Existing Periodization by the Report 8.3.2 Re-periodization of the Cemetery 8.4 Spatial Distribution of the Burials 8.4.1 Phase I Burials 8.4.2 Phase II Burials 8.4.3 Phase III Burials 8.5 Demographic Analysis 8.5.1 Average Life Span and Mortality Rate 8.5.2 The Amount of Residents 8.6 Social Conditions 8.6.1 Phase I: Clan Graveyards 8.6.2 Polarization Between Families: Disintegration of the Clan Society 8.6.3 Special Cases: Male–Female Joint Burials 8.6.4 Phases II and III: Family Graveyards 8.6.5 Replacement of Clan Graveyard with Family Graveyard: A Critical Step Towards Civilization The Ancient Cities of Liangzhu, Taosi and Erlitou: The Evolution of Early Chinese Civilization 9.1 General Information of the Three Ancient Cities 9.2 Features of the Three Ancient Cities 9.3 The Decline of the Three Ancient Cities 9.4 Concluding Remarks Liangzhu: An Early State with Regional Sovereign Power 10.1 The Liangzhu Culture: A Civilization 10.2 A State with Regional Sovereign Power 10.3 The Liangzhu Culture Nourished by the “Early China” 10.4 The Influence of the Liangzhu Civilization on the “Early China”

vii

125 125 127 128 128 137 140 140 141 142 142 143 146 147 149 150 155 157

158 163 163 170 177 182 185 185 188 189 191

viii

CONTENTS

11

Shimao: Its Significance in the Development of Chinese Civilization 11.1 The Shimao City: Its Origin in the Central Plains and Connection to Eurasia 11.2 Regional State and the Northern Mode 11.3 Southward Movement to the Central Plains and Reconstruction of Chinese Civilization

195 196 201 203

Part II The Three Regional Patterns of the Origin of Chinese Civilization 12

13

The General Tendency and Different Patterns of Societal Development in the Chalcolithic Age 12.1 Three New Changes in the Chalcolithic Age 12.1.1 The Prominence of the Patriarchal Jiating Family and Jiazu Clan 12.1.2 The Spread of Jiazu Clan Commune Groups 12.1.3 Frequent Wars 12.2 Obvious Differentiations in the Eastern Regions 12.2.1 The Widening Gap Between Rich and Poor 12.2.2 The Striking Difference in Social Status 12.2.3 A Clear Social Division of Labour 12.3 Non-obvious Differentiations in the Northern Regions 12.3.1 A Lesser Degree of Social Polarization in Wealth 12.3.2 No Obvious Difference in Social Status 12.3.3 No Clear Division of Labour 12.4 The Central and Northwestern Regions 12.5 Concluding Remarks The Xipo Cemetery and the “Central Plain Pattern” 13.1 The Periodization of the Cemetery 13.2 The Composition of the Burials 13.3 The Distribution of the Cemetery 13.4 The Connotations of Central Plains Mode

207 208 208 210 213 215 216 217 222 225 225 226 227 228 231 235 236 242 248 250

CONTENTS

14

15

16

17

18

The Middle Reaches of the Yellow River: Its Central Position in the Civilizing Process 14.1 Debate on the Cultural Centre of China: The Yellow River Basin or the Central Plains 14.2 The Central and Leading Role of the Yellow River Basin in the Making of Chinese Civilization 14.3 The Special Position of the Middle Reaches of the Yellow River in the Making of Chinese Civilization A Comparison of the Civilizing Processes in the Central Plains and the Jianghan Regions 15.1 The Rise of the Central Plains and the Decline of the Jianghan Region 15.2 The Central Plains Pattern and the Eastern Pattern 15.3 “Life Out of Sorrow and Calamity, Death from Comfort and Joy”

ix

257 257 259

261 267 268 276 280

The Central Plains and the Northern Region in the Longshan Era: A Comparison of Their Civilizing Processes 16.1 Achievements of Development 16.2 Modes of Civilization 16.3 Motives for Development

285 286 289 292

The Central Plains and the Haidai Region in the Longshan Era: A Comparison of Their Civilizing Processes 17.1 Cultural Patterns 17.2 Patterns of Civilization 17.3 The Motivating Forces of Development

295 297 301 307

The Three Burial Traditions in the Longshan Era 18.1 The Longshan Era 18.2 The Haidai Tradition 18.3 The Jianghan Region 18.4 The Central Plains 18.5 The Exceptional Case of the Taosi Culture 18.6 Concluding Remarks

311 312 313 316 318 321 322

x

CONTENTS

Part III Environmental Evolution, War and Conflict, and the Evolving Mechanism of Civilizations 19

20

21

22

Holocene Loess: The Material Foundation of Early Chinese Civilization 19.1 The Potou Loess and the Zhouyuan Loess 19.2 The Agriculture of the Holocene Loess 19.3 The Appearance of the Early Chinese Civilization 19.4 The Continuity of Early Chinese Civilization 19.5 Concluding Remarks

327 328 331 334 335 337

The Impact of the Climatic Events of 5000 to 4000 BP on the Culture of Northern China 20.1 The Cold and Dry Climate at About 5000 BP 20.2 The Cold and Dry Climate at About 4000 BP 20.3 Implications from the Two Extreme Climate Events

339 340 343 346

Heroes in Chaotic Times, Civilization Out of Turbulent Age: Formation of the Early Chinese Civilization and Cold-Dry Climate Events

349

Neolithic Wars and the Evolution of Early Chinese Civilization 22.1 Warfare at 4000 BCE 22.2 Warfare at 3000 BCE 22.3 Warfare at 2000 BCE 22.4 Concluding Remarks

355 356 361 366 373

Part IV Origin of the Chinese Culture and Its Outbound Interactions 23

On the Dawn of the Erlitou Bronze Civilization 23.1 The Cultural Foundations 23.2 External Influence 23.3 The Environmental Background 23.4 The Relevant Historical Texts

24

A Brief Overview of “the Bronze Age Revolution” in China 24.1 The Rapid Spread of the Bronze Techniques and the Decline of the Pottery Techniques

379 379 387 396 400 405 406

CONTENTS

24.2 24.3

The Dramatic Social Complication and the Emergence of the Kingdom Civilization The Rapid Development of Animal Husbandry Economy and Significant Adjustment of the Cultural Landscape

xi

409

410

Part V Culture Genes and Historical Memory 25

26

8000 Years Old Cultural Genes of Early China Revealed from Archaeological Discoveries 25.1 Holistic Thinking and Harmony Between the Heaven and Man 25.2 Ancestor Veneration and Companionship with Fellow Humans 25.3 In Pursuit of Order and Steadfast Impartiality 25.4 Capacity for Coalescence and Peaceful Coexistence 25.5 Hard-Working and Unswerving Determination Violent Cultural Changes in the Longshan Period and Tribal Warfare in Chinese Legendary Era 26.1 Introduction 26.2 The Southward Expansion of the Wangwan Phase III Culture and Yu’s Conquest of the Miao Man Tribes 26.2.1 The Rapid Development and Expansion of the Wangwan Phase III Culture 26.2.2 The Rise and Fall of the Shijiahe Culture 26.2.3 Yu’s Conquest of the Miao Man Tribes and the Early Xia Culture 26.3 The Southward Expansion of the Laohushan Culture and Ji’s Banishment of Danzhu 26.3.1 The Growth and Rise of the Laohushan Culture 26.3.2 The Rise and Fall of the Taosi Culture 26.3.3 Ji’s Banishment of Danzhu and the Origin of the Pre-Zhou Culture 26.4 The Longshan Period and the Times of Yao, Shun and Yu Emperors 26.4.1 The Zaolvtai Culture, the Late Miaodigou Phase II Type and Shun of the Youyu Clan

417 418 420 422 425 427 429 429

433 433 438 442 448 448 451 453 457 458

xii

CONTENTS

26.4.2

26.5 27

Phase II of the Hougang Culture, Phase II of the Xueshan Culture and the earliest Pre-Shang Culture Conclusion

460 463

Ancient Historical Legends: To be Considered in Studies of the Origin of Chinese Civilization 27.1 The Rationale Underlying the Approach 27.2 Findings based on the Approach 27.3 The Approach as a Research Method

465 465 467 469

28

Ancient History of the Legendary Era: Not Unverifiable

473

29

An Archaeological Approach to Studies of Ancient History of Legendary Era 29.1 Archaeology: The Key to Ancient History Problems 29.2 Genealogy: The Combination of Cultural, Genetic and Genus Genealogy 29.3 Radical Change: The Combination of Cultural, Settlement and War Migration 29.4 Conclusion

479 480 483 486 488

List of Figures

Fig. 5.1 Fig. 5.2

Fig. 5.3

Rudiments of the Early Chinese Cultural Sphere (5400–5000 BCE) Comparison of ceramic vessels of the Baijia and Peiligang cultures sites 1–7: from the Baijia Site 白家 in Lintong District (T309➂:4, T204H25:1, T116H4:2, T117➂:4, T121➂:8, T305➂:4, T308H15:5). 8–14. from the Shuiquan Site 水泉 in Jiaxian County (M96:5, M27:2, M2:2, M20:2, M59:4, M66:2, M33:2)Pottery vessels:1 and 8: deep-bellied guan jars 深腹罐; 2, 6, 9 and 13: round-bottomed bo bowls 圜底 钵; 3, 5, 7, 11, 12 and 14: three-legged bo bowls 三足 钵; 4 and 10: round-footed bo bowls 圈足钵 Grouping of ceramic vessels of the late Cishan Culture in Wu’an County 1–3. yu water pot 盂 (T87➁:29, T96➁:38, T8➁:10). 4. round-footed guan jar 圈足罐 (T104➁:4). 5. tube-shaped guan jar 筒形罐 (T96➁:25). 6. supporting foot 支脚 (H453:7). 7 and10. hu jugs 壶 (T87➁:25, T96➁:35). 8. deep-bellied guan jar 深腹罐 (T106➁:8). 9. flat-bottomed bo bowls 平底钵 (H77:3). 11 and 12. three-legged bo bowls 三足钵 (T46➁:30, T87➁:32)

67

73

75

xiii

xiv

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 7.1

Fig. 7.2

Double-lipped small-mouthed pottery amphorae 双唇 口小口尖底瓶 of various sites of the Miaodigou Era (1–3. the Dongzhuang type 东庄类型 of the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化 [the Beigan Site 北橄 H34:27, 5; II T1302➃:6]; 4–6. the Miaodigou type 庙底沟类型 of Yangshao culture [the Nanjiaokou Site 南交口 H90:1, the Xiyin Site 西阴 G1:28, the Xipo Site 西坡 H110:5]; 7–9. the Quanhu type 泉护类型 of Yangshao culture [the Dadiwan Site 大地湾 T704➂:P50, the Anban Site 案板 GNDH24:7, the Fulinbao Site 福临堡 H37:8]; 10–15. the Bainiyaozi type 白泥窑子类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Bainiyaozi Site 白泥窑子 F1:1, the Wangmushan Poxia Site 王墓山坡下 I F1:21, I F11:13, the Duanjiazhuang Site 段家庄 H3:15, 27; the Yangjiaping Site 杨家坪 F1:3]; 16–17. the Dahecun type 大河村类型 of Yangshao culture [the Dahecun 16 :27, 28]; 18. the Daxi culture 大 大河村 site T56 溪文化 [the Guanmiaoshan Site 关庙山 T63➄A: 27]; 19. the Yancun type 阎村类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Shuidihe Site 水地河 W1:2]) Black-striped bo bowls pottery 陶黑彩带纹钵 of various sites of the Miaodigou Era (1–2. the Dongzhuang type 东庄类型 of the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化 [the Beigan Site 北橄 H34:20, H32:2]; 3–5. the Miaodigou type 庙 底沟类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Beigan Site 北 橄 II T402➂:2, the Xiyin Site 西阴 H33:54, H30:9]; 6–7. the Shijia type 史家类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Yuanzitou Site 原子头 H126:1, the Dadiwan Site 大地湾 T302➂: 21]; 8. the Quanhu type 泉护 类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Dadiwan Site 大 地湾 F709:1]; 9–12. the Bainiyaozi type 白泥窑子 类型 of the Yangshao culture [Bainiyaozi Site 白泥 窑子 F1:11, Wangmushan Poxia Site 王墓山坡下 I H1:4, I F6:13, Duanjiazhuang Site 段家庄 H3:5]; 13. the Hougang type 后岗类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Nanyangzhuang Site 南杨庄 T40➁:1]; 14. the Diaoyutai type 钓鱼台类型 of Yangshao culture [the Diaoyutai Site H1]; 15. the Hongshan culture 红山 文化 [the Xishuiquan Site 西水泉 T7➁:20])

99

100

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 7.3

Painted pottery pen basins with petal patterns 花瓣 纹彩陶盆 in various sites of the Miaodigou Era (1–2. the Dongzhuang type 东庄类型 of the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化 [the Beigan Site 北橄 H38:11, the Dongzhuang Site 东庄 H104:1:01]; 3–5. the Miaodigou type 庙 底沟类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Beigan Site 北橄 T8➈:1, the Xiyin Site 西阴 H33:7, H30: 63]; 6. the Shijia type 史家类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Yuanzitou Site 原子头 H42:1]; 7–10. The Quanhu type 泉护类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Dadiwan Site 大地湾 T700➂:19, the Quanhu Site 泉护 H5:192, H1127:871, the Hulijia Site 胡李家 H14:2]; 11–13. the Bainiyaozi type 白泥窑子类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Zhangmaowusu Site 章毛勿素 F1:4, the Duanjiazhuang Site 段家庄 H3:07, the Bainiyaozi 白泥窑子类型 Point A F2:2]; 14–16. the Yancun type 阎村类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Dahecun Site 大河村 T1➅D:113, the Dianjuntai Site 点军台 F3:7, the Dahecun Site 大河村 T11➄A:83]; 17–18. the Diaoyutai type 钓鱼台类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Nanyangzhuang Site 南杨庄 H108:1, the Diaoyutai Site 钓鱼台 T4➁]; 19. the Dawenkou culture 大汶口文化 [the Liulin Site 刘林 M72:1]: 20–21. the Songze culture 崧泽文化 [the lower cultural layer of the Qingdun Site 青 墩下文化层, the Caoxieshan Site 草鞋山 T304:6]; 22–24. the Daxi culture 大溪文化 [Tomb 1 of the Luosishan Site 螺蛳山, the Guanmiaoshan Site 关庙山 T37➃:9, T4➂:9])

xv

102

xvi

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 7.4

Fig. 8.1 Fig. 8.2 Fig. 9.1 Fig. 13.1 Fig. 13.2

Three-Level Cultural Structure of “the Early China” during the Miaodigou Era (Ceramic Vessels 1, 7, 12, 13. pen 盆 basin [the Zhangmaowusu Site 章毛乌素 F1:4, the Miaodigou Site 庙底沟 H11:75, the Hulijia Site 胡李家 T1➁:1, H14:2]; 2, 8, 20. Guan 罐 jar [the Zhangmaowusu Site 章毛乌素 F1:2, the Miaodigou Site H322: 66, the Zhizhushan Site 蜘蛛山 T1➂:47]; 3, 10, 14, 16, 22. Bo 钵 bowl [the Zhangmaowusu Site 章毛乌素 F1:6, the Dadiwan Site T1➂:1, the Hulijia Site T1004➁B:3, the Chengtoushan Site H210:3, the Xishuiquan Site H4:2]; 4, 9, 11. Ping 瓶 vase [the Miaodigou Site 庙底沟 T203:43, the Dadiwan Site 大地湾 F2:14, QD0: 9]; 5. Fu 釜 cauldron [the Miaodigou Site 庙底沟 H12: 12]; 6. pottery stove 灶 [the Miaodigou Site 庙底沟 H47:34]; 15, 23, 27. ding 鼎 tripod cauldron [the Chengtoushan Site 城 头山 M665:2, the Dawenkou Site 大汶口 M1013:5, the Songze Site M10:3]; 17, 24, 28. dou 豆 pedestal plate [the Chengtoushan Site 城头山 M678:4, the Dawenkou Site 大汶口 M2005:49, the Songze Site 崧泽 M30:4]; 18, 25. bei 杯 cup [the Chengtoushan Site 城头山 M679:3, the Dawenkou Site 大汶口 M2002: 8]; 19. cylindrical guan jar 筒形罐 [the Xishuiquan Site 西水泉 F13:31] 21, 26, 29. Hu 壶 jug [the Xishuiquan Site 西水泉 H2:21, the Dawenkou Site 大汶口 M1013:2, the Songze Site 崧泽 M30:3]) Distribution of the burials (1) Distribution of the burials (2) Sphere of influence of the Liangzhu, Taosi and Erlitou cultures Distribution Map of the Xipo Burial Classification of the potteries of the Xipo residential remains (pen basin [H22:71]; 2, 3, 9, 10. bo bowl [H22:76, H22:77, H20: 22, H20:17]; 4, 12, 18. bei cup [H22:5, H20:43, H 144:2]; 5, 14, 15, 19, 20. deep-bellied guan jar [H22:74, H20:6, H20:12, H143:1, H143:2]; 6, 11. fu cauldron [G102:1, H20:46]; 7. zao stove [H22:103]; 8, 16. small-mouthed ping jar with a pointed bottom [H22:102, H20:45]; 13. wan bowl [H20:25]; 17. dailiu pen basin [H144:3])

121 138 140 171 237

240

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 13.3

Fig. 13.4

Fig. 13.5

Fig. 13.6

Fig. 13.7

Fig. 15.1

Fig. 17.1

Fig. 19.1

Comparison of the groups of potteries from the Xipo Residential Remains and the Xipo burials (1, 5, 9, 13. fu cauldron [G102:1, H20:46, M14:4–1, M29:3]; 2, 6, 10, 14. bo bowl [H22:77, H20:17, M14:7, M34:3]; 3, 7, 11, 15. wan bowl [H105:4, H20:25, M6:3, M13:4]; 4, 8, 12, 16. bei cup [H22:5, H20:43, M31:3, M24:4]) Comparison of the potteries from the Xipo burials, the Xipo Phase III residential remains and H14 of the Xiwang type (1, 4. deep-bellied guan jar [H143:2, H4:2:19]; 2, 3, 6. bo bowl [M14:7, M34:2, H4:2:10]; 5. dou pedestal plate [H4:2:14]; 7. pen basin [H4:2:8]; 8. small-mouthed pointed-bottomed ping jar [H4:2:44]) Profile Map of M27 in the Xipo Cemetery (1, 2. big-mouthed pottery gang jars; 3. pottery hu jars; 4. pottery bo bowls; 5, 6, 9. gui-shaped pottery vessels; 7. pottery fu cauldrons; 8. pottery zao stoves [7–9 cannot be recovered]) Profile Map of M2005 of the Dawenkou culture (tooth hair-binding device 2, 3. bone hairpins; 4–9. river deer’s teeth; 10. handle of an ivory object; 11–17, 20. horn-stick-shaped pendants; 18, 19. tooth zu arrowheads; 21–44. two-edged bone objects; 45, 46, 50, 52, 100, 101, 103. pottery bo bowls; 47, 54. pottery hu jugs; 48, 51, 56 pottery ding tripod cauldrons; 49, 55, 82–97, 102. pottery dou pedestal plates; 53, 104. lids of potteries; 57–70. pottery gui-shaped bei cups; 71–81. pottery goblets; 98. stone ben adzes; 99. stone axes) The big-mouthed gang vats with a round bottom and yue battle-axes (1, 2. pottery big-mouthed gang vats with a round bottom [Laofengang M10: 2, 3]; 3, 4. stone yue battle-axes [Laofengang M3: 6, 7]; 5. yue in the painting [Yancun]) The cultural development in the Central Plains and the Jianghan Regions during the Neolithic and Early Bronze ages Diagram of the civilizing processes in the central plains and the Haidai Region from the Neolithic Age to the Bronze Age Diagram of the relationship between the Zhouyuan Loess and its cultural layers (Adapted from Figure 1 of article “The relationship between the Zhouyuan Loess and its cultural layers by Zhou Kunshu)

xvii

241

242

243

246

254

269

297

330

xviii

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 20.1 Fig. 22.1

Fig. 22.2 Fig. 22.3 Fig. 22.4 Fig. 22.5

Fig. 22.6

Fig. 22.7

Oscillation of the northern boundary line of pottery between 6000 and 4000 BP “Th stork, fish, and stone-axe design”, and the jade and stone yue battle-axe. (1. “Th stork, fish, and stone-axe design” [from the Yancun Site]; 2. The Stone yue battle-axe [from the Laofengang Site M3:6]; 3 & 4. The jade yue battle-axe [from the Xipo Site M6:1 & M34:7]) Layout of the Zhaizita settlement The southward moving trend of the late Longshan Culture Plan of the eastern gate of the outer city of the Shimao Site Orthophotos and contour superposition of the mamian-bastions and corner towers at the eastern gate of the outer city of the Shimao City Site Human bone remains in the Taosi Site (From: “Report on the excavation of the Taosi Site in Xiangfen, Shanxi in 2002”) (1. IHG8 human skulls [partial]; 2. IHG8 a female skeleton) Stone weapons of the Wangwan (III) and Shijiahe cultures. (1–8. The Shijiahe Culture, the Xiaojiawuji Site [AT1205:1, H84:4, AT2019:4, AT1506:11, AT1408:10, AT603:6, H37:1, H42:168]; 9–16. Phase III of the Wangwan culture, the Haojiatai Site [M45:8, T11B:113, T43:24, T10D:50, T9A:46, T12D:5, T11A:21, T55A:6] [1 & 9 were yue, 3–8 & 11–16 were zu])

342

358 363 367 369

370

370

372

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 23.1

Fig. 23.2

Fig. 23.3

Fig. 23.4

Comparison of pottery from the late Erlitou I and the late Xinzhai II phases (1 & 15. deep-bellied jar 深腹罐 [IIH216:13, 2000T6➇:930]; 2 &16. deep-bellied vat 深腹缸 [VIIIH53:14, 2000T6➇:784]; 3 & 17. converging-mouth jar-shaped ding 敛 口罐形鼎 [IVH106:12, 2000T6➇:772]; 4 & 18. folded-rim jar-shaped ding 折沿罐形鼎 [II·VT104➅:51, 2000T6➇:779]; 5 & 19. flat-bottomed basin 平底盆 [II·VT104➅:28, 2000T6➇:598]; 6 & 20. zun-shaped urn 尊形瓮 [IIH216:17, 2000T11➆B:41]; 7 & 21. vessel cover 器盖 [II·VT104➅:48, 2000T6➇:211]; 8 & 22 leibo motar and pestle 擂钵 [II·VH148:15, 2000T6➇:637]; 9 & 23. straight-collar urn 直 领瓮 [II·VH148:12, 2000T6➇:810]; 10 & 24 zhepandou ridged pedestal plates 折盘豆 [II·VH148:20, 2000T11➆A:28]; 11 & 25. flat-bottomed bowl 平底碗 [II·VT203➆:13, 2000T6➇:616]; 12 & 26. curved-bellied basin with double pan [handles] 双鋬弧 腹盆 [II·VT104➅:47, 2000T5➇:22]; 13 & 27. arched belly basin with two handles 双耳弧腹盆 [II·VH105:18, 2000T11➆A:56]; 14 & 28. zeng 甑 boiler for steaming rice [IXH1:12, 2000T6➇:827]) A comparison of the primitive pottery jue from the Wangwan III Culture with that from the Erlitou I Culture (1. The Shilipu Site [H5:1]; 2. The Xiaopangou Site [T5 H44:52]; 3. The Erlitou Site [II·VM54:7]) Laced-rim jars with a constricted neck and round belly 束颈圆腹花边罐 from the Longshan and Erlitou cultures (1. the Caiyuan culture [Linziliang LF11➄:11]; 2. the Keshezhuang II culture [Qiao Village H4:24]; 3–5 & 7–9. the Qijia culture [Shizhao Village T317➁:6, Yehezi H148:12, Liuwan M968:1, Laoniuspo 88XL I 2H24:14, Qinweijia,Hengzhen M9:5]; 6. the Wangwan III culture [Cuoli H22:31]; 10–12. the Erlitou culture [Erlitou II-V·T104➅:21, Xiya Village H4:40, Xiya Village H4:4]) Comparison of bronzes of the Tianshanbeilu in Hami, the Late Qijia and the Erlitou cultures (1, 3 & 4. axe [Qijiaping,Nanwan,Erlitou K3:1]; 2 & 5. ring-headed knife [Shangguandi,Erlitou III M2:4]; 6. ge [Erlitou III Cai:60]; (1 & 2. The Late Qijia culture; 3. The Tianshanbeilu in Hami; 4–6. The Erlitou culture)

xix

384

386

391

395

xx

LIST OF FIGURES

Fig. 24.1

Fig. 24.2

The cultural landscape of the northwestern region in the late Neolithic Age (the late Longshan culture, 2200–2000 BCE) The cultural landscape of the northwestern region in the early Bronze Age (2000–1500 BCE)

412 412

List of Maps

Map 3.1

The Early Neolithic regional cultural systems in China (18,000–7000 BCE) The Five Major Regional Cultural Systems 五大区域文化系统: I. the cord-marked round-based cauldron 绳纹圜底釜文化系统; II. the flat-bottom basin, pedestal dish and two-eared pot 平底盆-圈足盘-双耳罐文化系统; III. the deep-belly pot 深腹罐文化系统; IV. the unmarked round-based cauldron 素面圜底釜文化系统; V. the bucket-shaped pot 筒形罐文化系统 Ceramic Artifacts 陶器: 1–3. the fu cauldron 釜 (Zengpiyan 甄皮岩 DT6:072, 玉蟾岩 Yuchanyan 95DMT9:26, Dingshishan 顶蛳 山 T2206➃:1); 4. the pen basin 盆 (Shangshan 上山 H301:1); 5 and 16. the dou tall pedestal dishes 豆 (Shangshan 上山 H193:1, Shuangta 双塔 IIT130➁:2); 6. the shuang-er guan two-eared pot 双耳罐 (Shangshan 上 山 H226:5); 7. the quanzu pan short pedestal dishes 圈 足盘 (Xiaohuangshan 小黄山 M2:2); 8 and 9. the shenfu guan deep-belly pots 深腹罐 (Lijiagou 李家沟 09XLL: 612, 738); 10. The su-mian fu unmarked cauldron 素 面釜 (Bianbiandong 扁扁洞); 11–15. the bucket-shaped pots 筒形罐 (Donghulin 东湖林 T9➄:20, Zhuannian 转 年, Shuangta 双塔 IIT406➁:4, IIC2:1, IIT117➁:11)

36

xxi

xxii

LIST OF MAPS

Map 3.2

The Middle Neolithic regional cultural systems in China (6200–5500 BCE) The Four Major Regional Cultural Systems 四大区域文化系统: I. the cauldron-pedestal dish 釜-圈足盘-豆文化体系; II. the deep-belly jar, two-eared vase and unpedestal bowl 深腹罐-双耳壶-钵文化体系; III. the unmarked round-based cauldron 素面圜底釜 文化系统; IV. the bucket-shaped pot 筒形罐文化系 统Ceramic Artefacts 陶器: 1–4. bucket-shaped pots 筒 形罐 (Cishan 磁山 T96➁:38, 25; Xinglongwa 兴隆洼 F171➃:10, F180➃:8); 5 and 10. deep-belly pots 深腹罐 (Baijia 白家 T309➂:4, Peiligang 裴龙岗 M37:3); 6–9, 13–14, 16, 18, 20 and 25. bo unpedestal bowls 钵 (Baijia 白家 T204H25:1, T116H4:2, T117➂:4, T121➂:8, Peiligang 裴龙岗 M38:11, M56:4, Pengtoushan 彭头山 T5➄:4, F2:1, Houli 后李 H1546:1, Kuahuqiao 跨湖桥 T0410 Lake 湖 III:17); 11 and 22. hu two-eared vases 壶 (Peiligang 裴龙岗 M100:10, Houli 后李 H16777:1); 12. ding tripod 鼎 (Jiahu 贾湖 H104:6); 15, 17, 19, 21 and 23. fu round-based cauldrons 釜 (pots 罐) (Pengtoushan 彭头山 H2:47, H1:6, Houli 后李 H3827:1, H3832:1, Kuahuqiao 跨湖桥 T0411➇A:132); 24. two-eared pot 双耳罐 (Kuahuqiao 跨湖桥 T0411➇A:24); 26. quanzu pan short pedestal dish 圈足盘 (Kuahuqiao 跨湖桥 T0513➈C:2)

37

LIST OF MAPS

Map 3.3

The Late Neolithic regional cultural systems in China (5000–4200 BCE) The Three Major Regional Cultural Systems 三大区域文化体系: I. the cauldron-pedestal dish 釜-圈足盘文化体系; II. the vase-unpedestal bowl (basin), jia and ding tripod 瓶 (壶) -钵 (盆) -罐-鼎文 化系统; III. bucket-shaped pot 筒形罐文化系统Ceramic Artefacts 陶器: 1 and 15. bucket-shaped pots 筒形 罐 (Zhaobaogou 赵宝沟 F105➁: 28, Xinle 新乐); 2. ritual wine pot zun 尊 (Zhaobaogou 赵宝沟 F7➁:15); 3 and 16. quanzu bo pedestal bowls 圈足钵 (Zhaobaogou 赵宝沟 F105➁:11, Xinle 新乐); 4 and 17. ding tripod 鼎 (Hougang 后岗 H5:6, Beixin 北辛 H706:7); 5, 8 and 18. ping vases 瓶 (壶) (Hougang & Jiangzhai 后 岗、姜寨 T181F46:11, Beixin 北辛 H1002:12); 6, 9 and 24. guan pots 罐 (Hougang 后岗 H2:2, Jiangzhai 姜寨 T276M159:4, Hemudu 河姆渡 T33 (4):109); 7, 10 and 14. bo unpedestal bowls 钵 (Hougang 后 岗H2:1, Jiangzhai 姜寨 T276W222:1, Huachenggang 化城岗 T28➅:1); 11 and 22. pen basins 盆 (Jiangzhai 姜寨 T16W63:1, Luojiajiao 罗家角 T129➃:3); 12, 18, 20 and 23. fu cauldrons 釜 (Huachenggang 化城 岗 T13➆B:5, Beixin 北辛 M702:1, Luojiajiao 罗家角 T128➂:20, Hemudu 河姆渡 T26 (4):34); 13, 27 and 28. quanzu pan short pedestal dishes 圈足盘 (Huachenggang 化城岗 M156:1, Xiantouling 咸头岭 T9➄:1, T1➇:2); 21. he spouted vessel 盉 (Luojiajiao 罗家角 T107➀:2); 25. dou tall pedestal disc 豆 (Hemudu 河姆渡 T211 (4B): 447); 26. bei cup 杯 (Xiantouling 咸头岭 T1➄:2)

xxiii

38

xxiv

LIST OF MAPS

Map 3.4

The Early China at the Miaodigou Era (4200–3500 BCE) Three Major Regional Cultural Systems 三大区 域文化体系: I. the cauldron-pedestal dish 釜-圈足底文化 系统; II. the vase, unpedestal bowl (basin), jar & ding tripod cauldron 瓶 (壶) -钵 (盆) -罐-鼎文化系统; III. the bucket- shaped pot 筒形罐文化系统The Three-tire Concentric Structure of the Earliest China 三大文化 圈: A. the Core Zone 核心区; B. the Main Zone 主体 区; C. the Peripheral Zone 边缘区Ceramic Artifacts 陶 器: 1, 7, 12 and 13. basins 盆 (Zhangmaowusu 章毛乌素 F1:4, Miaodigou 庙底沟 H11:75, Hulijia 胡李家 T1➁:1, H14:2); 2, 8 and 20. Pots 罐 (Zhangmaowusu 章毛乌 素 F1:2, Miaodigou 庙底沟 H322:66, Zhizhushan 蜘蛛 山 T1➂:47); 3, 10, 14, 16, and 22. unpedestal bowls 钵 (Zhangmaowusu 章毛乌素 F1:6, Dadiwan 大地湾 T1➂:1, Hulijia 胡李家 T1004➁B:3, Chengtoushan 城 头山 H210:3, Xishuiquan 西水泉 H4:2); 4, 9 and 11. bottles ping 瓶 (Miaodigou 庙底沟 T203:43, Dadiwan 大地湾 F2:14, QD0:19); 5. cauldron 釜 (Miaodigou 庙底沟 H12:112); 6. Stove 灶 (Miaodigou 庙底沟 H47:34); 15, 23 and 27. ding tripods 鼎 (Chengtoushan 城头山 M665:2, Dawenkou 大汶口 M1013:5, Songze 崧泽 M10:3); 17, 24 and 28. tall pedestal dishes 豆 (Chengtoushan 城头山 M678:4, Dawenkou 大汶口 M2005:49, Songze 崧泽 M30:4); 18 and 25. cups 筒形 罐 (Chengtoushan 城头山 M679:3, Dawenkou 大汶口 M2002:8); 19. bucket-shaped pots 筒形罐 (Xishuiquan 西水泉 F13:31); 21, 26 and 29. Vases 壶 (Xishuiquan 西 水泉 H2:21, Dawenkou 大汶口 M1013:2, Songze 崧泽 M30:3)

40

List of Tables

Table Table Table Table

8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4

Table 8.5 Table 8.6 Table 8.7

Artefacts in different sections in the Dawenkou Cemetery Gender and age of Phase I human skeletons (n = 25) Age of human skeletons from the Xixiahou Site (n = 47) Residents in the Dawenkou Site reflected by the Phase I graves Categorization of Dawenkou Phase I burials Funerary Objects from Dawenkou Phase I burials Categorization of Dawenkou Phases II and III graveyards

139 144 145 147 151 152 153

xxv

CHAPTER 1

Preface

At the outset of the twentieth century, Chinese historian and thinker Liang Qichao 梁启超 (1873–1929) pointed out in his treatise entitled The General Development of Chinese Academic Thought (1902), “The Westerners claim that there have appeared five homelands for [ancient] civilizations in the history of the world, and they were China, India, Arsacid 安息 (a Parthian empire from 250 BCE to 224 AD), Egypt and Mexico. However, four of them have perished as nations, and so have their civilizations. It is only our China that has not only stood survived, but also continued to flourish, without cessation up to this day”. Numerous fine sons and daughters of the Chinese nation have thus kept a sacred faith in this time-honoured civilization at the bottom of their heart. In the past century, it is this faith that has served as the source of courage in their resistance against foreign aggression, in the building and rejuvenation of the nation. Ever since it came into being as an academic discipline in 1921, Chinese archaeology has taken on as its own natural responsibility to explore the origin of the Chinese civilization. The arduous endeavours of Chinese archaeologists of several generations have borne fruit with illuminating discoveries which confirm that as early as 8000 BP, a “Cultural Early China” 文化上早期中国 had begun to germinate and the Chinese civilization had commenced its genesis; and that China had virtually entered a civilized society approximately 5000 BP. More significantly, these solid archaeological testimonies prove beyond doubt the conclusion © China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_1

1

2

J. HAN

that “the Chinese civilization is the one and only civilization that has not been interrupted, that has sustained to the present day”. I became interested in the origin of Chinese civilization when I started my master’s degree studies at Peking University in the early 1990s, and that was owing to the inspiration from Prof. Yan Wenming 严文 明, my adviser. In 1994, I published a paper titled “Analysis of the Dawenkou Cemetery” (see Chapter 8), in which I discussed my observations concerning the similarities and differences between the three phases of the cemeteries first excavated in 1959 at the Dawenkou Cemetery 大 汶口墓葬 (6500–4500 BCE) at Tai’an City, Shandong Province. Specifically, despite a conspicuous polarization between the rich and the poor in Phase I (the early period, 4100–3500 BCE) and Phase II (the middle period, 3500–3000 BCE) of the Dawenkou Cemetery, the burials of the rich and the poor were assembled in the same cemetery, indicating that the outer appearance of clan societies remained somewhat intact in these two phases. In Phase III (the late phase, 3000–2600 BCE), however, the burials of the richest families took the place of the cemetery of the whole clan 家族墓地, marking “a critical step towards the threshold of civilization”. This significant change occurred 5000 BP when the Dawenkou culture turned into its late period. The study mentioned above represents a rewarding challenge for me to examine both the transformation of a society and the formation of a civilization in general. Conducted from a micro perspective, the study reflected my observation of the changes of the status of “the clan” 家 族 as embodied by their tombs. Afterwards, I have been paying attention to the evolution process of the Neolithic 新石器时代 societies in the northern regions of China and even the whole country, including changes of the family as a social institution and its social status. The methodology adopted for my studies in this respect is the analysis of settlement patterns 聚落形态 analysis, spatial analysis of cemeteries included. In 1996, while I was pursuing my doctoral studies at Peking University, I published a paper entitled “On the mutual relations between the Dongyi, Huaxia and Miao Man cultural groups in ancient China: with a perspective on the formation of the Chinese civilization”. In this paper, I argued that an important factor which had contributed to the making and maturation of the Chinese civilization lies in the long-term constant interaction between the three cultural groups, that is, the Huaxia 华夏 (pertaining to the Yangshao 仰韶文化 and Longshan 龙山文化 cultures which were centred in the middle Yellow River Plains), the Miao Man 苗

1

PREFACE

3

蛮文化 (pertaining to the Qujialing 屈家岭文化 and Shijiahe 石家河文 化 cultures which were centred in the middle Yangtze River Valley), and the Dongyi 东夷文化 (pertaining to the Dawenkou 大汶口文化 and Longshan cultures which were centred in the Shandong Peninsula) cultures. Following this study, I began to study ancient historical legends as an indispensable factor in my studies of the genesis of Chinese civilization. Ever since the beginning of the twenty-first century, I concentrated more on the exploration of the genesis and early evolution of the Chinese civilization. In my studies, I paid particular attention to the integration of such factors as settlement patterns, genealogies of archaeological cultures, climate environment, and ancient historical legends. My principal point of view can be summarized as follows. It goes without saying that it is necessary to conduct etymological examinations of theories and concepts in the research of the genesis of civilization. What is more important is to problematize, on the basis of objective archaeological materials, current theories, and concepts, with an aim to revise them or even to propose new ones at the opportune moment. The ultimate purpose of such examinations consists in construing a theoretical and a conceptual system which is not only practical for China’s archaeological actuality and comes with Chinese characteristics, but which also enables dialogue with the international community. This process of examination is beneficial for Chinese archaeologists to avoid the indiscriminate transplantation of Western theories of the origin of a civilization to explain Chinese archaeological situation. My exploration of the origin and early development of the Chinese civilization can be summed up into five major categories as follows.

1.1 The Origin, Formation and Early Evolution of Chinese Civilization My doctoral thesis A Study on the Neolithic Cultures of the Northern Regions of China, which was finished in 2000, offered a systematic analysis of the cultural pedigree and settlement patterns of the northern regions of China and put forward the concepts of the “Early China” 早期中国 and the “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” 早期中国文化圈. Afterwards, I joined the project hosted by Prof. Yan Wenming and Prof. Zhao Hui 赵辉, i.e. “The Relation between Settlement Patterns and Early Civilization”, and carried out further explorations into the settlement patterns and the evolution of the early civilization in the North China. In recent

4

J. HAN

years, when writing the monograph Early China: The Making of the Chinese Cultural Sphere (2015), I made a sorting, to varying degrees, of the cultural pedigrees and settlement patterns of the Neolithic on a national level. On the basis of this study, I especially investigated largesized settlement centres at such cultural remains as the Liangzhu 良渚 (at Yuhang District, Zheijiang), Taosi 陶寺 (at Xiangfen County, Shanxi), Shimao 石峁 (at Shenmu County, Shaanxi) and Erlitou 二里头 (at Yanshi District, Henan). My current views on the origin, formation and early development of the Chinese civilization are encapsulated in a paragraph from my latest paper “The Peiligang era and origin of Chinese civilization” (2021, see Chapter 4): The Peiligang era 裴李岗时代 (8200-7000 BP) can be seen as the first phase of the origin of the Chinese civilization, dating its origin farther back to 8000 BP. This phase was marked by the relatively advanced system of concepts and knowledge, and more complex social forms which had manifested themselves in key regions of Chinese lands. […] By 6000 BP, Chinese civilization entered its second phase, that is the Miaodigou era 庙 底沟时代. During this era, the system of concepts and knowledge which had begun to take shape in the earlier era evolved further, the society in general experienced and increased in refinement, and most of the regions of the Chinese lands stepped into the “Early State” 早期国家.[…] By 5000 BP, an early Chinese civilization, composed of several regional civilizations such as the Liangzhu culture 良渚文化, with common formal characteristics had emerged. (p. 35)

1.2 The Three Regional Patterns in the Genesis of the Chinese Civilization With regard to the patterns in which the Chinese civilization originated, I proposed two concepts in my doctoral thesis, i.e. “the Northern Pattern” 北方模式 and “the Eastern Pattern” 东方模式. I added a third concept, that is “the Zhongyuna (Central Plains) Pattern” 中原模式, in my 2003 paper titled “A brief discussion on the general tendency and different patterns of societal development in the Chalcolithic Age” (see Chapter 12). Off the three patterns, I argued in these papers that:

1

PREFACE

5

[T]he Northern Pattern, static and backward as it might have appeared in comparison with the other patterns, conformed to the severe natural environment by avoiding, to a certain extent, excessive use of resources. This thus helped to conserve energy effectively and enhanced the development of the region in an evident and lasting manner. The Eastern Pattern, more complex in techniques and more rapid in development than at first sight, was inclined to nurture an ethos of extravagance, gains without pains, contentedness with the mediocre, which might impede sustainable development. The Zhongyuan Pattern can be seen as taking the best of the aforementioned two patterns: it allowed disparity in social status but guarded against social split; it favoured a good social order but did not resort to stern laws and severe punishment; it emphasized a gradual raise of productivity but cautioned against sumptuous luxury; it concerned itself with reality instead of religious immersion; it relied on consanguinity but attached importance to collective interests. In its steady but not hasty pace of development, the northern region eventually evolved into a mature civilization, i.e. the Late Xia Dynasty (1800 -1600 BC) as it is symbolized by the Erlitou culture 二里头文化.

Specifically, I also compared the civilizing process of the Zhongyuan 中原 region with that of the Jiang-Han (the Yangtze and the Hanjiang rivers) 江汉 plains, the Haidai (the Bohai Sea-Mount Tai) 海岱 region and the Northern 北方 region. The findings of these studies helped to justify the central role the Zhongyuan region or the Middle Reaches of the Yellow River had played in the evolution of Chinese civilization.

1.3 Environmental Evolution, War and Conflict, and the Evolving Mechanism of Civilizations I have touched upon the impact or constraints of natural environment and its changes on the Chinese civilization and its evolving process in both my doctoral thesis and the monograph The Natural Environment and Cultural Development of Northwestern China in the Pre-Qin Period (2008), as well as in several other relevant essays. In the essay “The impact of the climate events of 5000 to 4000 BP on the culture of Northern China” (see Chapter 20), I have argued for the following thesis: Different response strategies to extreme climate events might lead to different consequences. To adapt to climate change in order to adjust the economic structure and pattern of resource utilization is apparently

6

J. HAN

an effective response strategy. The period of extreme climate change has proved a leaps-and-bounds process of societal development in Chinese history.

In the book Early China: The Making and Development of the Chinese Cultural Sphere (2015), I argued that: Seen from a holistic perspective, it were the geographical surroundings of China that determined, to a large extent, the structure of the Chinese culture as a pluralistic unity 多元一体 with a mainstay and a centre 有主体 有中心, which is characterized by a steady, calm 稳定内敛 and sustainable process of development 持续发展. Whereas the mainstay is represented by the two relatively independent but enormously vast river valleys (i.e. the Yellow River and the Yangtze River) 两大河流, the centre is signified by the Zhongyuan region (the Central Plains) 中原地区. In fact, the genesis, formation and early development of the cultural Early China were closely interrelated with the change of the natural environment. What merits attention is the relation between climate changes and their impacts upon the genesis, formation and maturity of the early Chinese culture between 4000 to 2000 BCE. Around 4000 BCE, warm and moist air flow flourished the Zhongyuan culture 中原文化 and enhanced the formation of an Early China 早期中国. Around 3500 BCE, the climate turned cold and facilitated the general rise of incipient civilized societies. Around 2000 BCE, the cold period gave rise to the Bronze Age Revolution 青铜器时代革命 and the emergence of a developed civilization. To account for these changes, I argued that climate changes, favourable or unfavourable, were not solely responsible for the rise and fall of the culture of Early China as a whole; instead, they only provided potential opportunities for cultural change. In comparison with the vast and diversified geographical range of Early China, any climate change, towards warmth or coldness, could not produce a sweeping welcoming or inhibiting effect on the whole culture in general.

I also paid attention to the enhancing effect of wars on the process of civilization. In the essay in Chapter 22, i.e. “Neolithic wars and the evolution of early Chinese civilization”, I pointed out that: Early Chinese civilization, deep-rooted in an enormous and profound agricultural economy, was short of outward expansion but instead well suited at consolidating internal order. As a consequence, each large-scale civil war

1

PREFACE

7

constituted a radical action whereby the current social order was demolished and a new one established. The wars of the Neolithic Age served to raise the status of chieftains and enhanced social stratification and the division of labour. More importantly, these wars forced a deep and violent integration of culture and kinship in a short time over large areas of land. Therefore, these wars provided a further momentum, for the genesis, formation and development of the early Chinese civilization, which in turn fermented more and larger wars. In fact, every step forward toward civilization meant a war on an increased scale. War and civilization can thus be said to interact with each other as cause and effect, and that explained why war constituted one of the two factors with the greatest national significance in ancient China, that is, “The priority of state affairs, lies in sacrifices and wars” 国之大事, 在祀在戎, just as it is recorded in the “Thirteenth Year of Lord Cheng of the Lu Kingdom” in the Zuo Zhuan Chronicle《左传》 成公 十三年 (about 360-355 BCE).

1.4

Origin of the Chinese Culture and Its Outbound Interactions

It goes without saying that the origin of Chinese culture lies in the native land of China. From 5000 BP, especially 4000 BP, elements of Western culture began to flow in, adding fresh blood to the formation and early development of Chinese civilization. As far as I am concerned, I even put forward the concept of a “Bronze Age Revolution” 青铜时代革命—a concept which now looks somewhat exaggerated—to describe the relation between early Chinese civilization and Western bronze culture. I pointed out in the essay “A brief overview of ‘the Bronze Age Revolution’” (2012) that: When China entered the Bronze Age at round 2000 BCE, salient innovations took place in the fields of the technical economy, cultural structure and social order in a great majority of the regions of the country, a phenomenon which well deserves the term of “the Bronze Age Revolution”.

I also added that:

8

J. HAN

Whereas the refinement of the society at the Bronze Age did occur on the basis of the early civilization represented by the Longshan Era 龙山时代 or the guguo (ancient states) 古国 civilization (2500 to 2000 years BCE), the degree of the acuteness of this refinement was unprecedented.

And I concluded that: While the Bronze culture of China emerged as a whole on the basis of its indigenous Chalcolithic culture, the part of China which lay east to the Eurasian Steppe entered the Bronze Age more than 1000 years later than the West. Therefore, this “Bronze Age Revolution” had an intimate relation with the influence and inspirations of the Western Bronze culture.

1.5

Culture Genes and Historical Memory

Chinese civilization is characterized with rich cultural traits and historical memories which have accumulated over thousands of years. I made an initial investigation and extraction of the cultural features and traits of the Cultural Early China in my monograph titled Early China: The Making and Development of the Chinese Cultural Sphere (2015). I followed this topic up in a recent article entitled “8000 years old cultural traits of Early China seen from archaeological discoveries” (2020). These features and traits can be summarized into the following five aspects: 1. Holistic thinking and harmony between the heaven and the human sphere 整体思维、天人合一; 2. Ancestor worship and orientation towards humans 祖先崇拜、以人 为本; 3. Pursuit of order and steadfast impartiality 追求秩序、稳定执中; 4. A capacity for creating a social environment and for peaceful coexistence 有容乃大、和谐共存; 5. Hard-working perseverance and unswerving determination 勤劳坚 毅、自强不息. These cultural traits, unlike those in any other culture in the world, are peculiar to the Chinese civilization and have served as the original source for the Chinese nation to live, grow, prosper and invigorate without interruption.

1

PREFACE

9

The historical memory of the Chinese civilization has been collectively passed down in written stories and oral legends. For many years, I have made a rather systematic archaeological investigation into the ancient historical pedigree of the Huaxia-centred Chinese civilization 华夏文明. I have also expounded on the necessity and methodology of integrating both ancient history and historical contemporaneous legends 时代古史传说 in studies of the origin of Chinese civilization. In particular, I have published two collections of essays in this respect: The Five Emperors Era: Archaeological Observations of the Huaxia-centred Ancient Historical System (2006) and Approaching the Era of the Five Emperors (2019). In one of the essays titled “Ancient historical legends: To be taken into consideration in studies of the origin of Chinese civilization” (see Chapter 27), I argued that: There exists a long temporal distance from the Shang and Zhou dynasties 商周时期 (about 1600–256 BCE) back to the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors Era 三皇五帝 (about 9684 - 2015 BCE). The written records about the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors, i.e. the semi-mythical sagekings and moral paragons, after the Shang and Zhou dynasties, were passed down from generation to generation with inevitable embellishments, exaggerations and even absurdities. While it is imperative that researchers make meticulous differentiations so as to discard the false from the true, it is also imperative that researchers hold these historical materials in veneration and compassion, cautioning themselves against indiscriminate denial or elimination without enough evidence.

The twenty-eight papers included in this collection represent my views and studies of the origin or genesis of Chinese civilization in the abovementioned five aspects and are thus arranged in that order. I sincerely hope to benefit from critiques and feedback from readers. Upon the publication of this collection, I would like to express my utmost gratitude to my kind and respected mentor Prof. Yan Wenming, emeritus professor at Peking University, to whom I owe every bit of my progress in my studies of the origin of Chinese civilization. Even at nearly 90 years of age, he showed me his guidance and encouragement by attending the inaugural seminar of my zhongda or major research project 重大项目 sponsored by the National Social Science Foundation 国家社科 基金 “Study on the Early Chinese Civilizing Process from the Perspective of Eurasia Steppe” in 2019.

10

J. HAN

I would also like to express my gratitude to my teachers: Prof. Li Boqian 李伯谦, Prof. Zhang Jiangkai 张江凯, Prof. Li Shuicheng 李水城, and Prof. Zhao Hui. These professors taught me in class and were always ready to support and encourage me even out of class. For instance, under the support of Prof. Li Boqian, I undertook the major research project of “Study of the Regional Pattern of the Origin of Early Chinese Civilization” sponsored by the Zhengzhou Academic Society of the Source of China and the Songshan Civilization 郑州市中华之源与嵩山文明研究 会. Last but not least, I owe a debt of gratitude to the researchers and colleagues at the Institute of Archaeology at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences for their lasting support in my studies, especially Prof. Wang Wei 王巍, Prof. Chen Xingcan 陈星灿 and Prof. Feng Shi 冯时, to name just a few.

PART I

The Origin, Formation and Early Development of Chinese Civilization

CHAPTER 2

In Search of the Cultural “Early China” from Prehistoric Relics

2.1

Introduction

Talking of the origin of the Chinese civilization or wenming 中国文 明, one cannot avoid touching on the topic of “Early China” 早期中 国 from a cultural perspective. The cultural “Early China”, or to put it in another term, the “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” 早期中国文化 圈, refers to the ultra-large cultural community 文化共同体 or cultural sphere 文化圈 which began to take shape at the prehistoric era when the various cultures of most regions on the Chinese land blended and contacted with each other. While I name this prehistoric cultural community the “Early China”, which stands quite equivalent to the “Chinese Sphere of Interaction” 中国相互作用圈 proposed by Zhang Guangzhi (i.e. Kwang-chih Chang 张光直, 1987), Yan Wenming 严文明 likens it to a “double-flower” 重瓣花朵, which is “a flower with multiple petals” whereby the huaxin or centre of the flower 花心, i.e. pistil or stamen, signifies the culture in the Central Plains, and the multi-petals 重瓣 the regional cultures surrounding the centre. A word of caution, though. What will be discussed below is restricted to the “Early China” in a purely cultural sense rather than a political one. Historically, the concepts of “the political China” and “the cultural China” have been closely related to each other just as they have been distinctly differentiated from each other. Take for instance the Han Dynasty 汉代 (including both the western and eastern Han periods, 202 BCE to 220 AD). Seen from a cultural perspective, the territory of the © China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_2

13

14

J. HAN

Han had been vast, covering regions both inside and outside the Great Wall, involving both the Han nationality and the Huns 匈奴, because their cultures were actually close to each other. Nevertheless, the two ethnic groups have experienced a long political antagonism between each other. For another example, during the period of the Wei, Jin, Southern and Northern dynasties 魏晋南北朝 (220 to 589 AD), despite the change of various political powers, what had continued to prevail steadily was the one and only Chinese culture. It can thus be concluded that throughout the history of China, the Cultural China had served as the paramount foundation upon which unity had been both craved to be built in times of division and safeguarded to be maintained in times of unity. Why could the Chinese civilization have continued to develop successively without any interruption for several thousand years? Why have the Chinese people been aspiring so earnestly to national unity and social stability? To a great extent, the answer to such questions is associated with the continuous existence of the Cultural China. It is exactly in this aspect that lies the significance of this discussion.

2.2

Budding of the Early China: First Step of Its Civilization

What had China been like before the Early China emerged? This question can only be approached from as early as the Paleolithic Age. Judging from available archaeological discoveries, it has been found that in the two million years of long stretch of the Paleolithic Era, while the stone wares used in the region of China had always exhibited its own unique features, the human fossils had displayed continuity in inheritance in terms of the time line. This is despite the fact that the “modern human” 现代人 from Africa had had some degree of consanguinity with the ethnic Chinese. It is based upon these evidence that Su Bingqi 苏秉琦 pointed out that “The Chinese culture is a culture which boasts an ethnic identity with nearly two million years history”. Entering the Neolithic Age, that is around 10,000 BP, grain agriculture had emerged, whereby rice was grown in the southern regions of China and millet cultivated in the northern regions. At the same time, five sub-cultural areas had emerged in the central and eastern parts of China, namely the Huanan or southern China 华 南, the lower reaches of the Yangtze River 长江下游, the Zhongyuan or Central Plains 中原, the lower reaches of the Yellow River 黄河下游, and the Hebei or North of the Yellow River 河北 and the Northeast 东北

2

IN SEARCH OF THE CULTURAL “EARLY CHINA” …

15

regions. The rationale behind the division of these sub-cultures lies in the subtle differences between the pottery wares unearthed in each region. However, since the ceramic vessels excavated in the Huanan or southern China region can be traced back to 20,000 BP, it is highly probable that ceramics found in the other regions might have gained inspiration from that in the Huanan area. At around 9000 BP, the centre of the cultural growth and development shifted to the reaches of the Yellow River, the Yangtze River and the West Liao River 西辽河, resulting in some cultures outperforming others. Take for instance the painted pottery wares discovered at the Qiaotou Site 桥 头遗址 in Yiwu City, Zhejiang Province. As the earliest ceramic vessels known so far in the world, some of the ping bottles 瓶 and guan jars 罐 were delicate, but were not necessarily practical for everyday use. Instead, they might have been related to sacrifice ceremonies. In fact, some of the coloured paintings on the vessels looked similar to yin-yang yao symbols 阴阳爻卦画, i.e. the unbroken yang lines or broken yin lines, as in Zhou Yi, or I-Ching, The Book of Changes《周易》 , and others to numerical divinatory symbols 数字卦象符号. Seen together with similar discoveries along the lower reaches of the Yangtze River, it can be speculated that the divinatory practice of bagua 八卦, i.e. the Eight Trigrams, by means of numerical divinatory symbols 数卜, had probably existed then. At around 6200 BCE, the Chinese culture evolved into the Peiligang Era 裴李岗时代(7000–8000 BP), which was represented by the Peiligang culture 裴李岗文化 in Xinzheng City, Henan Province. In the Jiahu Site 贾湖遗址 (9000–7500 BP) in Wuyang City, Henan, tortoise shells have been found as burial articles in some of the male adults’ graves. What was popular were eight pieces of shells found in one of the tombs. While some shells were held in the grave owner’s hands, there were gravels in the shells, the number of gravels varying from half a dozen to two or three dozens. According to Zhang Junzhong 张居中 and other excavators, both the shells and the gravels might have a connection with the numerical divinatory tradition of the bagua eight trigrams. On some shells, there were symbols which looked like Chinese characters and were similar to the inscriptions of the Shang Dynasty (1600–1046 BCE) on tortoise shells or animal bones, and these symbols might have been records of either the forms or results of the divination practice. In some of the larger burials, delicate compass-like bone artefacts 骨规 形器 and bone plates 骨板 had also been found among the grave objects. Theories have been proposed that such artefacts might have been the

16

J. HAN

earliest “compasses and rulers” 规矩 used for astronomical observation for perfecting the calendar 观象授时, a practice which had been so indispensable to agriculture then, such as rice cultivation found in the Jiahua Remains. Meanwhile, since the carapace of the tortoise was rather round and the plastron square and flat, the use of both of them in the divination practice might have been related to the cosmological conception of tian yuan di fang “the round sky and square earth” 天圆地方. In the Peiligang culture, bone flutes 骨笛 had been found, quite an extraordinary archaeological discovery. According to Feng Shi 冯时, this kind of flutes was actually pitch pipes 律管, a kind of instrument for weather observation, which indicates that astronomical knowledge had emerged 8000 years ago. In addition, various hu pots 壶 had been found in the Peiligang culture, suggesting that pottery making had evolved to a sophisticated stage then. An examination of the remnants in the hu pots revealed that the pots had been used to contain alcohol which might also imply some connection with some sacrificial rites. Also in the Peiligang culture, special cemeteries have been found. While the graves in the cemeteries were all buried deep underground, the decreased were neatly dressed and burial objects were laid with them. Cemetery memorial ceremonies had been practised, which not only represented the particular reverence and remembrance for those beloved deceased, but also signified the notable existence of the custom of ancestral veneration 祖先崇拜. On the other hand, the burials were arranged orderly in rows and columns. Whereas this arrangement might have been made for the distinction of seniority of generation and degree of affinity in the same clan, it also bore witness to the appearance of the earliest zuzang clan burials 族葬 or zufenmu clan cemetery 族坟墓. In fact, both ancestral veneration and clan burial could as well be seen as a reflection of the emphasis on kinship, ethics and social order of the contemporary culture in the realistic life. Sometimes, the same cemetery could last one hundred years, or two or even several hundreds of years, which demonstrates in very explicit terms how a clan had persisted in their memories of and adherence to the habitat of their remote ancestors. Seen from the perspective of the world as a whole, this phenomenon should find no match. The settlements of the Peiligang culture had shown signs of some social polarization. For example, some big settlements could cover an area as large as 300,000 m2 while most of the settlements measured only a few thousand square metres. As for the burials, some big ones could have

2

IN SEARCH OF THE CULTURAL “EARLY CHINA” …

17

more than 60 pieces of burial objects, including such special articles as bone flutes and compass-like bone artefacts. Furthermore, the big graves mostly belonged to male adults. Whereas these differences indicated some degree of social polarization, they also signified the relatively higher status men had enjoyed in the society. Nevertheless, these differences might have merely existed between people in a religious centre and those in the ordinary villages, and between religious leaders and ordinary people, meaning that no substantial polarization had occurred in the society as a whole. There appeared a Baijia culture 白家文化 in the area along the Weihe River 渭河流域 (the largest branch of the Yellow River and originating in Dingxi City, Gansu Province) and in the upper reaches of the Hanshui River 汉水 (the largest branch of the Yangtze River and originating in Hanzhong City, Shaanxi Province). This should have been a culture resulting from the fusion of the local cultures with the Peiligang culture when the latter had expanded to Shaanxi and Gansu provinces. Typically represented by the Baijia culture in Lingtong City, Shaanxi, and the Dadiwan culture 大地湾文化 in Qin’an County, Gansu, respectively, the Baijia culture also practised clan burial. The pottery vessel bo flatbottomed bowls 钵 found here had delicate painted symbols on the inner wall. Carved symbols were also found on the bottom side of many of the ceramics in the Shuangdun Site 双墩遗址 in Bengbu City, Anhui Province. For instance, according to Feng Shi, the symbols which looked like the Chinese characters十 shi or “ten”, 井 jing or “a well”, and 亞 ya or “being inferior”, etc., expressed the ideas of the ancient Chinese people about the world, that is their cosmology, such as sifang wuwei or “four directions and the fifth position” 四方五位, i.e. the four cardinal directions and five positions, namely the four directions of the east, south, west and north, and the position of the central or middle; and bafang jiugong or “eight directions and the ninth palace” 八方九宫, i.e. the eight cardinal directions and the nine positions, namely the eight directions of the east, southeast, south, southwest, west, northernwest, north, northeast and the ninth palace. On the other hand, on the antler articles 鹿角 器 and wooden counting rods 木算筹 unearthed in the Kuahuqiao 跨湖 桥Remains in Xiaoshan City, Zhanjiang Province of the lower reaches of the Yangtze River, numerical divinatory symbols were also found, which can be traced to the same line of origin as those excavated in the Qiaotou 桥头 Remains in Yiwu City, Zhejiang. A few more words are necessary for the possible relationship between the Gaomiao culture 高庙文化 in Hongjiang City in southern Hunan

18

J. HAN

Province and the Xinglongwa culture 兴隆洼文化 in the West Liaohe River reaches in northeastern Liaoning Province. With regard to the former, archaeologists have found, in the Gaomiao Remains, a large-sized altar which can be traced back to 7500 BP and which covers an area of 1000 m2 . In the altar, there were four 1 m2 holes, which, according to the excavators, should have been used for columns to support a high building, most possibly a sacrifice-offering-related structure like tianti “ladder to heaven” or celestial steps 天梯. Such a conclusion was drawn on the images and symbols on the delicate white ceramics uncovered in this site, including the ladder-like image, the sun motif 太阳纹, the octagonal star pattern 八角星纹, the phoenix pattern 凤鸟纹, the pattern of a flying dragon with fangs and a beast face 獠牙兽面飞龙纹, etc. Whereas the ladder-like image spoke for itself, the octagonal star pattern might be connected to the cosmological conception of tian yuan di fang “the round sky and square earth”. It is worth noting that both the beast face pattern and the octagonal star pattern had spread across and influenced the whole country, so much so that taotie curve pattern 饕餮纹 (a mythical ferocious animal in the Classic of Mountains and Seas《山海经》 ) and beast face motif as seen on the bronze wares of the Shang 商 and Zhou 周 dynasties found their origin in the beast face pattern and the octagonal star pattern of the Gaomiao culture. As far as the latter, that is the Xinglongwa culture in the West Liaohe River reaches, is concerned, a long dragon 龙, which was piled up with stones and was more than 20 metres long, had been unearthed on the Chahai Remains 查海遗址 in Fuxin City, Liaoning Province. The dragon lay on the central square of the site and was surrounded by many houses. A stone monument which was recently discovered in the nearby (5 km away) Tachiyingzi Remains 塔尺营子遗址 had on it the pattern of a beast face with fangs which resembled the pattern of a flying dragon with fangs and a beast face found on the white ceramics in the Gaomiao culture in Hunan Province. Now arises the question: since the two sites were distantly apart from each other (more than 2500 km), how could any connection between these cultures have occurred? Similar mystery applies to the possible connection between the Xinlongwa culture in Inner Mongolia and the culture in the distant eastern coast regions. In the Xinlongwa Remains in Chifeng City, including both the Xinglongwa Site and the Xinglonggou Site 兴隆沟 in Aohan Banner 敖汉旗, as well as the Baiyinchanghan Site 林西白音长汗 in Linxi County, settlements surrounded by a moat have been found where the houses were arranged

2

IN SEARCH OF THE CULTURAL “EARLY CHINA” …

19

in rows and columns, with the large-sized one standing in the centre. While such settlements represented the well-established social order of the Xinglongwa culture, delicate jade burial objects have also been unearthed in some of the cemeteries here, which later somehow spread to the eastern coast regions. Archaeological discoveries made in the Peiligang culture in the reaches of the Yellow River, the Yangtze River and the West Liaohe River in terms of such fields as astronomy, image-numbers or divinatory symbols, character symbols and religion, all suggested that not only had China commanded a system of ideas, concepts and knowledge, both sophisticated and advanced, then. More importantly, it signified that a rather universal world outlook or cosmology had been developed out of this system, and that initial social polarization had emerged in China. Whereas these findings served to shift the time of origin of the Chinese civilization back to 8000 BP, it meant that the first step towards civilization had been taken here. It was exactly at this juncture that the Peiligang culture, which was originally situated in the Central Plains, expanded outward and influenced the Yellow River and Huaihe River reaches. This not only brought the local cultures and the Peiligang culture into intimate contact. It could have also promoted exchange in the upper social layer in terms of religious sacrifices and cosmology, resulting in more similarities in the cultures in the regions of the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River and the West Liaohe River reaches, to those in the regions of the Yellow River and the Huaihe River reaches. With this cultural exchange and fusion, there burgeoned the “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” or the cultural “Early China”. At around 7000 BP, China entered the Era of the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化 and engaged in further social and cultural development. In the Banpo Remains 半坡遗址 in Xi’an City, Shaanxi Province, and the Jiangzhai Remains 姜寨遗址 in Lintong City, Shaanxi—both pertaining to the Banpo type 半坡类型 of the Yangshao culture—there were moats surrounding the settlements, most of whose doorways were oriented towards the central square. From this phenomenon, it can be seen that the society then enjoyed a high centripetal cohesion 向心凝聚 and observed an orderly fashion. In 1987, in the Xishuipo Remains 西水坡遗址 in the southwest of Puyang City, Henan Province, the “Clam-sculptured Dragon-Tiger Burial” 蚌塑 “龙虎” 墓 (i.e. M45) was discovered in which, apart from the body of a 184-cm-tall man and three bodies buried with him, there were also clam sculptures of a dragon, a tiger and the plough

20

J. HAN

青龙, 白虎, 北斗. According to archaeologist Feng Shi, the dragon, tiger and plough were related to astrology, and they shifted the time of appearance of both the Chinese ershiba xiu or the twenty-eight lunar mansions system 二十八宿体系 and the gaitian shuo or cosmic theory 盖天说 to an earlier date, that is 6000 BP. Southwards in the Hemudu culture 河姆渡 文化 in Yuyao City, Zhejiang Province, quite a lot of jade wares, lacquer works and ivory wares have been unearthed. Amidst these discoveries, the ivory-carved saucer suangfeng chaoyang or double-bird sunrise 双凤朝阳 stood out as the best-known work of art. There were various symbols on the ceramics, which might have been endowed with peculiar connotations and had been passed on to the later generations.

2.3

Formation of the Early China: Second Step of the Genesis of Its Civilization

Around 6000 BP, China entered a period when the weather was warm and moist, which was just favourable for farming. As a result, agriculture underwent a prehistoric development while the cultural structure significantly adjusted. As for the latter, the Miaodigou type 庙底沟类型 of the Yangshao culture was formed in the juncture of the three provinces of Henan, Shaanxi and Shanxi. Apart from the small-mouthed pointedbottom ping bottles 小口尖底瓶 used as wine vessels, what is most typical of the pottery wares unearthed from the remains of this cultural type is the flower-petal pattern 花瓣纹 on the painted ceramics. Bright, witty, ever-changing and animated, the pattern fitted both the unprecedented might and expanding momentum of the Miaodigou type perfectly. At the same time, ceramic vessels themed on eagles and birds were also popular here. One exponent of this is the taoying ding or eagle-shaped tripod 陶鹰鼎 collected by and exhibited in the National Museum in Beijing— the eagle was portrayed with exceptional divine and imposing bearing. Another piece of pottery ware, which is also collected by and exhibited in the National Museum, is the Stork Fish Stone-Axe Painting, i.e. the painting of “A Stork with a Fish and a Yue Ritual Axe” 鹳鱼钺图, on a colour-painted pottery jar excavated in Yancun Village 阎村 of Ruzhou County, Henan Province. The colour painting depicted a big-eyed stork holding a fish in its beaks, with a pretty yue axe which symbolized military power on its right side. Yan Wenming explained the implication of

2

IN SEARCH OF THE CULTURAL “EARLY CHINA” …

21

this picture as a “monument” commemorating the triumph of the guanniao or the stork clan 鹳鸟氏族 over the qingyu or spotted silver carp clan 青鱼氏族. This explanation could find justification in many archaeological findings: there were quite a lot of bird images in the remnants of the Miaodigou type, just as that of the fish prevailed in the Banpo type. As a corollary, it can be speculated that the painting might most possibly represent the historic fact that the clan of the Miaodigou type won the war against the clan of the Banpo type. The archaeological evidence of the victory of the former over the latter was more directly reflected in the cultural appearance of most regions of Shaanxi and Gansu provinces, which looked approximately the same as that of the Miaodigou type. This culture type had spread far and wide. In the west, it reached the eastern part of Qinghai Province; in the southwest, it got to the northwest Sichuan Province. In fact, a quasi-Miaodigou type of culture even moved further northward and southeastward: north-wise, occupying the central and southern part of Inner Mongolia, reaching furthest north to the Xilinhot District; southeast-wise, taking control of most of Hebei and Henan provinces, and northern Hubei Province. Covering the whole area of what can now be counted as eight or even nine provinces, the enormously huge Yangshao cultural sphere had assimilated this vast area into the Miaodigou type during the Miaodigou Era. This phenomenon of assimilation can thus be called the “Miaodigourization” 庙底沟化. Nevertheless, the Miadigou type did not stop its outward expansion and influence afterwards. Northeast-wise, its influence passed on to the West Liaohe River 西辽河 reaches, leaving both black-coloured and petallike patterns on the painted ceramics in the Hongshan culture 红山文 化. Eastward, it spread to Shandong Province and the southeast coastal area, giving rise to petal-like patterns on the painted pottery in both the Dawenkou 大汶口文化 and the Songze 崧泽文化 cultures. And southward, the petal-patterned painted ceramics permeated the Daxi culture 大溪文化 in the regions of Hubei and Huna provinces, and the Sanxia or the Three Gorges 三峡 area near Chongqing City. In a nutshell, it can be said that up to 6000 BP, along with the intense outward expansion and great influence of the Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture from its core area in the Central Plains, a great majority of the local cultures on the Chinese land then got connected and formed a relatively consistent cultural community, thus giving birth to the “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” or “Early China”. As the earliest “Early China”,

22

J. HAN

this community was composed of three layers, i.e. the core area 核心区, the main area 主体区 and the marginal area 边缘区. This three-layered structure had served as the prehistorical foundation for the jifu zhi or the Appointed Enlistment System 畿服制度 of the Shang and Zhou dynasties, for the “cultural unity with multiple branches” 多支一体文化 which emerged from the Qin and Han dynasties and lasted till present day, and for the unified country with ethnic diversity 多民族统一国家. The vigorous expansion of the Miaodigou culture type, be it out of warfare, or because of its admirable distinguishing quality or convincing strategies, must have been related to its unimaginable hard power. Indeed so. It has been found that several settlements as large as 1,000,000 m2 had existed in the Core Area of the Central Plains, such as the Xipo Site 西坡遗址 in Lingbao City, Henan Province, and the Xiahe Site 下河遗 址 in Baishui County, Shaanxi Province. In these settlements, there were quite a few big houses measuring more than 200 m2 or even 500 m2 , the floor and walls of which were fastidiously colour-painted. Archaeologists speculated that these houses might have possibly been religious or imperial buildings. In the Xipo Site, a large-sized burial of 20 m2 had been excavated, and a delicate jade yue axe 钺 found. While the size of the burial and its yue axe symbolized the exalted position of the owner of the burial, the scarcity of burial objects embodied characteristics of the Central Plain Pattern 中原模式 or Northern China Style 北方模式 of the culture whereby people believed in such values as: the appropriate and rational rituals of living and dead 生死有度; honour preferred to riches 重 贵轻富; well-ordered for ritual demands 井然有礼; and pursuit of a character of simplicity and steadfast impartiality 朴实执中. Li Boqian 李伯谦 pointed out that this pattern represented the wangquan “royal power or kingship” 王权 of the process of civilization evolution of the Miadigou type of culture, as distinguished from the shenquan “divine power” 神权 of the Hongshan culture. Inspired or driven by the Miaodigou type, the surrounding cultures such as the Dawenkou 大汶口, the Songze 崧泽 and the Hongshan 红 山 gathered pace of civilization. Archaeological discoveries confirmed this observation. In the Dawenkou Cemetery, some of the large-sized burials had more than 100 burial objects; in the Dongshancun Cemetery 东山村 in Zhangjiagang City, Shandong Province, which belonged to the Songze culture, some large-sized graves contained more than 60 objects such as coloured-painted yue stone axe 石钺 and huang semicircular jade pendant 玉璜. As two coastal culture types lying in East China, they represented

2

IN SEARCH OF THE CULTURAL “EARLY CHINA” …

23

“the Eastern Pattern” 东方模式 of the civilization evolving process, since, different from the culture types prevailing in the Central Plains, they were experiencing a critical social polarization with dual emphasis on both fortune and honour 富贵并重. Therefore, from 6000 BP, when the Chinese society began to become sophistication and initial polarization, it entered its second step of civilization.

2.4 The Guguo or Ancient State of the “Early China” and the Formation of Its Wenming Civilization Around 5000 BP, when the climate became arid-cold, warfare took place frequently, and cultures went through rapid change and development, resulting in drastic social transformation and numerous tribal states or kingdoms popping up one after another. This is an era when many regions of China approached the threshold of a civilized society, or to be more exact, the initial state of a country with an elementary civilization, an era which Su Bingqi called the guguo or “ancient tribal states” 古国. In this era, two cultural centres in the Central Plains or the middle reaches of the Yellow River had formed, one in the Loess Plateau regions of Gansu and Shaaxin provinces and the other in central Henan Province, both pertaining to the Late Yangshao culture. By 5300 BP, there appeared a mega settlement measuring more than one million m2 in size in the Dadiwan Remains 大地湾遗址 in Qin’an County, central Gansu Province. In this settlement, there was a 420 m2 palace-like dwelling which exhibited the preliminary feature of layout characteristic of classical Chinese architecture: i.e. public hall in the front and private rooms in the back 前堂后室, eastern and western wings 东西两厢, and one door on the left, right and front side each 左中右三门. In the Shuanghuaishu Settlement 双槐树聚落 site in Gongyi City, Henan Province, a one million m2 dwelling site was also excavated, where a large triplex surrounding moat 三重环壕 and a large-scale rammed-earth foundation 夯土基地 were discovered. Here, a long row of palace architecture was found, which, different slightly from the Dadiwan 大地湾 palace architecture with a main hall and adjacent rear bedrooms, was adopted as the “fountain head” of the palace buildings of both the Xia and Shang dynasties. It can be speculated that both the Dadiwan 大地湾聚落 and Shuanghuaishu settlements might have been the central settlements of

24

J. HAN

the two big guguo or ancient tribal states in the region of the Gansu and Shanxi provinces and central Henan Province, respectively, and both had stood at the threshold to a civilized society or a society with the elementary traits of civilization. Nevertheless, since they both lacked the luxury of a society like those in the eastern coastal regions as embodied by sumptuous jade wares and an elaborate burial custom, they remained the “Central Plain Pattern” or Northern China Pattern. While by 4800 BP the “Heluo ancient state” 河洛古国 in Gongyi, Henan Province, represented by the Shuanghuaishu Settlement, declined, more and larger settlements sustained in regions of eastern Gansu and northern Shaanxi provinces. Among these settlements, the palace architecture of public hall in the front and private rooms in the back in the Nanzuo Site 南佐遗 址 of Qingyang City, Gansu Province, which covered an area of 630 m2 and had several rammed-earth terraces 夯土台 of 100 metres in diameter on both sides in the front of the palace hall, indicated a higher extent of social development than that of the Dadiwan Site. By 4500 BP, China entered the era of the Longshan culture 龙山文化. The middle reaches of the Yellow River, especially the region of eastern Gansu and northern Shaanxi provinces, got further strengthened as centre of this culture. An indication of this are the six million m2 Qiaocun Site 桥村遗址 in Lingtai County, Gansu Province, and the two million m2 Lushanmao Site 芦山峁遗址 in Yan’an City, Shaanxi Province. In both remains, quite a lot of pantiles 板瓦 and imbrices 筒瓦, and jade wares were unearthed, the former of which, i.e. the tiles, might have been used for palace buildings such as an ancestral temple. On the 10,000 m2 plus rammed-earth terrace which has just been excavated so far in the Lushanmao Site, an architectural complex which indicated a symmetrical central axis 中轴对称 and a distinction of primary and secondary buildings 主次分明 had been revealed. Looking similar in style to that in the Dadiwan Site 大地湾遗址, this architecture was more magnificent and complicated. In the meanwhile, in Xiangfen County of southern Shanxi Province, the Taosi Ancient City 陶寺古城 materialized, with an area as large as 2.8 million m2 . The city site contained a large imperial palace, a massive rammed-earth building base, a great palace, a semicircular observatory and a big luxurious grave with a quantity of burial articles such as jade wares, paint wares and dragon-patterned pan plates 龙盘. In the late Taosi period, relatively mature characters written on the ceramics in cinnabar 朱砂 and little copper wares were found. Discoveries of these central settlements and palace-like architecture signify that not only had

2

IN SEARCH OF THE CULTURAL “EARLY CHINA” …

25

the middle reaches of the Yellow River already stepped into the period of a state or a civilized society, but outperformed the Yangtze River reaches in terms of the extent of social development. By 4000 BP, there appeared a stone city wall in Shenmu City, north of Shaaxin Province, the Shimao Stone City 石峁石城. Covering an area of more than four million m2 , this stone city had a magnificent huangcheng tai palatial foundation 皇城台, a grand and complicated city gate, exquisite jade wares, deity faces 神面, beast-faced stone carvings 兽面石雕 and copper wares, etc., which all manifested the grandeur of the early state and its civilization. In the meantime, more central settlements emerged in the mid-western part of Henan Province, such as the Wangchenggang Ancient City 王城岗古城 in Dengfeng County, the Wadian Central Settlement 瓦店中心聚落 in Yuzhou County, and both the Guchengzhai Site 古城寨古城 and the Xinzhai Site 新砦古城 in Xinmi City. If the southward advancement of the Laohushan culture 老虎山文化 (in Liangcheng County, Inner Mongolia) as centred on the Shimao Stone City 石峁古城 and its destruction of the Taosi Ancient City could be assumed as the consequence of the internal struggle within the tribes and clans in the middle reaches of the Yellow River, the large-scale replacement of the Shijiahe culture 石家河文化 in the Jianghan (YangtzeHanjiang rivers) regions 江汉地区, by Phase III of the Wangwan culture 三湾文化 (in central Henan Province) as embodied by the Wangchenggang Site 王城岗遗址 in Dengfeng County and the Wadian Central Settlement in Yuzhou County, was undoubtedly the conclusive evidence of the triumph of the Central Plains tribes over those of the Jianghan region. While this triumph corresponds nicely to the historic legend of yu zheng san miao “Yu the Great conquering the Miao Man tribes” 禹 征三苗 (Miao Man 苗蛮 is a collective term for the ancient tribes in preand proto-historic China which lived to the south of the Central Plains. The term is the combination of San Miao 三苗 and Nan Man 南蛮, which was first introduced by Xu Xusheng in gushi zhenwei (1927)), it had laid a solid foundation for the establishment of the Xia Dynasty 夏朝 (2070–1600 BCE). The lower reaches of the Yellow River had also been one of the birthplaces of the Chinese civilization. By the mid-late Dawenkou culture era at 5000 BP, there had appeared, in Shandong Province, both cites and highprofile cemeteries, including the Dantu City 丹土古城 in Wulian County, and the Dawenkou Cemetery 大汶口墓地 in Tai’an City, the Lingyanghe Cemetery 陵阳河墓地 in Juxian County, and the Jiaojia Cemetery 焦家

26

J. HAN

墓地 at Zhangqiu District of Ji’nan City, etc. In some of the large-sized cemeteries, both outer and inner coffins 棺椁 were found, in which quite a lot of precious burial objects were discovered, such as jade wares, black pottery, ivory wares and tuogu alligator drum 鼍鼓. Besides, there were also jade yue battle-axes 玉石钺 which signified military power. On some of the pottery urns 陶缸 unearthed, there were primitive symbols as well. By the era of the Longshan culture at more than 4000 BP, there arose, in Shandong Province, more than ten ancient cites or settlement centres and higher-profile cemeteries, the former of which include the Chengziya Site 城子崖遗址 at Zhangqiu District, Ji’nan City, the Tonglin Site 桐林 遗址 at Linzi District, Zibo City, and both of the Yaowangcheng (City of the King Yao) Site 尧王城遗址 and Liangchengzhen (Twin Cities) Site 两 城镇遗址 in Rizhao City. What merits attention is the Xizhufeng large-sized Tomb 西朱封大 墓 in Linqu County, Shandong Province. In the tombs, there were one inner coffin and one or even two outer coffins 一棺一椁, 一棺二椁, with a large number of grave artefacts, such as exquisite jade wares and delicate pottery wares. These discoveries indicated the features emblematic of “the Eastern Pattern” of the Longshan Culture type, i.e. “equal stress on wealth and nobility”. The black ceramics, for which the culture type is best known, was so delicate that the thinnest part had only 0.2–0.3 mm, which was a sign of quite an astonishing craftmanship and artistry. What is also worthwhile mentioning is the 11 characters carved on the potter shard 陶片 excavated in the Dinggong Site 丁公遗址 in Zouping County, Shangdong Province. Those symbols, most possibly pertaining to a paragraph or part of a text, also indicated that by then the Late Dawenkou culture or the Longshan culture should have entered the epoch of a civilized society. Most notable of the regions in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River are the Lingjiatan culture 凌家滩文化 in Hanshan County, Anhui Province, and the Liangzhu culture 良渚文化 in Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province. The former, which existed around 5500 BP, had both large-sized sacrifice sites and high-rank cemeteries. In some of the large tombs, as many as 330 burial articles were excavated, more than 200 pieces of which being jade wares. One layer upon another, these relics filled the tomb chambers and showcased the surprising extent of wealth and extravagance of the tomb owner. Among the jade objects, there were the Luo Shu Yu Ban or “the jade plate with the Luo (River) Book motif” 洛书玉版 with the eight pointed-star or octagonal pattern 八角星

2

IN SEARCH OF THE CULTURAL “EARLY CHINA” …

27

纹 carved in the centre of plate, wares of octagonal-patterned jade eagles 玉鹰 and jade tortoises 玉龟, together with some quasi-Hongshan culture 类似红山文化 artefacts such as jade figurines and jade dragons. All these relics indicated a cosmology which bore witness to a distant chime with and continuity of the cultures of Peiligang, Gaomiao and Hongshan 红山 文化. As far as the latter is concerned, at around 5100 BP, the Liangzhu culture entered its prime time. In the Liangzhu Site at Yuhang District, Hangzhou, Zhejiang, the excavations include an inner and outer city 内城外城, large-scale and massive water conservancy facilities, as well as large-sized sacrificial earthen platforms or altars 祭坛 and luxurious cemeteries. In a wang mu or royal tomb 王墓, there were more than 500 burial articles, including jade wares, painted wares and ceramics which were extraordinarily exquisite. Among them, the jade cong, a straight jade tube with a circular bore and square outer section with more or less convex sides 玉琮, and bi, a ritual jade flat disc with a circular hole in the centre 璧, might have been used as sacrificial vessels in ceremonies to honour the heaven and earth; the sacred man- and animal-mask design 神人兽面纹 might have been the zongshen or ancestor 宗神 worshiped by the Liangzhu residents 良渚人. On the other hand, there were quite a lot of graphs carved on the pottery wares, which looked like characters and might have been used as their pictographic scripts 文字. From all these discoveries, it can be safely concluded that the Liangzhu culture, having possessed the essential makings characteristic of an early civilization, became one of the earliest regional civilizations 区域文明 on the great land of China that had stepped into a civilized society. Nevertheless, by 4200 BP, this culture experienced an abrupt decline and the makings of its civilization, such as the jade wares, began to spread far and wide. With regard to the region along the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, it had experienced the Jujialing 屈家岭文化 and Shijiahe cultures, respectively, between 5000 to 4100 BP. In this region, twenty ancient city sites have been discovered, and the largest of them is the Shijiahe Ancient City Site 石家河古城 in Tianmen City, Hubei Province, which covers 1.2 million m2 of area, and is divided into sections, such as the “palace” zone, the sacrifice zone and the burials zone. Among the artefacts unearthed at this site, tens of thousands of them, including red pottery bei cups 红陶 杯, red little pottery animals and pottery figurines 小人, etc., might have something to do with a sacrificial purpose, creating a strong and peculiar atmosphere of a primitive religion. On some of the pottery gang urns,

28

J. HAN

there was an individual character or script which looked similar to that in the Dawenkou culture. All these findings indicate that this region should have stepped on the doorsill of a civilized society. By 4100 BP, the Shijiahe culture 石家河文化 was destroyed by Phase III of the Wangwan culture 王湾文化 from the Central Plains, resulting in the emergence of quite a lot of jade wares which were exquisite in design but had never existed before, including shenren tou or heads of a god-man 神人头, tiger heads, phoenixes and eagles. The origin of these artefacts might be traced to the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River. As far as the western Liaohe River reaches is concerned, it might have entered the Late Hongshan culture by 5000 BP, which is best known for the large-scale religious sacrifice remains at the Niuheliang Site 牛河 梁遗址 in Lingyuan City, Liaoning Province. What was excavated here includes the nvshen miao or the Goddess Temple 女神庙, the yuanqiu or ritual circular mound 圜丘 for sacrifices to heaven, and the shizhong or stone burial mound 石冢 which might have been designated for a religious leader, as well we many delicate jade burial articles. Once again, it is safe to speculate that the Hongshan culture had come to the doorsill of civilization, only to go through a sudden decline after 5000 BP, leaving behind some fragments of the basic makings of civilization.

2.5

Concluding Remarks

In a nutshell, the inception and origin of the Cultural Early China and Chinese civilization can be traced back to 8000 BP. By 6000 BP, this Cultural Early China formally took shape owing to the drastic expansion of the core area of the Central Plains and its influence. By 5000 BP, several regions of China had stepped on or even across the threshold of a civilized society and entered the guguo or “ancient tribal states” era of Early China. By 4000 BP, while the Yellow River valley, especially the middle reaches, increased substantially in power, the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River were experiencing a downside period. As a result, by 3800 BP, China, centring on the Central Plains, evolved with a mindset of all-embracing 兼容并蓄 and diversity-inclusiveness 海纳百 川, and formed a vast sovereign state situated in the Erlitou Site 二里头 遗址 in Yanshi County, Henan Province, or at least the state of the late Xia Dynasty 夏代 (2070–1600 BCE). By then, the Chinese civilization became full-grown.

2

IN SEARCH OF THE CULTURAL “EARLY CHINA” …

29

Looking for differences in the Euro-Asian continent, in terms of available archaeological discoveries made so far into three early cultural spheres, it is obvious that the Early China is nothing else than the centre of the early eastern or oriental culture sphere. In the thousands of years’ long dawn of civilization, i.e. its inception and formation, the Cultural Early China 文化上的早期中国, or the Early Chinese Wenming (Civilization) 早期中国文明, to be exact, gradually accumulated and developed features distinctively different from those of other civilizations. These features, as far as I am concerned, can be summarized into four aspects as follows. (i) agrarian orientedness, conservatism to preserve stability 以农为本, 稳定内敛; (ii) heaven and ancestral veneration, a holistic way of thinking 敬天法 祖, 整体思维; (iii) a cultural composition of “one unity with multiple branches” centred on the mainstay 有主体有中心的, 多支一体文化结构; and (iv) an uninterrupted but turbulent process of evolution 跌宕起伏的 连续发展. The Cultural Early China, together with these unique cultural traits, has left a far-reaching impact on the continuous development of the forthcoming Cultural China or the Chinese civilization. (This section was originally delivered at the National Museum of China Forum on 10 September 2020 and then published in the Guangming Daily on 3 October 2020.)

CHAPTER 3

The Earliest China: The Makings of a Pluralistic Unity

3.1

Research into the Earliest China

When and where was the “Earliest China” 最早的中国 born? What was it like? These might be questions to which many people nowadays would want an answer. The issue of the origin of the Earliest China only became a moot topic in recent years, although it was first voiced as early as in the 1980s. It was 1986 when Yan Wenming 严文明 first posited that the modern China 现代中国 might owe its fundamental prototype to the one-centred, pluralistically united 有中心多元一体, “double-flowered” 重 瓣花朵式 cultural landscape which had begun to take shape in the prehistoric period.1 In 1987, Zhang Guangzhi (Chang Kwang-chih) 张光直 put forward the hypothesis that a “Chinese Sphere of Interaction” 中国

1 Yan, Wenming, “Unity and diversity in Chinese prehistoric culture.” Paper first presented in English at the International Conference on Ancient Chinese History and Social Science Generalizations, Airlie House, Virginia, 21–27 June, 1986. The paper was later published in Chinese as Yan Wenming (1987) in Cultural Relics, 3: 38–50.

The article was originally published as Han Jianye (2009), “The Earliest China: On the Formation of the Early China as A Mono-Centred Complex”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2: 60–65. © China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_3

31

32

J. HAN

相互作用圈 had formed circa 4000 BCE.2 These two hypotheses point to different foci: the former interprets the concentric spatial structure 圈层结构 of the Earliest China, while the latter defines the time of its formation. Towards the end of the twentieth century, Su Biqi 苏秉琦 proposed an “ideological consensual China” 共识的中国 which had existed in the Pre-Qin Period.3 Zhao Hui 赵辉 posited that a Chinese culture which was situated in the Central Plains 中原 as its centre and exhibited a multispatial structure 多重空间. There, a historical trend had begun to take shape between circa 3000 and 2500 BCE.4 In 2004 and 2005, I proposed the concepts of “Early China” 早期中国 and “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere”5 早期中国文化圈; and in 2009, I further put forward the idea that culturally the “Early China” and “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” had emerged during the Peiligang culture 裴李岗文化 period (ca. 6000 BCE), and formally taken its shape during the Miaodigou culture type 庙底沟类型 (ca. 4000 BCE).6 In 2011, I held the “Symposium on the Formation and Evolution of the Cultural ‘Early China’” to enhance the process of my National Social Science Foundation of China (NSSFC) 国 家社会科学基金 project “Research on the Formation and Evolution of the Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” 早期中国文化圈的形成和发展研究.

2 Chang, Kwang-chih (1989), The Archaeology of Ancient China, 4th Ed., Revised

and Enlarged, New Haven, CT, USA: Yale University Press, 241–242. Later translated in Chinese and published as Zhang Guangzhi (1989), “Chinese sphere of interaction and the formation of civilization”, in The Team in Celebration of Su Bingqi’s 55 Years Archaeological Work (ed.), Proceedings in Celebration of Su Bingqi’s 55 Years Archaeological Work, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 3 Su, Bingqi (1999), A New Investigation into the Origin of the Chinese Civilization, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing, 161–162. 4 Zhao, Hui (2000), “The historical process toward the centricity of the Central Plains”, Cultural Relics, 1: 41–47. 5 Han, Jianye (2004), “On the historical position of the Central Plain cultures in the Neolithic China”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1: 59–64; Han, Jianye (2000), “Research on the cultural periodicity—‘Separation’ and ‘unification’ in Early China”, Historical Review, Suppl. issue, 65–71. 6 Han, Jianye (2009), “Migration influence of the Peiligang culture and the rudiment of the early Chinese cultural circle”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2:11–15.

3

THE EARLIEST CHINA: THE MAKINGS OF A PLURALISTIC …

33

At the conference, Li Xinwei 李新伟 proposed that the prehistoric foundation of China could be seen as the “initial China”7 最初的中国, while He Nu 何驽 claimed that the first “China” 最初 “中国” was probably the Taosi culture8 陶寺文化 (ca. 2300–1900 BCE). While all these opinions boiled down to a conclusion that an “Earliest China” had either shown an embryonic form or had already been developed during the prehistoric times, they differed in specifics. Yan 严文明 (1986), Zhao 赵辉 (2000) and I (Han 2004 and 2005) agreed that the Prehistoric China was centred on the Central Plains, while Su 苏秉琦 (1999), Zhang 张光直 (1987 and 1989) and Li 李新伟 (2013) highlighted the “equal status” between the cultural regions. Furthermore, He (2013) limited the “First China” 最初的中国 to the southern Shanxi Province, which refers literally to the concept of “the middle of the earth” 地中/中土 in pre-Qin period, whereas the Zhong-guo (China) 中国 to which the other scholars referred to might come closer to the “Tian-xia” or “under the heaven” literally 天下, in the pre-Qin period,9 or “China” 中国 in the modern sense. Some other scholars argued that the First “Zhong-guo” (China) had come into being only after the emergence of the ancient tribal states 国 家, that is during the Xia 夏 (ca. 2070–1600 BCE), Shang 商 (ca. 1600– 1046 BCE) and western Zhou 西周 (ca. 1046–771 BCE) dynasties. Li Ling 李零 (2005) argued that since the legend of the Yu ji “Traces of Yu the Great (in his water control and flood prevention)” 禹迹 emerged in the Western Zhou Dynasty, and that since this legend “is the earliest evidence whereby the concept of ‘Zhong-guo’ from ancient legends was used to denote China to the outside world”, this usage might serve as proof that the Earliest China had appeared in the western Zhou period.10 7 Li, Xinwei (2013), “Reconstruction of the prehistoric foundation of China”, in The Archaeological Research Center of Beijing United University (ed.), Studies in the Early China, 1, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 1–18. 8 He, Nu (2013), “Archaeological search for the first ‘China’”, in The Archaeological Research Center of Beijing United University (ed.), Studies in the Early China, 1, Beijing: Wenwu, 36–43. 9 In Zhou Dynasty, the concept “Tian-xia (天下)” included both the core region or narrowly “Zhong-guo (中国 or the Middle Kingdom)” directly ruled by the emperor of Zhou, and the peripheries ruled by vassal subjects around the core region “Si-Fang (四 方 or the Four Directions)”. 10 Li, Ling (2005), “On the footsteps of Yu the Great: From the legends of ‘Yu taming the floods’”, Shucheng, 3:55–58.

34

J. HAN

Xu Hong 许宏 (2009), on the other hand, claimed that it was the significant expansion of Erlitou culture 二里头文化 during Erlitou period 二里 头时代 (1735–1530 BCE) that had contributed to the emergence of the Earliest China.11 While it is true that the Early China had existed in the western Zhou and the older Erlitou periods, but this Early China might not necessarily be the “Earliest China”. In my view, the “Earliest China” is solely the Earliest China in a cultural sense: it refers to a mega cultural community or sphere 超级文化共同体或文化圈, which had not only lived on to the modern China with a long uninterrupted tradition, but also fits into the modern China in terms of the general geography. Since my concept of the “Earliest China” differs from that in the political sense, it follows that this Earliest China did not have to emerge until a state had already come into being, or until the late period of the first three dynasties, i.e. the Xia, Shang and Zhou.

3.2

Formation of the Earliest China

Vast as the size of its territory, China boasts a vast cultural sphere 超级文 化圈 to which most regions on this land belong, and which shares quite similar features. This phenomenon has come as a result of the long-time interaction and integration between the various regional cultures on this relatively independent geographical unit which is called China. In fact, the beginning of interaction and integration can be traced back to the Palaeolithic age, that is two million years ago. During the long Palaeolithic age, despite regional cultural diversities, and the genetic and cultural interactions with the West, a significant continuity and unity has manifested itself on both the human evolution and the cultural development on this land. The former lies in the widespread appearance of Mongoloid biological traits 蒙古人种特征 such as the Shovel-shaped incisors 铲形门齿 among the Paleolithic humans, and the latter consists in the stable cultural landscape according to the consistent divide of lithic technological traditions, i.e. flakes in North China vs. gravels in South China 砾石-石片工业传统, throughout most time of Palaeolithic age. It is exactly from this perspective that Su noted

11 Xu, Hong (2009), The Earliest China, Beijing: Science Press, 226–229.

3

THE EARLIEST CHINA: THE MAKINGS OF A PLURALISTIC …

35

that “Chinese Culture is a native culture with a tradition of nearly two million years”.12 At around 20,000 BP, the Neolithic age began and cultural integration accelerated. At the late phase of the Early Neolithic (9000 BCE), five major regional cultural systems emerged in the central-eastern part of China, with manifest relations between each other. With regard to the ceramic traditions of these five regions, it is most probable that they were all inspired by the world’s earliest pottery techniques from South China (see Map 3.1). At the middle phase of the Middle Neolithic age (6000 BCE), with the significant acceleration of cultural interactions among these regions, the Neolithic cultures in most parts of China gradually integrated into four major cultural systems. Against this background, the dominant position of the Peiligang culture in the Central Plains became more prominent and exercised positive influence on the surrounding cultures, resulting in the preliminary landscape of the first prototype of Early Chinese Cultural Sphere or Early China in the cultural sense (see Map 3.2). At the Late Neolithic (5000–4000 BCE), the major regional cultural systems further merged and consolidated into three subsystems, those of the Yellow River Valley, the Yangtze River Valley-South China and the Northeast. As a result of this integration, the prototypical Early Chinese Cultural Sphere dramatically expanded in scope (see Map 3.3). The last phase of the Neolithic age (4000 BCE) became a crucial point for the Chinese civilization. The Dongzhuang and Miaodigou types 东庄庙底沟类型 of the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化 expanded outward with strong influence which emanated from the core ranging from southern Shanxi to western Henan and eastern Guanzhong Basin 关中. This influence eventually resulted in the “Miaodigouization” 庙底沟化 of the Yangshao culture and an unprecedented convergent cultural community across most parts of the upper and middle reaches of the Yellow River Basin. Painted potteries were decorated with petal designs and flowing lines 花瓣纹彩陶, which used to become typical of the Miaodigou pottery, began to spread across most part of China. The previous landscape of the three major regional cultural systems or cultural regions dramatically changed, and Neolithic cultures in most parts of China amalgamated into a vast cultural community or sphere (see Map 3.4). This cultural 12 Su, Bingqi (1994), “Some thoughts about the reconstruction of Chinese prehistory”, in Su Bingqi (ed.), The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, and the Chinese People: An Archaeological Seeking for Roots, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 114–123.

36

J. HAN

Map 3.1 The Early Neolithic regional cultural systems in China (18,000–7000 BCE) The Five Major Regional Cultural Systems 五大区域文化系统: I. the cord-marked round-based cauldron 绳纹圜底釜文化系统; II. the flat-bottom basin, pedestal dish and two-eared pot 平底盆-圈足盘-双耳罐文化系统; III. the deep-belly pot 深腹罐文化系统; IV. the unmarked round-based cauldron 素面圜 底釜文化系统; V. the bucket-shaped pot 筒形罐文化系统 Ceramic Artifacts 陶器: 1–3. the fu cauldron 釜 (Zengpiyan 甄皮岩 DT6:072, 玉蟾岩 Yuchanyan 95DMT9:26, Dingshishan 顶蛳山 T2206➃:1); 4. the pen basin 盆 (Shangshan 上山 H301:1); 5 and 16. the dou tall pedestal dishes 豆 (Shangshan 上山 H193:1, Shuangta 双塔 IIT130➁:2); 6. the shuang-er guan two-eared pot 双耳罐 (Shangshan 上山 H226:5); 7. the quanzu pan short pedestal dishes 圈足盘 (Xiaohuangshan 小黄山 M2:2); 8 and 9. the shenfu guan deep-belly pots 深腹罐 (Lijiagou 李家沟 09XLL: 612, 738); 10. The su-mian fu unmarked cauldron 素面釜 (Bianbiandong 扁扁洞); 11–15. the bucketshaped pots 筒形罐 (Donghulin 东湖林 T9➄:20, Zhuannian 转年, Shuangta 双塔 IIT406➁:4, IIC2:1, IIT117➁:11)

3

THE EARLIEST CHINA: THE MAKINGS OF A PLURALISTIC …

37

Map 3.2 The Middle Neolithic regional cultural systems in China (6200–5500 BCE) The Four Major Regional Cultural Systems 四大区域文化系统: I. the cauldron-pedestal dish 釜-圈足盘-豆文化体系; II. the deep-belly jar, two-eared vase and unpedestal bowl 深腹罐-双耳壶-钵文化体系; III. the unmarked roundbased cauldron 素面圜底釜文化系统; IV. the bucket-shaped pot 筒形罐文化系 统 Ceramic Artefacts 陶器: 1–4. bucket-shaped pots 筒形罐 (Cishan 磁山 T96➁:38, 25; Xinglongwa 兴隆洼 F171➃:10, F180➃:8); 5 and 10. deep-belly pots 深腹罐 (Baijia 白家 T309➂:4, Peiligang 裴龙岗 M37:3); 6–9, 13–14, 16, 18, 20 and 25. bo unpedestal bowls 钵 (Baijia 白家 T204H25:1, T116H4:2, T117➂:4, T121➂:8, Peiligang 裴龙岗 M38:11, M56:4, Pengtoushan 彭头山 T5➄:4, F2:1, Houli 后李 H1546:1, Kuahuqiao 跨湖桥 T0410 Lake 湖 III:17); 11 and 22. hu two-eared vases 壶 (Peiligang 裴龙岗 M100:10, Houli 后李 H16777:1); 12. ding tripod 鼎 (Jiahu 贾湖 H104:6); 15, 17, 19, 21 and 23. fu round-based cauldrons 釜 (pots 罐) (Pengtoushan 彭头山 H2:47, H1:6, Houli 后李 H3827:1, H3832:1, Kuahuqiao 跨湖桥 T0411➇A:132); 24. two-eared pot 双耳罐 (Kuahuqiao 跨湖桥 T0411➇A:24); 26. quanzu pan short pedestal dish 圈足盘 (Kuahuqiao 跨湖桥 T0513➈C:2)

38

J. HAN

Map 3.3 The Late Neolithic regional cultural systems in China (5000–4200 BCE) The Three Major Regional Cultural Systems 三大区域文化体系: I. the cauldron-pedestal dish 釜-圈足盘文化体系; II. the vase-unpedestal bowl (basin), jia and ding tripod 瓶 (壶) -钵 (盆) -罐-鼎文化系统; III. bucket-shaped pot 筒 形罐文化系统 Ceramic Artefacts 陶器: 1 and 15. bucket-shaped pots 筒形罐 (Zhaobaogou 赵宝沟 F105➁: 28, Xinle 新乐); 2. ritual wine pot zun 尊 (Zhaobaogou 赵宝 沟 F7➁:15); 3 and 16. quanzu bo pedestal bowls 圈足钵 (Zhaobaogou 赵宝 沟 F105➁:11, Xinle 新乐); 4 and 17. ding tripod 鼎 (Hougang 后岗 H5:6, Beixin 北辛 H706:7); 5, 8 and 18. ping vases 瓶 (壶) (Hougang & Jiangzhai 后岗、姜寨 T181F46:11, Beixin 北辛 H1002:12); 6, 9 and 24. guan pots 罐 (Hougang 后岗 H2:2, Jiangzhai 姜寨 T276M159:4, Hemudu 河姆渡 T33 (4):109); 7, 10 and 14. bo unpedestal bowls 钵 (Hougang 后岗H2:1, Jiangzhai 姜寨 T276W222:1, Huachenggang 化城岗 T28➅:1); 11 and 22. pen basins 盆 (Jiangzhai 姜寨 T16W63:1, Luojiajiao 罗家角 T129➃:3); 12, 18, 20 and 23. fu cauldrons 釜 (Huachenggang 化城岗 T13➆B:5, Beixin 北辛 M702:1, Luojiajiao 罗家角 T128➂:20, Hemudu 河姆渡 T26 (4):34); 13, 27 and 28. quanzu pan short pedestal dishes 圈足盘 (Huachenggang 化城岗 M156:1, Xiantouling 咸头 岭 T9➄:1, T1➇:2); 21. he spouted vessel 盉 (Luojiajiao 罗家角 T107➀:2); 25. dou tall pedestal disc 豆 (Hemudu 河姆渡 T211 (4B): 447); 26. bei cup 杯 (Xiantouling 咸头岭 T1➄:2)

3

THE EARLIEST CHINA: THE MAKINGS OF A PLURALISTIC …

39

community laid the foundation for the China of the Xia, Shang and Zhou dynasties 夏商周朝, and even to the post-Qin and Han dynasties 秦汉以 后, both geographically and culturally, and this marked the actual formalization of “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere”, or the “Early China” in the cultural sense of the word.13 In a sense, this symbolizes the birth of the “Earliest China”! After this, China entered the Chalcolithic age (i.e. 3500 BCE) and went through the Longshan period 龙山时代, to the wangguo “kingdom” 王国 period of the first three dynasties (i.e. the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties), but its culture was merely an emulation and development of the Earliest China, which formed in the Miaodigou Era 庙底 沟时代. The Miaodigou Era happened to be the period when social differentiation began to emerge, which set the precedent of the course of civilization of China.14 At this time, there appeared large “palace-like” 宫殿式 buildings with an area of 200 to 500 m2 at such sites as Xipo 西坡 (Lingbao, Henan), Xiahe 下河 (Baishui, Shaanxi) and Quanhu 泉护 (Huaxian, Shaanxi) of the Central Plains Core Zone 中原核心区. These buildings had probably functioned as the public “halls” 殿堂 and chiefs’ resident places, and this indicates that the Central Plains had taken the lead in the social sophistication process. While the growing emphasis on the status of chiefs was most likely related to their leadership role in wars, the perforation of specialized weapons like yue stone axes 石钺 probably symbolized military power. A case in point is the expression of such power in the painting “A Stork with a Fish and an Axe” 鹳鱼钺图 on the burial urn from Yancun 阎村, Ruzhou in Hennan.15 It could thus 13 Han, Jianye (2012), “The Miaodigou age and the “Early China”, Archaeology, 3: 59–69. 14 Su Bingqi has pointed that the time of 6000 BP was “the critical point to evolve from the clan society to an ancient state”. See Su, Bingqi (1994), “To embrace a new age of Chinese archaeology”, in Bingqi Su (ed.), The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, and the Chinese People: An Archaeological Seeking for Roots, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 238. 15 According to Yan Wenming, the painting “A White Stork with a Fish and an Axe” was a commemoration of the victory of the White Stork clan over the Silver Crap clan and is thus “a picture with historical significance”. The “stone axe” in the picture, featured with perforation and a decorated handle, should be identified as a ceremonial axe yue, though the material of the axe remains unknown, be it stone or jade. Therefore, it might be more appropriate to refer to the picture on the exterior of the burial jar as such. See Yan, Wenming (1981), “Epilogue to ‘the stork, fish and stone axe picture’”, Cultural Relics, 12: 79–82.

40

J. HAN

Map 3.4 The Early China at the Miaodigou Era (4200–3500 BCE) Three Major Regional Cultural Systems 三大区域文化体系: I. the cauldron-pedestal dish 釜-圈足底文化系统; II. the vase, unpedestal bowl (basin), jar & ding tripod cauldron 瓶 (壶) -钵 (盆) -罐-鼎文化系统; III. the bucket- shaped pot 筒形罐文 化系统 The Three-tire Concentric Structure of the Earliest China 三大文化圈: A. the Core Zone 核心区; B. the Main Zone 主体区; C. the Peripheral Zone 边缘区 Ceramic Artifacts 陶器: 1, 7, 12 and 13. basins 盆 (Zhangmaowusu 章 毛乌素 F1:4, Miaodigou 庙底沟 H11:75, Hulijia 胡李家 T1➁:1, H14:2); 2, 8 and 20. Pots 罐 (Zhangmaowusu 章毛乌素 F1:2, Miaodigou 庙底沟 H322:66, Zhizhushan 蜘蛛山 T1➂:47); 3, 10, 14, 16, and 22. unpedestal bowls 钵 (Zhangmaowusu 章毛乌素 F1:6, Dadiwan 大地湾 T1➂:1, Hulijia 胡 李家 T1004➁B:3, Chengtoushan 城头山 H210:3, Xishuiquan 西水泉 H4:2); 4, 9 and 11. bottles ping 瓶 (Miaodigou 庙底沟 T203:43, Dadiwan 大地湾 F2:14, QD0:19); 5. cauldron 釜 (Miaodigou 庙底沟 H12:112); 6. Stove 灶 (Miaodigou 庙底沟 H47:34); 15, 23 and 27. ding tripods 鼎 (Chengtoushan 城头山 M665:2, Dawenkou 大汶口 M1013:5, Songze 崧泽 M10:3); 17, 24 and 28. tall pedestal dishes 豆 (Chengtoushan 城头山 M678:4, Dawenkou 大 汶口 M2005:49, Songze 崧泽 M30:4); 18 and 25. cups 筒形罐 (Chengtoushan 城头山 M679:3, Dawenkou 大汶口 M2002:8); 19. bucket-shaped pots 筒形 罐 (Xishuiquan 西水泉 F13:31); 21, 26 and 29. Vases 壶 (Xishuiquan 西水泉 H2:21, Dawenkou 大汶口 M1013:2, Songze 崧泽 M30:3)

3

THE EARLIEST CHINA: THE MAKINGS OF A PLURALISTIC …

41

be concluded that the large-scale outward expansion of the Central Plains cultures in the Miaodigou Era had driven the course of civilization of the surrounding cultures of Dawenkou 大汶口文化, Hongshan 红山文化 and Songze 崧泽文化. The reason behind this influence may be due to the admirable achievement of the “civilization” of the Central Plains and the direct promotive effect of the warfare. We once suggested that the strong cultural expansion of the Dongzhuang-Miaodigou types of the Yangshao culture towards the Shaanxi and Gansu regions might coincide with the Battle of Banquan 阪泉之战, and the painting “A Stork with a Fish and an Axe” perhaps functioned as the “monument” the victory of the Yellow Emperor 黄 帝 over the Yan Emperor 炎帝. In the same vein, the decline of the Hougang type 后岗类型 of the Yangshao culture in the Hebei Plain 河 北平原 in Miaodigou Era might relate to the Battle of Zhuolu 涿鹿之 战 in which the Yellow Emperor defeated Chi-you 蚩尤.16 According to the great historian Sima Qian’s 司马迁 (145–90 BC) Annals of the Five Emperors in Shiji or The Historical Records《史记·五帝本纪》 , “To those under the heaven who would not submit themselves, the Yellow Emperor would launch a military expedition, and when they were subdued, he would leave them. In order to make roads among the hills, the Yellow Emperor would cut along, and was never at rest”. “天下有不顺者, 黄帝 从而征之, 平者去之, 披山通道, 未尝宁居。 ” This may reflect certain real events in history.

3.3 The Geographical Scope and Structure of the Earliest China The earliest Chinese Cultural Sphere which took form in the Miaodigou Era ranged over a vast area which covered most parts of the modern China: from the coastal regions of the Shandong Peninsula 海岱 in the east to Gansu and Qinghai 甘青 provinces in the west, stretching from Hunan 江湘 Province in the south to the steppes beyond the Yan Mountains 燕山 in the north. If the Eurasian continent 欧亚大陆 could be

16 Han, Jianye (2002), “Research into the Battle of Zhuolu”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 4: 20–27.

42

J. HAN

divided into three major cultural spheres,17 the relatively small Earliest China is the main part of the Early Eastern Cultural Sphere 早期东方 文化圈, overlapping the frontier regions of the Early Western Cultural Sphere 早期西方文化圈 and Early Northern Cultural Sphere 早期北方文 化圈 in the west and north, respectively. With regard to its internal structure, the earliest Chinese Cultural Sphere consisted of a three-tier concentric “mono-centred complex” structure 有中心有主体的三层次的多元一体结构. To be specific, the core zone or tier 中心区 lay in the region from Southwestern Shanxi, to western Henan and the east of the Guanzhong Basin, which was occupied by the Dongzhuang-Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture. The potteries typical of this region are recognizable in particular by their elegant, painted petal designs and flowing lines, as well as by the orderly and stately designed type of artefacts, such as double-lipped, small-mouthed pointed-bottom bottles 双唇口小口尖底瓶 and carinated cauldron-shaped ding tripods 折腹釜形鼎. Outside of the core zone was the main zone or tier 主体区. It comprised the Middle Yellow River region, including the upper and middle Han River 汉水 and upper Huai River 淮河 reaches to the south, and actually represented the entire Yangshao cultural sphere except the core zone. Here, the painted petal designs varied slightly from place to place and the lines looked a little clumsy. Towards the east of this tier, the potteries were often multi-coloured and the designs appeared too lively to be composed. Further outward, in the peripheral areas of the lower reaches of the Yellow River, the middle and lower Yangtze River, and the Northeast part of China, i.e. the neighbouring areas of the Yangshao culture, lay the peripheral zone 边缘区. While this zone presented various local Neolithic cultures, it is common to see coloured petal-patterned potteries 花瓣纹 彩陶 there. Therefore, although the main ceramic assemblages of those local Neolithic cultures retained local traditions, the combination of local traditional ceramic shape and Miaodigou-typed petal patterns 花纹 was common.

17 In 2015, I proposed the theory about three major cultural spheres in Eurasia: the “Early Eastern Cultural Sphere” centred in the Yellow and Yangtze river valleys, the “Early Western Cultural Sphere” centred in Mesopotamia and the “Early Northern Cultural Sphere” in the north of the “East” and “West” centres in Inner Asia.

3

THE EARLIEST CHINA: THE MAKINGS OF A PLURALISTIC …

43

This three-tiered structure remained stable for such a long period of time in the Miaodigou Era that it even evolved into a four-tiered structure in the Shang and Zhou dynasties, coinciding with the social systems of “Nei-wai (interior and exterior) subordinates domains” 内外服制度 as recorded in the Shang and Zhou historical sources. In fact, this fourtiered structure later served as the political-cultural base not only of the forthcoming Qin and Han empires, but even of the modern China as a multi-ethnic state characterized by diversity in unity 多元一统. According to records in the Annals of the Five Emperors in The Historical Records, the Yellow Emperor (Huang-di) once [went] eastward to the sea, and climbed the Wan-shan and Dai-zong mountains (modern day Mount Tai in Shandong); travelled westward to the Kong-tong mountain (modern day Mount Kongtong in Eastern Gansu Province) and climbed the Ji-tou hill; went southward to the Yangtze River, and climbed the Xiong and Xiang mountains (two mountains in the middle of Dongting Lake, Hunan Province); while in the north he drove out the Xunyu tribe (a northern barbarian tribe, associated with later Xiongnu or Huns, an ancient ethnic group in the north of China), accorded a peace conference at Fushan (a hill at Zhuo-lu, Hebei Province), and finally built a city on the hill of Zhuo-lu.” “东至于海, 登丸山, 及岱宗。 西至于空桐, 登鸡头。南至于江, 登熊、湘。 北逐荤粥, 合符釜山, 而邑于涿鹿 之阿。

This historical record is a surprisingly exact coincidence with the archaeological scope of the “Earliest China”! In the Chinese ancient history system from the Annals of the Five Emperors in The Historical Records, and the chapters “The Virtue of the Five Emperors ”《五帝德》and “Genealogy from the Yellow Emperor”《帝系》in the Ritual Records of Dai the Elder《大戴礼记》(about 100 BCE), the other four emperors all descended from the Yellow Emperor and came down in one continuous line. In some legends, even the Bei-di 北狄, an ethnic group in northern China relating to later steppe nomadic groups, also belonged to the lineage from the Yellow Emperor as ancestry. These legends tally nicely with the profound influences of Dongzhuang-Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture.18 No matter how the local cultures in different 18 According to the recent linguistic genealogical study published in the journal Nature, the earliest diversification of Proto-Sino-Tibetan languages could be traced back to about 5900 BP and probably in northern China. This event happens to correspond to the

44

J. HAN

regions of China evolved in later ages, the cultural “gene” which had descended from the Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture had long been passed on; and the Yellow Emperor as the common ancestor of the Chinese civilization has become deeply entrenched as an ever-lasting national memory. To put it another way, the memory of the Yellow Emperor in different regions of China as a nation was probably the reflection of a real historical background, instead of the fabrication, imagination or tuft-hunting in the later period of time as some scholars have argued.

3.4

The Cultural Traits of the Earliest China

The reason why the Earliest China had formed a relatively independent cultural sphere lies in the peculiar features of her material culture and the traits of her civilization. I once expounded the traits of the Earliest China, including agrarian orientedness 以农为本, calm conservatism to preserve stability 稳定内敛, the emphasis on rites 礼器礼制, holism 整体 思维, secularism 世俗观念 and ancestral veneration 祖先崇拜,19 of which agrarian orientedness is the most essential, and ancestral veneration the most central. As far as agrarian orientedness is concerned, this cultural trait had become a deep-rooted concept in the Earliest China as an agrarian economy. The Early China lay in the moderate mid-latitude region of northeastern Asia, where two great rivers the Yellow River and the Yangtze River flew (and still flow now), and where there were vast loess zones suitable for farming. Ten thousand years ago, cultivation of rice and millet had emerged in this region and became established as the two major and complementary agrarian systems. By the time when the Earliest China formed, agriculture had become the main subsistence method in the Miaodigou Era, and agrarian ideas had long taken root in this culture. The rites emerged as the regulatory mechanism of the agricultural development. To cultivate crops required both long-term schemes and a stable social order, and this is where rites had to be designed to check

expansion of the Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture and the formation of the Early China during the early Miaodigou era. See Zhang, Menghan, Yan, Shi, Pan, Wuyun, & Jin, Li (2019). “Phylogenetic evidence for Sino-Tibetan origin in northern China in the Late Neolithic”, Nature, 569: 112–115, https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-019-1153-z. 19 Han, Jianye (2015), Early China: The Making of the Chinese Cultural Sphere, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press, 269–271.

3

THE EARLIEST CHINA: THE MAKINGS OF A PLURALISTIC …

45

and regulate social behaviours. At the site of the Xipo Cemetery 西坡大墓 in Lingbao, Henan, which was located at the Core Zone of the Central Plains and could be dated back to the turn from the Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture to the Xiwang type 西王类型, the large burials M27 and M29 had commodious burial rooms with er-ceng-tai or second-tier platforms 二层台 along two long sides, together with such burial articles as exquisite jade ceremonial yue axes钺, and the ceramic pairing of da kou gang 大口缸 (wide-mouthed urns), and gui xing qi 簋形器 (gui-shaped ritual tureen vessels). Nevertheless, the burial articles in each burial of the Xipo Cemetery were limited to less than a dozen and mostly looked crude and only made for funerals. While these tombs signified the noble status of those buried in them, some traits of the culture were also manifested thereby, including the appropriate and rational rituals of life and death 生 死有度; preference of authority over property 重贵轻富; establishment of orderly rites 井然有礼; and restraint and impedance 朴实执中.20 The lack of burial articles in most Miaodigou type burials did not always have anything to do with the “poverty” of the buried, but with the belief in frugality. Actually, the customs of agrarianism and ritual were strengthened in the following Xia, Shang and Zhou dynasties and passed down to modern times, which have, to a great extent, determined the basic path of development of China and its social patterns for thousand years. Finally, with regard to the ancestral veneration, the Earliest China had rarely worship of a deity 神祇崇拜 as the large temples 神庙, shrines 神祠, idols 偶像 found in ancient Egypt and Western Asia. This was especially true in the Central Plains Core Zone, where the prehistoric religious belief was embodied in the agriculture-centred everyday life of the people. The ancestral veneration might have been the core of their belief system. The funeral practices of the Early China were mostly focused on the burial, which emphasized on the notion of the deceased “being laid to rest in eternal peace underground” 入土为安. This notion might have served to justify the descendants’ inheriting their ancestors’ land and continuing 20 Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology (2010), The Xipo Cemetery in Lingbao County, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Han, Jianye (2014), “The Xipo cemetery and the ‘Central Plains Model’”, in Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Museum of Yangshao Culture (eds.), Yangshao and Its Age: Proceedings of the International Conference in Commemoration of the 90th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 153–164.

46

J. HAN

the farming. In the Central Plains, ever since the Peiligang Era, the space between the burial sites was laid out in sections probably in accordance with the consanguinity and seniority of the deceased. This custom did not only represent the Chinese respect for and remembrance of their ancestors, but also showcased the importance the Chinese had attached to the social order in clan societies. Besides, Early China did not have abundant mythologies about the creation of the world as compared with that in the West. What we had are merely legends and histories about our ancestors’ deeds, which can be verified according to archaeological discoveries. For instance, to cultivate agrarian crops required an accurate knowledge in the areas of astronomy and geography, and religious concepts tended to be associated with farming. Whereas some early astronomic remains have been found by archaeology,21 legends and histories attributed their owners generally to the ancestors. The ancient custom of “clan cemetery” 聚族而葬 and ancestral veneration may have corresponded to the real-life social practice of “clan-gathering” 聚族而居 whereby members descending from the same patriarchal clan gathered to live. From this custom later evolved the Chinese zongfa patriarchal system 宗法 and the ideology of filial piety 孝 道, which had become ever powerful since the western Zhou period and has remained so until the present day.

21 Feng, Shi (2018), Continuity of the Illustrious Culture: Astronomy, Thoughts and Institutions in Ancient China, Beijing: China Social Sciences Press.

CHAPTER 4

The Peiligang Era and the Origin of Chinese Wenming

4.1

Definition of Wenming and the Research into the Origin of Chinese Wenming

The origin of the Chinese wenming civilization 文明 has gradually become a scholastic enquiry since the 1980s. Xia Nai 夏鼐 (1985) and Su Bingqi 苏秉琦 (1986) both directed their attention to the broadranged Neolithic age almost at the same time. Xia, from a macroscopic perspective, pointed out that “the main object of study is the origin and development of various elements of wenming during the final period of the Neolithic or the Chalcolithic age”.1 This period, also called the Chalcolithic age in Xia’s term, refers to the Longshan Era 龙山时代. On the other hand, Su drew our attention to the period of the Late Hongshan culture 红山文化 when he pointed out that “the development of the tribe clans of the primitive commune society 原始公社 had reached 1 Xia, Nai (1985), The Origin of Chinese Civilization, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 80.

The section was originally published in Chinese as Han Jianye (2021), “The Peiligang era and the origin of Chinese civilization”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1: 50–55. However, in this section here, the definition of wenming is largely different from the English concept “civilization”. Therefore, a proper translation of the term wenming into English is contingent on the specific context in which the term is used. © China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_4

47

48

J. HAN

a point where it resulted in a higher social organization or superstructure that both based itself upon but also overrode the commune at the same time”.2 Yan (1985, 1992), on the basis of a systematic survey of the Neolithic settlement patterns found in China nationwide, succinctly pointed out that “enquiry into the origin of the Chinese wenming should start from nowhere else than 3500 BCE”.3 In the early 1990s, Su made more instructive comments, proposing that the discoveries of a large number of jade objects at the Chahai Site 查海 indicated the specialized production and application of jade had become established. He argued that “the division of labor led to the social division, which in turn gave rise to the start of wenming around 8000 BP”.4 Su (1993) pushed back the time of the dawn of Chinese wenming to “more than ten thousand years ago” when the cultural traditions had first emerged.5 In the same year, basing his theory on the discovery of the you-ping 酉瓶 or so-called small-mouthed pointed-bottom bottles 小口尖底瓶, painted potteries and other special religious objects, Su (1993) concluded that the Miaodigou Era 庙底沟时代 (6000 BP) was “the turning point of social advance from clan to state”.6 Cai Yunzhang 蔡运章 and Zhang Juzhong 张居中 (2003), by citing as evidence the divinatory symbols unearthed from the Jiahu Site 贾湖遗址, argued in unequivocal terms that “the magnificent dawn of the Chinese

2 Su, Bingqi (1986), “On the ancient cities and states in Western Liaoning, and the priorities or major issues in the recent archaeological fieldwork”, Cultural Relics, 8: 41–44. 3 Yan, Wenming (1989), “Survey on the Neolithic settlement patterns in China”, in Team in Celebration of Su Bingqi’s 55Years Archaeological Work (ed.), Proceedings in Celebration of Su Bingqi’s 55 Years Archaeological Work, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 24–37; Yan, Wenming (1992), “On the origin of Chinese civilization”, Cultural Relics, 1: 40–49. 4 Su, Bingqi (1994), “The beginning of civilization and the homeland of the Jade Dragon: On the Chahai Site”, in Su Bingqi (ed.), The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, and the Chinese People: An Archaeological Seeking for Roots, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 127. 5 Su, Bingqi (1994), “Research into the origin of the state and national cultural tradition: an outline”, in Su Bingqi (ed.), The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, and the Chinese People: An Archaeological Seeking for Roots. Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 132–134. 6 Su, Bingqi (1994), “Embrace a new age of Chinese archaeology” in Su Bingqi (ed.), The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, and the Chinese People: An Archaeological Seeking for Roots, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 238.

4

THE PEILIGANG ERA AND THE ORIGIN OF CHINESE …

49

wenming ” had been in existence at 8000 BP.7 Pei Anping 裴安平 (2014) held the view that the Chinese wenming started at about 7500 BP.8 Feng Shi 冯时 (2018) also claimed that “China has owned an uninterrupted history of wenming for at least 8000 years”.9 The latest report of the “Research Project on the Origins of Chinese Civilization” “中华文明探 源工程”, published in 2018, concluded that “the signs of the origins of wenming could be found in the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River and Yangtze River, and the West Liao River 西辽河 valley at about 5800 BP”.10 From the aforementioned views, it can be concluded that, with the increase in archaeological discoveries and the progress of archaeological research, a great majority of Chinese archaeologists are inclined to push the temporal point of the origin of Chinese wenming from the Longshan Era (i.e. 4000 BP) back to the Miaodigou Era (i.e. 6000 BP), with someone even tending to trace it back to 8000 BP or even more. The reason why the views on the time of origin of the Chinese wenming civilization vary so conspicuously lies in the fact that scholars have a diverse understanding of the term wenming. Since Xia and Su, most Chinese archaeologists define wenming according to the translation of the concept “civilization” in the Western world, or in the English language, with a focus on the cultural background, especially in reference to Friedrich Engels’ classical argument on civilization in “Die Zusammenfassung der zivilisierten Gesellschaft ist der Staat 国家是文明社会的 概况 (The essence of civilized society is the state)”.11 In this perspective,

7 Cai, Yunzhang & Zhang, Juzhong (2003), “The magnificent dawn of Chinese civi-

lization: On the divinatory symbols unearthed at the Jiahu Site in Wuyang”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 3: 17–22. 8 Pei, Anping (2014), The Origin of Family, Private Property, Civilization, State and

City in China, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press, 345–346. 9 Feng, Shi (2018), Continuity of the Illustrious Culture: Astronomy, Thoughts and Institutions in Ancient China, Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 1. 10 Zhou, Yating (2018), “First view of the profile about the origins of Chinese civilization”, People’s Daily (Overseas edition), May 29, 2018. 11 Engels, Friedrich (1975), “Der Ursprung der Familie, des Privateigentums und des Staats”, in Karl Marx Friedrich Engels Werke (Vol. 21, 5th ed.), Berlin, GDR: Karl Dietz Verlag Berlin, 172. The current English translation of this sentence is “The central link in civilized society is the state”, which should not be appropriate for original meaning. See Chinese translation: Friedrich Engels (1999), The Origin of The Family, Private Property and The State, trans. The Central Compilation and Translation Bureau, Beijing: People’s Press, 183.

50

J. HAN

the origin of wenming has long been seen more or less as the equivalent of the origin of statehood 国家起源. For instance, Su has been adamant that he definitely supported Engels’ argument and that “the origin of wenming civilization, in my opinion, is the synopsis of Friedrich Engels’ work The Origins of Family, Private Property and The State”.12 Feng, on the other hand, relates the concept wenming to its connotation within the Chinese traditions and classics such as I-Ching《易传》and Book of Documents《尚书》and defines wenming as comprising “those human beings who are brightly illuminated by self-cultivation and self-discipline to perfect internal civilities and virtues, and the society which is brightly manifested by the makings of the structured institutions and rites”. “人类 以修养文德而彰明, 而社会则得有制度的建设和礼仪的完善而彰明”. He highlights the notion of guan-xiang shou-shi or observation of celestial phenomena and calendar making 观象授时, i.e. the astronomical achievements.13 To put it simple, Su’s definition focuses on the social attributes of wenming while Feng’s places emphasis on the cultural achievements. Generally speaking, “being civilized” is a state antithetical to “being a barbarian” 野蛮, the opposite of which refers not only to mature material cultures and complex social structures, but to intellectual accomplishments such as beliefs, knowledge systems, self-cultivation and etiquette. According to Fernand Braudel 费尔南·布罗代尔, a civilization, then, is neither a given economy nor a given society, but something which can persist through a series of economies or societies, barely susceptible to gradual change. A civilization can be approached, therefore, only in the long term, taking hold of a constantly unwinding thread—something that a group of people have conserved and passed on as their most precious heritage from generation to generation, throughout and despite the storms and tumults of history.14

12 Su, Bingqi (1994), “Speech at the symposium on the origin of Chinese civilization”, in Su Bingqi (ed.), The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, and the Chinese People: An Archaeological Seeking for Roots, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 128. 13 Feng, Shi (2018), Continuity of the Illustrious Culture: Astronomy, Thoughts and Institutions in Ancient China, Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 2–7. 14 Braudel, Fernand (1994), A History of Civilizations, 1st ed., trans. Richard Mayne. New York: Penguin Books, 79. See Chinese translation: Fernand Braudel (2014), 文明 史: 人类五千年文明的传承与交流, trans. Chang Shaomin, Feng Tang, Zhang Wenying, & Wang Mingyi, Beijing: CITIC Press Group, 68.

4

THE PEILIGANG ERA AND THE ORIGIN OF CHINESE …

51

Samuel Huntingdon 塞缪尔·亨廷顿 wrote, in addition, that “of all the objective elements which define civilizations [,] the most important usually is religion”, and that “a civilization is the broadest cultural entity”.15 As I mentioned above, Su pointed out that the critical period for the origin of the Chinese wenming should be identified at 8000 BP or 6000 BP in terms of the appearance of jade objects, you-ping 酉瓶 (unitary bottles) and primitive religious rites. In view of the fore-going two perspectives, wenming might as well be defined, from the two-fold view of social and cultural aspect, as the synthesis of both human culture and social development at an advanced stage.16 By this definition, as we shall explore, the origin of the Chinese wenming would have started further back, that is at the Late Peiligang culture 裴李岗文化 period or the “Peiligang Era”17 裴李岗时期 in short. This is a period when the Peiligang culture had left great impacts on surrounding areas.18 This period took place at the late phase of the 15 Huntingdon, Samuel (1996), The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, 1st ed, New York: Simon & Schuster, 42–43. See Chinese translation: Samuel Huntingdon (2010), 文明的冲突与世界秩序的重建, trans. Zhou Qi, Beijing: Xinhua Press, 21. 16 Wang Wei pointed out that wenming should come with the following characteristics, i.e., “a constantly growing production of material wealth, a continuous enrichment of intellectual life, a growing degree of social complexity, the development of diverse social classes as a result of the division of labor and stratification, and the emergence of a coercive public power in the form of state.” See Wang, Wei (2008), “Comprehension of some concepts relating to the research on the Chinese civilization”, Journal of Historical Science, 1: 10–13. 17 Luan Fengshi first used the term “the Peiligang era” to describe the time period of the whole Peiligang culture, and Chen Minghui has an essay dedicated to this discussion. However, their concept of “the Peiligang era” is different from my point of view here. See Luan, Fengshi (1996), “On the cultural relations between the East and the Central Plains at the Yangshao era”, Archaeology, 4: 45–58; Chen, Minghui (2018), “On the Peiligang cultural system and the cultural landscape of China during the Peiligang era”, in Zhu Jiangping (ed.), Essays on the Shangshan Culture, Beijing: Zhongguo Wenshi Press, 136–200. 18 Based on the cultural stratigraphy from archaeological report of the Jiahu site in Wuyang, Henan, I think the Phases 1–4 of the Jiahu site belonged to the Early Phase (7000–6200 BCE) of the Peiligang culture, and Phases 4–9 to the Late Phase (6200–5000 BCE). Han, Jianye (2009), “Migration influence of the Peiligang culture and rudiment of the Early Chinese Cultural Circle”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2: 11–15, 40; Han, Jianye (2012), “The Northward expansion of the Shuangdun culture and the formation of the Beixin culture: A discussion from the ‘Beixin culture’ of the Zhangshan site, Jining City”, Jianghan Archaeology, 2: 46–50.

52

J. HAN

Middle Neolithic (8200–7000 BP) and in the valleys of the Yellow River, the Yangtze River and the western Liao River, where with the remarkable increase in the number of settlements and population, and the significant development in material cultures, more advanced and complex ideologies, intellectual systems and social structures had emerged.

4.2

The Proper Zone of “The Peiligang China”

Let us first of all have a look at the Peiligang culture, Baijia culture 白 家文化 and the Shuangdun culture 双墩文化 in the valleys of the Yellow River and the Huai River 淮河. The remains of the early Peiligang culture are currently only seen in the Jiahu Site, Wuyang County, Henan Province, while the late Peiligang cultural remains are distributed over most of Henan Province. In the larger graves of the Jiahu Site, assemblages of some unusual burial articles are usually found, such as tortoise shells 龟甲 filled with small gravels 石子, compass-like bone artefacts 骨规形器 and bone flutes 骨笛. On some tortoise shells and compass-like artefacts, script-like signs are engraved on the surface.19 While it is noteworthy that most of the large graves buried with such unusual artefacts pertain to the late Peiligang period (6200–5000 BCE), the exquisite bone flutes in the graves were generally seen as musical instruments, which according to Feng are actually the pitch pipes 律管 not only for tuning, but also for weather observation through wind-blowing.20 With regard to the tortoise shells filled with small gravels, they are identified as implements for tortoise

19 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology (1999), The Jiahu Site in Wuyang City (Vol. 1), Beijing: Science Press; Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology, & Department of Technology History & Technology Archaeology of University of Science and Technology of China (2015), The Jiahu Site in Wuyang City (Vol. 2), Beijing: Science Press; Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology, Department of Technology History & Technology Archaeology of University of Science and Technology of China, & Museum of Wuyang County (2017), “The excavation of the Jiahu site in Wuyang County, Henan in 2013”, Archaeology, 12: 3–20. 20 Feng, Shi (2001), Chinese Archaeoastronomy, Beijing: China Social Sciences Academic Press, 195–197.

4

THE PEILIGANG ERA AND THE ORIGIN OF CHINESE …

53

divination21 龟占, or as rattles22 响器. Given that the signs on the tortoise shells might be associated with the gua-xiang divinatory symbols23 卦 象 or the inscriptions of the verification of divination24 验辞, tortoise shells were more probably used as divinatory tools. With regard to the compass-like bone artefacts, since they were usually found above the piles of tortoise shells, the excavators of the Jiahu Site indicated that their function might be associated with that of the tortoises.25 Ji Yingming 姬英明 (2019) claimed that the compass-like artefacts were actually “compasses” 规 and the bone plates “rulers” 矩, and that these two articles might have been used in astronomical observations for both scientific and religious considerations. He argued that this might coincide with the records in I-Ching《周易·系辞下》that “When Fuxi, the legendary Chinese ruler credited with the introduction of farming, fishing and animal husbandry, ruled the realm all under the Heaven, he began to make astronomical observations (包牺氏之王天下也, 仰则观象于天)”.26 Therefore, it might be more plausible to define this type of artefacts as compass because its lower end was usually smooth and shiny as a result of the longterm hand-grasping—some of them were even found in the hands of the deceased. The fact that the tortoise shells and compasses were usually found together adds further evidence to the speculation that both articles 21 Song, Huiqun & Zhang, Juzhong (1998), “The symbols of tortoise and numerical divinatory symbols: On the origin of the thinking of xiang (symbols) shu (numbers) from the ‘tortoise filled with small gravels’ in the Jiahu Site”, in Dajun Liu (ed.), Proceedings of the Third Cross-strait Symposium on I-Ching, Chengdu: Bashu Publishing House, 11–18. 22 Chen, Xingchan & Li, Runquan (2004), “On the Chinese prehistoric tortoise-shell

rattles”, in Xingchan Chen & Chong Deng (eds.), Collection of Papers in Celebration of an Zhimin’s 80th Anniversary, Hong Kong: The Chinese University of Hong Kong Press, 72–97. 23 Cai, Yunzhang & Zhang, Juzhong (2003), “Magnificent dawn of Chinese civilization: On the divinatory symbols unearthed at the Jiahu Site in Wuyang”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 3: 17–22. 24 Feng Shi identified an eye-like symbol on the tortoise shell from the grave M344 at the Jiahu Site as the character “lucky” 吉 in the Old Yi Script (古彝文). See Feng, Shi (2016), Introduction to the Study of Ancient Chinese Scripts, Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 24–25. 25 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology (1999), The Jiahu Site in Wuyang City (Vol. 1), 445–446. 26 Wang, Nan & Hu, Anhua (2019), “Confirmation of myths and legends: The discovery of the bone compasses and rulers in the Jiahu Site”, China City News, 22 July 2019.

54

J. HAN

might have been related to the astronomical phenomenon whereby the carapace 背甲 symbolized “the sky” 天 and the plastron 腹甲 “the earth” 地. Since records of relevant phenomena can be found in many Chinese legends,27 it goes without saying that the cosmology of tian yuan di fang “round sky and square earth” 天圆地方 had established itself at that time. In the First-Sixth Excavations of the Jiahu Cemetery, most graves (i.e. 23) are buried with tortoise shells, ranging from 1, 2, 4, 6 to 8. In the six graves that have the most tortoise shells (i.e. 8), 1 pertains to the Early Phase of the Peilonggang culture and the rest to the Late Phase. The tortoise shells found in the Jiahu graves are mainly in even numbers, and the largest number is eight. In the Seventh Excavation, a group of 8 tortoise shells were found in the sacrificial pit H502 of the Late Phase of the Peilonggang culture. The number of small gravels inside the tortoise shells vary from three to thirty, mostly ten and the remaining twenty. The tortoise shells filled with small gravels were used in the numerical divination like ba gua or the Eight Trigrams28 八卦, manifesting the “xiang shu thinking” or “image-number thinking” in which one thinks through semiotic analysis on images and deductive reasoning based on numbers 象数思维.29 The practice of divination shows the worship of supernatural power by the Jiahu people. While this spiritual practice pertains to a primitive religious act in nature, its dedication to shu or number 数 expresses the pursuit of laws and rules on the part of its followers. The use of the

27 The myth of the mother goddess Nüwa 女娲 “cutting off the legs of a great tortoise to mend the four cardinal pillars in support of the sky” is found in Liezi and Huananzi. The Book of Luo《雒书) describes the divine tortoise as having “a bulging carapace to symbolizes the sky, and a flat plastron to symbolize the earth”. In Maya mythology, the tortoise is also symbolized as the form of the earth. See Li, Xinwei (2004), “The prehistoric cosmology of jade objects and the upper class communication network in the early complex society of eastern prehistoric China”, Southeast Culture, 3: 66–72; Xu, Feng (2013), “On the tortoise worship of ancient China”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 3: 43–50; Li, Xinwei (2018), “The earth tortoise in Maya civilization”, The Guangming Daily, 12 May 2018. 28 Cai and Zhang (2003) suggested the phenomenon of numerical divination and tortoise divination in the Jiahu Site corresponds to the legend of “the creation of ba gua by Fuxi”. See Cai and Zhang (2003). 29 Song, Huiqun & Zhang, Juzhong (1998), “The symbol of the tortoise and numerical divinatory symbols: On the origin of the thinking of xiang (symbols) shu (numbers) from the ‘tortoise filled with small gravels’ in the Jiahu Site”.

4

THE PEILIGANG ERA AND THE ORIGIN OF CHINESE …

55

bone compass to observe celestial phenomena as mentioned above probably represents a combination of both mystique and secular purposes in perfecting a sophisticated calendar. In the individual sites of the Peiligang culture such as the Jiahu 贾 湖, Peiligang 30 裴李岗 and Shuiquan 31 水泉 sites, a special cemetery was found in each site. The graves in these cemeteries are all deep burials in which the decreased were carefully-dressed, and burial goods were found. It can be concluded that memorial ceremonies and sacrifices must have been observed at the cemeteries. This conclusion can be justified by the blank space in between the graves around in the cemeteries and the memorial remains in the pits in these blank spaces. For example, in the Shuiquan Cemetery, there is a blank space without any burials between the eastern and western zones of the cemetery. Here lies a relatively large burnt earth pit which was filled with some gravels. This pit might be the place reserved for sacrifices to the common ancestors of the whole clan in the Shuiquan Site. Another example is a relatively small burnt earth pit which was filled with animal bones in the western zone of the same cemetery, suggesting offerings to the ancestors of one cadet branch. Likewise, in the First-Sixth Excavations of the Jiahu Site, there are also six pits lying either in the middle or at one side of each cemetery; inside these pits the remains of dog skeletons were found. These archaeological discoveries reflect the particular reverence and remembrances for those beloved deceased, which is an indication of the widespread existence of the custom of ancestral veneration. The separation of the burials into sections and groups in these cemeteries could possibly correspond to the stratification of social kinship organizations or institutes from core families 家庭, extended families 家族, to clans 氏族, while the neat arrangement of the graves in rows and columns could be accounted for by the distinction for the seniority or generation of the deceased. These burials might constitute the earliest evidence of the clan cemetery in China. Just as Zhen Xuan 郑玄, the eastern Han 东汉 Confucianist, annotated to the term zu fen mu clan graves 族坟墓, in Rites of 30 Henan Archaeological Team One of Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1984), “The excavation report of the Peiligang Site in 1979”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1: 23–52, 137–146. 31 Henan Archaeological Team One of Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1995), “The excavation report of the Peiligang cultural site at Shuiquan in Jia County, Henan Province”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1: 39–77.

56

J. HAN

Zhou《周礼·地官·司徒》 , “a clan is a group of similar people living together; people descend from the same ancestor are close to each other in both this world and the afterworld” 族犹类也。同宗者, 生相近, 死相迫. Therefore, both ancestral veneration and the clan cemetery served as a reflection of the Chinese traditional emphasis on kinship, ethics and social orders in their everyday life. Generally, the burials pertaining to the same phase in the Peiligang cemeteries do not have stratigraphic superpositions which either cut into or overlap each other 叠压打破. It can be speculated that this might be a result of some signs which had been planted on the ground to mark the existing graves, which also indicates the continuous and precise memories people held for their deceased ancestors and genealogies of families and clans in the past few decades. Some cemeteries were even used for hundreds of years without interruption, such as the Northwestern Section of the Jiahu Cemetery which, although consisting of two major phases with five sub-divisions of time of burial, showed a rather complex overlapping of the phases. The continuous use of the same burial space symbolizes the clan’s persistent memories of and adherence to their ancestors’ habitat, and thus its stubborn “historical memories” of the ancestors. All these memories provided both justification and “legitimacy” for the descendants’ farming on this land from generation to generation. In the late Peiligang settlements, a degree of social differentiation is observed. The differentiation of settlement sizes is shown: the area of cultural remains of the Tanghu Site 唐户 of Xinzheng City, Henan, is about 300,000 m2 ,32 that of the Jiahu Site is about 50,000 m2 , and the average size of the majority of the sites ranges only between within a few thousand square metres. The differentiation of wealth and power can be seen in the burials too. In the 327 vertical pit burials 竖穴墓 from the first to the sixth excavations of the Jiahu Site, 89.9% pits have a width of less than one metre, while the rest a width of more than one metre. In all the 349 burials of the Jiahu Site, 91.5% have less than 10 32 Office of Cultural Relics Protection in the South-North Water Transfer Project of Henan Provincial Administration of Cultural Relics & Zhengzhou Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2008), “A brief report of the excavation of the Peiligang cultural remains at the Tanghu Site of Xinzheng City, Henan”, Archaeology, 5: 3–20, 97; Henan Provincial Administration of Cultural Relics & Office of Cultural Relics Protection in the South-North Water Transfer Project (2010), “A brief report of the 2007 excavation of the Peiligang cultural remains at the Tanghu Site of Xinzheng City, Henan”, Archaeology, 5: 3–23, 97–102, 109.

4

THE PEILIGANG ERA AND THE ORIGIN OF CHINESE …

57

burial goods, while the remaining with more than 10. The largest burial, i.e. M282, is a pit covering an area of 2.8 m in length and 1.8 m in width. While this burial pit amounts to approximately 5 m2 in size, the amount of burial goods in it are altogether 60, including tortoise shells, bone flutes, bone plates and compasses. Since such special artefacts are generally found in the large burials of the Jiahu Site, and the majority of those buried in these burials were adult males, it shows a certain degree of social differentiation whereby males had enjoyed a relatively higher status in the contemporary society. While these special artefacts did not seem to be related to military power or the ritual system, or to the wealth differentiation, they had strong religious connotations which were associated with the wu xi 巫觋, i.e. a Chinese “shaman” or “sorcerer”, the female and male spirits respectively in ancient China who mastered divination, music and medicine. Despite the fact that differentiation might have existed between the religious-cultural centres and the common villages, as well as between the religious-cultural leaders and common people,33 class differentiation above kinship had not emerged. West of the Peiligang culture is the Baijia culture at Lintong, Shanxi Province or Phase I of the Dadiwan culture 大地湾一期 at Qin’an County, Gansu Province. Based on current available documents, the Baijia culture might be seen as a fusion of late Peiligang culture which expanded westward to the Wei River 渭河 valley and the upper Hanshui River 汉水 valley, and the local ethnic traditions at about 8000–7000 BP. Though fewer discoveries were found with the Baijia culture as compared with that of the Peiligang culture, there also existed the similar phenomenon of “clan cemetery”34 族葬 in the Baijia culture. For example, on the interior of the beautifully painted unpedestal bowls 陶 钵 unearthed in the Baijia Site are many signs which might have some connections with similar signs engraved on the Peiligang bone artefacts and tortoise shells. East of the Peiligang culture lies the Shuangdun culture 双墩 at Bengbu, Anhui Province, which would probably have come into being as 33 Han, Jianye (2009), “Migration influence of the Peiligang culture and the rudiment of the Early Chinese Cultural Circle”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2: 11–15. 34 Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1994), The Baijia Village of Lintong County, Chengdu: Bashu Press, 1994; Gansu Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2006), The Excavation Report of the Dadiwan Neolithic Site of Qin’an County, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

58

J. HAN

a result of the eastward migration of the Peiligang culture at its terminal stage to the middle Huai River region at about 7300–7000 BP.35 A number of engraved signs and symbols are found on the Shuangdun potteries,36 of which many are deemed as “script-like signs” 文字性符 号 or with the characteristics of “pictographs” and “ideographs”37 文字 画. With regard to such engraved symbols which look in form like the Chinese characters “十” (ten), “井” (water wel l) and “亞” (being inferior), they are thought to represent the cosmological structures such as si fang wu wei “four cardinal directions and five positions” 四方五位, and ba fang jiu gong “eight cardinal directions and nine positions” 八方九宫, which manifests the ideology of “positioning the heaven and the earth” 天地定位 and fits the cardinal theory of bagua.38 In summary, during the Peiligang Era, in the cultural regions along the Yellow River and Huai River, there had appeared advanced ideologies and knowledges, including mature ideas on cosmology, religion, ethics, history, and developed knowledge systems of astronomy, mathematics, signs and music. The appearance of these ideologies and knowledge systems should be attributed to development of the more advanced subsistence economy, especially farming and livestock husbandry.39

35 Han, Jianye (2012), “The northward advance of the Shuangdun culture and the formation of the Bexin culture”, Jianghan Archaeology, 2: 46–50. 36 Anhui Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology & Museum of Bengbu (2008), The Excavation Report of the Shuangdun Neolithic Site of Bengbu City, Beijing: Science Press. 37 Wang, Hui (2017), Collected Essays on the Ancient Scripts and Early Chinese Culture, Beijing: Science Press, 2–72. 38 Feng, Shi (2018), Continuity of the Illustrious Culture: Astronomy, Thoughts and

Institutions in Ancient China, Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 46–78. 39 Although the main subsistence economy of the Peiligang, Baijia and Shuangdun cultures was primarily hunting and gathering food, but farming of rice, foxtail millet and proso millet and domestication of livestock were evident; moreover, the proportion of farming increased with the times. See Luo, Yunbing & Zhang, Juzhong (2008), “An re-examination the pig bones of the Jiahu Site of Wuyang County, Henan”, Archaeology, 1: 90–96; Zhang, Juzhong, Cheng Zhijie, & Lan, Wanli, etc. (2018), “Recent progress of archaeobotanical research on the Jiahu Site of Wuyang County, Henan”, Archaeology, 4: 100–110; Liu, Changjiang, Kong, Zhaochen & Lang, Shude (2004), “Discussion on the agricultural plant remains and human subsistence of the Dadiwan Site from the environmental perspective, 4: 26–30.

4

THE PEILIGANG ERA AND THE ORIGIN OF CHINESE …

59

4.3 The Peripheral Zone of “The Peiligang China” Let us now review the Kuahuqiao 跨湖桥文化 and Gaomiao 高庙文化 cultures in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, and the Xinglongwa culture 兴隆洼文化 in the West Liao River valley. These cultures, despite the lack of direct and firm evidence of communication or relation with the Peiligang culture, likewise exhibited the existence of rather developed and complex ideologies, knowledge systems and social forms. The Kuahuqiao culture, or the Kuahuqiao Neolithic Site 跨湖桥新石 器遗址 at Hangzhou, Zhejiang, lies on the south side of lower Yangtze River, which is about 8200–7000 BP. In the Kuahuaqiao Site, eight sets of engraved signs were found on the antler objects 鹿角器 and wooden calculating rods40 木算筹. These ideograms are basically the same as both of those on the bone rods 骨算筹 of the Qingdun Site 青墩遗址 of Hai’an, Jiangsu Province, at 6000 BP,41 and the numerical divinatory symbols 数字卦象 popular in the Shang and Zhou periods.42 These eight sets of signs therefore might have been none other than the primordial forms of the numerical divinatory symbols43 数字卦象符号.

40 The numerical divinatory symbols excavated in the Kuahuqiao Site are engraved on the wooden rods. Later in three burials of the Wangyin Site of Yanzhou, Shandong, similar shaped bone rods were found inside the tortoise shells, the number of bone rods being 7, 11 or 17, respectively. While these discoveries echo those of the tortoise shells filled with small gravels in the Jiahu Site, both the bone rods and the wooden rods could be confirmed as the calculating rods used in tortoise divination. See Zhejiang Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology & Museum of Xiaoshan (2004), The Kuahuaqiao Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2000), Excavation Report of the Wangyin Neolithic Site, Shandong, Beijing: Science Press. 41 Eight sets of numerical divinatory symbols were engraved on the antler objects and bone calculating rods (once identified as “hair stick” in the excavation report), including “3-5-3-3-6-4 (Hexagram 遁 or ‘Retiring’)”. See Nanjing Museum (1983), “The Qingdun Site of Haian, Jiangsu”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2: 147–190, 275– 282; Zhang, Zhenglang (1980), “A trial explanation of the divinatory symbols gua in Western Zhou bronze inscriptions”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 4: 403–415. 42 Zhang, Zhenglang (1980), “A trial explanation of the divinatory symbols gua in Western Zhou bronze inscriptions”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 4: 403–415. 43 Wang, Changfeng, Zhang, Junzhong & Jiang, Leping (2008), “A study on the engraved signs found in the Kuahuqiao Site of Zhejiang”, Southeast Culture, 1.

60

J. HAN

A new amazing discovery of divinatory symbols has been made recently in the Qiaotou Site 桥头 in Yiwu City, Zhejiang, which is close to the Kuahuqiao Site 跨湖桥遗址 but belongs to the earlier Shangshan culture 上山文化 at Pujiang County, Zhejiang Province. Some of the divinatory symbols unearthed in the Shangshan Site consist of sets of six of unbroken yang lines in rows or broken yin lines 阴阳爻卦画, and others are numerical divinatory symbols. These symbols were all painted on the earliest-known painted potteries dating back 9000–8500 BP.44 Since the Kuahuqiao Culture descended from the Shangshan culture,45 the divinatory symbols of both the Qiaotou and Kuahuaqiao sites certainly shared the similar divinatory traditions with that of the Jiahu tortoise shells, though with some subtle differences. The former recorded the forms of the divinatory symbols 卦象 whereas the latter left the divinatory result 卜辞; while the Kuahuqiao Site used calculating rods 算筹, the Jiahu Site used small gravels in the tortoise shells in the divination. In addition, rice agriculture accounted for a certain proportion of the subsistence of the Kuahuaqiao culture. The Gaomiao culture, or the Gaomiao Ruins 高庙遗址 at Hongjiang, Hunan Province, is located in the southwest of the Dongting Lake 洞庭 湖 along the middle Yangtze River. It dates back to about 7800–7000 BP. In this site, remains with critically important ritual complexes were discovered, which include a large-sized ritual ground of 1000 m2 and exquisite white ceramic ritual vessels. In the ritual ground, there are four large square-shaped postholes 柱洞, each side measuring one metre long, which, if restored, would supposedly constitute the four high pillars of a “bent-structured stepped building” 排架式梯状建筑 used as a temple. Apart from the postholes, dozens of sacrificial pits (including one pit for human sacrifice 人祭坑) and outbuildings around the temple were also discovered. The white ceramic vessels are covered by stamped elaborate designs of symbols and subjects, including the “sacred pillars” 梯 阙, and symbols of the sun 太阳纹, the octangular star 八角星纹, birds

44 Zhejiang Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2020), “The Neolithic Site of Qiaotou, Yiwu City, Zhejiang Province”, in National Cultural Heritage Administration of China (ed.), Major Archaeological Discoveries in China in 2019, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 23–27. 45 Han, Jianye (2010), “A study on the origin and the outward influence of the Kuahuaqiao culture and the middle Neolithic cultural communication between the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River”, Southeast Culture, 6: 62–66.

4

THE PEILIGANG ERA AND THE ORIGIN OF CHINESE …

61

鸟纹 and the beast face with fangs 獠牙兽面纹.46 The symbols of the “sacred pillars” might correspond to the main temple in the ritual ground. The excavators thought that since the motifs of the beast face with fangs usually appeared with flanking “wings” and are carved in between the “sacred pillars”, they might have been used to signify such an image of a celestial sacrificial ceremony 通天祭祀仪式 as an ascent to heaven with the aid of a “flying dragon” 飞龙 and two staircases. The motif of birds usually appeared together with motifs of the sun, the “dragon” and the octangular star, thus symbolizing feng phoenix 凤, the divine bird in Chinese culture. With regard to the octangular star, it used to be associated with the solar calendar and the cosmology of tian yuan di fang, “the round sky and square earth”.47 In this respect, the cosmological structure of the Gaomiao culture is similar to that of the Jiahu 贾湖文 化 and Shuangdun cultures, at least insofar as such beliefs as “the round sky and square earth” and ba fang jiu gong, “the eight cardinal directions and nine positions” are concerned. With no evidence of farming, the subsistence of the Gaomiao culture might have relied primarily on hunting and food gathering, which contrasted sharply with the premature religion, rites and cosmologies. The Xinglongwa culture 兴隆洼文和 at Aohan Banner, Inner Mongolia, dating about 8200–7500 BP, occupied the West Liao River valley and the areas on both the northern and southern sides of the Yan Mountain 燕山. Here, in the central area of the settlement in the Chahai Site 查海遗址, a 20-metre-long dragon-like stone pile and 10 “central burials” were found. While the former indicates the existence of the cult of dragon worship in the Xinglongwa culture, the latter shows strong associations with certain sacrificial ritual behaviours.48 At the Tachiyingzi Ruins 塔尺营子遗址 of the Xinglongwa Site, a pedant 石牌形器 carved

46 Hunan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2000), “A brief excavation report of the Gaomiao Site of Qianyang County, Hunan Province”, Cultural Relics, 4: 4–23; ibid. (2006), “The Gaomiao Neolithic Site, Hongjiang County, Hunan Province”, Archaeology, 7: 9–15, 99–100. 47 He, Gang (2013), The Prehistoric Remains in West Hunan and Chinese Ancient Histories and Legends, Changsha: Yuelu Publishing House. 48 Liaoning Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2012), The Excavation Report of the Chahai Neolithic Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

62

J. HAN

with the motif of a beast face with fangs49 was excavated. The “S” symbols flanking the beast face look like the figure of a dragon, which suggests the strong likelihood that this motif is linked to the same “flying dragon” as that in the Gaomiao culture. At the Baiyinchanghan Ruins 白音长汗遗址, a female figurine in stone 女性石雕 was found behind the hearth of House AF19, which implies the possibility of “worship of goddesses” 女神崇拜.50 The settlements of the Xionglongwa culture, such as Xinglongwa 兴隆洼聚落,51 Xinglonggou 兴隆沟聚落,52 Chahai 查海聚落 and Baiyinchanghan 白音长汗 聚落, were usually encircled by a moat. The houses inside the settlements were aligned in orderly rows, with some large ones sitting in the central or near the central place of the settlements. While this distribution represents early concentric 向心 and cohesive 凝聚 ideologies,53 it indicates a similar emphasis on social order as the Peiligang culture did. The finely manufactured jade artefacts are also proof of a certain degree of social differentiation in the aspect of specialization of production in the Xinglongwa culture. However, no traces can be found of such cultural achievements as divinatory symbols, script-like signs, cosmological structure and clan cemeteries,54 which distinguishes in a distinctive manner the Xinglongwa culture from the cultures along the Yellow and Yangtze

49 Liu, Yong (2019), “The stone figurine of 7500 BP at the Chahai Site of Fuxin County, Liaoning Province”, The Guangming Daily, 29 September. 50 Inner Mongolia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2004), The Excavation Report of the Baiyinchanghan Neolithic Site, Beijing: Science Press. 51 Inner Mongolian Archaeological Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1985), “A brief excavation report of the Xinglongwa Site in Aohan Banner, Inner Mongolia”, Archaeology, 10: 865–874, 961–962; ibid. (1997), “A brief report of the 1992 excavation of the Xinglongwa Site in Aohan Banner, Inner Mongolia”, Archaeology, 1: 1–26, 52, 97–101. 52 Inner Mongolian Archaeological Team 1 of the Institute of Archaeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2004), “The excavation of the Xinglonggou Settlement Site in Chifeng City, Inner Mongolia at 2002–2003”, Archaeology, 7: 3–8, 97–98. 53 Chen, Jiling & Chen, Shengqian (2012), “An art design analysis of the bucketshaped pot in the Xinglongwa culture”, Research of China’s Frontier Archaeology (Vol. 11), Beijing: Science Press, 313–327. 54 The orderly-arranged cemeteries are absent in the Xinglongwa culture. The excavated burials are predominately house burials associated with some special religious or ritual ideologies. See Yang, Hu & Liu, Guoxiang (1997), “Inquiry into the custom of house burials in the Xinglongwa culture and related questions”, Archaeology (1): 27–36.

4

THE PEILIGANG ERA AND THE ORIGIN OF CHINESE …

63

rivers. Yet where the Xionglongwa culture depended primarily on hunting and gathering, rainfed millet agriculture had existed.

4.4 The Characteristics of “The Peiligang China” The main zone of China in the Peiligang Era had exhibited more developed customs and knowledge systems, as well as more complex social form, all of which pushed the beginning of Chinese wenming (civilization) back to 8000 BP, which can be regarded as the first stage in the course of Chinese civilization. It is exactly at this time that the Peiligang culture in the Central Plains expanded outward with intense influence, enabling not only cultural integration between the Yellow River and Huai River reaches, but also communication between the former and the Yangtze River and the West Liao River valleys in such superstructure fields as religion, rites and cosmologies.55 This advance in integration and communication resulted in similarities between these regions, and served as an embryo of the “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” 早期中国 文化圈 or “Early China” 早期中国 in the sense of culture.56 After 6000 BP when the Miaodigou Era began, the earlier-established customs and knowledge systems further developed, and all these regions went through a process of universal social complexity. Therefore, different regions of China gradually ushered in the prototype of an early guojia or state 早期 国家, namely the second stage of the course of civilization, an era when the “Early China” in the cultural sense had formally taken shape.57 By the time of about 5000 BP, the Early Chinese civilization, composed

55 Li Xinwei created the model “Long-Distance Communication Network among the Upper Class in Chinese Prehistoric Society” to account for the social and cultural commonalities sprouting all over China after 3500 BCE. This model could also be applied to explain the spread of customs and knowledge systems during the Peiligang era. See Li, Xinwei (2015), “The formation of the long-distance communication network among the upper class in Chinese prehistoric society”, Cultural Relics, 3: 51–58. 56 Han, “Migration Influence”; Han, “The Northward Expanding”. 57 Zhang, Guangzhi (1989), “The Chinese Sphere of Interaction and the formation

of civilization”, in The Team of the Proceedings in Honour of Su Bingqi’s 55 Years Archaeological Work (ed.), Papers in Honour of Su Bingqi’s 55 Years Archaeological Work, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 6; Han, Jianye (2012), “The Miaodigou age and the early China”, Archaeology, 3: 59–69.

64

J. HAN

of different regional civilizations like Liangzhu 良渚文化, had exactly established itself. About 8000 BP, civilization also commenced its course in West Asia. Elements of civilization such as irrigated agriculture, sacrificial buildings, mace heads 权杖头, copper objects, seals, script-like symbols and clay counters 原始筹码 had appeared.58 Symbols of Western civilization such as worship of deities 神祇崇拜, icons of power and authority, the social division of labour, a writing system and commerce had been born. However, there had been clear distinctions between China and the West at the very beginning of civilization. In China, in the Peiligang Era 裴 李岗时代, the belief system did not only include the worship of deities, but emphasized particularly kinship, ethics, social orders, ancestral veneration and historical memories. The scripts, symbols and calculating rods were mainly related to divinatory and astronomical usage, but fell short of commercial application. These characteristics of civilization, together with numerical divinatory symbols 数卜, the use of symbols and numbers 象数, astronomical observation for perfecting the calendar, the cosmological structure of round sky and square earth, dragon and jade, etc., all gathered, blended and evolved on this land, only to become the bedrock of the Chinese civilization for ideas and ideologies of cosmology, religion, ethics, history and even politics in the first three dynasties (i.e. Xia, Shang and Zhou) and even after the Qin and Han empires.

58 Yang, Jianhua (2014), Mesopotamia: From Farming Villages to City States, Beijing: Science Press.

CHAPTER 5

The Migration Influence of the Peiligang Culture and the Rudiments of Early Chinese Cultural Sphere

The Early Chinese Cultural Sphere 早期中国文化圈 refers to the relative cultural unity formed by the intermingling of cultures in most parts of China in the pre-Qin period 先秦时期 (the Palaeolithic Age–221 BCE), with the Central Plains 中原 at its core. This concept shares similar meanings with a series of propositions such as Kwang-Chih Chang’s 张光直 “Chinese Interaction Sphere” 中国相互作用圈,1 Yan Wenming’s 严文明 “double-flowered cultural landscape or pattern 重瓣花朵式格局”2 and Su Bingqi’s 苏秉琦 “an ideologically consensual China共识的中国”.3 It is not certain whether the concept of “China” 中国 had existed before Yu 虞 and Xia 夏 (arguably the first two dynasties in the history of China), yet in most parts of China there had long been a widely shared concept of identity and a historical trend centred on the Central Plains.4 In fact, the concept of “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” had actually become the 1 Chang, Kwang-Chih (1989), “Early Chinese cultural sphere and the formation of civilization”, in Essays in Honour of Su Bingqi’s 55 Years of Archaeology, Beijing: Cultural Relics Publishing House, 6. 2 Yan, Wenming (1987), “The unity and diversity of Chinese prehistoric culture”,

Cultural Relics, 3. 3 Su, Bingqi (1999), A New Inquiry into the Origins of Chinese Civilization, Shanghai: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 161. 4 Zhao, Hui (2001), “The formation of the historical trend centered on the Central Plains”, Cultural Relics, 1; Han, J. (2004) “The Central Plains culture in the Neolithic Age and its historical status”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_5

65

66

J. HAN

geographical, cultural and political foundation upon which the Qin (221– 207 BCE) and Han (202 BCE–220 AD) empires had been established. In this sense, it is not unreasonable for us to call the “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” the cultural “Early China” 早期中国. This cultural sphere can be divided into two major stages at least from the Longshan period 龙山时 代 (2500–2000 BCE) onward, namely the guguo 古国 (literally “ancient tribal states”, roughly equivalent to “chiefdom”) stage and the fangguo 方国 (literally “regional states”, an advanced stage of the guguo) stage as proposed by Su Bingqi.5 As for the time of its formation, Kwang-Chih Chang believes the cultural Early China had come into being during the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化 (5000–3000 BCE) around 4000 BCE. This chapter attempts to argue the following points: firstly, the Early China Cultural Sphere could date back at least as early as around 6000 BCE and then began to take shape around 5400 BCE; secondly, the migratory influence of the Peiligang culture 裴李岗文化 in the Central Plains played a crucial role in the development of this sphere (see Fig. 5.1).

5.1

The Peiligang Culture

The Peiligang culture was discovered in 1977 at the Peiligang Site 裴李岗遗址6 in Xinzheng, Henan Province, with other important sites distributed in most parts of Henan now, such as Jiahu 贾湖遗址 in Wuyang, Shuiquan 水泉遗址 in Jiaxian County,7 Tanghu 唐户遗址 and Shawoli 沙窝李遗址 in Xinzheng,8 Egou Beigang 莪沟北岗遗址 in

5 Su, Bingqi (1994), “National origin and national cultural tradition”, in The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, the Chinese People—An Archaeological Search for Roots, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 132–134. 6 Kaifeng Municipal Cultural Relics Management Committee & Xinzheng County Cultural Relics Management Committee. (1978) “The Peiligang Neolithic Site in Xinzheng, Henan”, Archaeology, 2; Henan Team I of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1984), “Report of the 1979 excavation of the Peiligang Site”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1. 7 Henan Team of the Institute of Archaeology in the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1995), “The Peiligang cultural site in Shuiquan, Jiaxian County, Henan”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1. 8 Henan Team of the Institute of Archaeology in the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1983), “The Shawoli Neolithic Site in Xinzheng, Henan”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 12.

5

THE MIGRATION INFLUENCE OF THE PEILIGANG …

67

Fig. 5.1 Rudiments of the Early Chinese Cultural Sphere (5400–5000 BCE)

Mixian County,9 Shigu 石固遗址 in Changge,10 Wayaozui 瓦窑嘴遗址 in Gongyi11 and Zhaigen 寨根遗址 in Mengjin.12 Among these cites, the remains of the Jiahu Lake in Wuyang, which has attracted much attention, are named “the Jiahu culture” 贾湖文化 by the excavators. Yet in fact it bears a general resemblance to the previously discovered Peiligang

9 Henan Provincial Museum & Mixian County Culture Center (1981), “The Egou Beigang Neolithic Site in Mixian County, Henan”, Archaeological Collectanea, 1: 1–26. 10 Henan Institute of Cultural Relics (1987), “Excavation report of the Shigu Site in Changge County”, Huaxia Archaeology, 1. 11 Gongyi City Cultural Relics Administration (1996), “Brief report on the trial excavation of the Wayaozui Neolithic Site in Gongyi, Henan”, Archaeology, 7; Zhengzhou Municipal Cultural Relics Team & Gongyi City Cultural Relics Administration (1999), “The excavation of the Wayaozui Neolithic Site in Gongyi City, Henan”, Archaeology, 11. 12 Henan Provincial Cultural Relics Bureau (2006) An Archaeological Report on the Xiaolangdi Reservoir of the Yellow River (II), Zhengzhou: Zhongzhou Guji Press, 157– 211.

68

J. HAN

cultural remains, so it might be more appropriate to refer to it as “the Jiahu type 贾湖类型 of the Peiligang culture”.13 The Jiahu Site was divided into three phases and nine sections, and considering the tree-ring-based 14C calibration data (14C 树轮校正), its absolute date is presumed to be between 7000 and 5800 BCE. Under a meticulous comparison, the most important division among these sections can be found in between Phases Four and Five: before which, the ceramic vessels such as zhikou 直口 (straight-mouthed), jiaoba 角把 (horn-shaped handles), guan 罐jars, fangkou 方口 (square-mouthed) pen 盆 basins and shenfu 深腹 (deep-bellied) pen basins were common; while after which, zheyan 折沿 (folded rim), shenfu (deep-bellied) guan jars, basin-shaped or jar-shaped ding 鼎 tripod cauldrons, huawen 划纹 (scratch-patterned) pen basins, sanzu 三足 (three-legged) bo 钵 flat-based bowls and quanzu 圈 足 (round-footed) bowls were common. Besides, the hu 壶 jugs that were popular before and after also showed significant morphological changes, as the boundary between the neck and belly, which had not been distinctive before, but gradually became obvious afterwards. In accordance with this distinction, the Jiahu Remains should be divided into two phases to better reflect its development characteristics.14 As such, the lower limit of the absolute date of the Jiahu culture should also be adjusted to about 5500 BCE, as the dating range of H55 in Section Eight is tested to be 5750–5520 BCE. Apart from the Jiahu culture, there have appeared several periodization proposals for the remains of the other Peiligang cultures, yet the overall conclusion is similar to that of the late Jiahu Era or even later, with tree-ring calibration dates basically between 6200 and 5400 BCE.15 In this way, the Peiligang culture as a whole can be divided into two major development stages, which are roughly bound by 6200 BCE. The pottery of the Peiligang culture, generally simple and less patterned, consists of a large number of hu jugs but no fu 釜 cauldrons. This characteristic shows that the Peiligang culture not only lacked connection with the early Neolithic remains represented by the shengwen 绳纹 (rope-patterned) fu cauldrons in South China, but also differed distinctly from the pingdi 13 Zhang, Juzhong (1989) “On the characteristics of the Jiahu type and its relationship with its surrounding cultures”, Cultural Relics, 1. 14 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology (1999), The Jiahu Lake in Wuyang, Henan, Beijing: Science Press, 465–519. 15 Ibid., 520–531.

5

THE MIGRATION INFLUENCE OF THE PEILIGANG …

69

平底 (flat-bottomed) guan jar remains of the early Neolithic period in North China. Therefore, the pottery here must have had its own earlier cultural sources. The pottery of the Peiligang culture was neatly shaped, evenly fired and rich in ware types. The hu jugs, as water or wine vessels, displayed various shapes and serve refined functions. The ding tripod cauldrons, as the most important cooking vessels in China, were also created. Other tools, such as stone spades 石铲 and serrated stone sickles 锯齿形石镰, were well-sharpened. And the four-feet stone quern 石磨盘 had come into being. Overall, the tool development was significantly more advanced than that of the surrounding cultures. The settlements of the Peiligang culture were slightly differentiated in size, with the small ones being about a few thousand square metres, the larger ones like those in the Jiahu Site in Wuyang reaching 50,000 m2 and those in the Tanghu Site in Xinzheng even 300,000 m2 . The burial artefacts in the Jiahu Site consist of many exquisitely made bone arrowheads 骨镞, bone darts 骨镖, bone flutes 骨笛, bone plates 骨板, fork-shaped bone wares 骨叉形器 and turquoise jewellery 绿松石 饰品. There also appeared the custom to put in musk deer teeth 獐牙, tortoise shells 龟甲 and pig mandibles 猪下颌骨 as burial artefacts. As for the tortoise shells, some of them contained small stone pieces or bone needles 骨针, while others had carved symbols on them. The burial articles are also differentiated in number, with small-sized graves having only one to half a dozen pieces, while larger graves tens of them. There is a clear development in terms of the number of burial articles from the early phase to the late phase of the Peiligang culture. In the early phase, the maximum number of burial articles per grave is no more than 20 pieces, but in the later phase, the largest tombs, i.e. M282 and M277, have more than 60 burial articles. M282, in particular, with 2.8 metres in length and 1.8 in width, is the most spacious of all, and its burial articles include a seven-hole bone flute 七孔骨笛 which can form a seven tone scale 七声音阶, and tortoise shells with stones. On closer analysis, we can assume that although the majority of the burial articles from these larger tombs are similar to those of ordinary graves in terms of type and quality, some of the burials come with tortoise shells with stones in them, bone flutes, bone plates, fork-shaped bone wares, etc. These special grave articles seem to have nothing to do with military power or rituals, nor are they likely to be related to social polarization. In fact, they are associated with “wuxi” 巫觋, the ancient

70

J. HAN

Chinese shamans or sorcerers who were proficient in divination (by turtle shells, animal bones and yarrow stalks), music and medicine 卜筮乐医兼 通, thus having a strong religious implication. It can thus be inferred that the owners of the larger tombs were most likely those who had merely enjoyed high religious esteem. It thus follows that the Jiahu settlement with its strong religious overtones could have been the religious and spiritual centre of the Peiligang culture. The Peiligang culture settlement at the Tanghu Remains is the most important settlement site in the Zhengzhou area. Here, about 60 semicave houses 半地穴式房屋 have been found, which scattered around in subdivisional groupings. Since in these large settlements a more complex superstructure of belief systems had been established on a rather advanced material culture, it had provided favourable conditions for the Peiligang culture to exert a greater influence on the outside world.

5.2

The Baijia Culture

While the Peiligang culture had experienced only limited influence from surrounding cultures, its own impact on others was remarkable, especially in its later stage. Upon entering its late period at around 6200 BCE, the Peiligang culture exercised a very obvious leverage and penetration westward to the Wei River Basin 渭河流域 and in the upper reaches of the Han River 汉水 and also northward to the areas of southern Hebei and northern Henan provinces. The Baijia culture 白家文化, which was previously known as the Laoguantai culture 老官台文化, was located in the upper reaches of the Wei River and the Han River, and is represented by the remains of both the Ruins of the Baijia Village 白家村遗存 in Lintong, Shaanxi Province, and Phase I of the Dadiwan Remains 大地湾遗存 in Qin’an, Gansu Province.16 It is also found scattering in the Wei River Basin at Xishanping 西山坪 and Shizhao 师赵村 villages17 in Tianshui, Gansu 16 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1994), The Baijiacun Village Site in Lintong, Xi’an, Chengdu: Bashu Press; Gansu Provincial Museum, et al. (1981), “The early Neolithic remains of the Dadiwan Site in Qin’an, Gansu Province”, Cultural Relics, 4; Gansu Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2006), Excavation Report on the Neolithic Site of the Dadiwan in Qin’an County, Gansu, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 17 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1999), The Shizhaocun Site and Xishanping Site, Beijing: China Encyclopaedia Press.

5

THE MIGRATION INFLUENCE OF THE PEILIGANG …

71

Province; in Beishouling 北首岭18 and Guantaoyuan 关桃园19 in Baoji, in Lingkou 零口20 in Lintong District, Xi’an, and Beiliu 北刘21 in Weinan City, as well as in the upper reaches of the Han River at Lijiacun 李家村 and Hejiawan 何家湾 in Xixiang County, Ruanjiaba 阮家坝 in Hanyin County, Majiaying 马家营 and Baimashi 白马石22 in Ziyang County, Longgangsi 龙岗寺 Temple23 in Nanzheng District and Zijing 紫荆24 in Shangxian County, Shaanxi Province. The Baijia culture can be clearly divided into the early and late periods. The early period is represented by the remains of the Baijiacun, the Dadiwan Phase I, the Xishanping Phase I, the early stage of the Beiliu and the Zijing Phase I. During this period, the three-legged guan 三足 罐 jars are mostly straight-bellied and tube-shaped 直腹筒形. The second period, represented by the Xishanping Phrase II, the Shizhaocun Village Phase I, had produced, apart from three-legged guan jars with arced belly 弧腹, a new type of flat-bottomed clay bo 平底钵 bowls and flatbottomed rope-patterned guan 平底绳纹罐 jars with wide flared mouth 侈口 and bulging belly 鼓腹. According to the published tree-ring calibration dating data of the Dadiwan in Qin’an County, the Baijiacun Village in Lintong District (Xi’an), the Lijiacun Village in Xixiang County and the Beiliu Site in Weinan City, the absolute age of the Baijia culture is 18 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (ed.) (1983), The Beishouling Site of Baoji, Shaanxi, Beijing: Wenwu Press. Yan Wenming distinguished the 78H32 remains from the general Banpo type of the Yangshao culture, see Yan Wenming (1989), “Analysis of the prehistoric remains in the Beishouling Site”, A Study of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 87–109. 19 Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology & Baoji Municipal Archaeological Team. (2006), “Excavation brief of the Guantaoyuan Site in Baoji City, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 3. 20 Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology (2004), The Lingkoucun Village in Lintong District, Xi’an, Xi’an: Sanqin Press, 26–39. 21 The Xi’an Banpo Museum, et al. (1982) “Briefing on the survey and trial excavation of the early Beiliu Neolithic Site in Weinan City, Shaanxi”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 4. 22 Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology, et al. (1994), Collection of Archaeological

Reports in Southern Shaanxi Province, Xi’an: Sanqin Press. 23 Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology (1990), Excavation Report on the Neolithic Site of the Longgangsi Temple, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 24 Shangxian County Library & Xi’an Banpo Museum, et al. (1981), “Briefing on the excavation of the Zijing Site in Shangxian County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 3.

72

J. HAN

between 5900 and 5000 BCE, which is contemporary with the late Peiligang culture.25 Most of the Baijia cultural sites are only a few thousand square metres in size, with the larger ones ranging between 11,000 and 20,000 m2 . While the majority of the graves in this culture do not have any burial articles, a small number of them are found with a couple of ordinary daily objects, with only a few having up to six pieces. From this fact, it is safe to conclude that the degree of social evolution and productivity of the Baijia culture was obviously lower than that of the Peiligang culture. Not only can the archetypes of ceramic vessels during the early Baijia culture be found in the Peiligang culture, including the bo bowls featuring a round base 圜底钵, three legs 三足钵 and round feet 圈足 钵, and the deep-bullied guan jars 深腹罐 (see Fig. 5.2); there also exists obvious relationship between the serrated clam scythe 锯齿形蚌镰 and bone scythe 骨镰 of the Baijia culture and the stone scythe of the Peiligang culture. Besides, both cultures have simple semi-crypt huts 半地穴 式窝棚 as living rooms, feature extended supine burials 仰身直肢葬 and joint burial tombs, and have urn burials 瓮棺葬. What is more interesting is that the Baijia culture also displays the custom of burying musk deer teeth and pig mandibles. For example, the owner of tomb M12 in the Baijiacun Site holds a musk deer tusk in his hand, and in tomb M15 and tomb M208 in the Dadiwan Site, pig mandibles are found on the chest of the tomb owners. Whereas so many commonalities indicate that the two cultures were closely related, there had been no sign of earlier agriculture in the Wei River Basin and in the upper reaches of the Hanshui River, and even the initial age of the Baijia culture is about 1000 years later than that of the Peiligang culture. Given this consideration, it is only plausible to speculate that the Baijia culture may have been the result of the westward expansion of the Peiligang culture and its integration in the indigenous culture. Of course, there are considerable differences between the two cultures, at least in terms of ceramic vessels. For example, the Baijia culture featured the inter-locking or inter-crossing rope pattern 交错绳纹 with 25 The data were all corrected using the high-precision tree-wheel calibration table confirmed by the 1988 International 14C Conference. See the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (ed.) (1991), Carbon 14 Dating Data Set in Chinese Archaeology (1965–1991), Beijing: Wenwu Press.

5

THE MIGRATION INFLUENCE OF THE PEILIGANG …

73

Fig. 5.2 Comparison of ceramic vessels of the Baijia and Peiligang cultures sites 1–7: from the Baijia Site 白家 in Lintong District (T309➂:4, T204H25:1, T116H4:2, T117➂:4, T121➂:8, T305➂:4, T308H15:5). 8–14. from the Shuiquan Site 水泉 in Jiaxian County (M96:5, M27:2, M2:2, M20:2, M59:4, M66:2, M33:2) Pottery vessels: 1 and 8: deep-bellied guan jars 深腹罐; 2, 6, 9 and 13: round-bottomed bo bowls 圜底钵; 3, 5, 7, 11, 12 and 14: three-legged bo bowls 三足钵; 4 and 10: round-footed bo bowls 圈足钵

brownish-red bands, dots and coloured lines, and also guan jars with small mouths, high collars and bulging bellies 小口高领鼓腹罐, which were all different from the Peiligang culture. It is also worthwhile to note that, whereas the characteristics of the Baijia potteries, such as the rope pattern, the red and brown colouring, the embossing of the outer rim of the mouth 口沿外压光, and the embossed lace on the lip 唇面 压印花边, all differed from the plain style of the Peiligang potteries, but instead looked very much similar to those of Pengtoushan 彭头山potteries in Xiajiang County and the Dongting Lake District, Hunan Province.

74

J. HAN

Besides, the same might also be true of the few flexed burials 屈肢葬26 found in the Baijia Site. If it could be inferred that, apart from the Peiligang culture, another important source of the Baijia culture was no other than the Pengtoushan culture, it follows that the Hanshui River Basin may have been the channel through which the exchange between the two cultures had taken place.

5.3

The Cishan Culture

The Cishan culture 磁山文化, which lied in northern Henan and southern Hebei, is represented by the Cishan Site 磁山遗址 in Wu’an, Hebei Province,27 but can also be found in nearby sites such as Niuwapu 牛洼堡 and Xiwannian 西万年28 in the Ming River Basin 洺河流域, as well as in the Huawo Site 花窝遗址in Qixian County, Henan Province.29 Among them, the remains of the Cishan culture have been divided by excavators into the “first cultural layer” 第一文化层 and the “second cultural layer” 第二文化层, which are the early and late phases, respectively. According to the tree-ring calibration data of the Cishan and Huawo sites, the absolute age of the Cishan culture is between 6000 and 5600 BCE. The pottery of the Cishan culture can be divided into Type A and Type B. The former carried its own unique feature: being mostly sand-covered rope-patterned 夹砂绳纹 yu water pots 盂, supporting feet 支脚, etc.; and the later includes ceramic vessels popular in the Peiligang culture, such as patternless three-legged bo bowls, round-bottomed bo bowls, hu jugs and deep-bellied guan jias. According to the excavation report, there were 99 restored practical pottery containers of the early period of the Cishan culture, most of which were Type A, and only 7% (7 pieces) were 26 Hubei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2001), The Chengbeixi Site in Yidu County, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Hunan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2006), The Pengtoushan and Shibadang Sites, Beijing: Science Press. 27 Hebei Provincial Cultural Relics Management Office & Handan City Cultural Relics Preservation Office (1981), “The Cishan Site in Wu’an County, Hebei Province”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3. 28 Hebei Provincial Cultural Relics Management Office & Handan Cultural Relics Preservation Office, et al. (1984), “Trial excavation of several sites in the Minghe River Basin in Wu’an County, Hebei Province”, Archaeology, 1. 29 Anyang Cultural Relics Preservation Committee (1981), “Trial excavation of the Huawo Site in Qixian County, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 3.

5

THE MIGRATION INFLUENCE OF THE PEILIGANG …

75

Type B. As for the late period, there were 269 restored practical pottery containers, of which Type B accounted for 27% (73 pieces) (see Fig. 5.3). It can be seen that the late Peiligang culture had not only left an obvious mark on the Cishan culture, but strengthened it gradually. Nevertheless, unlike the Baijia culture, the Type A pottery of the Cishan culture had always remained in the dominant position. For example, even its rectangular crypt 长方形窖穴 and grave goods which might have been used for rituals exhibited rich and unique local characteristics. This shows that the influence from the Peiligang culture had not fundamentally changed the indigenous attributes of the local culture.

Fig. 5.3 Grouping of ceramic vessels of the late Cishan Culture in Wu’an County 1–3. yu water pot 盂 (T87➁:29, T96➁:38, T8➁:10). 4. round-footed guan jar 圈足罐 (T104➁:4). 5. tube-shaped guan jar 筒形罐 (T96➁:25). 6. supporting foot 支脚 (H453:7). 7 and10. hu jugs 壶 (T87➁:25, T96➁:35). 8. deep-bellied guan jar 深腹罐 (T106➁:8). 9. flat-bottomed bo bowls 平底钵 (H77:3). 11 and 12. three-legged bo bowls 三足钵 (T46➁:30, T87➁:32).

76

J. HAN

Looking at the broader picture, remains of the Cishan culture can also be found in the Yishui River Basin 易水流域 in central Hebei Province, such as Phase I of both the Beifudi Site 北福地遗存 in Yixian County and the Shangpo Site 上坡遗存 in Rongcheng County.30 However, in these sites, not only Type A potteries were found, but also pottery masks and jue penannular jade rings 玉玦, which represent a special religious custom, expressed in a decorative style which was diametrically different from those of the Peiligang culture. It can be concluded from these observations that the northward influence of the Peiligang culture had basically ended in northern Henan and southern Hebei provinces.

5.4

The Beixin Culture

After 5400 BCE, the migration and influence of the Peiligang culture became rather obscure. What is known with some certainty is its presence in some areas in Gongyi and Mengjin counties in northern Henan Province. From the remains unearthed in the Wayaozui Site in Gongyi and the Zhaigen Site in Mengjin County, it can be estimated that the lower limit of the absolute date of these sites may be later than the Peiligang period. For instance, the typical features such as black potteries and vertical stripes excavated from these sites are not seen in the earlier Peiligang culture. Furthermore, since the characteristics of certain bowls with slightly folded mouths looked similar to those found in the early the Yangshao culture, the lower limit of the date of these bowls should be close to that of the Yangshao culture, i.e. 3000 BCE. In addition, in the remains of the earliest stage of the Yangshao culture at the Dazhangzhuang Site 大张庄遗址 in Fangcheng County,31 several elements are found to be similar to those of the Peiligang culture, such as round-footed pottery bowls with vertical stripes 竖条纹圈足碗, pseudoround-footed bowls 假圈足碗, double-lugged pots 双耳壶 and serrated stone scythes. This indicates that there may well have been some direct connection between the Peiligang culture and the local Yangshao culture. However, it is undeniable that the Peiligang culture had since entered a phase of decline. It so happened that at this time or a little later, features 30 Hebei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics (2007), The Beifudi Prehistoric Sites in the Yishui Basin, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 31 Nanyang Cultural Relics Team, et al. (1983), “The Dazhangzhuang Neolithic Site in Fangcheng County, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 5.

5

THE MIGRATION INFLUENCE OF THE PEILIGANG …

77

of the Peiligang culture were more often seen in the Haidai (the Bohai Sea-Mount Tai) region 海岱地区, Shandong Province. The original Houli culture 后李文化, which was distributed in the Haidai region at the same time as the Peiligang culture, was transformed into the Beixin culture 北辛文化 in 5400 BCE or later. Its representative sites abounded in Shandong Province, including the Beixin 32 in Tengzhou County, the Donggubai 东贾柏33 in Wenshang County and Phase I of the Dawenkou 大汶口34 in Tai’an City. The ceramic vessels of the Houli culture, represented by the round-bottomed fu cauldrons with straight belly and thickened lip 叠唇直腹圜底釜, were obviously different from those of the Peiligang culture. Yet the Beixin culture was heavily influenced by the Peiligang culture, as could be seen from such a group of ceramic vessels such as the double-lugged flat-bottomed hu jugs 双 耳平底壶, three-legged hu jugs 三足壶, three-legged bo bowls 三足钵 and bo bowls with either a round or flat bottom 圜底钵/平底钵, all of which bore rich Peiligang features. It is even highly probable that the pot-shaped ding tripod cauldrons 釜形鼎 of the Beixin culture had been influenced by the Peiligang culture. Luan Fengshi 栾丰实 thus pointed out in unequivocal terms, “The Peiligang culture is one of the main sources of the Beixin culture in the Wensi (i.e. the Wen River and the Si River) reaches 汶泗流域”.35 Not only do almost all the Beixin cultural relics contain more or less the Peiligang elements, but even the relics in the Baishi type 白石类型 of the Shandong Peninsula are no exception.36 Therefore, it can be said that it was probably the eastward migration of part of the population of the Peiligang culture that had contributed to the transformation of the Houli culture into the Beixin culture. As a corollary, it is reasonable to assume this accounts for the fact that the elements 32 Shandong Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, et al. (1984), “Excavation brief of the Beixin Neolithic Site in Tengxian County, Shandong Province”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2. 33 Shandong Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1993), “Brief report of the excavation of the Neolithic Site of Donggubai Site in Wenshang County, Shandong Province”, Archaeology, 6. 34 Shandong Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (1997), The Dawenkou Sequel—The Second and Third Excavation Reports, Beijing: Science Press. 35 Luan, Fengshi (1998), “Study on the Beixin culture”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3. 36 Yantai City Cultural Relics Management Committee (1992), “Brief report of the

excavation of the Baishi Village Neolithic Site in Yantai, Shandong Province”, Archaeology, 7.

78

J. HAN

of the Peiligang culture were commonly seen in the relics of the nearby northern Huai River 淮河 region, such as Phase I of the Shishanzi Site 石子山遗存 in Suixi County, Anhui Province.37 After the Wensi Basin in south-central Shandong and North Jiangsu provinces stepped into the early period of the Dawenkou culture 大汶口文 化, the custom of burial with tortoise shells and musk deer teeth became common practice. This custom naturally gives rise to the association of the Dawenkou culture with the Jiahu type of the earlier Peiligang culture.38 Moreover, such a connection was also considered between the two populations in terms of their strong biotypologic resemblance. However, the early Dawenkou culture in the Wensi Basin was mainly formed on the basis of the Beixin culture, with strong northward influence from the Longqiuzhuang culture 龙虬庄文化 at Gaoyou City, Jiangsu Province. Even up to now, the custom of burying tortoise shells and musk deer teeth has not been found in the tombs of either the Longqiuzhuang culture or the Beixin culture. Therefore, there must be other ways whereby such customs of the Jiahu type had linked themselves with the early Dawenkou culture.

5.5

A Few Concluding Remarks

In its heyday, the Peiligang culture had exerted its influence and linked the Wei River 渭河 Basin, the upper reaches of the Han River closely with the north of the middle reaches of the Yellow River. In its decline, the Peiligang culture had migrated eastward, permeating its cultural elements deeply into the culture of the lower reaches of the Yellow River and the northern Huai River 淮河. It can be seen that it is precisely the enormous impact of the Peiligang culture which was favourably situated in the core of the Central Plains that had enabled the close integration of the cultures of the Yellow River Basin, thus forming the Neolithic “Yellow River Basin Cultural Area” 黄河流域文化区 in the ninth millennium BCE. It is the pivotal role of the Peiligang culture that had helped the cultures of the lower reaches of the Yellow River, the upper reaches of the Han River, 37 Anhui Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (1992), “The Shishanzi Neolithic Site in Suixi County, Anhui Province”, Archaeology, 3. 38 Luan, F. (1998) “Study on Beixin culture”, Journal of Archaeology, 3; Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology (1999), Jiahu Lake in Wuyang, Beijing: Science Press, 539–541.

5

THE MIGRATION INFLUENCE OF THE PEILIGANG …

79

the northern Huai River 淮河 and even those of the middle reaches of the Yangtze River to communicate frequently with those of the Central Plains, which in turn had given birth to the “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere”. Moreover, it is also the Peiligang culture that had laid a foundation which had been rather common to the cultures of the Yellow River Basin and the Yangtze River Basin. This foundation, entailing a certain degree of shared identity and mutual understanding between different populations, had helped to promote communication among them and played a crucial role in the subsequent development of the culture of the Central Plains. (This section was originally published in Cultural Relics of Central China, 2009, 2.)

CHAPTER 6

Clan Burial and Ancestral Veneration of the Peiligang Era

6.1

Introduction

The term “zu zang ” 族葬 (clan burial) comes from The Rites of Zhou《 周礼》 . According to the essay titled “mu da fu” 墓大夫 in the chapter Offices of Spring 春官 of The Rites of Zhou, the official post mu da fu (i.e. the grave or tomb overseer) “is in charge of the affairs related to cemetery in his kingdom and maps it out”. “He makes sure the deceased are buried according to their clans belonging or origin, and reinforces the relevant prohibitions. He is also responsible for instructing people to arrange burial positions according to seniority of the deceased in the clan, regulating the size of the graves, so as to ensure that each clan should have its own private burial area. Where there is contention over the cemetery, he judges and settles the disputes” 《周礼·春官·墓大夫 ( 》 : “掌凡邦墓之地域, 为之图。 令国民族葬, 而掌其禁令; 正其位, 掌其度 数, 使皆有私地域。 凡争墓地者, 听其狱讼。”). In short, the duty of the grave overseers in the Zhou Dynasty was to manage the bang mu 邦墓 (common graves or cemetery) of the ordinary people 国民, so that each of the clan members had a private area or a separate cemetery to practice orderly “clan burial” (zu zang ). According to the essay “Zhong ren” 冢人 in the same chapter (i.e. Offices of Spring ) of The Rites of Zhou, the graves of nobles were called “gong mu” 公墓 (public graves) and were managed by the “zhong ren”, i.e. officials who managed and planned the noble graves and graveyards. The difference between “bang mu” and “gong mu” mainly lay in the class distinction of the buried. In essence, both © China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_6

81

82

J. HAN

were used for the deceased of the same clan based on the paternal line in the same cemetery. Therefore, they can be regarded as “clan burial” (zu zang ) in a broad sense. There was a clear system of clan burial during the Zhou Dynasty. As an important part of the rites of Zhou, clan burial was also one of the most crucial customs for the Zhou people. According to the essay “Si tu” 司徒 in the chapter of Offices of Earth 地官 in The Rites of Zhou, si tu (director of the masses) was “responsible for making the people live in peace with six traditional customs”, and another custom “was zu fen mu 族坟墓 (i.e. to distribute the burial ground according to the clans)” 《周礼·地官·司徒》“以本俗六安万民……二曰族坟墓”). ( Here, zu fen mu means zu zang as well. Archaeological findings have confirmed that clan burial was a common custom in the Zhou Dynasty and also in the Shang Dynasty.1 Going further back, from the Erlitou 二里头时代 and Longshan 龙山时代 periods to the Yangshao 仰韶文化 culture period, clan burial had been popularly practised in most parts of the country. However, the origin of the clan burial practice can actually be traced back to the Peiligang Era 裴李岗时代 around 6000 BCE,2 which is a reflection of the consolidation of the concept of ancestor veneration. This section thus sets out to discuss the clan burial and ancestral veneration of the Peiligang Era.

1 Anyang Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1979), “Report on the excavation of the graves in the western area of Yin Ruins from 1969 to 1977”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1; Yang, Xizhang (1983), “The cemetery system of the Shang Dynasty”, Archaeology, 10. 2 The “Peiligang Era” in this paper refers to an era in which the culture of most regions of China was related to the Peiligang culture in some way. The absolute age of this era is between 6200 and 5000 BCE. The formation of the Peiligang Era can be attributed to the expansion of the middle and late Peiligang culture in the Central Plains. See Han Jianye (2009), “The migration influence of the Peiligang culture and the rudiments of Early Chines Cultural Circle”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. Luan Fengshi was the first scholar to use the concept of “the Peiligang Era” to refer to the period in which the entire Peiligang culture had lasted. Chen Minghui has also discussed this issue. Their opinions on “the Peiligang Era” are slightly different from the one held in this article. See Luan Fengshi (1994), “On the relationship between the East and the Central Plains during the Yangshao period”, Archaeology, 4; Chen, Minghui (2018), “On the Peiligang cultural system and the cultural pattern of China’s Peiligang Era”, Collections of Papers on the Shangshan Culture, Beijing: Zhongguo Wenshi Press, 136–200.

6

6.2

CLAN BURIAL AND ANCESTRAL VENERATION …

83

Zuzang in the Peiligang Era

The earliest zu zang or clan burials in a broad sense appeared in the Yellow River and Huai River 淮河 basins in the middle of the Neolithic Age. Between 6200 and 5000 BCE, public cemeteries which displayed a certain pattern had begun to appear in the Peiligang culture 裴李岗 文化, Baijia culture 白家文化 and Houli culture 后李文化. The earliest and most numerous public cemeteries were found in the middle and late stages of the Peiligang culture in the middle reaches of the Yellow River and the Huai River Basin. In Henan Province, many public cemeteries which pertained to the Peiligang culture had been discovered, including sites such as Peiligang3 新郑 and Shawoli4 沙窝李 in Xinzheng, E’gou 莪沟 in Xinmi5 新密, Shigu 石固 in Changge6 长葛, Shuiquan 水泉 in Jiaxian7 郏县 and Jiahu 贾 湖 in Wuyang8 舞阳. Take the Jiahu Site 贾湖遗址 as example. After several excavations, more than 500 burials have been found there. These burials exhibit not only relatively well-preserved human bones, but also the longest chronological continuation which can be divided into three phases. Of these phases, while the early burials and dwellings were not distinctly separated, there were five or six relatively independent public

3 Team I (Henan), Archaeological Institute of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1984), “The excavation report of the Peiligang site in 1979,” Journal of Archaeology, 1. 4 Ibid. (1983), “The Shawoli Neolithic Site in Xinzheng County, Henan Province,” Journal of Archaeology, 12. 5 Henan Museum and Mixian County Culture Center (1981), “The Mixian Neolithic

Egoubeigang Site in Mixian County, Henan Province”, Collection of Archaeology, Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 1, 1–26. 6 Henan Institute of Cultural Relics (1987), “Excavation report of the Shigu Site in Changge”, Chinese Archaeology, 1. 7 Team I (Henan), Archaeological Institute of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1995), “The Peiligang Culture Site in Shuiquan, Jiaxian County, Henan Province,” Journal of Archaeology, 1. 8 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology (1999), The Jiahu Lake in Wuyang, Beijing: Science Press. Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology, Department of History of Science and Technology and Archaeology, University of Science and Technology of China (2015), The Jiahu Lake in Wuyang II, Beijing: Science Press.

84

J. HAN

cemeteries in the middle and late phases.9 This observation applies to the public cemeteries of other sites in general. A meticulous comparison of the burials in the middle and late periods of the Peiligang culture can reach the following understanding: Firstly, cemeteries designated especially for people of the same clan had existed. The burial area was located in the vicinity of residential areas, such as ash pits and houses. These cemeteries should bear testimony to the phenomenon of “Living and burying together in clans” 聚族而居, 聚 族而葬, which indicates the traditional emphasis on the kinship in life and death between people who were of the same clan and had been related by blood.10 However, the residential areas and burial areas were separated in planar space, which may be a reflection of the rational concept that “the living and the dead are different” 生死有别: living people probably did not like to be disturbed by the ghosts of the dead. Secondly, the same cemetery was either divided into groups, or in rows and columns, showing a certain spatial order. This special distinction might reflect the distance and differences between people of the same clan in terms of affinity and seniority. For example, the 114 burials in the Peiligang Site can be clearly seen in division into the eastern and western zones. With regard to the eastern zone, it was even further separated into two groups, with each group of burials arranged in rows and columns and some groups centred on a larger earlier burial—possibly a burial for an important ancestor. Upon further analysis, it can be estimated that the Peiligang Cemetery had continued for more than 100 years in total, and that the usual resident population represented by each group of the burials was around 10 people (equivalent to the size of a small family), while the usual resident population represented by the whole cemetery was around 30 people at the most (equivalent to a small clan11 ). The same is true of the 120 burials in the Shuiquan 水泉墓地 Cemetery

9 The early, middle and late stages of the Jiahu Site are the representatives of the early, middle and late stages of the entire Peiligang culture. Han, J. (2015), Early China—The Formation and Development of Early Chinese Cultural Sphere, Shanghai: Shanghai Classics Publishing House, 31–45. 10 According to Zheng Xuan’s annotation of “zufeimu” in “Situ (Director of the Masses)” in “Offices of Earth”, The Rites of Zhou, “People in the same clan belong together. They should be close to each other in life and after death.” 11 Dai, Xiangming (1996), “A new exploration of the Peiligang Cemetery”, Huaxia Archaeology, 3.

6

CLAN BURIAL AND ANCESTRAL VENERATION …

85

in Jiaxian County. These graves were also divided into the eastern and western zones, and the eastern zone into two groups. But there is a slight difference in the arrangement between this cemetery and that of the Peiligang Cemetery: graves in the Shuiquan Cemetery looked more orderly organized, each group consisting of about a dozen rows with about half a dozen columns in each row. Despite this subtle nuance, the usual or constant population and social structure as reflected by these two cemeteries remains much the same. Thirdly, while burials in the same cemetery and those pertaining to the same period of time generally exhibited no overlapping or boundarybreaking 叠压打破 between each other, the complexity of the layers and the boundaries of the graves increased with the time duration of the cemetery. It can be speculated that the avoidance of the possible overlapping or boundary-breaking might been attributed to the use of burial marks on the ground at the time of burial. If the clansmen could keep a clear memory of their ancestors’ graves and their genealogy within a few decades, the earlier tombs of their clan would not be destroyed; but if the burial marks disappeared after a few decades, or if the clansmen’s memory of the genealogy became blurred, boundaries of the graves between different generations might be broken and stacking of newgaves on the older ones would occur. However, the fact that the same cemetery could have lasted for one to two hundred years or even hundreds of years might just prove the effect of the long-term memory the clansmen kept for the habitat of their distant ancestors and the adherence they held to the habitat. For example, it is estimated that the Peiligang Cemetery had lasted for about 100 years in total, with each phase used for 30 to 60 years.12 In spite of this long interval, each individual tomb in the same phase was intact and its boundary rarely broken by another one. The same is true of the Shuiquan Cemetery in Jiaxian County. With regard to the cemetery in the northwestern section of the Jiahu Site, although it exhibited only two periods (i.e. Phases II and III), it can be subdivided into five sections, with a rather complex relationship between the layers and boundaries of the graves in this cemetery in its several hundred years’ duration.13

12 Ibid. 13 The absolute dates of the second and third phases of the Jiahu Site, as divided by

the excavators, range from about 6600 to 5800 BCE. See Henan Provincial Institute

86

J. HAN

Fourthly, the burial pits of the Peiligang Cemetery are all earthen vertical ones, most of which contained only one body. The majority of the bodies were placed in supine position, with extended limbs, and daily necessities as grave goods were often buried with the body. What is more, in the same cemetery, the head position of the bodies is roughly the same. In a sense, such a cemetery should be seen as an underground “eternal home”14 永恒家园 for the dead clansmen, a reflection of the concept of “death as life”, that is, “serving the dead as if they were alive” 事死如 事生. Take as an example the graves in the Jiahu Cemetery where the human bones were best preserved. Generally speaking, the grave owner’s arms were placed close to the sides, feet close together, while others had both hands or one hand on the abdomen. Apparently, there had been a process of rearranging or dressing of the bodies after death, and the feet of the deceased may have been bound together. With regard to the direction of the heads of the bodies, it varied from cemetery to cemetery in accordance with its geographical location. In the southern-drift cemeteries such as the Jiahu and Shuiquan cemeteries, the head of the buried body was mostly positioned towards the west; in the central or intermediate cemeteries, such as the Shigu Cemetery, the head was placed towards the east, while in the north-drift cemeteries such as the Peiligang, Shawoli and E’gou cemeteries, the head was directed towards the south. This shows that subtle differences existed in funerary practices even in small areas. As far as grave goods are concerned, they could generally be divided into two categories: i.e. personal ornaments and utensils placed in the tomb chamber such as pottery, stones and bones.

of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology (1999), The Jiahu Site in Wuyang City, Henan Province, Beijing: Science Press, 518. 14 In the Han Dynasty, there was a clear concept of creating an underground “eternal home” for the owner of the grave. In fact, this concept of burial can be traced back to the Neolithic Age. See Wu Hung (2005), “Art in rituals—Relooking at the Mawangdui Han Dynasty Tombs”, Art in Its Ritual Context: Essays on Ancient Chinese Art, Shanghai: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 110.

6

CLAN BURIAL AND ANCESTRAL VENERATION …

87

Fifthly, a few large burials with special grave goods were found, indicating that a certain degree of differentiation of social status had begun to appear within the same clan. For example, in M344 of the Jiahu Cemetery and other large graves, there were dozens of burial goods such as exquisite compass-shaped bone artefacts 骨规形器, bone plates 骨板, bone flutes 骨笛, tortoise shells 龟甲 and turquoise ornaments 绿 松石饰. As for tortoise shells, they have been found in several tombs in groups of eight. Some tortoise shells were filled with stones, which might have been related to numerical divination 数卜 and image reading15 象 数, while others were engraved with symbols,16 which are believed to be primitive writing. As for the owners of these large-sized graves, they were mostly adult males and were likely to be great shamans 大巫 and tribal leaders who were proficient in astronomy, calendar, divination, music and medicine.17 Sixthly, the grave goods of men and women were differentiated, and children were buried in urns 瓮棺葬. Generally, men were buried with woodworking and excavation tools such as axes 斧, adzes 锛 and shovels 铲, whereas women with food processing tools such as stone grinding slabs 石磨盘 and stone sticks 石磨棒 which constitute a set of grinding stone. This difference implies to a certain extent the appearance of the natural division of labour between men and women in the society, i.e. men managing external affairs and women looking after the house 男主 外女主内. In Jiahu and other cemeteries, the so-called urn burial was practised for children using pottery as burial utensils. The reason behind this practice, it is speculated, might be that the cemetery should have been officially reserved for deceased adults. And this might be a true reflection of the convention that only adults enjoyed full social rights in real life then. 15 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology, & Department of History of Science and Technology and Archaeology of the University of Science and Technology of China (2015), The Jiahu Site in Wuyang City, Henan Province (II), Beijing: Science Press, 511–528. 16 Ibid.: 529–539. 17 “These special grave goods seem to have nothing to do with military power or ritual,

neither are they necessarily related to social polarization. However, they are associated with the Wuxi (ancient Chinese shamans) who were proficient in divination (by turtle shells, animal bones and yarrow stalks), music and medicine, thus having a strong religious implication.” See Han J. (2009), “The migration influence of the Peiligang culture and the rudiments of the Early Chinese Cultural Circle”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2.

88

J. HAN

Seventhly, in some cemeteries, there were remains of burial offerings. For example, in the open space between the eastern and western areas of the Shuiquan Cemetery, there was a large burnt earth pit with stones inside. It is estimated that whereas the remains might have resulted from the grave sacrifices to the entire cemetery, the offerings must have been devoted to the ancestors of the entire clan. In the western part of the cemetery, there was another smaller burnt earth pit with animal bones inside, which may have been related to the sacrifices to the ancestors of the family in this part of the cemetery. The clan cemetery of the Baijia culture (or Phase I of the Dadiwan culture) in the upper reaches of the Yellow River is mainly found in the Baijia Site, Lintong, Shaanxi Province,18 and the Dadiwan Site in Qin’an, Gansu Province.19 While the basic situation of the cemetery was very similar to that of the Peiligang culture, there was something special with one burial in Phase I of the Dadiwan Cemetery: not only are the bones of the grave owner well preserved, both of his hands rested crossed on his chest. At the Xiaojingshan Site 小荆山遗址, which pertained to the Houli culture in the lower reaches of the Yellow River, there were also neatly arranged graves.20 In the Baijia culture, which was a product of the westward expansion of the Peiligang culture and its integration with the local indigenous culture,21 a burial custom similar to that of the Peiligang culture was found. While it is easy to explain or understand this similarity, it is hard to account for the similarity of burial customs between the Houli and Peiligang cultures, since there had not been much known exchange between the two cultures, hence the need to investigate other possible relationships of origin.

18 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1994), The Baijiacun Site in Lintong, Xi’an, Chengdu: Bashu Press. 19 Gansu Provincial Institute of Archaeology (2006), Excavation Report on the Dadiwan Neolithic Site in Qin’an County, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 20 Luan, Fengshi (1997), “On the Houli Culture”, Archaeological Research in the Haidai Region, Jinan: Shandong University Press, 1–26. 21 See Han Jianye (2009), “The migration influence of the Peiligang culture and the rudiments of the Early Chinese Cultural Circle”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2.

6

6.3

CLAN BURIAL AND ANCESTRAL VENERATION …

89

Burial Customs in Other Cultures

Looking at the Eurasian continent as a whole, we will find that as early as 6000 BCE such typical earth clan burial practices as of the Yellow River Basin were rarely seen in other places. Human burials have been practised in Eurasia more than 100,000 years ago, and 40,000–50,000 years later, i.e. in the late Late Pleistocene 晚更新世 (late Palaeolithic) to early the Holocene 全新世 (early Neolithic), more and more discoveries have been made of such burials. However, most of these burials were simply covered, and their distribution scattered. More than 10,000 years ago in South China, there were flexed burials 屈肢葬 in which the body crouched with the legs folded up to the chest,22 but no obvious pattern can be seen in the spatial distribution of the burials. It is speculated that the corpses had been dismembered and tied up before burial. During the same period in West Asia, residential burial 居室葬 was a major practice.23 In some cases, the skull of the deceased adult was not placed in the burial, but on the dwelling plane instead. Some skulls were covered with mud, and their eye sockets covered with shells.24 In addition, scattered burials around tens of thousands of years old have been found in some areas of northern and northeastern China—for instance, the earliest extended supine burial 仰 身直肢葬 in China found in the Donghulin Site 东胡林遗址 in Beijing— but it is uncertain whether there was a public cemetery in these areas back then.

22 Cultural Relics Team of the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, et al. (1976), “Trial excavation of the Zengpiyan Cave in Guilin, Guangxi”, Archaeology, 3. 23 Chen, Xingcan (1989), “Study on the prehistoric residential burials”, Huaxia Archaeology, 2. 24 Yang, Jianhua (2014), The Mesopotamia: From a Rural Village to a City State, Beijing: Science Press, 50.

90

J. HAN

In the Pengtoushan Site 彭头山文化 of the Dongting Lake area in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, some rectangular and irregularshaped vertical pit burials which were wide but short were discovered. Whereas the burials can be traced back to around 6000 BCE, human bones were unseen in most of the burials. The disappearance of human bones might be attributed to the acidic environment there, and the burials are believed to be the same flexed burials as those found in South China. Generally scattered around, all of these burials were located in residence areas, with some even indoors,25 resulting in a possible phenomenon whereby houses and burials coexisted with each other. In the Xinglongwa culture 兴隆洼文化 in the west Liao River Basin of northeast China, both separately designated cemeteries and residential burials were discovered. Designated cemeteries were found at the Baiyinchanghan Site26 白音长汗遗址 in Linxi County, Inner Mongolia and the Chahai Site27 查海遗址 in Fuxin City, Liaoning Province. At the Baiyinchanghai Site, two cemeteries which are categorized into the Phase II of Type B might be another example of the clan burial. Located outside the southern ring-shaped moat of the settlement, the two cemeteries only consisted of 14 sparsely scattered burials. Most of the bodies in these burials were in flexed position. At the centre of the Chahai settlement, there were 10 burials with bodies in supine position and extended limbs. These burials were irregularly distributed under the “belly” or ventral part 腹 of a dragon-shaped pile of stones, which seems to imply a special meaning of worship and sacrifice. Residential burials have been found at the Chahai Site and both the Xinglongwa 28 兴隆洼 and Xinglonggou 29 25 Hunan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology (2006), The Pengtoushan Site and the Shibadang Site, Beijing: Science Press. 26 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region (2004), Excavation Report on the Neolithic Site of Baiyinchanghan, Beijing: Science Press. 27 Liaoning Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2012), Excavation Report on the Neolithic Settlement Site of Chahai, Being: Wenwu Press. 28 Inner Mongolia Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1997), “The excavation brief of the Xinglongwa settlement site in Aohanqi, Inner Mongolia”, Archaeology, 1. 29 Inner Mongolia Team 1 of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2004), “The 2002–2003 excavation report of the Xinglonggou settlement site in Chifeng, Inner Mongolia”, Archaeology, 7.

6

CLAN BURIAL AND ANCESTRAL VENERATION …

91

兴隆沟 sites in Aohanqi, Inner Mongolia. Because of the small number, the excavators speculate that these burials might just be a special form of burial.30 While residential burials seemed to put more emphasis on the realistic connection between the deceased and the living, they failed to exhibit the relationship and ranking among the deceased. Whether indoor or outdoor, the burials of the Xinglongwa culture, like those of the Peiligang culture, were rectangular vertical pits with daily pottery and stone tools, which shows that both cultures shared at least the same conception for ground burials: i.e. “lying in earth brings peace to the deceased” 入土为安. As for the popularity of large-scale public cemeteries in northeastern China thereafter, it was both a result of social development and the influence of the northward expansion of funerary traditions from the Yellow River Basin. When it comes to burials in West Asia, they appeared at around 6000 BCE and most of them were either secondary or dismembered burials within the abode, with some cremation burials in which the human bones were buried in pottery after cremation. For example, at the sites of Çatal Hüyük31 恰塔尔·休于 and Hacliar32 哈吉拉尔 in Turkey and the Tell esSawwan Site33 梭万 in Iraq, most of the residential burials were under and near the platform of the household “shrine” 神祠. As for the bodies of the deceased, most of them were in flexed position and their bones incomplete, which is presumably a result of devotion to the gods. Judging from the frescoes at the Çatal Hüyük Site, there are images of eagles pecking at human flesh, the head of which had been eaten away. What this image depicts is presumably a celestial burial 天葬 scene. In Iraq, cremation remains were found in the Yarim Tepe II 耶里姆 2 号丘, with

30 Yang, Hu & Liu, Guoxiang (1997), “Discussion on residential burial custom and related issues of the Xinglongwa culture”, Archaeology, 1. 31 Mellaart, J. (1970), Catal Huyuk: A Neolithic Town in Anatolia, New York: McGraw-Hill, 204–209. 32 Mellaart, J. (ed.) (1970), Excavations at Hacilar (1), Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. 33 El-Wailly, F. & Abues-Soof, B. (1964). “The excavations at Tell es-Sawwan: First preliminary report”, Sumer, 21, 17–32.

92

J. HAN

special cremation stoves and cremation jars34 火葬罐. From these discoveries, it can be presumed that residential burial, sky burial and cremation were the main practices in West Asia at that time, and that the purpose of these burial practices lay in the pursuit of the purification and sublimation of the human soul, an ideal quite different from the Peiligang concept that “lying in earth brings peace to the deceased”. As a corollary, it can be assumed that some of the bones, after being pecked by eagles in the process of the sky burial, became selected and dedicated to the gods. It was not until around 4000 BCE that clan burial sites began to appear as a more frequent phenomenon in West Asia and Egypt.

6.4

An “Idol-Free Ancestral Veneration” Culture

In the Peiligang culture and other cultures, the deceased were dressed neatly, laid together with burials articles and then buried in specially selected cemeteries for the clan. Their burials were placed deep in earth and arranged in an orderly manner. This custom reflected the extraordinary solicitude and reverence the clansmen held for the deceased. Around 6000 BCE, the strong expansion of the Peiligang culture in the Central Plains not only integrated most of the Yellow River Basin, but also promoted the communication and connection between this culture and those of the middle reaches of the Yangtze River. As a result, the “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” 早期中国文化圈 or the cultural “Early China” 早期中国 was germinating.35 During such a special period, the emergence of clan burials in the Yellow River and Huai River basins with the Peiligang culture as the core should be a reflection of ancestor worship and the strengthening of social order of that time. As such, there should have been a tenacious historical memory of ancestors by then.

34 Merpert, N. I. & Munchaev, R. M. (1973), “Early agricultural settlement in the Sinjar Plain, Northern Iraq”, Iraq, 35, 97–113. 35 Han, Jianye (2009), “The migration influence of the Peiligang culture and the rudiments of Early Chinese Cultural Circle”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2.

6

CLAN BURIAL AND ANCESTRAL VENERATION …

93

The practice of burial arrangement in both the Peiligang 裴李岗墓 地 and Shuiquan cemeteries represents a clear convention of ancestor veneration, with the former burying the first generation of ancestors in the centre and the latter setting up sacrificial pits in the centre. The Peiligang culture did not have the tradition of idol worship as represented by the face-shaped utensils 人面形器 in the Xinglongwa culture in northeast China; nor did it worship the deities by means of the temples, ritual platforms, shrines and statues as people did in the West Asia region. Therefore, the Peiligang practice can be regarded as an “idol-free ancestral veneration” 无偶像祖先崇拜 culture. Later on, this tradition of ancestor veneration not only spread to and prevailed in the Yangshao and Dawenkou 大汶口文化 cultures, but also influenced most of the Chinese Neolithic cultures. Originating from the Yellow River reaches, this tradition of “idol-free ancestral veneration” was also passed down to the Xia and Shang dynasties, and formed a strict patriarchal system or clan system in the Western Zhou Dynasty, which has continued until modern times. The arrangement and grouping of clan burials in the cemeteries of the Peiligang and other cultures might have corresponded to different levels of social organization in the reality of that time. In the case of the Peiligang and Shuiquan cemeteries, both can be divided into at least three levels, i.e. groups, zones and burial areas, which might have matched the three levels of the social organization then, namely the household, the family and the clan. Further arrangements of the burials in the clan cemetery, such as the rows and columns, might have been made in accordance with the differentiation of generation and gender. There are even differences in terms of the number of grave articles between male and female burials, let alone more special goods found with men’s burials. All these differences indicate that there were distinctions between close and distant relatives, between senior and junior clansmen, and between men and women. Besides, some religious leaders enjoyed a very prominent burial status as well. With the development of such a society which attached great importance to social order, an early ritual system began to emerge when it came to the Miaodigou Era 庙底沟时代 in around 4000 BCE, which not only formed the “Central Plains Pattern” 中原模式 of society, but also continued to develop until the Western Zhou Dynasty and beyond.

94

J. HAN

To sum up, it should be pointed out that the Peiligang culture was able to arrange the burials of their clansmen in an orderly manner in a short period of time, and adhered to the same cemetery (and their ancestral graves) for a long time duration (usually hundreds of years). This practice not only reflects a persistent historical memory of their ancestors on the part of the whole clansmen; it might probably have also provided the right justification and “legitimacy” for future generations to live and farm on this land for a long time. This tradition of valuing an ancestral memory lasted until the late Neolithic period and the three dynasties of Xia, Shang and Zhou. As a result, ancestral genealogical legends have occupied a central place in both handed-down documents and excavated materials, and later literature, such as genealogies and tomb epigraphs, has also focused on tracing ancestors, especially the most distant ones. It is worthwhile to note that the long and advanced tradition of historical narratives of China should have originated from the historical memory of the ancestors of the Chinese with the Huaxia clan 华夏集团 in the Yellow River Basin as its core. No matter how the society had been reconstructed and how the regime had changed in the dynasties thereafter, this “root culture” 根文化 which had been based on ancestral veneration continued to live for a long time.36 The Peiligang Era in fact had strengthened this tradition and enabled it to become the key reason for the continuous development of the cultural pattern of “One Centre with Multiple Branches” 有中心多支一体 in ancient China for thousands of years. (This section was originally published in Huaxia Archaeology, No. 1. 2020.)

36 Liu, Q. (2019), “An archaeological interpretation of the five-thousand-year continuation of Chinese civilization”, Chinese Social Sciences, 12.

CHAPTER 7

The Miaodigou Era and “The Early China”

In the era of the Dongzhuang-Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture 仰 韶文化东庄-庙底沟类型, archaeological cultures in most parts of China were integrated and connected for the first time to form a cultural community with the Central Plains as the core. The new era in which this cultural community was situated is the so-called the Miaodigou Era 庙底 沟时代.1 A general consensus has basically been reached among academia that the Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化 had been so prevalent that it has made a great impact upon the outside world. As early as in 1965, Su Bingqi 苏秉琦 had noticed that the Miaodigou type “had a great influence on the distant and neighbouring areas”.2 Later, Yan Wenming 严文明 pointed out that “the Miaodigo Era was a period of considerable prosperity, which was demonstrated, on the one hand, by the increased tendency for the integration of local sub-types of cultures within it, and on the other, by its increased influence on external

1 “The Miaodigou Era” is a concept corresponding to “the Longshan Era”. See Wenming, Yan (1981), “The Longshan culture and the Longshan Era”, Cultural Relics, 6. 2 Su, Bingqi (1965), “Some issues on the Yangshao culture”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica,

1.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_7

95

96

J. HAN

cultures”.3 Zhang Zhongpei 张忠培 believed that as a “period of relative unity”,4 the Miaodigou type (or the Xiyin culture 西阴文化) had left a positive effect on the surrounding contemporaneous archaeological cultures.5 Wang Renxiang 王仁湘 regarded the pottery expansion during the Miaodigou Era as “an artistic wave in prehistoric China”.6 Based on previous studies, this section attempts to argue that the Miaodigou Era was formed under the influence of the strong expansion of the Dongzhuang-Miaodigou type, and that the arrival of this period marked the formation of the “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” 早期中国 文化圈 or the cultural “Early China” 早期中国.

7.1

The Dongzhuang and Miaodigou Types

The Dongzhuang and Miaodigou types of the Yangshao culture were mainly distributed in the regions of southwest Shanxi and western Henan provinces, during the late Neolithic Age. Its absolute date was about 4200–3500 BCE.7 As far as the Dongzhuang type is concerned, it is represented by the remains of the Yangshao culture in Shanxi Province, such as the Dongzhuang Village Site 东庄村遗址 in Richeng County8 and Phases I and II of the Beigan Site 北橄遗址 in Yicheng County.9 It dates back to a time between the Banpo type 半坡类型 and the Miaodigou 3 Yan, Wenming (1989), “A brief discussion of the origin and stages of development of

the Yangshao culture”, The Yangshao Culture Studies, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 122–165. 4 Zhang, Zhongpei (1991), “Some issues on the archaeology in the eastern Inner Mongolia district”, Collected Studies on the Archaeological Culture in the Eastern Inner Mongolia, Beijing: Haiyang Press, 3–8. 5 Zhang, Zhongpei (1997), “The Yangshao Era—the prosperity of the prehistoric society and its transformation towards a civilized society”, Journal of Chinese Antiquity, 1. 6 Wang, Renxiang (2011), The Art Waves in Prehistoric China—A Study on the Painted Pottery of the Miaodigou Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 7 Yan, Wenming (1989), “A brief discussion of the origin and stages of development

of Yangshao culture”, Yangshao Culture Studies, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 122–165. 8 Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (1973), “Excavation of the Dongzhuang cun site and Xiwangcun site in Ruicheng County, Shanxi Province,” Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1. 9 Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology (1993), “Excavation report of the Beigan site in Yicheng County, Shanxi Province”, Journal of Chinese Antiquity, 4.

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

97

type 庙底沟类型 with an absolute age of about 4200–4000 BCE.10 The Dongzhuang type was formed on the basis of the local Zaoyuan type 枣园类型 of the Yangshao culture, receiving the strong influence from the eastward-moving Banpo type.11 Specifically, the main pottery of the Dongzhuang type, such as the bo 钵 bowls, the pen 盆 basins, the guan 罐 jars and the wen 瓮 jars (or large-sized earthen bellied jars), bears characteristics of both the Zaoyuan and the Banpo types. For example, the amphora with double-lipped mouth is a combination of the infoldinglip mouth of the Zaoyuan type of Yangshao culture and the cup-shaped mouth of the Banpo type (see 1–3 in Fig. 7.1). Other Banpo influences on the Dongzhuang type can be seen from not only the designs of the pottery but also the burial practices, including the pointed-bottom style of ceramic vessels (e.g. amphorae 尖底瓶 with both cup-shaped mouth and double-lipped mouth), the cord pattern 绳纹 and the wide-band pattern 宽带纹 (see 1–2 in Fig. 7.2), the design painted in black colour such as triangle, diamond and fish, as well as the secondary burial 二次葬 practices12 of stacking skulls and limb bones in piles. Meanwhile, other Zaoyuan type influences can be found by the slender features of the nonpatterned hu 壶 jugs, ding 鼎 cauldrons and amphorae, and the simple burials customs whereby barely any grave goods were be seen. Calabashshaped ping bottles 葫芦形瓶, tinder pots 火种炉 and painted pottery motifs such as pod and petal patterns (see 1–2 in Fig. 7.3) were new creations. On the whole, the influence from the Banpo type was enormous, so much so that to some extent the Dongzhuang type 东庄类型 can be

10 Zhang, Zhongpei & Yan, Wenming (1964), “The cultural nature and chronology of the Yangshao remains at Sanliqiao”, Archaeology, 6. 11 Tian, Jianwen, Xue Xinmin, & Yang, Linzhong (1992), “A new understanding of

the Neolithic archaeological culture of the southern Shanxi region”, Journal of Chinese Antiquity, 2; Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology (1993), “Excavation report of the Beigan site in Yicheng County, Shanxi Province”, Journal of Chinese Antiquity, 4. 12 As for the Yuanjunmiao cemetery in Huanxian County, Shaanxi Province, secondary burial with supine position and straight limbs was prevalent in Phase I (see Department of Archaeology of the School of History of Peking University (1983) ed., The Yuanjunmiao Yangshao Cemetery, Beijing: Wenwu Press), while after Phase II, secondary burial with skulls and limb bones stacking in piles took over. There should be an evolutionary relationship between these two secondary burials. Phases I & II of the Yuanjunmiao Site belonged to the early Banpo type, and its relative date are slightly earlier than the Phase I of the Beigan Site.

98

J. HAN

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

99

Fig. 7.1 Double-lipped small-mouthed pottery amphorae 双唇口小口尖底瓶 of various sites of the Miaodigou Era (1–3. the Dongzhuang type 东庄类型 of the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化 [the Beigan Site 北橄 H34:27, 5; II T1302➃:6]; 4–6. the Miaodigou type 庙底沟类型 of Yangshao culture [the Nanjiaokou Site 南交口 H90:1, the Xiyin Site 西阴 G1:28, the Xipo Site 西坡 H110:5]; 7– 9. the Quanhu type 泉护类型 of Yangshao culture [the Dadiwan Site 大地 湾 T704➂:P50, the Anban Site 案板 GNDH24:7, the Fulinbao Site 福临堡 H37:8]; 10–15. the Bainiyaozi type 白泥窑子类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Bainiyaozi Site 白泥窑子 F1:1, the Wangmushan Poxia Site 王墓山坡下 I F1:21, I F11:13, the Duanjiazhuang Site 段家庄 H3:15, 27; the Yangjiaping Site 杨家坪 F1:3]; 16–17. the Dahecun type 大河村类型 of Yangshao culture 16 :27, 28]; 18. the Daxi culture 大溪文化 [the [the Dahecun 大河村 site T56 Guanmiaoshan Site 关庙山 T63➄A: 27]; 19. the Yancun type 阎村类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Shuidihe Site 水地河 W1:2])

Fig. 7.1 (continued)

regarded as a variant of the Banpo type13 in northeast China. Its widemouthed guan jar 大口勾鋬罐 features a hooked handle 勾鋬 shaped like a bird’s head, suggesting that the Dongzhuang type might have practised a custom of bird worship. The Dongzhuang type can be roughly

13 Yan, Wenming (1980), “On the Banpo type and Miaodigou type of cultures”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 1; Dai, Xiangming (1998), “On the origin of the Miaodigou culture”, Qingguo Ji: Papers Commemorating the 10th Anniversary of the Founding of the Department of Archaeology of Jilin University, Beijing: Zhishi Press, 18–26.

100

J. HAN

Fig. 7.2 Black-striped bo bowls pottery 陶黑彩带纹钵 of various sites of the Miaodigou Era (1–2. the Dongzhuang type 东庄类型 of the Yangshao culture 仰 韶文化 [the Beigan Site 北橄 H34:20, H32:2]; 3–5. the Miaodigou type 庙底沟 类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Beigan Site 北橄 II T402➂:2, the Xiyin Site 西阴 H33:54, H30:9]; 6–7. the Shijia type 史家类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Yuanzitou Site 原子头 H126:1, the Dadiwan Site 大地湾 T302➂: 21]; 8. the Quanhu type 泉护类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Dadiwan Site 大地 湾 F709:1]; 9–12. the Bainiyaozi type 白泥窑子类型 of the Yangshao culture [Bainiyaozi Site 白泥窑子 F1:11, Wangmushan Poxia Site 王墓山坡下 I H1:4, I F6:13, Duanjiazhuang Site 段家庄 H3:5]; 13. the Hougang type 后岗类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Nanyangzhuang Site 南杨庄 T40➁:1]; 14. the Diaoyutai type 钓鱼台类型 of Yangshao culture [the Diaoyutai Site H1]; 15. the Hongshan culture 红山文化 [the Xishuiquan Site 西水泉 T7➁:20])

subdivided into two phases: the early phase represented by the Beigan 北橄 Phase I where the amphorae have no neck and the lower lip of the double-lipped mouth is not prominent, and the late phase represented by the Beigan Phase II where the amphorae have an obvious neck and the lower lip of the double-lipped mouth is more prominent. Both the Yangshao Remains 仰韶遗存 of the Sanliqiao Site in Shaan County,14 14 The Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1959), The Miaodigou and Sanliqiao Sites, Beijing: Science Press.

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

101

west Henan Province, and the Phase I of the Yangshao culture in the Nanjiaokou Site15 三里桥, Sanmenxia City, also west Henan, belong to the Dongzhuang type. However, in these two sites, there were only amphorae with cup-shaped mouths, neither double-lipped amphorae nor tinder pots were found. From these discoveries, it can be speculated that the centre of the Dongzhuang type was not in the west of Henan, but in the southwest of Shanxi.

15 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology (2009), The Nanjiaokou Site in Sanmenxia City, Beijing: Science Press.

102

J. HAN

Fig. 7.3 Painted pottery pen basins with petal patterns 花瓣纹彩陶盆 in various sites of the Miaodigou Era (1–2. the Dongzhuang type 东庄类型 of the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化 [the Beigan Site 北橄 H38:11, the Dongzhuang Site 东庄 H104:1:01]; 3–5. the Miaodigou type 庙底沟类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Beigan Site 北橄 T8➈:1, the Xiyin Site 西阴 H33:7, H30: 63]; 6. the Shijia type 史家类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Yuanzitou Site 原子头 H42:1]; 7–10. The Quanhu type 泉护类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Dadiwan Site 大地湾 T700➂:19, the Quanhu Site 泉护 H5:192, H1127:871, the Hulijia Site 胡李家 H14:2]; 11–13. the Bainiyaozi type 白泥窑子类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Zhangmaowusu Site 章毛勿素 F1:4, the Duanjiazhuang Site 段家庄 H3:07, the Bainiyaozi 白泥窑子类型 Point A F2:2]; 14–16. the Yancun type 阎村类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Dahecun Site 大河村 T1➅D:113, the Dianjuntai Site 点军台 F3:7, the Dahecun Site 大河村 T11➄A:83]; 17–18. the Diaoyutai type 钓鱼台类型 of the Yangshao culture [the Nanyangzhuang Site 南杨庄 H108:1, the Diaoyutai Site 钓鱼台 T4➁]; 19. the Dawenkou culture 大汶口文化 [the Liulin Site 刘林 M72:1]: 20–21. the Songze culture 崧泽文化 [the lower cultural layer of the Qingdun Site 青墩下文化层, the Caoxieshan Site 草鞋山 T304:6]; 22–24. the Daxi culture 大溪文化 [Tomb 1 of the Luosishan Site 螺蛳山, the Guanmiaoshan Site 关庙山 T37➃:9, T4➂:9])

With regard to the Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture, it is represented by Phase I of the Miaodigou Site 庙底沟遗址, Shaanxian County, Henan Province,16 and its absolute date is about 4000–3500 BCE, the lower limit of which is perhaps much later. Generally speaking, the Miaodigou type is a continuation based on the Dongzhuang type. The potteries recently unearthed here, such as the straight-necked fu cauldrons 直领釜 and the stove, reflect the influence from ZhengzhouLuoyang area. Painted bird-pattern pottery was popular in the Miaodigou type, and bird-shaped ding tripod cauldrons, stoves and vessel lids have been discovered. The Miaodigou type can be roughly divided into three phases: the early period is represented by Phases III and IV of the Beigan Sites, and the early part of Phase II of the Yangshao culture at the Nanjiaokou Site 南交口遗址; the middle period by Phase I of the Miaodigou Site and the main remains of the Miaodigou type in the Xiyin

16 The Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1959), The Miaodigou and Sanliqiao Sites of the Yangchao Culture, Beijing: Science Press.

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

103

Village Site17 西阴村遗址; while the third period by the Xipo burials 西 坡墓葬 and the H110 burial.18 As far as their potteries are concerned, the small-mouthed amphora firstly has a round perked upper lip and a protruding lower lip that droops and forms a real double-lipped mouth. Then, while both lips gradually flatten out, the upper lip finally almost disappears and becomes nearly a bell mouth, with the bottom of the vessel changing from pointed to obtuse (see 4–6 in Fig. 7.1). The upper part of the calabash-shaped ping bottle changes from an oblique arc to an oblique straight line and finally to a bell-mouth shape with an edge on the neck. Whereas the belly part of bo bowls and wide-brimmed pen basins change from shallow curved style to deep curved style, that of guan jars and weng jars evolves from a short arc style to a deep straight style. Besides, it becomes more and more common for the vessels to be decorated with handles and attached clay strips on the body. The pattern of petals in painted pottery becomes gradually complicated at first but later becomes more simplified (see 3–5 in Fig. 7.3). The rim of the bo bowls changes from a wide-band pattern to a narrow-band pattern, with their coloured band ultimately disappearing in general (see 3–5 in Fig. 7.2). As far as the rather high-ranking Xipo Cemetery 西坡墓地 is concerned, it can be seen that at least by its late period the centre of the Miaodigou type had already shifted to western Henan. After the Dongzhuang type was formed, it gained great momentum and expanded rapidly: in fact, the Miaodigou type excelled its predecessors and further enhanced its influence.

17 Li, Ji (1927), “The Prehistoric Remains of the Xiyin Village Site”, Collections of the School of Chinese Studies (Vol. III), Beijing: Tsinghua University; Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology (1996), “The second excavation of the prehistoric remains of the Xiyin Village Site”, Sanjin Archaeology II , 1–62. 18 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology & Henan Team

I of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences et al. (2002), “Brief report on the excavation of the Xipo Site in Lingao City, Henan Province in the spring of 2001”, Huaxia Archaeology, 2; The Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences & Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology (2010), The Xipo Cemetery of Lingbao City, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

104

J. HAN

7.2 The Dongzhuang Type: The “Miaodigouization ” of the Yangshao Culture The expansion of the Dongzhuang type and the Miaodigou type to the neighbouring areas caused the “Miaodigouization” 庙底沟化 and unprecedented unification of the Yangshao culture. Once the Dongzhuang type was formed, it quickly spread and influenced the Guanzhong (the central Shaanxi plains) area, bringing the Banpo type into the late period, that is, the Shijia type 史家类型 stage.19 On the whole, the remains of the Shijia type such as the Shijia Cemetery20 史家墓葬 in Weinan City, Shaanxi Province, and the Phase II of the Jiangzhai Cemetery 姜寨墓葬 in Lintong21 inherited the early Banpo type and experienced further development. This change can be seen from the emerging style of pointed-round bottom 尖圜底 and carinated belly 折腹 in vessels like bo bowls and pen basins, and the reduction of smallmouthed amphorae 小口尖底瓶 and thin-necked hu jugs 细颈壶. Still, some Dongzhuan type elements could be seen from the calabash-shaped ping bottles and the petal pattern and pod pattern in painted pottery. Considering that the Banpo type favoured fish, while the Dongzhuang type worshipped birds, the newly unearthed bird-fish combination of patterns at this time could be regarded as a symbol of the fusion of the two types.22 This cultural wave also extended to the western part of Guanzhong (the central Shaanxi plains) and even the central-eastern part of Gansu Province, forming the Yuanzitou 原子头遗存 Phase I and II,23 Yangshao Remains in Longxian County, Shaanxi Province, and the Dadiwan 大地湾遗存 Phase II24 in Qin’an County, Gansu Province (see 19 Wang, Xiaoqing (1993), “On the Shijia type of the Yangshao culture”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 4. 20 The Xi’an Banpo Museum & Weinan County Culture Centre (1978), “The Shijia Neolithic Site in Weinan City, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology, 1. 21 The Banpo Museum & Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology (1988), Excavation Report on the Neolithic Site of Jiangzhai, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 22 Zhao, Chunqing (2000), “From the fish-bird fight to the fish-bird fusion: A trial

analysis of the painted fish and birds of the Yangshao culture”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 23 Baoji City Archaeological Team & Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology (2005), The Yuanzitou Site in Longxian County, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 24 Gansu Provincial Institute of Archaeology (2006), Excavation Report on the Neolithic Site of Dadiwan in Qin’an County, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

105

6–7 in Fig. 7.2 and 6 in Fig. 7.3). Northwest-wise, the wave had spread to the eastern edge of the Hexi Corridor 河西走廊,25 a 1000 km narrow stretch of plains running northwest from the Yellow River’s Ordos Loop, which was an important part of the Silk Road linking inner China to the historic western regions. However, in terms of burial practices and ceramic vessels, these remains in western China do keep some of their local characteristics. For example, extended supine burial was prevalent, rather than the eastern style of secondary burial with multiple bodies; ceramic vessels such as guan jars with double handles on the belly 双腹耳罐, bo bowls with double handles on the belly 双腹耳钵, calabash-shaped small-mouthed amphorae 葫芦口 小口尖底瓶, flat-bottomed anthropomorphic ping vase with the humanhead shaped mouth 人头形口平底瓶 all exhibited a unique regional style. In fact, the westward influence of the Miaodigou type had been so much stronger that it had transformed the cultural attributes of central Shaanxi and eastern Gansu from the Shijia type to the Quanhu type 泉护类型, such as Phase I of the Quanhu Site 泉护遗存 in Huaxian County,26 Shaanxi Province, Phase I of the Xiahe Site 下河遗存 in Baishui County,27 Phase I of the Anban Site 案板遗存 in Fufeng County,28 Phases I and II of the Fulinbao Site 福临堡遗存 in Baoji City,29 and Phase III of the Dadiwan Site in Qin’an County, Gansu Province. With regard to the ceramic vessels, while the elements typical

25 Shijia type pottery—a round-bottomed bo bowl with black ribbon motif—has been

excavated at the Sanjiaocheng Site, Gulang County, Gansu Province. See Gansu Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology & School of Archaeology and Museology of Peking University (2011), Survey Report of the Hexi Corridor Prehistoric Archaeological, see Figures 3 & 5 on p. 65, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 65. 26 Department of Archaeology of Peking University (2003), The Quanhucun Site in Huaxian County, Beijing: Science Press. 27 Wang, Weilin, & Zhang, Pengcheng (2011), “The Xiahe Neolithic site in Baishui County, Shaanxi Province”, Major Archaeological Discoveries in China in 2010, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 18–20. 28 Department of Archaeology of the School of Arts and Museology of Northwestern University (2002), Excavation Report on the Anban Site in Fufeng County, Beijing: Science Press. 29 Baoji City Archaeological Team & The Baoji Team of Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology (1993), Excavation Report on the Neolithic Site of Fulinbao in Baoji City, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

106

J. HAN

of the Quanhu type are much the same as those of the Miaodigou type, for instance the painted pottery with petal motif and bird motif, and double-lipped amphora with small mouth (see 7–9 in Fig. 7.1, 8 in Fig. 7.2, 7–9 in Fig. 7.3), the two types only differ in details, such as the style of ding tripod cauldrons. Similar remains were also found further northwest, including the east of Qinghai Province30 and to the south of Ningxia Autonomous Region,31 and even further southwest to the south of Longnan City, Gansu Province, and the northwest of Sichuan Province.32 In the late stage of the Quanhu type, the painted pottery is obviously over-elaborate (see 10 in Fig. 7.3), which is contrary to the trend of gradual simplification in the east of the Guanzhong plains (central Shaanxi Province), reflecting an increasing separation of the core area and “remote areas”. As for the remains of the Ruanjiaba 阮家坝 and Majiaying 33 马家营 sites in Hanyin County, Shaanxi Province, of the Hanzhong area (generally the southwest of Shaanxi Province), pot-shaped ding tripod cauldrons 釜形鼎 were popular, which is different from the Quanhu type. This difference, it is speculated, should be attributed to the direct influence from the culture of the core area of southern Shanxi and western Henan provinces. At the same time, the Dongzhuang type of culture had left a profound impact on northern China in the narrow sense, which included central and northern Shanxi, central and southern Inner Mongolia, northern Shaanxi and northwestern Hebei, forming the Bainiyaozi 白泥窑子类 30 Qinghai Provincial Cultural Relics and Archaeology Team (1984), “Briefing on the trial excavation of the site of Yangwapo in Minhe County, Qinghai Province”, Archaeology, 1. The Gansu & Qinghai Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences & Qinghai Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2001), “The excavation of Hulijia site in Minhe County, Qinghai Province,” Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1. 31 The Field Archaeology Team of Peking University et al. (1997), “Excavation report of the Yehezi Neolithic Site in Longde County”, Studies in Archaeology III , Beijing: Science Press, 158–195. 32 Department of Archaeology of Peking University & Gansu Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2000), “Excavation report of the Dalijiaping Neolithic Site in Wudu County, Gansu Province”, Archaeological Collectanea, 13, Beijing: China Encyclopaedia Press, 1–36. Chengdu Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, et al. (2006), “The 2002 trial excavation of the Boxi Site in Maoxian County, Sichuan”, Chengdu Archaeological Discoveries 2004, Beijing: Science Press, 1–12. 33 Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology, et al. (1994), Collection of Archaeological Reports in Southern Shaanxi, Xi’an: Sanqin Press.

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

107

型 and Majiaxiaocun types34 马家小村类型 of the Yangshao culture. Both the Lujiapo type 鲁家坡类型 and the Shihushan type 石虎山类型 of the Yangshao culture, which previously was scattered from southern and central Inner Mongolia to northern Shaanxi, can be regarded to some extent as a fusion of both the Hougang type 后岗类型 and the Banpo type. At this time, this fusion evolved into the Bainiyaozi type, whereby its early and late periods were represented by the remains of Point C, F1 of the Bainiyaozi Site35 in Qingshuihe County, Inner Mongolia, and the remains of Section 1 at the Wangmushan Poxia Site36 王墓 山坡下遗址 in Liangcheng County, respectively. The Bainiyaozi type is related to the influx of the Dongzhuang type, which is evident from the newly unearthed double-lipped small-mouthed amphorae 双唇口小口尖 底瓶 (see 10–11 in Fig. 7.1) and tinder pots, and the prevalence of broadband pattern (see 9–10 in Fig. 7.2) and black-coloured petal-patterned decorations in bo bowls and pen basins. Besides, even the features of the amphorae mouth in the early and late periods of the Bainiyaozi type corresponded to Phases I & II of the Beigan type 北橄类型, which indicates adequately that the former had been following the cultural trend in the southwest of Shanxi Province. However, the Bainiyaozi type not only lacked ding tripod cauldrons, fu 釜 cauldrons and pottery stoves; even its petal-patterned painted pottery was relatively simpler, implying certain local characteristics of its pottery. In northern Shanxi and northwestern Hebei, the culture, which used to pertain to the Hougang type, now evolved into the Majiaxiaocun type37 with strong local characteristics as represented by the remains of the Majiaxiaocun Site in Datong City, Shanxi Province. Painted pottery with broad-band pattern and petal pattern became fewer in number and simpler in design; most amphorae had single round lips and flattened

34 Han, Jianye (2003), A Study on the Neolithic Cultures of the Northern Zone of China, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 35 Cui, Xuan & Si, Qin (1988), “Excavation brief of Points C and J of the Bainiyaozi Site in Qingshuihe County, Inner Mongolia”, Archaeology, 2. 36 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region (2003), Archaeology of the Daihai Region (III)—Collection of Excavation Reports on the Yangshao Culture Sites, Beijing: Science Press. 37 Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology & Datong City Museum (1992), “The Majiaxiaocun Neolithic site in Datong City, Shanxi Province”, Journal of Chinese Antiquity, 3.

108

J. HAN

mouths, while very few had an additional ring of clay attached outside to the rim, looking like double lips. In the early and middle periods of the Miaodigou type, the cultural features of the central and northern Shanxi and northwestern Hebei provinces were basically the same as those of the Miaodigou type.38 In central and southern Inner Mongolia, however, the previous cultural features prevailed as usual (see 12–15 in Fig. 7.1, 11–12 in Fig. 7.2, and 11–13 in Fig. 7.3). In the late period of the Miaodigou type, the relationship between the culture of the northern region of China and that of southwestern Shanxi became increasingly distant. For instance, the southward influence of the Hongshan culture 红山文化 bred the earliest Xueshan culture 雪山文化 (Phase I) in northwestern Hebei Province39 ; meanwhile, the remains of the 3rd Section of the Wangmushan Poxia Site were formed in the Daihai region 岱海地区 of Liangcheng County, Inner Mongolia, featuring more red-coloured decorations. The Dongzhuang type also exerted great influence southeastsouthward on the southern and central Henan Province and the northern Hubei Province. In the Zhengluo (i.e. Zhengzhou-Luoyang, Henan Province) area 郑洛地区 and the area south of it, Phase II of the pre-Dahecun type 前大河村类型 which used to be prevalent40 was, by now, transformed into the Dahecun type 大河村类型. Newly emerged pottery features the Dongzhuang elements, such as the double-lipped small-mouthed amphorae in an early form (see 16–17 in Fig. 7.1),41 black-coloured patterns of petals and pods; while some local characteristics were kept, for example the prevalence of pot-shaped ding tripod

38 Such as H3 of the Duanjiazhuang Site in Fenyang County and F1 of the Yangjiaping Site in Liulin County, Shanxi Province (see National Cultural Heritage Administration, Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology, & Department of Archaeology of Jilin University (1999). Jinzhong Archaeology, Beijing: Wenwu Press), F3 of the Sanguan Site in Wenxian County, Hebei Province (see the Zhangjiakou Archaeological Team (1981), “Main achievements of the Neolithic archaeology in Yuxian County in 1979”, Archaeology, 2), etc. But the ding tripod cauldrons are rarely seen in all the above sites. 39 Represented by the Jiabi remains in Pingshan County, Hebei Province. See the

Hutuohe River Archaeological Team (1993), “Archaeological survey and trial excavations in the Hutuohe River Basin, Hebei Province”, Archaeology, 4. Han, Jianye (2003), “On the Phase I of the Xueshan culture”, Huaxia Archaeology, 4. 40 Zhengzhou City Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology (2001), The Dahecun Site in Zhengzhou, Beijing: Science Press. 41 In The Dahecun Site in Zhengzhou, it is categorized as an M type guan jar.

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

109

cauldrons, plain surfaces and red-coloured band design. The emergence of pot-shaped ding tripods with a small mouth and carinated belly 小 口折腹釜形鼎 was the result of the influence of the Beixin culture 北 辛文化, while the dou 豆 pedestal basins and pottery cup reflected the cultural connection between this region and the Jianghuai region (the area between the Yangtze River and the Huai River) 江淮地区. In southwest Henan Province and northwest Hubei Province, the previous Dazhangzhuang type42 大张庄类型 of the Yangshao culture was taken over by the Xiawanggang type 下王岗类型, as represented respectively by the lower layer of Phase II the Xiawanggang Site43 下王岗遗址 in Xichuan County, Henan Province, and M5344 of the Baligang Site 八 里岗遗址 in Dengzhou County, Henan. Its Dongzhuang type influence can be seen from recently-unearthed pottery which features broadband pattern and pod pattern, and burial customs such as secondary burial of multiple bodies. Most amphorae of the Xiawanggang type had small cup-shaped mouths. The influence of the Miaodigou type had been so profound that the painted pottery with petal pattern became a typical feature in these areas (see 14–16 in Fig. 7.3). In fact, even the double-lipped small-mouthed amphorae (see 19 in Fig. 7.1) and the calabash-shaped ping bottles were also found in various places; it is only that these vessels were scattered increasingly further away from the west of Henan and also in a smaller amount.

42 Nanyang District Cultural Relics Team, et al. (1983), “The Neolithic Site of

Dazhangzhuang in Fangcheng County, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 5. 43 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage and Archaeology, et al. (1989), The Xiawanggang Site in Xichuan County, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 44 The Field Archaeology Team of Peking University & Nanyang City Institute of Cultural Relics of Henan Province (1998), “Excavation brief of the Baligang Site in Dengzhou County, Henan Province”, Cultural Relics, 9.

110

J. HAN

However, the local characteristics were still very prominent. With regard to the pottery, most small-mouthed amphorae 小口尖底瓶 featured short cup-shaped mouths; shallow-bellied pot-shaped ding tripod cauldrons were popular; black and red colours were often applied on white surface. As for the burials, urn burial for adults was a common practice. Such pottery and burial custom both pertained to the Yancun type 阎村类型 of the Yangshao culture45 and were discovered in various remains in the region from southwest Henan to northwest Hubei provinces, including the Yancun Site in Ruzhou County, Henan, Phases I & II of the Dahecun Site 大河村遗址 in Zhengzhou City, Phase I of the Dianjuntai Site46 点军台遗址 in Xingyang County, Phases III & IV of the Shuidihe Site47 水地河遗址 in Gongyi County. In fact, the type of culture in this region was still the continuation of the Xiawanggang type, represented by the middle and upper layers of Phase II of the Xiawanggang Site. This culture also spread to Yunxian County, Zaoyang County and Suizhou County, all in northwest Hubei Province,48 where its pottery featured the prevalence of round-bellied ding tripod cauldrons, cup-shape-mouthed amphorae, and painted pottery with black, red and white colours. Under the influence of the Dawenkou culture 大汶口文化, the Daxi culture 大溪文化 and the Songze culture 崧泽文 化, the painted pottery of the late Xiawanggang type began to develop patterns which looked like the sun or the Chinese character hu (i.e. 互 or “mutual”). Whereas the types and numbers of ceramic vessels increased, such as dou pedestal basins, pottery cups, round-footed bowls 圈足碗, as

45 Yan, Wenming (1989), “A brief discussion of the origin and development stages of the Yangshao culture”, Studies of the Yangshao Cultures, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 12–165. Yuan, Guangkuo (1996), “Study on the Yancun type”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3. 46 Zhengzhou Museum (1982), “Report on the 1980 excavation of the Dianjuntai Site in Xingyang County”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 4. 47 Zhang, Songlin, Liu, Yanfeng & Liu Hongsen (2003), “Excavation brief of the Shuidihe Site in Gongyi County, Henan Province”, Archaeological Research of Cultural Relics in Zhengzhou (I), Beijing: Science Press, 220–254. 48 Represented by H98 of the Dasi Site in Yunxian County and Phase I of the Diaolongbei Site in Zaoyang County, respectively. See Hubei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology & the South to North Water Diversion Office of Hubei Provincial Bureau of Cultural Relics (2008), “Briefing of the 2006 excavation of the Dasi Site in Yunxian County, Hubei Province 2006”, Archaeology, 4; Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2006), The Diaolongbei Site in Zaoyang County, Beijing: Science Press.

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

111

well as round-footed plates with cups attached to the rim 附杯圈足盘, they began to diverge from the culture of the core areas of southwestern Shanxi Province and western Henan Province. The Dongzhuang type had left the least impact on the east of the Taihang Mountains. In terms of ceramic vessels, features of the Dongzhuang type have only been found in such sites in Hebei Province as Phase III of the Nanyangzhuang Site 南杨庄遗存 in Zhengding County, Section IV of the middle period of the Shibeikou Site 石北口遗存, as well as H52 of the late period of the Shibeikou Site, Yongnian District. The vessels discovered in these sites include broad black-banded bo bowls 黑彩宽带钵 (see 13 in Fig. 7.2), cord-marked guan jars with a concave folded rim 凹折沿绳纹罐 and whorl-patterned guan jars 旋纹罐.49 The exiguity of the Dongzhuang type of culture in this region could be accounted for by the tenacious resistance of the Hougang type. In fact, it was at a time when the cultural confrontation between the Hougang type and the Miaodigou type which had appeared since the formal formation of the latter around 4000 BCE finally came to a conclusion. As a consequence of this confrontation, a cultural depression spread across most of the Hebei Plains, except for a small number of the Diaoyutai Remains 钓鱼台遗存 which were similar to the Miaodigou type as represented by the Diaoyutai Site in Cixian County and Phase IV of the Nanyangzhuang Site in Zhengding County (see 14 in Fig. 7.2 and 17–18 in Fig. 7.3).50 While this depression might be attributed to the intense warfare caused by the entry of the Miaodigou type into the east of the Taihang Mountains, it might also indicate how violent the expansion of the Miaodigou type could have been.

49 Hebei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2003), Excavation Report on the Nanyangzhuang Neolithic Site in Zhengding County, Beijing: Science Press. 50 Yan, Wenming (1989), “A brief discussion of the origin and development stages of the Yangshao Culture”, Studies of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 122–165.

112

J. HAN

7.3

Impact of the Dongzhuang and Miadigou Types on Other Parts of the Country

The Dongzhuang type and the Miaodigou type had left a far-reaching impact on regions which lay outside the Yangshao culture, such as the northeast, the eastern coast and the middle reaches of the Yangtze River. 7.3.1

The Northeast Region

When the influence of the Dongzhuang and Miaodigou types penetrated into the northeast region, they gave rise to the prosperity of the Hongshan culture in the West Liao River Basin 西辽河流域. Before about 4200 BCE, the West Liao River Basin in Northeast China had been home to both the late Zhaobaogou culture51 赵宝沟文 化 as represented by the Xiaoshan Site 小山遗存 in Aohanqi County, Inner Mongolia, and the early Hongshan culture as represented by the Weijiawopu Site 魏家窝铺遗存 in Chifeng City. At that time, the Xiapanwang type 下潘汪类型 and the Hougang type of the Yangshao culture had already penetrated into the above two cultures, as is shown from the bo bowls and pen basins made of red clay. After the formation of the Dongzhuang type, it had a strong influence to the north, forming the Bainiyaozi type and the Majiaxiaocun type of the Yangshao culture. While the former had even expanded to the Xilingol League of Inner Mongolia, the latter reached the northwest of Hebei Province.52 The strong penetration of these two types of culture in the northeast region led to the transformation of the Zhaobaogou culture in the West Liao River Basin into the early Hongshan culture as represented by T1➂

51 The Inner Mongolia Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1987), “The Xiaoshan Site in Aohanqi County, Inner Mongolia”, Archaeology, 6. 52 Represented by F4 of the Sanguan Site in Yuxian County, Hebei Province. Zhangjiakou Archaeological Team (1981), “Major achievements of the Yunxian County Neolithic archaeology in 1979”, Archaeology, 2.

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

113

of the Zhizhushan Site53 蜘蛛山遗址 and H2 of the Xishuiquan Site54 西 水泉遗址 in Chifeng, Inner Mongolia, respectively. The Hongshan culture then took on a new look and produced a large number of red clay pottery bo bowls, pen basins and hu jugs decorated with black colours, among which the black-coloured bo bowls with wide-band patterns 宽带纹黑彩 钵 show clear influence from the Dongzhuang type (see 15 in Fig. 7.2). When the Miaodigou type continued to exert its influence further into the northeast region, it had had two major impacts. On the one hand, it left behind remains in the northwest of Hebei Province very similar to F3 of the Sanguan Site 三关遗址 in Yuxian County. On the other, it also popularized the spiral-patterned painted pottery 涡纹彩陶 in the mid-period Hongshan culture, as represented by H1 of the Sandaowanzi Site55 三道湾子遗址 in Aohanqi County and F13 of the Xishuiquan Site in Chifeng City, a pottery which was actually a variant of petal-patterned pottery. Su Bingqi once summarized the cultural connection between the Central Plains and the Northeast region by means of a poetic line “Huashan Roses meets the Yanshan Dragon” (华山玫瑰燕山龙). While “Huashan Roses” in this line refers to the rose-petal-patterned pottery unearthed from the Huashan Mountain 华山 regions in Weinan City, Shaanxi Province, in western China, “Yanshan Dragon” signifies the dragon-shaped Yanshan Mountain 燕山 which ranges northeast from Beijing all through Hebei Province, ending in the sea at the Shanhaiguan Pass 山海关 (i.e. pass at the edge of mountain and sea), Hebei. He pointed out that the elements of the Yangshao culture such as the petalpatterned pottery started at the foot of the Huashan Mountain, passed through the southern and northern areas of Shanxi Province, and reached northeastern China (where the dragon-scale pattern was popular). He

53 The Inner Mongolia Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1979), “The excavation of the Zhizhushan Site in Chifeng City”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2. 54 The Inner Mongolia Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1982), “The Xishuiquan Site of the Hongshan Culture in Chifeng”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2. 55 Liaoning Provincial Museum, the Zhaowuda League Cultural Relics Workstation & the Aohanqi County Cultural Centre (1977), “Discovery of three primitive cultures at the Xiaoheyan Site in Aohanqi County, Liaoning Province”, Cultural Relics, 12.

114

J. HAN

also believed that the Hongshan culture “is the product of the collision and fusion of the two major cultural groups in the north and the Central Plains in the upper reaches of the Daling River 大凌河 in western Liaoning Province and northern Hebei”.56 However, by the late Hongshan culture era, this culture which was represented by the main remains of the Niuheliang 牛河梁遗址 in Lingyuan County, Liaoning Province,57 began to reverse its influence onto the Yangshao culture.58

56 Su, Bingqi (1988), “The new dawn of Chinese civilization”, Southeast Culture, 5. 57 Liaoning Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2001), “Excavation

of the 5th site of the Niuheliang Remains in Lingyuan City, Liaoning Province, 1998– 1999”, Cultural Relics, 8. 58 Han, Jianye (2009), “Three levels of the southward influence of the late Hongshan Culture”, Studies in Cultural Relics (16), Hefei: Huangshan Bookstore.

7

7.3.2

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

115

The Eastern Coastal Region

The expansion of the Dongzhuang type and the Miaodigou type to the eastern coastal areas changed the newly-born Dawenkou culture in the Haidai (the Bohai Sea—Mount Tai) 海岱地区 region to a certain extent. More importantly, it also stimulated the “Songzenization” 崧泽化 (i.e. the Songze culture at the Qingpu District of Shanghai) process of the cultures in Jianghuai (the Yangtze River and Huai River Basin) 江淮 and JiangsuZhejiang region 江浙, and enhanced the formation of a cultural system featuring ding tripod cauldrons, dou pedestal plates, hu 壶 jugs, bei 杯 cups and gui 鬶 pots (he 盉 spouted pitchers) in eastern China. Around 4100 BCE, with the northward penetration of the Longqiuzhuang culture 龙虬庄文化 in the Jianghuai region (i.e. Gaoyou City, Jiangsu Province), new elements such as bei 杯 pottery cups, dou 豆 pedestal plates and he 盉 spouted pitchers were introduced to the Haidai region. Consequently, the former Beixin culture transformed into the earliest Dawenkou culture as represented by H2003 of the Dawenkou Site59 in Tai’an City, Shandong Province. However, influence of the Dongzhuang type was only reflected in the secondary burial of multiple bodies as in M2558 of the Wangyin Site 王因遗址 in Yanzhou.60 After about 4000 BCE, the influence of the Miaodigou type was significantly enhanced. In the early Dawenkou cultural remains, such as the Dawenkou Site and the Wangyin Site, in addition to the second burial of multiple bodies, there suddenly appeared many Miaodigou elements, including petal-patterned painted pottery, deep-bellied painted bo bowls with folding rim and pointed shoulders 敛口鼓肩深腹彩陶钵, as well as painted pottery pen basins with a wide folding rim 宽折沿彩陶盆 (see 19 in Fig. 7.3), which changed the look of the Dawenkou culture to a certain extent. However, judging from the combination of the black, red and white colours of the pottery, as well as the more obvious folding rim of the bo bowls, these pottery should be more closely related to the Yancun

59 Shandong Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (1997), The Dawenkou Sequel—The Second and Third Excavation Reports, Beijing: Science Press. Han, Jianye (2011), “The northward advancement of the Longqiuzhuang culture and the formation of the Dawenkou culture”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1. 60 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2000), Excavation Report on the Wangyin Neolithic Site in Shandong, Beijing: Science Press.

116

J. HAN

type, indicating that the Miaodigou type only influenced the Dawenkou culture indirectly, i.e. via the Yancun type. At the time before 4100 BCE, in the Jianghuai region, there was Phase I of the Longqiuzhuang culture61 or similar remains,62 whereas in the regions around Jiangsu and Zhejiang provinces there was the Majiabang culture 马家浜文化. Later, in the process of the transformation of the Majiabang culture to the Songze culture, a series of cultures which were similar to the Songze culture emerged, including the Beiyinyangying 北阴阳营文化, the Xuejiagang 薛家岗文化 and Phase II of the Longqiuzhuang cultures. Here, in this section, the formation of all these remains is tentatively referred to as the process of “Songzenization”. Likely influenced by the small-mouthed carinated-belly pot-shaped ding tripod cauldrons of the Miaodigou type and the Yancun type, a smallmouthed globular ding tripod cauldron 小口鼓腹鼎 was invariably found in those sites, a few of which feature multiple whorl-pattern on the shoulders. What can be more unequivocally determined as traits of the Miaodigou influence are the ceramic vessels found in the following sites respectively: the petal-patterned painted pottery (see 20 & 21 in Fig. 7.3) seen in H2 of the early stage of the Gugeng Site63 古埂遗址 in Feixi County, Anhui Province, in the lower cultural layer of the Qingdun Site64 青墩下文化层 in Hai’an County, and in T304 of the Caoxieshan Site65 草 鞋山遗址 in Wuxian County, Jiangsu Province; and the calabash-shaped 61 The Longqiuzhuang Site Archaeological Team (1999), Excavation Report on the Longqiuzhuang Neolithic Site in the East of Jianghuai Region, Beijing: Science Press. 62 Examples include the early Xuecheng Site in Gaochun District, Jiangsu Province,

and Phase I of the Sanxing Village Remains in Jintan District, Jiangsu Province. Nanjing Municipal Bureau of Cultural Relics, Nanjing Museum & Gaochun County Cultural Relics Administration (2000), “Excavation brief of the Xuecheng Neolithic Site, Gaochun County, Jiangsu Province”, Archaeology, 5. The Joint Archaeological Team of the Sanxing Village Remains, Jiangsu Province (2004), “The Sanxing Village Neolithic Site Village in Jintan District, Jiangsu Province”, Cultural Relics, 2. 63 Anhui Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (1985), “The Gugeng Neolithic Site in Feixi County, Anhui Province”, Archaeology, 7. 64 Nanjing Museum (1983), “The Qingdun Site in Hai’an County, Jiangsu Province”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1. 65 Nanjing Museum (1980), “The Caoxieshan Site in Wuxian County”, Cultural Relics Series (3), Beijing: Wenwu Press, 1–24.

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

117

ping bottles seen in M141 of Phase II of the Longqiuzhuang Site. It can thus be assumed that the influence of the Dongzhuang-Miaodigou type, especially the latter, had played an important role in stimulating the process of the “Songzenization”. 7.3.3

The Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River

The Dongzhuang type and the Miaodigou type have also penetrated tenaciously into the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, not only adding fresh elements to the local cultures, but also greatly enhancing their vitality. Around 4200 BCE, the culture of the middle reaches of the Yangtze River could be divided into two systems, i.e. the Yangshao and the Daxi. The remains of the Bianfan Site66 边畈遗存 in Zhongxiang County, Hubei Province, east of the Hanjiang River, generally pertained to the Yangshao culture. Its pottery featured high cone-footed pot-shaped ding tripod cauldrons 高锥足釜形鼎, red-topped bo bowls 红顶钵 and pen basins, which are similar to the remains of Phase I the Xiawanggang Site 下王岗遗存 in southwest Henan and northern Hubei. While to the west of Hanjiang River, there existed the early Daxi culture as represented by the Guanmiaoshan 关庙山遗存, i.e. Phase I of the Daxi culture67 in Zhijiang County, Hubei Province, and the Chengtoushan 城头山遗存 Phase I in Lixian County,68 Hunan Province. Its popular pottery included fu 釜 cauldrons, bo bowls with carinated belly 折腹钵 and round-footed bowls. Later, at around 4100 BCE, the Daxi culture penetrated east, adding a large number of round-footed plates, round-footed bowls and other pottery wares to the eastern part of the Hanjiang River, which eventually transformed into the Youziling type69 油子岭类型 of the Daxi culture. At the same time, elements of the Dongzhuang type, such as the 66 Zhang, Xuqiu (1987), “A preliminary discussion on the Neolithic culture in eastern Hanjiang River”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 4. 67 The Hubei Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1981), “Excavation brief of the Guanmiaoshan Neolithic site in Zhijiang County, Hubei Province”, Archaeology, 4. The Hubei Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1983), “The second excavation of Guanmiaoshan site in Zhijiang County, Hubei Province”, Archaeology, 1. 68 Hunan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2007), Excavation Report on the Neolithic Site of Chengtoushan in Lixian County, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 69 Zhang, Xuqiu (1992), Introduction to Neolithic Culture in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River, Wuhan: Hubei Science Jishu Press.

118

J. HAN

petal-patterned painted pottery 花瓣纹彩陶, the embryonic form of the small-mouthed amphorae 小口尖底瓶 (see 18 in Fig. 7.1) and the smallmouthed globular ding tripod cauldrons with whorl-pattern 小口鼓腹旋 纹鼎, also spread across both sides of the Hanjiang River, the result of which could be found in the remains of the Guanmiaoshan Phase II and the Chengtoushan Phase II. Nevertheless, the thin-bodied painted cup 薄胎彩陶杯 which newly emerged at this time in the Daxi culture could also be attributed to the influence of the painted pottery of the Yangshao culture. The influence of the Miaodigou type on the Daxi culture in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River was so profound that its typical elements, such as petal-patterned and bird-patterned decoration and secondary burials of multiple bodies, were found in Phase I of the Zhongpudao Neolithic Site70 中堡岛新石器时代 in Yichang City, Hubei Province, Phase III of the Guanmiaoshan Site of the Daxi culture (see 23 & 24 in Fig. 7.3) and the Daxi Remains71 in Wushan County, Sichuan Province. In M1 of the Luosishan Site 螺丝山遗址 in Huanggang City, Hubei Province, even the painted globular pen basin 彩陶鼓腹盆 of the Miaodigou style (see 22 in Fig. 7.3) was found buried.72 Through the influence of this exchange, the Daxi culture was ushered into a period of vigorous development.

70 The Three Gorges Archaeological Team of the National Cultural Heritage Administration (2001), The Chaotianzui Site and the Zhongpudao Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 71 Sichuan Provincial Museum (1981), “The third excavation of the Daxi Site in Wushan County”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 4. 72 The Hubei Excavation Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1962), “The excavation of the Luosishan Site in Huanggang City, Hubei Province”, Archaeology, 7.

7

7.4

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

119

The Formation of the “Early China”

On the whole, the strong expansion and influence of the DongzhuangMiaodigou type of the Yangshao culture from the core areas of southern Shanxi and western Henan provinces around 4000 BCE had enhanced intermingling of the cultures of most regions in China, forming a relative stable cultural community.73 The spatial structure of this community can be divided into at least three layers from inside out. The core area lay in an area from southwestern Shanxi Province to western Henan Province and ending in eastern Guanzhong (the central Shaanxi Plain). This is the distribution area of the Dongzhuang-Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture and the east of Quanhu type. The most representative petal-patterned painted pottery in this area displayed smooth lines and elegant colours. Other typical vessels, such as the double-lipped smallmouthed amphorae and pot-shaped ding tripod cauldrons with carinated belly 折腹釜形鼎, exhibited stylish and neat design. The middle layer constituted the main area, which included the middle reaches of the Yellow River, the upper and middle reaches of the Hanshui River and the upper reaches of the Huai River. This area covered the whole Yangshao Culture area except the core layer. In this area, the shape of the petal-patterned pottery varied slightly from place to place, and the lines were sluggish. The colour and design also reflected regional differences. For example, the pottery in the east was multi-coloured; in the northwest, there were more double-lipped small-mouthed amphorae and fewer ding tripod cauldrons, while the contrary was true in the southeast. The outermost layer is the marginal area, namely the neighbouring regions of the Yangshao culture, including the lower reaches of the Yellow River, the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, and the northeast region. In these regions, not only were the typical and variant types of the petal-patterned painted pottery often seen, black-coloured banded bo bowls 黑彩带钵, pot-shaped ding tripod cauldrons with carinated belly 折 腹釜形鼎, double-lipped small-mouthed amphorae and calabash-shaped ping bottles were seen as well.

73 Chang, Guangzhi (1989), “The Early Chinese Cultural Sphere and the formation of civilization”, in Essays in Honour of Su Bingqi’s Fifty-Five Years of Archaeology, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 1–23. This paper has proposed that the “Chinese Interaction Sphere” began to take form before 4000 BCE.

120

J. HAN

This three-layer community initially took shape during the Dongzhuang type period, became fully grown during the Miaodigou type era and continued as a relatively stable cultural community for 600–700 years. Constituting the era of the Miaodigou Era, this cultural community intersected at the edge slightly with the cylindrical guan jar cultural system 筒形罐文化系统 in Northeast Asia and the fu cauldron cultural system 釜文化系统 in South China, but remained a generally self-contained (see Fig. 7.4). The Miaodigou Era was a time when the society began to move towards differentiation, ushering in the trend of social transformation and sophistication in the subsequent Chalcolithic period. To be specific, in the early and middle stages of the Dongzhuang type and Miaodigou type, the number of agricultural production tools such as the claw sickle 爪镰 and stone spade 石铲 in both the core and the main areas increased greatly, indicating a significant development in agriculture. As a special weapon, the stone yue 石钺 (i.e. axe for battle, punishment and symbol of royal power) with punched holes had appeared in small numbers, which implied that it might already have a symbolic meaning of military power,74 and that the warfare was becoming increasingly important in society. In terms of dwellings, settlement houses varied in size and were distributed in rows75 ; the society developed in good order, indicating that there existed a relatively effective social organization and management at that time.

74 In the Painting of the Stork, the Fish and the Stone Axe found at the Yancun Site in Ruzhou County, Henan Province, the fu axe seems to have a pieced hole on it, which means it should be a stone yue battle-axe instead. It may as well be called Painting of the Stork, the Fish and the Stone Yue. Yan Wenming believed that this stone yue (axe for battle) was a symbol of military power (Yan Wenming, “Postscript to the Painting of the Stork, the Fish and the Stone Axe”, Cultural Relics, 1981, 12). 75 Represented by Settlement I of the Wangmushan Poxia Site in Liangcheng County, Inner Mongolia, the largest, i.e. F7, was located at the highest point, and the rest of the houses were arranged in rows. See Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region (2003), The Daihai Archaeology III—Collection of Excavation Reports on Sites of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Science Press.

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

121

Fig. 7.4 Three-Level Cultural Structure of “the Early China” during the Miaodigou Era (Ceramic Vessels 1, 7, 12, 13. pen 盆 basin [the Zhangmaowusu Site 章毛乌素 F1:4, the Miaodigou Site 庙底沟 H11:75, the Hulijia Site 胡李 家 T1➁:1, H14:2]; 2, 8, 20. Guan 罐 jar [the Zhangmaowusu Site 章毛乌素 F1:2, the Miaodigou Site H322: 66, the Zhizhushan Site 蜘蛛山 T1➂:47]; 3, 10, 14, 16, 22. Bo 钵 bowl [the Zhangmaowusu Site 章毛乌素 F1:6, the Dadiwan Site T1➂:1, the Hulijia Site T1004➁B:3, the Chengtoushan Site H210:3, the Xishuiquan Site H4:2]; 4, 9, 11. Ping 瓶 vase [the Miaodigou Site 庙底沟 T203:43, the Dadiwan Site 大地湾 F2:14, QD0: 9]; 5. Fu 釜 cauldron [the Miaodigou Site 庙底沟 H12: 12]; 6. pottery stove 灶 [the Miaodigou Site 庙底 沟 H47:34]; 15, 23, 27. ding 鼎 tripod cauldron [the Chengtoushan Site 城头山 M665:2, the Dawenkou Site 大汶口 M1013:5, the Songze Site M10:3]; 17, 24, 28. dou 豆 pedestal plate [the Chengtoushan Site 城头山 M678:4, the Dawenkou Site 大汶口 M2005:49, the Songze Site 崧泽 M30:4]; 18, 25. bei 杯 cup [the Chengtoushan Site 城头山 M679:3, the Dawenkou Site 大汶口 M2002: 8]; 19. cylindrical guan jar 筒形罐 [the Xishuiquan Site 西水泉 F13:31] 21, 26, 29. Hu 壶 jug [the Xishuiquan Site 西水泉 H2:21, the Dawenkou Site 大汶口 M1013:2, the Songze Site 崧泽 M30:3])

122

J. HAN

Very few burial articles were found in the burials, which on the one hand indicated that the differentiation of social status and between the rich and the poor was still very limited, and on the other hand, manifested social simplicity. Whereas we have referred to the social development model in the subsequent Chalcolithic period as the “Zhongyuan (Central Plains) Pattern” 中原模式,76 it was already taking shape at this time. The burials of the Dawenkou culture, the Songze culture and the Beiyinyangying culture in the marginal area were significantly differentiated in the same period. In particular, the craftsmanship of jade artefacts was much more sophisticated than that of the Yangshao culture, which seemed to be ahead in social development as well as an initial reflection of its “Eastern Pattern” 东方模式. But ultimately, the rapid development of these cultures could not be separated from the inspiration from the Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture. By the late Miaodigou type, large-scale “palace-style” 宫殿式 houses and large tombs covering 200– 300 m2 had appeared near the core area, including the Xipo Site 西 坡遗址 in Lingbao County, Henan Province, the Xiahe Site 下河遗址 in Baishui County, Shaanxi Province, and the Quanhu Site 泉护遗址 in Huaxian County, Shaanxi Province. This shows that the society had by then become complex and already stood at the threshold of a civilized society. However, the Xipo burial 西坡大墓, extraordinarily large as it was, had only a small number of funerary objects buried in it. This still reflected the simple and austere traditions of the “Zhongyuan Pattern”, namely priority of the noble over the rich 重贵轻富, orderly observation of the ritual system 井然有礼 and strict distinction between life and death 严于生死之分. When in the cultures in the east, i.e. the Dawenkou, the Songze, the Beiyinyangying, the Xuejiagang and the Hongshan, the differentiation in social status, agriculture, handicrafts and between rich and poor grew increasingly pronounced, the characteristics of the “Eastern Pattern” became more and more distinct. Whereas the three-layer cultural community in the Miaodigou Era shared striking similarities with the three-level structure of the political

76 Han, Jianye (2003), “A preliminary discussion on the general tendency and different modes of societal development in the Chalcolithic Age”, Ancient Civilization, Vol. 2, 84–96.

7

THE MIAODIGOU ERA AND “THE EARLY CHINA”

123

geography in the Shang Dynasty,77 this community had laid the foundation, both geographically and culturally, for China during the Xia and Shang dynasties and even after the Qin and Han dynasties. Therefore, this community can be justifiably called the “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” or the Cultural “Early China” 文化上的早期中国, or the “Early China” for short.78 As for the reason for the rise of the DongzhuangMiaodigou type in the Central Plains, it might have had some connection with the most favourable hydrothermal conditions during the Holocene Climate Optimum (HCO, 全新世) around 6000 BP. Meanwhile, the special geographical location of the Central Plans, i.e. “the Centre under Heaven” 天下之中, had also benefited the strong expansion and even the formation of the Miaodigou Era. (This section was originally published in Archaeology, Issue 3 in 2012.)

77 Song, Xinchao (1991), A Study of the Yin and Shang Cultural Region, Xi’an: Shaanxi Remin Press. 78 While its essence is equivalent to that of Yan Wenming’s “multi-layered petal pattern” (see “Unity and diversity of the prehistoric Chinese culture”, Cultural Relics, 1987, 3), it is similar to Kwang-Chih Chang’s “China Interaction Sphere” (see “Formation of the Early China Interaction Sphere and the Chinese civilization”, in Essays in Honour of Su Bingqi’s Fifty-Five Years of Archaeology, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 1989, 1–23) and Su Bingqi’s “China in General Consensus” (see A New Inquiry into the Origins of Chinese Civilization, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 1999, 161).

CHAPTER 8

An Analysis of the Dawenkou Cemetery

8.1

Introduction

There are heated discussions on the origin of the Chinese civilization in academic circles at present, and central to the discussions is the perspectives on some major archaeological discoveries made in recent years, such as the houses in the Dadiwan Site 大地湾遗址 in Shaodian Village northeast of Qin’an County, Gansu Province, the cities of the Longshan Era 龙山时代, i.e. the late Neolithic period in a wide geographic area in Zhangqiu City, Shandong Province, the large cemeteries in the Liangzhu Site 良渚遗址 in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River at Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, and the Taosi Site 陶寺遗址 in northeast Xiangfen County, Shanxi Province, and the “temples, altars, and cairns” of the Hongshan culture 红山文化 in the Liao River Basin in northeast China. However, as Yan Wenming 严文明 has pointed out, most of these discussions are focused on one archaeological site or one issue of the site, and few have taken the whole picture into consideration.1 Against this backdrop, a comprehensive investigation of the Chinese Neolithic Age is needed so that the position of each major archaeological site can be put in perspective, and one-sided research can be avoided. Yan’s treatise “A brief discussion on the origin of Chinese Civilization”

1 Yan, Wenming (1992), “A brief discussion on the origin of the Chinese civilization,” Cultural Relics, 1: 20–49.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_8

125

126

J. HAN

represents an endeavour in this regard, providing an outline for comprehensive research.2 Additionally, in-depth and meticulous analysis of each important archaeological site ensures that a maximum of crucial information is obtained and conclusions closer to reality are arrived at. This chapter conducts an analysis of the Dawenkou Cemetery 大汶口墓地, with the aim to arrive at some tentative conclusions with regard to the great changes that have taken place in the organization and structure of the society of the late Dawenkou culture 大汶口文化. Hopefully, the analysis of the material remains of the cemetery can provide some palpable insights into the formation and development of Chinese culture. The Dawenkou Cemetery is located at the junction between Tai’an County and Ningyang County in Shandong Province. The cemetery is rich in funerary objects, and the differences between big and small burials are obvious. Ever since the excavation report of the site was published, it has received much attention from academic circles and has aroused heated discussions, with some consensus reached.3 In recent years, along with the growing interest in the research on the origin of Chinese civilization, the name of the Dawenkou Cemetery frequently appears in academic papers, seminars and conferences.4 Dawenkou: A Report on the Excavation of the Neolithic Burial (hereinafter referred to as Report ), published in 1974, is an excellent work in this regard. It provides a comprehensive study of Dawenkou Cemetery, with careful selection of research materials. Also, there is a detailed Registry of the Dawenkou Burials attached (see Table 13 in the Report ). Based on the Report, this chapter analyses the cemetery in terms of five aspects, namely its scope, layout, periodization, demographics and the corresponding social conditions.5

2 Ibid. 3 The Archaeology Teaching and Research Section of the Department of History of

Shandong University (1981) (ed.), A Collection of Papers on the Dawenkou Culture. Jinan: Qilu Press. 4 See Yunxiang, Bai et al. (1989) (eds.), “Proceedings of the Forum on the Origin of the Chinese Civilization”, Archaeology 12, and “Proceedings of the Conference on the Origin of the Chinese Civilization”, Archaeology, 6. 5 Han, Jianye (1992), “Archaeological studies on graves: Theoretical and methodological explorations”, Southeast Culture, 3 & 4.

8

8.2

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

127

Scope of the Cemetery

According to the Report, the Dawenkou Cemetery is rather large in size. The 133 burials unearthed in 1959 constitute only a part of it. With regard to the unearthed burials, most of them were located in the western half of the excavation area, with a high density in the southwestern side. Most of the burials were concentrated in an area of 100 metres long and 30 metres wide. As is shown in the Plan of the Dawenkou Burials (see Figure 2 in the Report ), only one empty burial, i.e. M92, was located 10 metres south of the burial M120; no burial was found 10–15 metres to the east of the burials of M14, M126 and M117. While the north of the burial M64 was the border of the excavation area, the three burials of M128, M130 and M131 in the west were at some distance from the rest of the burials, a distance too insignificant to affect the integrity of the cemetery. In 1974, the Dawenkou Site was excavated for a second time, and a number of older burials were found. This excavation not only further proved that the burial ground excavated in 1959 was basically a relatively complete and independent ground. It also showed that the burials found around this ground all predate it.6 In general, the Dawenkou Cemetery is a well-preserved one. Due to the construction of a railway, the topsoil of the cemetery was removed 0.5–1 metre in depth; consequently, the depth from the surface of the ground to most of the entrance of burial pits cannot be determined, with the possibility that a few shallow burials might have already destroyed. For example, the remaining depth of some small burials, such as M70, M76, M96, M118 and M133, had only 0.1 metre of depth left. As a corollary, burials shallower than these must have been completely demolished. However, given that the remaining depth of most of the burials in the cemetery is between 0.5 and 1 metre, and that the aforementioned burials, such as M70, are the smallest in size, even though some burials have been removed out of sight, their number cannot amount to much and thus does not affect the forthcoming analysis in a significant extent.

6 Shandong Museum (1978) (ed.), “A discussion of the Dawenkou culture”, Cultural Relics, 4.

128

J. HAN

8.3

Periodization of the Cemetery

The Report divided the burials in the Dawenkou Cemetery into three phases: the early, middle and late periods, i.e. Phase I, Phase II and Phase III respectively. Although the periodization plan was basically in line with the actual time of burial of the cemetery, it was too rough to serve as the basis for the analysis of the distribution of the burials, the inhabitants or population of Dawenkou area, etc. Besides, certain types and forms of the funerary objects seemed improperly classified or designated in the Report. Therefore, it is necessary to make some adjustments to the existing periodization. With regard to the Dawenkou culture, researchers at the Shandong Museum periodized it into 11 phases (I to XI). According to this periodization, the burials in the Dawenkou Cemetery pertained to phases V to IX, respectively, with phases V and VI corresponding to the early phase as defined in the Report, phase VII to the middle phase, and phases VIII and IX to the late phase. While this new periodization was more meticulous, its description of the phases seemed so obscure that it was difficult to designate all the burials to their exact phases.7 There are other articles available which focus on the periodization of the Dawenkou culture in a comprehensive manner, but they make no breakthrough from the aforementioned two periodization plans.8 To improve the periodization defined by the Report, this chapter will make some adjustment to the division of the types and forms of some major pottery vessels unearthed in the Dawenkou Cemetery in accordance with their illustrations and plates, and then propose a new periodization plan for the burials. However, for most pottery, we do not have an illustration or plate to rely on, and it is difficult to apply our corrections to all of them. 8.3.1

Existing Periodization by the Report

Of the pottery vessels unearthed in the Dawenkou Cemetery, ding tripod cauldrons 鼎 are the most abundant and have manifested a clear evolutionary sequence. The number of gui ewers 鬶, beihu backpacking jugs 7 Ibid. 8 See Gao Guangren (1978), “The periodization of the Dawenkou culture”, Acta

Archaeologica Sinica, 4, 399–420; Wu, Ru (1982), “On types and periodization of the Dawenkou Culture”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3, 261–282.

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

129

背壶 and gaobing bei tall-stemmed goblets 高柄杯 is not big, but these artefacts have a clear evolutionary sequence, too. Therefore, they are significant for the periodization of the cemetery as well. Dou pedestal plates 豆, kuanjian hu broad-shouldered jugs 宽肩壶, shenfu guan deepbellied jars 深腹罐, he spouted pitchers 盉 and ping vases 瓶 are worthy of some reference when it comes to periodization. The rest of the artefacts unearthed are barely significant for this purpose, because they either lack a clear evolutionary sequence, such as wubi hu handleless jugs 无鼻 壶, yuanfu guan round-bellied jars 圆腹罐 and zun vase-like wine vessels 尊, or are very small in number, such as gang vats 缸 (i.e. the “helmetshaped vessels” in the Report 盔形器), pen basins 盆, bo flat-based bowls 钵, yi washing pitchers 匜 and guxing bei tall wine beakers 觚形杯 (i.e. “vessel pedestals” in the Report 器座). 8.3.1.1 The Ding Tripod Cauldrons Ding tripod cauldrons are the largest in number among all the burial objects unearthed in the Dawenkou Cemetery. They are found in 89 burials which account for 70% of the total of the burials. In the Report, ding were classified into zhefu ding carinated bellied tripod cauldrons 折 腹鼎, yuanfu ding round-bellied tripod cauldrons 圆腹鼎 and three other subsets. The other subsets of ding were further classified into 10 forms or types; since these 10 types appeared only in a couple of items, they are of little significance for the periodization. In the following section, the original classification in the Report of the ding, i.e. zhefu ding and yuanfu ding, is merely modified into two types. 1. Type A Type A includes zhefu ding carinated bellied tripod cauldrons and the Form I yuanfu ding round-bellied tripod cauldrons in the Report. Both of these ding cauldrons are sand-tempered pottery vessels 沙陶, with a carinated belly 折腹. They are divided further into 6 forms. (i) Form I : This pertains to the Form I yuanfu ding round-bellied tripod cauldrons in the Report. They have a contracting mouth, a narrow-folded rim, a slightly-carinated belly, and a round base or a small flat base. The upper part of the vessel is polished and in red slip. An example of this form is M106:7.

130

J. HAN

(ii) Form II : This includes the Forms I and II zhefu ding carinated bellied tripod cauldrons in the Report. They have a narrow flat rim, and a round base or a small flat base. The carina is in the middle of the vessel’s body. The upper part of the body is polished and in red slip. An example of this form is M54:20. (iii) Form III : This regards the Form III zhefu ding carinated bellied tripod cauldrons in the Report. They have a narrow flat rim and a small round base. The carina is lower. For some of this form, the carina is in red slip. An example of this form is M110:10. (iv) Form IV: This includes the Forms IV and VI zhefu ding carinated bellied tripod cauldrons in the Report. They have a relatively wide rim and a flat base. The carina is lower and close to the base. For some of this form, the upper part of the body is in red slip. An example of this form is M22:4. (v) Form V: This includes the Forms V, VII and VIII zhefu ding carinated bellied tripod cauldrons in the Report. They have a wide re-curved rim and a big flat base. The carina is close to the base. There is one or two dents at the top of the feet. An example of this form is M16:3. (vi) Form VI: This refers to the Form X zhefu ding carinated bellied tripod cauldrons in the Report. They have a wide folded rim or a wide curved rim, and the upper part of the body is noticeably dented. They have a big flat base. An example of this form is M117:53. The stratigraphic sequences of the burials to which the different forms of the ding classified above belong are as follows: M9 (IV) → M23 (III) M10 (VI) → M26 (II) M15 (IV) → M33 (III) M54 (II, III) → M 58(I) The sequences cover all forms of the ding discussed in this chapter except Form V. In addition, the stratigraphic sequences are in accord with the order of the ding from Form I to Form VI. 2. Type B The Ding in Type B includes yuanfu ding round-bellied tripod cauldrons of the Forms of II, III, IV and V in the Report. They are

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

131

all sand-tempered red pottery vessels, with a round belly. Type B can be further divided into 2 forms. (i) Form I : This pertains to the Form II yuanfu ding round-bellied tripod cauldrons in the Report. They have a contracting mouth, a curved rim and a small flat base. An example of this form is M73:9. (ii) Form II : This includes the Forms of III, IV and V yuanfu ding round-bellied tripod cauldrons in the Report. They have a folded rim which is relatively wide and a big flat base. There are dents on the feet. An example of this form is M47:43. Ding in BI and BII do not have any direct stratigraphic sequence. However, since the BI ding frequently coexisted with the AIII ding, and the BII ding with those in AV and AVI, it can be deduced that the BI ding predated the BII ding. 8.3.1.2 The Gui Tripod Ewers According to the Report, gui ewers were divided into wuzu gui ewers without feet 无足鬶, shizu gui ewers with solid feet 实足鬶 and kongzu gui ewers with void feet 空足鬶. Since there is only one wuzu gui ewer, this study just focuses on the shizu gui ewers and the kongzu gui ewers and divides them into two types in the following manner. 1. Type A This includes all the shizu gui ewers with solid feet, which can be subdivided into two forms. (i) Form I : This pertains to the Forms I, II and III shizu gui ewers with solid fee in the Report. They have a body resembling that of a hu jug 壶, a long narrow neck and a small flat base. An example of this form is M13:12. (ii) Form II : This includes the Form IV shizu gui ewers with solid fee in the Report. They have a short and relatively thick neck which leans to the belly or the back, and a round base. An example of this form is M36:1. 2. Type B

132

J. HAN

This includes the kongzu (also called daizu baggy-legged 袋足) gui ewers with void feet which can be subdivided into three forms as in the Report. The different forms of the gui ewers do not have any obvious stratigraphic sequence. However, the AI gui ewers often coexisted with those in the AII and AIII categories; the AII gui ewers also coexisted with the AIV ding ewers; the BI and BII gui ewers often coexisted with the AV ding ewers; and the BIII gui ewers with the AVI ding ewers. With reference to the research results of the Xixiahou Site 西夏侯遗址 in Qufu City, Shandong Province, Dadunzi Site 大敦子遗址 in Pizhou City, Jiangsu Province, and Yedian Site 野店遗址 in Jining City, Shandong Province, it can be deduced that the sequences of the historic development for the gui ewers are as follows: AI → AII → BI, and BII → BIII. 8.3.1.3 The Beihu Backpacking Jars According to the Report, beihu backpacking jars were divided into five forms. This division is basically in line with the actual situation. Forms I and II painted pottery beihu backpacking jars in the Report have a similar appearance to Forms I and V beihu, respectively, so the former two can be subsumed into the latter two forms, respectively. Since the beihu in Forms I and II often coexisted with the ding in Forms AI and AII, Form III beihu with the ding in Forms AIII and AIV, the beihu in Forms IV and V often coexisted with the ding in Forms AV and AVI, it is can be deduced that the beihu backpacking jars share a sequence of historic development with that of the ding in Forms I to V. 8.3.1.4 The Dou Pedestal Plates According to the Report, dou pedestal plates were divided into five categories, namely guanshipan dou jar-like basin pedestal plates 罐式盘 豆, daloukong dou pedestal-engraved plates 大镂孔豆, xibing dou thinstemmed pedestal plates 细柄豆, shuangcengpan dou pedestal plates with double-layered basin 双层盘豆, and tongxing dou tube-shaped pedestal plates 筒形豆. Guanshipan dou jar-like basin pedestal plates are few and do not have a clear sequence of historic development, so they are not included for the consideration of periodization. The other four categories are reclassified into four types as follows:

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

133

1. Type A This type includes the daloukong dou pedestal-engraved plates in the Report, which is subdivided into two forms: (i) Form I : This includes the daloukong dou in the forms of I.a, I.b, II.a, II.b and III in the Report. They are relatively big in size and have many ornamental holes drilled in an orderly fashion. The diameter of the plate is bigger than that of the stem. An example of this form is M12:24. (ii) Form II : This pertains to Form IV daloukong dou pedestalengraved plates in the Report. They are small in size and have few ornamental holes which are drilled in a disorderly fashion. The diameter of the plate is smaller than that of the stem. An example of this form is M54:15. The stratigraphic sequences of the burials to which the aforementioned two forms odaloukong dou pedestal-engraved plates belong are as follows: M54 (II) → M58 (I) M78 (I) → M129 (I). In addition, the AI daloukong dou pedestal-engraved plates often coexisted with those in the AII and AIII, and the AII daloukong dou pedestal-engraved plates with those in the AIII and AIV; therefore, it follows that these daloukong dou pedestal-engraved plates shared the sequence of development with those of Forms I and II. 2. Type B This includes the xibing dou thin-stemmed pedestal plates in the Report. Four of Form II xibing dou in the Report have illustrations or plates. Of the four, M118:2 and M9:2 have a similar appearance to M107:4 in Form I but are distinctly different from M123:5 and M47:Ad12, a difference which needs to be dealt with differently. Type B is divided into five forms. (i) Form I : This refers to Form I xibing dou thin-stemmed pedestal plates in the Report. They have a vertically straight mouth or a flaring mouth, a deep plate and a short round foot. An example of this form is M107:4. (ii) Form II : This includes Form II xibing dou thin-stemmed pedestal plates which are of the same form as M118:2 and M9:2

134

J. HAN

in the Report. They have an incurved lip-like rim, a shallow plate and a stem often decorated with holes. (iii) Form III : This includes Form IV xibing dou thin-stemmed pedestal plates in the Report. They have a flaring mouth and two bellies. An example of this form is M100:6. (iv) Form IV : This includes Form III xibing dou thin-stemmed pedestal plates and the Form II xibing dou which are of the same form as M123:5 and M47:Ad12 in the Report. They have a flaring mouth. The stem is tall and straight. The lower part is trumpet-shaped. (v) Form V : This pertains to Form V xibing dou thin-stemmed pedestal plates Form II shuangcengpan dou pedestal plates with double-layered basin in the Report. They have a flaring mouth, a shallow plate and a round foot which has at its lower part a pedestal. An example of this form is M25:30. Type B xibing dou thin-stemmed pedestal plates indicate only one stratigraphic sequence: M123 (IV) → M124 (III). In terms of coexistence, basically none of this type coexisted with the AI, AII or AIII ding tripod cauldrons. The xibing dou thin-stemmed pedestal plates in AI, AII and AIII coexisted with the ding tripod cauldrons in AIV, AV and AVI. Therefore, Type B xibing dou thin-stemmed pedestal plates have a sequence of development from Form I to Form V. 3. Type C This pertains to the tongxing dou tube-shaped pedestal plates in the Report. They are unearthed from four burials and coexisted with the ding tripod cauldrons in AV and AVI. 4. Type D This includes the Form I shuangcengpan dou pedestal plates with double-layered basin in the Report. They are unearthed from two burials and coexist with the ding tripod cauldrons in AV and AVI. 8.3.1.5 The Gaobing Bei or Tall-Stemmed Goblets The gaobing (tall-stemmed) bei goblets are divided into three types: 1. Type A

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

135

This includes the gaobing bei tall-stemmed goblets which have a round foot resembling a tall trumpet. The pottery is thick. Type A can be divided into five forms: (i) Form I : This pertains to Form II gaobing bei tall-stemmed goblets in the Report. They have a slightly contracting mouth, a small and narrow rim, and a relatively short round foot. An example of this form is M 49:6. (ii) Form II : This pertains to the same form as M67:11 in Form II in the Report. They have a flaring mouth, a folded rim, a shallow belly and a relatively thick stem. (iii) Form III : This pertains to the same form as M5:3 in Form V and those in the same form as M3:7 and M47:21 in Form VI in the Report. For this form, the rim is folded flat, the belly is relatively big, and the stem is thin and tall. (iv) Form IV : This pertains to the same form as M10:45 in Form VI in the Report. The stem is thin, and the pottery is also thin. (v) Form V: This includes Form VII in the Report. They are tall and thin. The boundary between the belly and the stem is vague. They are roughly made, and most of them have a lid. An example of this form is M25:43. 2. Type B This includes Form VIII in the Report. They are polished black pottery vessels. The pottery is very thin, and the belly is deep. The stem is thin and is decorated with holes. All of them have a lid with a hole drilled in the middle of the lid. An example of this form is M10:9. 3. Type C This includes the short gaobing bei tall-stemmed goblets. They are divided into two forms: (i) Form I : This includes those that are of the same form as M98:19 in Forms III and IV in the Report. They have a hollowed stem. (ii) Form II : This involves those which are of the same form as M105:3 and M4:2 in Form IV in the Report. They have a solid stem. All the gaobing bei tall-stemmed goblets do not have any obvious stratigraphic sequence. In terms of coexistence, none of them coexisted with the ding tripod cauldrons in Forms AI and AII. The AI,

136

J. HAN

AII and CI gaobing bei tall-stemmed goblets often coexisted with the AIV ding tripod cauldrons. The AIII, AIV and CII gaobing bei tall-stemmed goblets coexisted with the AV ding tripod cauldrons. The AV and Type B gaobing bei tall-stemmed goblets coexisted only with the AVI ding tripod cauldrons. Therefore, it is probable that the gaobing bei tall-stemmed goblets have the following sequence of development: AI, AII, CI → AIII, AIV, CII → AV, B. 8.3.1.6 The He Spouted Pitchers According to the Report, the he spouted pitchers were divided into pingdi he flat-based spouted pitchers 平底盉 and sanzu he three-legged spouted pitchers 三足盉. The only stratigraphic sequence for the he spouted pitchers in the Report is M10 (i.e. Form V pingdi he spouted pitchers and Form II sanzu he spouted pitchers) → M26 (i.e. Form VI pingdi he spouted pitchers); however, the sequence is not correct, and the order needs to be reversed. In this analysis, the division of the he spouted pitchers is adjusted into two types. 1. Type A This includes the pingdi he pouted pitchers in the Report. They are subdivided into four forms: (i) Form I : This includes those of Form II in the Report. The pingdi he pouted pitchers of this form have a deep belly and are relatively tall. An example of this form is M129:3. (ii) Form II : This includes those of Form I and those which are of the same form as M26:4 in Form VI in the report, as well as the painted pottery he pouted pitchers in the Report. They have a relatively shallow belly, and the width exceeds the height. (iii) Form III : This includes all those in Forms III and IV in the Report. They have an oblate belly which is shallower. M4:43 is an example of this form. (iv) Form IV : This includes all of those in Form V in the Report. The lower part of the belly is contracted. M10:10 is an example of this form. 2. Type B

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

137

This involves the sanzu he three-legged pouted pitchers in the Report. They were divided into two forms as in the Report. After the rearrangement, the he pouted pitchers have one stratigraphic sequence: M10 (AIV, BII) → M26 (AII). The AI and AII he pouted pitchers often coexisted with the AII and AIII ding tripod cauldrons, and the AIII he pouted pitchers with the AIV and AV ding tripod cauldrons. The AIV he pouted pitcher appears only once and coexisted with the AVI ding tripod cauldrons. The BI he pouted pitchers coexisted with the AIII ding tripod cauldrons, and the BII he pouted pitchers with the AV and AVI ding tripod cauldrons. Therefore, the sequence of development of the he pouted pitchers is basically in accord with the order of their forms. Besides, the kuanjian hu broad-shouldered jugs only coexisted with the AV and AVI ding tripod cauldrons, and they have one stratigraphic sequence, i.e. M123 (IV) → M124 (II). Also, the ping vases only coexisted with the AV and AVI ding tripod cauldrons.

8.3.2

Re-periodization of the Cemetery

Based on the sequence of development and coexistence of the pottery vessels, the burials of the Dawenkou Cemetery can be re-periodized into six sections (groups) as Fig. 8.1 (Table 8.1). The periodization of the burials into six sections is made mainly with reference to the Type A ding tripod cauldrons. If the periodization was to be made with reference to other vessels, the graves could also be divided into three phases, with a more noticeable sequence of development. For example, as far as the beihu backpacking jugs are concerned, Form I and Form II existed in Section 1 and Section 2, Form III existed in Section 3 and Section 4, and Form IV and Form V existed in Section 5 and Section 6. As to the type A he spouted pitchers 盉, the situation is similar. It thus follows that Section 1, Section 2 and Section 3 form Phase 1, Section 4 and Section 5 form Phase 2, and Section 3 forms Phase 3.9

9 The first phase includes most of the graves in the early phase and part of the graves in the middle phase in the Report, and the second phase includes part of the graves in the middle and late phases in the Report, and the third phase includes part of the graves in the late phase in the Report.

138

J. HAN

Fig. 8.1 Distribution of the burials (1)

As a corollary, of the 119 burials which can be determined stratigraphically, 87 belonged to Phase 1, 23 to Phase 2 and 9 to Phase 3. This leaves 15 burials without a periodization to fit in since they neither have funerary objects or pottery vessels buried within them, nor do they indicate any stratigraphic sequence. However, judging by the distribution of these 15 graves, most of them probably belong to Phase 1 (see Figs. 8.1 and 8.2).

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Phase

Ⅰ Ⅰ

Section 3 Ⅲ Ⅱ Ⅰ

Section 2

Section 1

Ⅲ

Ⅴ

A

Section 4 Ⅳ

Section 5

Section 6 Ⅵ

A

ding

Ⅲ

B

Ⅰ, Ⅱ

gui

Ⅰ, Ⅱ

Ⅰ, Ⅱ

Ⅲ

Ⅲ

Ⅳ, Ⅴ

Ⅳ, Ⅴ

beihu

Ⅰ

Ⅰ, Ⅱ

Ⅱ

A

Ⅰ

Ⅱ

Ⅲ

Ⅲ

Ⅳ, Ⅴ

B

dou

√

√

C

Artefacts in different sections in the Dawenkou Cemetery

√

√

D

Ⅰ, Ⅱ

Ⅲ, Ⅳ

Ⅴ

A √

B

gaobing bei

Ⅰ

Ⅱ

C

Ⅰ, Ⅱ

Ⅰ, Ⅱ

Ⅲ

Ⅲ

Ⅳ

A

he

√

√

kuanjian hu

Section 1: This includes seven burials, namely M21, M51, M56, M58, M82, M106 and M107 Section 2: This includes ten graves, namely M8, M12, M2O, M26, M38, M59, M66, M87, M99 and M111 Section 3: This includes 39 graves, namely M6, M7, M13, M18, M19, M23, M28, M29, M32, M33, M35, M42, M45, M49, M53, M54, M55, M76, M78, M81, M86, M88, M90, M91, M94, M102, M103, M109, M110, M112, M118, M129, and M130, plus M36, M44, M46, M93, M96 and M97. Three graves in this section, i.e. M31, M61 and M62, are destroyed, and in stratigraphic terms, the three graves are not later than those in the third section, but it is not clear to which exact section they belong Besides, there are some burials which can only roughly be put into Section 1 to Section 3, but the exact section they belong to cannot be determined. These graves are 28 in total, including M11, M14, M27, M30, M34, M41, M43, M48, M52, M63, M65, M71, M73, M79, M80, M84, M85, M89, M101, M108, M114, M115, M116, M119, M120, M131 and M132 Section 4: This includes only three graves, namely M9, M22 and M98 Section 5: This includes 20 graves, namely M1, M2, M3, M4, M5, M15, M16, M17, M24, M47, M67, M75, M100, M104, M105, M121, M122, M123, M124 and M125 Section 6: This include 9 graves, namely M10, M25, M60, M64, M72, M77, M117, M126 and M127

Table 8.1

8 AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

139

140

J. HAN

Fig. 8.2 Distribution of the burials (2)

8.4

Spatial Distribution of the Burials

The examination of the distribution of the burials in the cemetery must be made based on the periodization of the graves. According to the charts showing the distribution of the graves (see Figs. 8.1 and 8.2), the graves belonging to the same phase tended to be clustered in one particular area. In this research, only the apparently clustered graves are taken into consideration, for the sake of discretion; those scattering far and wide are not subsumed forcefully into any burial area. 8.4.1

Phase I Burials

Altogether the cemetery of the graves in Phase I can be divided into four blocks (see Fig. 8.1):

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

141

1. North Block I This block was located north of M13, to the exclusion of M14 at the eastern end of the cemetery. 2. North Block II It was located north of M40 and south of M48. This block can be further divided into two burial groups: (i) The First Burial Group: This group lay west of M56 and east of M42. A relatively neat row of four graves, including M37, M39, M40 and M50, which cannot be determined stratigraphically, was on its western border. The four graves might also be a part of this burial group. (ii) The Second Burial Group: This group consists of M5, M55, M65, M84 and the undetermined M57. 3. South Block II It lay north of M20 and south of the North Block II. This block can be divided into three burial groups. 4. South Block I It lay north of M120 and south of the South Block II. This block can be divided into four burial groups: (i) The First Burial Group: The first burial group lay at the northwestern part of the cemetery, including graves M27 to M71. (ii) The Second Burial Group: This group lay east of M87 and west of M112, and the undetermined M74 on the northern border could be subsumed into this burial group as well. (iii) The Third Burial Group: This lay at the centre of South Block I, i.e. south of M129 and north of M101. (iv) The Fourth Burial Group: This group lay south of M101. 8.4.2

Phase II Burials

The burials in the second phase of the cemetery are small in number. They can be roughly divided into three burial areas (see Fig. 8.2): North Block This area lay south of M5 and north of M3 and M17. M47 might be subsumed into the north burial area as well. South Block

142

J. HAN

This area lay in the south, including eight graves such as M105. Central Block This area can barely count as an independent burial area, including only 3 graves, M24, M75 and M98 at the centre (see Fig. 8.2). 8.4.3

Phase III Burials

The graves in Phase III can also be divided into three blocks. M64, M72 and M10 formed the north block, M25, M60 and M77 constituted the central block, while M117, M127 and M126 made up the south block. The three burial areas were clearly separate from each other (see Fig. 8.2).

8.5

Demographic Analysis

Among the 133 burials in the Dawenkou Cemetery, human skeletons were excavated in 128 of them and were mostly in good conditions. According to Yan Wenming who authenticated them, “the skulls and bones of 79 individuals which are representative of all those unearthed from the burials were taken back for further research”.10 However, the identification data obtained through different ways of analysis in the Report were not exactly in line with each other. For instance, 37 human skeletons (including 19 males and 18 females) were listed in the Worksheet of Sex and Age《性别和年龄分析表》 ; 34 human skeletons (including 17 males and 17 females) were presented in the Worksheet of Bone Age of the Neolithic Human Skeletons from Dawenkou《大汶口新石器组人骨 年龄》 . But in fact, a total of 39 human skeletons (including 18 males and 21 females) were mentioned in the Report. Since only the worksheet of bone age provided detailed information about the age and gender of the skeletons with reference to the respective burials,11 the following analyses are based upon the results from this worksheet.

10 Yan, W. (1992), “a brief discussion on the origin of Chinese civilization”, Wenwu,

1. 11 Ibid., Worksheet of the Bone Age of Neolithic Human Skeletons from Dawenkou 118–121.

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

143

Due to the large time span of the Dawenkou Cemetery, it makes sense to align the demographic analysis with the individual phases of the cemetery.12 Given that among the identified human skeletons, only one is from Phase III and six are from Phase II, this study is mainly focused on cases from Phase I. Table 8.2 presents the information of Phase I human skeletons by gender and age. All samples listed in Table 8.2 are skeletons of adults. According to the Report and the Registration Form of the Burials《墓葬登记表》 , among the 128 human skeletons, there are several skeletons of children (accounting for 8.6% of the total) and only one skeleton of infants (M28), which indicates significantly-lower-than-normal mortality rates for children and infants.13 It is thus likely that children and infants might not have been buried here.14 In addition, findings from the two excavations of the Xixiahou Site at Qufu City, Shangdong Province, which pertains to the later phases of the Dawenkou culture, show that the mortality rates for children and infants are 10.6% and 21.3%, respectively (see Table 8.3). Obviously, compared with prior records from the two prior excavations of the Xixiahou Site, the mortality rates for children and infants in Dawenkou are still relatively low. Considering that both the Dawenkou Cemetery and the Xixiahou Site were approximately of the same period, it is plausible to make some most conservative estimates. Assume Phase I mortality rates for children and infants at Dawenkou were 10% and 25%, respectively, it would be normal to add 13 or 14 children/infants to the 25 adults listed in Table 8.2. Next, the average life span, mortality rate and number of residents in Dawenkou should be estimated on the basis of the adjusted number. 8.5.1

Average Life Span and Mortality Rate

To facilitate the estimation, the median ages for children (4–12 years), young adults (21–35 years), middle-aged adults (36–55 years) and old adults (56–75 years) were first calculated. For the sake of convenience, 12 Xia, Nai (1981), “Carbon-14 dating and the Dawenkou culture,” in Shandong University (ed.), A Collection of Paper on the Dawenkou Culture, Jinan: Qilu Press. 13 Yan, Wenming (1986), “A preliminary analysis of the Hengzhen cemetery,” in Papers on Cultural Relics and Archaeology. Beijing: Wenwu Press. 14 Yan, Wenming (1989), “The burial and social system of the Banpo type,” in Research on the Yangshao Culture. Beijing: Wenwu Press.

M99

M107

M108

M30

M35A M35B

Young Middle- Young Middleaged aged

M28

aged M57

M82

aged M85

aged

aged

Middle- Young Young Old

M55

aged

M111

M115

M130 M131 Middle- Middle- Middle- Young Middleaged aged aged aged

M102

aged

aged

M91

aged

M73

Note Young (21–35 years of age), middle-aged (36–55 years of age), and old (56–75 years of age)

Gender Female Burial M7 No. Age Middleaged

M59

Middle- Young Middle- Young

M35

M111 M112 South Middle- Middle- Middle- Middle- Middle- Old

M34

Gender and age of Phase I human skeletons (n = 25)

Gender Male Burial M13 No. Age Young

Table 8.2

144 J. HAN

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

145

Table 8.3 Age of human skeletons from the Xixiahou Site (n = 47) Age

Infant

Child

Teenager

1st excavation

5

1

2

5

11

3

2nd excavation

5

4

1

6

4

0

Count

Young Middle-aged

Old

Site

Note Infant (0–3 years of age), Child (4–12 years of age), Teenager (13–20 years of age), Young (21–35 years of age), middle-aged (36–55 years of age), and old (56–75 years of age) Source Yan, Yan 颜阎 (1973) “Research report of the Neolithic human skeletons of the Xixiahou Site,” Archaeology, 2; The Shandong Team of the Institute of Archaeology of CASS. (1986) “Report of the second excavation of the Xixiahou Site,” Archaeology, 3

their median values were taken, which were 8, 29, 45.5 and 65.5 years, respectively. For infants (0–3 years), though the median age for this group should be 1.5 years, considering the large proportion of infants who would have died in the first four weeks after birth, the median age for this group was set as one year. As for teenagers, since they were not treated separately as an independent group in the previous study of the Dawenkou Cemetery, they could be included in the adult group as a whole. Given the situation, considering the small proportion of the teenage group (e.g. 6% in the Xixiahou Site), this group was not treated independently. Next, the median values of these groups were weighted according to the number of people, and the average life span of residents in Dawenkou could be obtained as 28.4 years. The formula is listed below.   9 × 1 + 4 × 8 + 8 × 28 + 15 × 45.5 + 2 × 65.5 = 28.4 years 38 By the same method, the average life span of male and female residents could be obtained as 28.9 and 28.0 years, respectively, which was little different in life span between the two genders. Without reference to short-term population growth rate, there should be a reciprocal relationship between mortality and life span. Given this rule, the mortality rate (R) of the residents in Dawenkou could be obtained as 3.524%. As is shown in Table 8.2, among the 25 deceased adults, there were 15 middle-aged, 8 young and 2 old adults, accounting for 60%, 32% and 8%, respectively, indicating that most adults died after the age of 50. The

146

J. HAN

above-reported results demonstrate that the average lifespan of the inhabitants of Dawenkou, compared with that of the Banpo Site 半坡类型 of the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化, shows a significant increase, with steady improvement in the structure of the population.15 ,16 8.5.2

The Amount of Residents

To estimate the number of residents of the Dawenkou Site, it is necessary to determine the duration of the cemetery. Though Phase I graveyard could be further divided into three stages, no significant variations in funerary objects were detected across these stages. Thus, each stage should only last for 30–40 years.17 In total, the time span of Phase I graveyard should be around 100 years. Altogether, in Phase I graveyard, there were close to 100 burials, including 87 burials for adults and some possible Phase I burials whose ages remained undetermined. In general, one individual was interred per burial. Additionally, there were also six 2people joint burials and one 3-people joint burial. Therefore, altogether, at least 100 people should have been buried in Phase I graveyard. Next, 34 infants were added with reference to corresponding proportion (the proportion of infants in the total population was set as 25%). This step yielded an estimated total number of 134 people, suggesting the average death per year should be equal to 1.34 person. With a mortality rate of 3.524%, the general residents represented by Phase I graveyard could then be derived as around 40 people. Given that certain residents might have not been buried in the graveyard, the total population of the community reflected in the Phase I burials could reach 50 people. All the burial areas and most burial groups contained tombs that corresponded to the three stages, suggesting that their time span should also be around 100 years. There were also certain burial groups that contain only Stage II and Stage III burials, suggesting a relative shorter time span. Given this information, the normal population of the human communities represented by each burial zone and burial group were estimated. Table 8.4 presents the estimated results. 15 Xin, Yihua (1991), “An analysis of the natural population structure reflected in the Yuanjunmiao cemetery,” Archaeology, 5. 16 Yan, Wenming (1986), “A preliminary analysis of the Hengzhen cemetery,” In Papers on Cultural Relics and Archaeology. Beijing: Wenwu Press. 17 Ibid.

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

147

Table 8.4 Residents in the Dawenkou Site reflected by the Phase I graves Block No. Burial group Residents Total

North Block I

4 4 47

North Block South Block I II

South Block II

1st 8 13

1st 4 19

2nd 5

1st 3 11

2nd 3

3rd 5

2nd 7

3rd 5

4th 3

Since the general picture of the residents in Phases II and III should not vary much from that in Phase I, a preliminary estimation will be made below with reference to the normal population as represented by the burials in Phases II and III. In Phase II, there were 23 burials, which, except for M1, contained one person per burial. After the corresponding infant proportion was added, a total of 30 people was derived. Supposing that Phase II lasted about 80 years, and that its mortality rate remained at 3.524%, then the normal population in Phase II of the cemetery would be about 15 persons. In Phase III, there were three vacant graves, which might have been set aside for some special deceased persons. Suppose that one person was buried in one grave, and after adding the corresponding infant proportion, a total of 11 or 12 people can be derived. Given the fact that Phase III cannot be further divided into stages, this phase lasted no more than forty or fifty years, indicating that only 12 people had lived in this community as normal residents.

8.6

Social Conditions

The social conditions reflected from the Dawenkou Cemetery have been frequently discussed in prior research. Though it is commonly acknowledged that there had existed a strict social differentiation then, there are still many different views with regard to specific questions. For example, as for the stage of social development in Dawenkou, some hold that Dawenkou still remained a clan society,18 or that it even simultaneously possessed the characteristics of both matrilineal and patrilineal

18 Peng Bangjiong (1977), “A clan society but not a slave society,” Guangming Daily, History Section, 5 December; Chen Guoqiang (1978), “On the social nature of the Dawenkou cemetery,” Journal of Xiamen University (Social Sciences edition), 1.

148

J. HAN

clan societies in Phase I period.19 Meanwhile, others insist that with the appearance of patriarchal families, Dawenkou was essentially a slave society,20 or that with the rise of noble families, Dawenkou was a de facto state, which merely retained the shell of a clan society.21 On the other hand, in terms of its economic ownership, some maintain that private ownership was either forming or in embryo, but public ownership still occupied a dominant position22 ; but others argue that private ownership had already come into being.23 The causes of these disparate views, undoubtedly, may be attributed to different understandings of relevant concepts and different analyses of the available materials, but the key lies in the different stances in addressing these questions. However, it does not constitute a feasible approach to infer that the Dawenkou society had already ushered in a patrilineal clan society just on the basis of a few joint male–female burials; nor would it be a plausible method to conclude that women in the Dawenkou society were oppressed merely on the basis of the subtle differences in burial objects between male and female. Yan Wenming pointed out that “the change of clan lineage cannot have served as the driving force behind the development of a primitive society, nor can it explain how a primitive society had moved forward and eventually entered a class society”. Therefore, “in the

19 Cai, Fengshu (1978), “A preliminary discussion on the social nature of the Dawenkou cultural period,” Literature, History and Philosophy, 1. 20 Tang, Lan (1981), “The upper limit of the origin of slavery society in China should be beyond 5000 or 6000 BP,” in Shandong University (ed.), A Collection of Essays on the Dawenkou Culture, Jinan: Qilu Press. 21 Gao, Guangren (1981), “The age and social nature of the Dawenkou culture,” in Shandong University (ed.), A Collection of Papers on the Dawenkou Culture, Jinan: Qilu Press; Cai, Fengshu (1978), “A preliminary discussion on the social nature of the Dawenkou cultural period,” Literature, History and Philosophy, 1. 22 Shan, Da. and Shi, Bing (1976), “The birth and sprout of private ownership in ancient China: Evidence from the remains of the Dawenkou culture,” Cultural Relics, 4. 23 Museum of Shandong Province (1978), “About the Dawenkou culture,” Cultural Relics, 4; Yu, Zhonghang (1976), “The Dawenkou culture and the disintegration of the primitive society,” Cultural Relics, 7; Wei, Qin (1975), “The origin of private ownership: Evidence from the Dawenkou cemetery,” Archaeology, 5; Lu, Bo (1976), “The origin of private ownership in China: Evidence from the Dawenkou culture,” Archaeology, 7; Li, Jiaxiu (1981), “The social nature of Dawenkou: Evidence from its burials,” in Shandong University (ed.), A Collection of Papers on the Dawenkou Culture, Jinan: Qilu Press; Wu, Ruzuo (1990), “Burials of the Dawnkou culture,” Archaeology, 1.

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

149

investigation of the nature or the stage of development of an archaeological culture, the status of productivity and relations of production rather than clan lineage should be prioritized”.24 As far as the current study is concerned, this comment is of significant pertinence. However, the investigation of the relations of production of a given historical period should not be oversimplified either. For example, the change of wealth within a family cannot be simply equated to social polarization, but the change of an individual’s wealth can lead to the change of his social status and economic conditions, and even differences between burials. Given the situation, if, as usual, burial size is employed to account for the polarization between the rich and the poor, wrong conclusion would arise. As Yan Wenming rightly pointed out, “early social polarization is, in essence, the redistribution of wealth between families”.25 If these families can be identified from the graveyards and then compared, we would be more likely to arrive at an understanding which is closer to the social polarization of the time. 8.6.1

Phase I: Clan Graveyards

There were not only a large number of burials in the Phase I graveyard, the burials were also clustered. In all the burials, except M128, the deceased were placed on an east–west axis, with heads oriented to the east (except M45) and funerary objects mostly placed near the heads and feet of the buried. Only two gu-shaped bei beakers, which were common at the Yedian Site in Jining City, Shandong Province, and some other sites, were excavated here. Further, only one case whereby the deceased held water deer tusks 獐牙 in his hands (M6) was found here, which was the custom for the Liulin Site, the Dadunzi Site in Pizhou City of Jiangsu Province and other sites. Moreover, deformed jaws caused by placing ceramic (stone) balls in the mouth of the deceased were also common in burials from the burials in Phase I of the Dawenkou Cemetery. All these phenomena indicate that there existed unique burial practices associated with this cemetery. Other common practices of the Dawenkou culture,

24 Yan, Wenming (1986), “Commemorating the 65th anniversary of the discovery of the Yangshao site,” Cultural Relics of Central China, 348. 25 Ibid.

150

J. HAN

such as tooth ablation 拔牙 and hand-holding deer tusks, were also prevalent here. It is thus highly possible that the human community which shared the same cemetery and obeyed a unique burial practice was none other than a clan. In the same vein, the estimated population of about 50 people in Phase I of the Dawenkou community was actually the size of a small clan. 8.6.2

Polarization Between Families: Disintegration of the Clan Society

A further examination of the Phase I burials suggests that there existed many differences between the burial areas in this phase. However, causes of these differences remain underexplored. To address this question, the burials of this cemetery were first classified into nine groups (Phase I of the cemetery involved only Groups 1–7), which were further categorized into three classes (i.e. small-, medium- and large-sized burials). The categorization was mainly based upon the number and type of funeral objects as well as erceng tai (second-tier platform) 二层台 and funeral items. The results of the categorization are presented in Tables 8.5 and 8.6. First, as shown in Tables 8.5 and 8.6, there existed differences in rank among these burial areas. North Block I burials were mainly mediumsized while those of the other three areas were mostly small-sized. Second, there were differences in the types of burial objects. On the one hand, the jade cong (a straight tube with a circular bore and square outer section with more or less convex sides) 玉琮 and the ji hairpin 笄, excavated from the North Block I burial area, are rarely seen in other burial areas. Moreover, North Block I burial area also hosted the largest number of spades 铲 and carved cylinders 雕筒. This evidence demonstrates the special status of the North Block I burial area in the cemetery. For example, the position of the spades and carved cylinders in the burials can be classified into the following five types: Type 1: The stone spade was placed under the right arm of the skeleton, and half a metre away, the carved cylinder was placed between the legs of the body (see Table 8.7 in the Report ). While this type was only present in M26 from the Phase I burials, as a matter of fact, the spade and the carved cylinder should have been one set joined together by a wooden handle, with the carved cylinder

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

151

Table 8.5 Categorization of Dawenkou Phase I burials Class

Group

Small-sized

Amount of funeral objects

1st

0–5

2nd

6–15

3rd

16–20

Medium-sized

4th

21–30

Large-sized

5th 6th 7th 8th 9th

31–40 41–50 51–70 71–90 91–180

Grave No. North Block I

11

North Block II

South Block II

South Block I

36, 43, 48, 55, 45, 65,

20, 21, 29, 31, 61, 62

27, 30, 71, 76, 85, 86, 88, 89, 90, 91, 96, 108, 114, 120, 132 34, 69, 87, 93, 94, 97, 99, 101, 107, 109, 112, 115, 116, 119 110, 111, 129

49

12, 58, 63 59 13, 54 26

81

41, 44, 51, 82, 53, 79,

42, 46, 52, 84 56, 80

6, 8, 18, 23, 28, 33, 38, 118, 130 7, 32, 66, 73, 131 19

35, 78, 102 103, 106

serving as a decorative item attached to one tip of the wooden handle.26 Type 2: The carved cylinder was placed either between the legs, or by one side of the body, or near the waist, but no corresponding spade was present. Cases of this type include M63, M109 and M112. It is likely that these cylinders were also attached to wooden handles originally. Type 3: Only stone spades were placed in the burials but without decorative carved cylinders. This type is the most common one. Type 4: The carved cylinder was placed below the waist, but the spade was placed above the waist. Obviously, these two objects did not form one set. This type was only present in M38.

26 Archaeology Institute of Zhejiang Province (1988), “Brief report of the excavation of Liangzhu sacrificial altar site at Yaoshan of Yuhang county,” Cultural Relics, 1.

Table 8.6

13, 26, 59 12, 13, 26, 54, 58, 59 26

Jade cong

Hairpin

Ring

Spindle whorl

49, 52, 55, 65

19

8, 32, 33

19

26 ,54, 63

Adze

11, 12, 13, 59, 63

Arrow head

38

38, 118

South Block II

19

13, 26, 59, 63

Carved cylinder

North Block II

Ax

12, 13, 26, 59

North Block I

Stone/Jade spade

Objects

Funerary Objects from Dawenkou Phase I burials

35, 106, 109, 110, 111,129

78

85, 91, 102, 110, 111,115, 116

87, 101, 103, 106

69, 110, 112

34, 103, 106, 109, 110

109, 112

South Block I

152 J. HAN

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

153

Table 8.7 Categorization of Dawenkou Phases II and III graveyards Class

Group Amount of Burial No. funerary Phase II objects

Phase III

North Central South Small-sized

1st 2nd

0–5 6–15

3rd

16–20

2, 15, 16 5, 22

Medium-sized 4th

21–30

3, 67

5th 6th

31–40 41–50

7th 8th

51–70 71–90

9th

91–180

Large-sized

North Central South

100, 105

24, 75, 98

127

121, 122, 64 123, 124, 104 72

1, 4, 17

77

60 125

9, 47

25

117, 126

10

Type 5: Carved cylinders, which could not be filled with wooden handles due to its extra-large size, were placed near the head or the waist of the body. Examples of this type include M59:11 and M13: (b4). To varying degrees, these five types reflect the special status the tomb owners had enjoyed, and the most representative, i.e. Type 1, was only found in the North Block I burial area. On the other hand, axes 斧 and spindle whorls 纺轮 were not found in the North Block I burial area. Additionally, rings 指环, which were common in the South Block I burial area, were only found in M26 in the North Block I burial area. This phenomenon may be attributed to the fact that most tomb owners from the North Block I burial area would not directly engage in production labour. However, the possibility of custom differences cannot be ruled out either. In short, the wealth and status of the North Block I burial area were significantly higher than that of the other burial areas. The large spatial distance between North Block I burial area and the other three might also be related to this fact.

154

J. HAN

Besides the above-mentioned differences related to the North Block I burial area, there were also differences in between the other three burial areas. For example, whereas there were five medium-sized burials in the South Block I burial area, there was only one such burial in the South Block II burial area, but none in the North Block II burial area. All burials from the North Block II burial area were small-sized, accounting for 73% of all small-size burials of the whole cemetery. Thus, the North Block II burial area should have been designated for the poor; in contrast, the South Block I should have been second only to the North Block I burial area in terms of wealth. Since the burials in Phase I had been set for the clan, the human communities represented by different burial areas with obvious social polarization and common mortuary practices should have been extended families. This finding also corroborates with the estimated number of residents reported in Table 8.4. Therefore, the differences between burial areas could as well be interpreted as the differences between extended families. Burial area A may be further subdivided into burial groups (although no such division can be made of the North Block I burial area). The human communities represented by these groups can be regarded kinship families, which was one level lower than the extended family in rank. In a given period of time, the human community symbolized by a burial group was, in fact, a family of 3–8 people living under one roof, a normal scale as shown in Table 8.4. It is the fact that the family members who were buried together one after another after death in a certain time span that had led to emergence of familial burial groups. There also existed, to some extent, social polarization within kinship families, which is reflected in the location of burial groups of a certain burial area. For example, Group 3 burials which were located at the centre of South Block I burial area were mostly medium-sized ones, while the other three burial groups were mostly small-sized ones. Further, different from the common practice that no funerary objects would be buried with children, the child burial of M94 from Group 3 was found to have eight funeral objects, along with some funeral items and erceng tai second-tier platforms. This may indicate that the human community conjoined by Group 3 burials had probably been a senior clan or a family with history. Judging from the findings presented above, there had indeed existed severe social polarization in the Phase I period. Such a trend was prevalent both between the extended families (and the burial areas) and between

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

155

kinship families (and the burial groups). It is the increasing polarization between these families that had destroyed and affected the harmony and tranquillity of the clan society, disintegrating it gradually. Differences were also present between burials from the same group. These differences could be attributed to the change of the economic condition of a family or to the special status enjoyed by certain family members in a social organization such as a kinship family, an extended family, a clan and even a higher organization. Thus, those big-sized burials would always appear in the burial areas or groups for the rich. No exceptions were found in this regard. For instance, M26 in North Block I was the only large-sized burial in the Phase I burials. On top of its size, funeral objects which clearly symbolized power such as a stone spade with a decorative ivory-carved cylinder shank 带象牙雕筒柄 were excavated from this tomb. These items suggest that when alive, the tomb owner might not only have been the power holder of the family associated with the North Block I burial area, but also the chief of the whole clan, or the leader of an even higher social organization. For another example, in South Block II burial area, M38 from Group 1—a rich burial group—contained carved cylinders and stone spades from different sets, as well as erceng tai second-tier platforms. In addition, in South Block II burial area, M19 from Group 3—another rich burial group—was the only medium-sized burial in this area. It goes without saying that M103 and M106, which hosted the largest amount of burial objects in South Block I burial area, were also from the richest Group 3. 8.6.3

Special Cases: Male–Female Joint Burials

In addition to social polarization, debate still remains on the status of males and females reflected in the Dawenkou Cemetery and the nature of the male–female joint burials. In terms of social status, few researchers hold the opinion that males and females were equal then, while most tend to agree that males enjoyed positions of authority and power over females at that time.27 As for the nature of the male–female joint burials, there are also two views: (1) the joint burial of a husband and a wife or (2) 27 Cai, Fengshu (1978), “A preliminary discussion on the nature of the society in the Dawenkou Era,” Literature, History and Philosophy, 1; Shan, Da & Shi, Bing (1976), “A look at the breeding and germination of the private ownership in ancient China: Evidence from the Dawenkou cultural relics”, Cultural Relics, 4.

156

J. HAN

the sacrificial burial of a concubine or a female slave.28 It now seems that these conclusions have been made mostly in a hasty manner and need further analysis. Among the eight joint burials reported in the Dawenkou Cemetery, except for M1, which was from the Phase II graveyard, and M70 and M70, whose ages were undetermined, the other five joint burials were all from the Phase I burial ground. In the four identified joint burials (M1, M13, M35 and M111), males were all placed on the left and females on the right. However, the validity for certain joint burials remains questionable. For example, in M1, the male body lay in the centre of the tomb, while the grave section for the female body protruded outward with a slightly higher base, forming a terrace-like shrine (see Figure 24 in the Report ). It is thus likely that instead of a joint burial, the female tomb was built as a secondary burial, destroying the prior burial for the male.29 In M13, the supine female body was 7 centimetres above the male body in profile, which indicates that the female might have been buried later than, instead of together with, the male (see Figure 6 in the Report ). Further, M35 was a three-people joint burial. Given this analysis, there would be only one reliable male–female joint burial, i.e. M111. Compared with other cemeteries such as the Xixiahou Site, it is apparent that there indeed appeared a few male–female one-time joint burials at that time, and that such practice was not a mere coincidence. However, it would be untenable for the jointly-buried female to be either a concubine or a slave, because among the joint burials listed in the Report, in M31, M70 and M92, no funeral objects were excavated; and in M13, M35 and M111, no funeral objects were placed on the male side. Thus, it would be feasible to infer that those males and females in the joint burials would be husband and wife. Moreover, given the lack of evidence of man being superior to women, it would not be reasonable 28 For support of the joint burial of a husband and a wife, see Wei Qin (1975), “The origin of private ownership: Evidence from the Dawenkou cemetery,” Archaeology, 5; Shan, Da. & Shi, Bin (1976), see Note 27 above; Cai, Fengshu (1978), see Note 27 above; Yu, Zhonghang (1981), “A brief look at the male–female joint burials of the Dawenkou Cemetery,” in Shandong University (ed.), A Collection of Papers on the Dawenkou Culture, Jinan: Qilu Press; Wang, Yuxin (1981), “Several questions about the nature of the society in the Dawernkou Culture,” in Shandong University (ed.), A Collection of Papers on the Dawenkou Culture, Jinan: Qilu Press. 29 Yan, Ming (1988), “A brief report on the excavation of the Xishuipo Site in Puyang and discussions on several issues in two related articles,” Huaxia Archaeology, 4.

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

157

to conclude that the human sacrifice must have been females rather than males, either. It is noteworthy that the seven reported joint burials (except M1) were mostly from the Phase I graveyard, and they were located on the periphery of different burial areas (see Fig. 8.1); besides, South Block I burial area hosted the most of the joint burials, including M35, M69, M92 and M111. As shall be shown below, since in the Dawenkou Site, only Phase I graveyard was a clan graveyard, these male–female joint burials, both small in number and peripheral in location, were more likely to be special cases of burials in the clan graveyard. This means that this practice did not seem to be advocated by the society at that time. As a result, it would be unconvincing to infer the developmental stage of the society of the given period of time on the basis of some special cases. Additionally, I attempted to deduce the gender of a tomb owner on the basis of the gender-related patterns of combination of the funeral objects unearthed from the identified single-male or single-female burials.30 My findings revealed that it was not rare for single-male and single-female burials to be arranged side by side, such as M38 (male) and M8 (female) from Stage 2, and M6 (male) and M7 (female) from Stage 3. Given its popularity, this burial arrangement was thus more likely to have been commonly applied for couples. Hence, it would be unnecessary to adopt the joint burial speculation to indicate matrimony. 8.6.4

Phases II and III: Family Graveyards

There existed great similarities in burial practices between Phase II and Phase III burial areas; however, significant differences in wealth were also apparent. For instance, within the Phase II graveyard, there were five medium-sized and two large-sized burials from the north burial areas, but only one large-sized burial in the south burial areas, i.e. M125; all the other burials were small ones (see Table 8.7). Considering the normal population size in Phase II and Phase III, which was approximately a

30 All arrowheads, axes, sharpening stones, daggers, dental knives, horn pendants and chisels were unearthed from the identified male burials; darts, shovels, carved cylinders, etc., were mostly from male burials. All neckpieces or headpieces were found in the identified female burials; spinning wheels and hair restraints were mostly from female burials.

158

J. HAN

dozen people, I may as well conclude that Phase II and Phase III graveyards each should represent an extended family, with each burial area representing a kinship family. 8.6.5

Replacement of Clan Graveyard with Family Graveyard: A Critical Step Towards Civilization

Compared with the Phase I graveyard, Phases II and III graveyards were different in the following four aspects. Firstly, the Phase I graveyard was a clan graveyard, within which individual burial areas and groups represented individual extended families and kinship families, respectively, while the Phases II and III graveyards each stood for an extend family, and the burial areas from these two cemeteries corresponded to different kinship families. Secondly, the Phases II and III burials, especially those in Phase III, contained more burial objects than the Phase I burials. Also, in the Phases II and III graveyards, there were no small-sized burials, but a large proportion of medium-sized burials, and seven large-sized burials (only one large burial among the Phase I burials) (see Table 8.7). The most typical large-sized burials from the Phase III graveyard included M10, M25 and M117, with M10 being the richest burial from the Dawenkou Cemetery. In M10, the spade, which had a carved bone tube handle and was placed next to the right leg of the human skeleton, was made of jade instead of stone (see Figure 17 in the Report ). Compared with M10, M25 was inferior in both size of space and number of funeral objects; however, it contained six stone spades and five carved tubes. Except for the stone spade M25:4 outside the coffin, each of the other five stone spades, placed close to the waist, could be linked to a corresponding carved tube. In their original state, these five stone spades with either wooden handles or carved bone tube handles should be placed on the chest of the deceased, under the body, and next to the legs, respectively (see Figure 18 in the Report ). While it might seem that the tomb owner of M25 enjoyed more prestigious status than that of M10, the jade spade unearthed from the latter burial might carry a more special meaning. Coincidentally, similar to M25, there was only one jade spade with a carved bone tube handle unearthed in M117, another large-sized burial from the south burial areas. To summarize, in the Phase III graveyard, complete sets of spades and carved tubes were only found in three large-sized burials, including

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

159

M10, M25 and M117; in other large-sized or medium-sized burials, only stone spades or carve tubes were seen; and in small-sized burials, neither stone spades nor carve tubes were present. This phenomenon suggests that there indeed existed various ritual systems at that time. Thirdly, in Phases II and III, especially Phase III, there existed a large variation in size between burials within different burial areas, which was in sharp contrast with the Phase I graveyard (see Table 8.7). Fourthly, there were also some burials which contained either no skeletons or headless skeletons. For example, M24 in the Phase II graveyard contained no skeleton and M2 contained a headless skeleton; M60, M126, and M127 in the Phase III graveyard—which corresponded to three different burial areas—contained no skeleton, accounting for 1/3 of the total Phase III burials. Moreover, there seemed to be no differences in burial practice between these burials and the common burials. The above-listed four differences demonstrate that the Dawenkou society in Phases II and III, particularly in the Phase III period, might have undergone some significant change, with the Phase II period serving as a transitional phase. Considering the consistency of burial practice from Phase I to Phase III graveyards and the emergence of large-sized burials in Phases II and III graveyards, it would not be feasible to attribute the change to either an outside invasion or cultural decline. Consequently, the only plausible explanation would be the drastic change of the social development; that is, a critical step towards the threshold of civilization had been taken. The replacement of clan graveyard with family graveyard further suggested that the clan society had collapsed or been on the brink of collapse. Similar situation was also observed in other cultures of the same period, such as the Fanshan and Yaoshan sites in Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, from the Liangzhu Culture, both of which also hosted large-sized family graveyards.31 It is, therefore, likely that in Dawenkou, with the rise of the economic status of certain families, some holders of power over an entire clan, a tribe

31 Archaeological Institute of Zhejiang Province (1988), “Brief report of the excavation of the Liangzhu sacrificial altar site at Yaoshan of Yuhang County,” Cultural Relics, 1; The Fanshan Team of the Archaeological Institute of Zhejiang Province (1988), “Brief report of the excavation of the Liangzhu sacrificial altar site at Yaoshan of Yuhang County,” Cultural Relics, 1.

160

J. HAN

and an even larger community began to exist.32 At this stage, it would be unnecessary to maintain the already dilapidated shell of the clan society by resorting to the common cemetery of the clan; instead, the power and wealth of rich families would be forcefully and publicly entrenched. Under such circumstances, rich families would take possession of a previous clan cemetery as a family one and drive other families to bury their deceased in other places. The appearance of artefacts with ritual connotations, such as the stone or jade spades that had wooden handles or carved bine tube handles, suggested that at that time, there had existed not only some natural social polarization but also some forceful measures to maintain and enforce the hierarchy. On the other hand, the emergence of burials that contained either no skeletons or headless skeletons might also be attributed to frequent wars.33 This burial arrangement is more likely to be made to sustain the glory of the family of the deceased; that is, decent burials would be arranged for those whose body could not be recovered. However, this claim does not suggest that there had been no wars before, nor people who died because of wars but whose body could not be recovered. Instead, it is the trait of a clan society to make a distinction between natural and battle-related or violent deaths. As a consequence, the clan would neither bring back the bodies of those who died in a battle nor arrange empty or bodyless burials for them. Whereas a clan society would prioritize common interests of its members, the rising family would do otherwise. In addition, it seems invalid to conclude that it was the change of the familial social economic conditions that had given rise to the great discrepancies between large-sized and small-sized burials within the same burial area in Phases II and III graveyards. In fact, such discrepancies

32 Yan Wenming (1992), “A brief discussion on the origin of the Chinese civilization”, Cultural Relics, 1. 33 Museum of Shandong Province (1978), “About the Dawenkou culture,” Cultural Relics 4; Yu, Zhonghang (1976), “The Dawenkou Culture and the disintegration of the primitive society,” Cultural Relics, 7; Wei, Qin (1975), “The origin of private ownership: Evidence from the Dawenkou Cemetery,” Kaogu, 5; Lu, Bo (1976), “The origin of the private ownership in China: Evidence from the Dawenkou culture,” Archaeology, 7; Li, Jiaxiu (1981), “The nature of the society of the Dawenkou culture: Evidence from its burial custom,” in Shandong University (ed.), A Collection of Papers on the Dawenkou Culture, Jinan: Qilu Press; Wu, Ruzuo (1990), “Burials of the Dawnkou culture,” Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1.

8

AN ANALYSIS OF THE DAWENKOU CEMETERY

161

might also be related to the personal status of the tomb owners, as indicated by the small-sized burials such as M64, M72, M77 and M127 serving as subordinating ones, a possibility which cannot be dismissed flatly from consideration. (This section was originally carried in Issue 2 of Cultural Relics of Central China, in 1994.)

CHAPTER 9

The Ancient Cities of Liangzhu, Taosi and Erlitou: The Evolution of Early Chinese Civilization

As far as the ancient cities of Liangzhu 良渚, Taosi 陶寺 and Erlitou 二 里头 are concerned, they are the largest pre-Shang settlements unearthed so far, each covering an area of about three million square metres. In the light of the changes of the historical and cultural patterns in early China, this chapter makes a comparative study of the structure and function, the sphere of domination and influence, as well as the formation and decline, of the three mega settlements, with an aim to shed some light on the evolution of early Chinese civilization.

9.1 General Information of the Three Ancient Cities The ancient city of Liangzhu was located in Yuhang District, Hangzhou, Zhejiang Province. The site was roughly shaped like a rectangle with rounded corners, and covered an area of 2.9 million square metres.1 At the centre of the city was the Mojiaoshan Palace Area 莫角山宫室区, a man-made piled-up terrace of 300,000 square metres.2 To the northwest 1 Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2008), “Report on the 2006–2007 excavation of the ancient city of Liangzhu in Yuhang District, Hangzhou”, Archaeology, 7. 2 Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2001), “The 1992–1993 excavation of the Mojiaoshan Site in Yuhang”, Cultural Relics, 12.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_9

163

164

J. HAN

of the Mojiaoshan was the highest ranking elite burial site, the Fanshan Cemetery 反山墓地.3 At the Fanshan Cemetery, in the highest ranking elite burial M12 alone, more than 647 jade objects were found, including big jade cong tubesdas (ritual jade artefact in the shape of a straight tube with a circular bore and square outer section) 大玉琮, big jade yue (ritual battle-axe) 大玉钺, both painted lacquer basins 漆盘 and lacquer cups 漆 杯 inlaid with jade, and “sacred emblems” 神徽 carved on jade artefacts, which featured a combination of a divine figure and a beast’s face 神人兽 面. These funerary objects “showed that the grave occupant not only had had military and political authority, but also was a religious chieftain with privilege”.4 Around the ancient city of Liangzhu were scattered more than 130 altars, cemeteries, dwelling sites and workshops which were all concentrated in an area of about 50 square kilometres. These buildings can be divided into at least three types.5 The highest-ranking altars were those at Yaoshan Altar 瑶山祭坛 northeast of the city and those at the Huiguanshan Altar 汇观山祭坛 west of the city.6 Next was the Fanshan Cemetery, where whole “sacred emblems” carved on a jade object were also seen. In the third place was the Huiguanshan Cemetery, where such “sacred emblems” were not found, but instead jade ritual vessels, such as cong tubes, yue battle-axes and bi discs 璧. In contrast, hundreds of small graves have also been excavated with few or no jade funerary objects. In addition, to the north of the ancient city of Liangzhu was the site of a man-made earth wall at Tangshan 塘山, which might have been used for flood control, and to the south of the city was the site of the Bianjiashan Wharf 卞家山码头.

3 Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2003), The Fanshan Cemetery, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 2003. 4 Yan, Wenming (2006), “The Fanshan Cemetery: An excellent archaeological report”, Newspaper of China’s Cultural Relics, 12 July, page 04. 5 Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2005), The Settlement Clusters of the Liangzhu Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 6 Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2003), The Yaoshan Cemetery, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology & The Yuhang Cultural Relics Management Committee (1997), “A brief report on the excavation of the altars and burials of the Liangzhu culture at the Huiguanshan Site in Yuhang, Zhejiang Province”, Cultural Relics, 7.

9

THE ANCIENT CITIES OF LIANGZHU, TAOSI AND ERLITOU …

165

On the whole, the Mojiaoshan Palace Area was situated at the core of the Liangzhu Site. It might have served as the political, military and religious centre of the Liangzhu settlement clusters as well. The ancient city of Liangzhu and its settlement clusters were on a grand scale, had a clear and precise layout and a complex structure. Together they manifested a relatively high-profiled society which had an explicit hierarchical system and specified functions carried out by different people. All the “sacred emblems” and other ritual symbols were unique and could not be found in other cultural regions. Moreover, the construction of the extra-large Mojiaoshan architectural complex must have required the mobilization of manpower and material resources from more than one settlement cluster. The graves at the Fanshan and Yaoshan Cemeteries contained a large number of exquisite jade artefacts, expressing the painstaking effort of countless craftsmen. While these jade articles might have been made through a set of wellorganized procedures and with high levels of specialization of labour, they were mostly in the possession of the aristocracy. Such a high degree of social organization might have also entailed both the inspiration of a strong religious atmosphere and the coercion of the military. In the burials at the Fanshan, Yaoshan and Huiguanshan Cemeteries, the funerary objects included the yue battle-axes symbolizing military authority, and the cong tubes or the bi discs, symbols of religious privilege. The graves at the Yaoshan and Huiguanshan Cemeteries were built on the erstwhile altars. All these indicated that the aristocratic grave occupants might have been both “great wizards”, i.e. mediators between man and god, and generals in charge of “armed forces”.7 These features therefore seemed to best describe the supreme ruler of the Liangzhu settlement clusters. Furthermore, the discovery of the “sacred emblem”, the bird pattern, and the dragon head pattern in many burials of the Liangzhu ancient city may suggest the existence of a centralized power over the whole Liangzhu cultural area.8 Given that the Liangzhu settlement clusters were the largest in scale and the highest in profile, and that the whole “sacred emblem” unearthed at the Fanshan and Yaoshan Cemeteries was not seen 7 Zhang Zhongpei (1995), “The temporal and social stage of the Liangzhu culture”, Cultural Relics, 5. 8 Zhang Chi (1997), A Preliminary Analysis of the Large Graves of the Liangzhu Culture, Beijing: Science Press, 57–67.

166

J. HAN

in any other area—even the jade objects decorated with patterns seem to have been distributed from the Liangzhu settlement clusters outward to other places at the prime time of the Liangzhu culture9 —the Liangzhu settlement clusters might have been the political centre of the whole Liangzhu culture.10 It follows that the Liangzhu culture had undoubtedly entered early civilization at that time. The ancient city of Taosi was located in Xiangfen 襄汾, Shanxi Province. This relics site can be divided into two periods: the early and middle periods. The city in its early period was slightly rectangular in shape, covering an area of about 560,000 square metres.11 To the southwest of the city was a large patch of burials, in which there were six big graves containing funerary objects, including jade yue battle-axes, jade cong tubes, jade bi discs, tuogu drums 鼍鼓, stone chimes 石磐, stone kitchen knives 石厨刀, wooden trays 木案, wooden boxes 木匣, lacquer dou pedestal plates 漆豆, pottery basins with coloured painting of a coiling dragon 彩绘蟠龙纹陶盘, jugs with coloured painting 彩绘壶 as well as other precious ritual vessels.12 The occupants of these graves might have been rulers of the city during its early period. The city in the middle period was shaped like a rectangle with rounded corners, and the total area after restoration covered about 2.8 million square metres. To the northwest of the city, a large rammed-earth foundation was found which covered an area of tens of thousands of square metres. In the foundation human sacrifices were found used as building material, and in the nearby area were found the remains of the fragments

9 Qin Ling (2006), “A comparative study on the patterns on the Liangzhu jade objects: The social network of the Liangzhu Society from the perspective of the carve patterns”, Journal of the Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, 8, Beijing: Science Press, 23–52. 10 Yan Wenming (1996), “Essays on the Liangzhu culture”, Cultural Relics, 3. 11 The Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of

Social Sciences, Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology & Linfen Municipal Bureau of Cultural Relics Administration (2005). “2002 Excavation report of the Taosi Site in Xiangfen, Shanxi Province, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3. 12 Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social

Sciences, & Linfen Cultural Relics Bureau (1980). “Brief report on the excavation of the Taosi Site in Xiangfen County, Shanxi Province,” Archaeology, 1; Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Science, & Linfen Cultural Relics Bureau (1983), “Brief report on the 1978–1980 excavation of the Taosi Cemetery in Xiangfen, Shanxi”, Archaeology, 1.

9

THE ANCIENT CITIES OF LIANGZHU, TAOSI AND ERLITOU …

167

of the rims of copper arsenide vessels 砷铜容器口残片, stone kitchen knives and potteries with coloured painting.13 The rammed-earth palace might have been the centre of the ancient city of Taosi. At the centre of the small city in the middle period were semicircular remains, which looked like a large observatory14 but might also have been used for sacrificial purposes. In the northwest of the city there was a large area of burials. Of the highest profiled graves in the cemetery, IIM22 was a typical example. In the burial, although only the relics of funerary objects were found—including jade yue battle-axes, jade qi axes 玉戚, jade cong tubes, jade bi discs, crown-shaped beast-faced jade decorations 玉兽面冠状饰, jade huang pendants 玉璜, pottery gui ewers with coloured painting 彩 绘陶簋, lacquer dou pedestal plates and other precious objects, as well as a set of neatly arranged stone kitchen knives, wooden trays and pigs cut in half15 —it can be speculated that the occupant of the grave might have been one of the supreme rulers of the ancient city of Taosi. There were also a number of early- and middle-period settlements around the ancient city of Taosi, forming a settlement cluster16 together with the ancient city itself. Nearby in the Daguduishan Site 大崮堆山遗址 quarries were found for the preparation of stone materials and the making

13 Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Shanxi Institute of Archaeology, & Linfen Cultural Relics Bureau (2008), “The discovery of the rammed earth foundation of the middle Taosi culture at the Taosi Site in Xiangfen County, Shanxi Province”, Archaeology, 3. 14 Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology in Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Shanxi Institute of Archaeology, & Linfen Cultural Relics Bureau (2004), “Report of on the 2003 excavation of the foundation of the large-sized buildings in the sacrificial area at the Taosi Site, Xiangfen County, Shanxi Province”, Archaeology, 7; Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Science, Shanxi Institute of Archaeology, & Linfen Cultural Relics Bureau (2007), “Report on the 2004–2005 excavation of Foundation II FJT1 of the large-sized building of the middle Taosi culture in Xiangfen County, Shanxi Province”, Archaeology, 4. 15 Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Shanxi Institute of Archaeology, & Linfen Cultural Relics Bureau (2003), “The discovery of burials of the middle Taosi culture at the site of the ancient Taosi city”, Archaeolog, 9. 16 Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1989), “Archaeological report of Southwest Shanxi Province”, Collection of Papers on Archaeology, 6 Beijing: China Social Sciences Press, 1–51.

168

J. HAN

of chime stones, kitchen knives and other semi-finished stone tools.17 Further outside, cemeteries were excavated, such as the Xiajin Cemetery 下靳墓地 in Linfen 临汾, which had small and medium-sized graves.18 These sites also manifested hierarchical differences. For those ranking higher, like the occupant of the Xiajin burial per se, jade yue battle-axes, jade bi discs, jade dao blade 玉刀, etc., were unearthed in their graves. This shows that the occupants might have been local chiefs with some authority. However, in such graves no high-profiling ritual vessels like those in the grand graves in the Taosi Site could be found, for instance, pottery basins with a coloured painting of a coiling dragon, tuogu drums, chime stones, crown-shaped beast-faced jade decorations and copper ling bells 铜铃, not to mention large palace-like or observatory-like facilities. From these it can be deduced that the ancient city of Taosi had not only been the centre of the Taosi settlement cluster, but also probably been the centre of all the sites of the Taosi type. In particular, with regard to the rammed-earth site of the city, which covered an area of nearly three million square metres, its construction might have required the mobilization of manpower in the entire area of the Taosi society. The production of jade and lacquer artefacts might also likely have been centralized by the ancient city of Taosi. These observations all indicate that there existed both a complex social system and a powerful political organization at the time of the Taosi Ancient City, both of which being definite signs of a society entering the stage of early civilization. The site of Erlitou Culture Relics in the ancient capital of Erlitou in Yanshi 偃师, Henan Province, can be divided into four periods or phases. The site of the first period covered an area of over one million square metres, but the layout of the settlement was unclear, and the relics excavated of this period included precious white pottery vessels, bronze tools and ivory and turquoise artefacts. From the second period, the area of the site was gradually enlarged, to over three million square metres in the 17 Tao, Fuhai (1991), “A relook at the new materials of the prehistoric site for the manufacturing of stone tools in the Daguduishan Site in Xiangfen County, Shanxi Province”, Archaeology, 1. 18 Cultural Bureau of Linfen Administrative Office of Shanxi Province, & Shanxi Team

of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1999), “Excavation report of the cemetery of the Taosi culture in Xiajin Village, Linfen, Shanxi Province”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 4; The Xiajin Archaeological Team (1998), “Brief report of the excavation of the Xiajin Cemetery in Linfen, Shanxi Province”, Cultural Relics, 12.

9

THE ANCIENT CITIES OF LIANGZHU, TAOSI AND ERLITOU …

169

second phase. In the centre, there lay a large palace area with more than 100,000 square metres, on which more than 10 large palaces had been built successively. Among them, Palace No. 1 was the largest, covering a total area of nearly 10,000 square metres. To the north of the centre of the foundation of this palace was a neatly rectangular main hall of 900 square metres.19 Around the walled palaces, dozens of small and medium-sized rammed earth foundations were found, indicating it might have been the residential area of the aristocracy. The western and northern parts of the Erlitou Site were residential areas of the commoners. In addition, copper casting workshops were found south of the palace area, and in the middle and east of the site were areas for sacrificial activities as well as workshops for the making of pottery and bone objects.20 It is worth noting that hundreds of graves scattered around in the Erlitou Site and were hardly distinguishable from the residential area; therefore, they were not likely to have been the main part of the graves in this settlement. Inside the walled palaces, the medium-sized graves with funerary objects including dragon-shaped turquoise artefacts 绿松石龙形 器 might not be the highest-ranking graves in the Erlitou Site. While a systematic survey of the whole Yanshi District in the Luoyang Basin 洛阳 盆地 reveals a total of 125 Erlitou-type cultural sites, which can be further graded, no settlements can be compared with the very large settlement in the Erlitou Site.21 Besides the Erlitou settlement, there are other large sites, like the Shaochai Site 稍柴遗址 in Gongyi County 巩义, which covered an area of up to several thousand square metres. In this site, precious objects such as white pottery gui tripod ewers 白陶鬶 were excavated, indicating that this site should have functioned as a secondary centre. The Huizui Site 灰咀 遗址 i n Yanshi County might have been a venue for the manufacturing of large stone artefacts which had mainly served the central settlement

19 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1999), The Erlitou Site in Yanshi: 1959–1978 Archaeological Excavation Report, Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press. 20 Xu, Hong, Chen, Guoliang, & Zhao, Haitao (2004). “A preliminary investigation of the patterns of the settlements at the Erlitou Site”, Archaeology, 11. 21 Erlitou Team of the Institute of Archaeology in of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2005). “Brief report of the 2001–2003 archaeological survey in the Luoyang Basin, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 5.

170

J. HAN

of Erlitou.22 In addition, the making of precious objects as bronze, jade and lacquer objects, etc., might also be controlled by the ancient capital of Erlitou, especially the casting of ding tripod cauldrons 鼎, jue wine vessels 爵, gu wine vessels 辜, jia wine vessels 斝 and gui tripod ewers 鬶, all being major symbols which distinguished the Erlitou culture from other early cultures. There are scholars maintaining that Erlitou as the symbol of a state had established a network for the production and distribution of goods used by the aristocracy, especially bronze ritual vessels, thus forming an Erlitou “world system”.23 This indicates that the scope and intensity of the control and administration of Erlitou as an ancient capital had been significantly expanded, and that in the first phase of the Erlitou culture, this capital had already become the largest central settlement in the Central Plains. After the second phase, this capital city had achieved even an incomparable position in the whole Early China period. Ever since then, the foundations of the palaces became impressively large in scale and neatly formed in design. Great in number and varied in profile, these palaces manifested a rather stringent system for palace chambers, which had already taken shape then. With regard to the medium-sized aristocratic graves unearthed, while they were not fit for the role as grand palaces, they were never seen in other sites. This is also a strong indication that the site was an imperial capital. All these show that the Chinese society would have become a mature civilization by then.

9.2

Features of the Three Ancient Cities

From the Neolithic Age till the founding of the Shang Dynasty, cultures in most parts of China were interrelated with each other, forming a relatively integrate cultural unity with the Central Plains at its core. This cultural unity is defined as the “Cultural Sphere of Early China” 早期中国文化圈, which can also be called the “Cultural Early China”, or “Early China” for short. An examination of the Early China as a whole reveals that although the Liangzhu culture, the Taosi type and the Erlitou culture 22 Chen, Xingcan, Liu, Li & Li, Runquan, et al. (2003), “The process of the increasing social sophistication in the hinterland of Chinese civilization: A study of the settlement patterns in the Yiluo River Area”, Acta Archaeological Sinica, 2. 23 Liu, Li (2007). The Neolithic Age in China: The Road to an Early State, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 216–217.

9

THE ANCIENT CITIES OF LIANGZHU, TAOSI AND ERLITOU …

171

were all centred on a super-large settlement and all displayed characteristics of a civilized society, noticeable differences existed between them in terms of their respective location, external influence and historical status in Early China (see Fig. 9.1). The Liangzhu culture has been divided into four phases, covering about 5300–4500 BP. In addition to the much later Guangfulin type 广富林类 in Shanghai (Phase V of the Liangzhu culture), the Liangzhu culture can be dated as late as 4300 BP.24 Although lasting for a thousand years, this culture enjoyed its prime only during the middle three

Fig. 9.1 Sphere of influence of the Liangzhu, Taosi and Erlitou cultures

24 Yang, Jing (2006), “On the site of the later stage of the Late Liangzhu culture”, Journal of Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, 8, Beijing: Science Press, 62–73.

172

J. HAN

phases, that is from 5000 to 4500 BP. At that time, the cultures around the Liangzhu culture were distributed in the following manner. To the west, in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River was the powerful Qujialing culture 屈家岭文化, which covered an area of 1.2 million metres2 , and boasted a number of central settlements with walled cities, such as the Shijiahe Ancient City 石家河古城 in Tianmen 天门, Hubei Province. To the northwest, in the middle reaches of the Yellow River was the late Yangshao culture 仰韶文化, which covered a vast area and owned the ancient city of Xishan 西山 in Zhengzhou 郑州 as well as other central settlements. To the north, in the lower reaches of the Yellow River was the late Dawenkou culture 大汶口文化, which included such high-raking burial sites as the Dawenkou Site 大汶口遗址 in Tai’an 泰安 and the Lingyanghe Site 陵阳河遗址 in Juxian 莒县, Shandong Province, etc. As for the Liangzhu culture, its sphere of existence mainly ranged along the Taihu Lake 太湖 on the southern bank of the lower reaches of the Yangtze River, with an expansion to the north of the Jianghuai 江淮 area during its most prosperous time, reaching as far as Linyi 临 沂 in southern Shandong.25 Its influence spread to the lower reaches of the Yellow River in the north,26 to southwestern Anhui and northern Jiangxi Provinces in the west,27 and even to the upper reaches of the Beijiang River 北江 in Guangdong Province in the south. Conversely, other cultural elements were rarely seen in the Liangzhu culture,28 indicating the insulating and self-contained traits of the Liangzhu culture. Since its influence was limited to the southeastern coastal regions, and since it did not have an imperial authority powerful enough to dominate the Early China and influence the whole country, the Liangzhu culture was, at best, a large state situated in the southeastern corner of

25 Nanjing Museum (2003), The Huating Site: Report on the Excavation of the Neolithic Graves, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 26 Luan Fengshi (1996), “The Northern spread of the Liangzhu culture”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 3. 27 Shuo, Zhi (2006), “A preliminary inquiry into the exchanges between the Xuejiagang and Liangzhu cultures: Also on the issue of the Wanjiang Passage and the Southern Taihu Passage”, Journal of Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, VIII, Beijing: Beijing: Science Press, 105–122. 28 Song, Jian (1992), “A comparative study on the civilizing processes in the Songshan and Taihu regions”, Collected Papers of Shanghai Museum Volume, VI, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press, 347–369.

9

THE ANCIENT CITIES OF LIANGZHU, TAOSI AND ERLITOU …

173

the country. Therefore, it can be called the Ancient State of Liangzhu or the Liangzhu State. The remains of the Longshan Era 龙山时代 such as the Taosi Ancient City were first named the Taosi type 陶寺类型 and then renamed the Taosi culture.29 In fact, there was a significant difference between its early and middle phases on the one hand, and the late phase on the other. In the former, cauldron-shaped jia wine vessels were popular whereas in the latter, fat-footed li tripods 鬲 prevailed. For a working definition and new periodization, we may refer to the former, i.e. the early and middle phases, as the Taosi type, and the latter, i.e. the late phase, as the Late Taosi type.30 The ancient city of Taosi was only built and used during the Taosi type period, and its absolute date was about 4500– 4200 BP.31 At that time, the Taosi type was surrounded by the Longshan culture and its culture types which all pertained to the culture of the Central Plains. Specifically, in the Yuanqu Basin 垣曲盆地 in Yuncheng City, Shanxi Province, there were the remains of the late Miaodigou Phase II Era 庙底沟时代, which belonged to the Yangshao culture; in the regions of Central Shanxi, northern Shaanxi and central and southern Inner Mongolia, there were the remains of the early Laohushan culture 老虎山文化; in the Guanzhong Region (i.e. Central Shaanxi Province) 关 中地区, there were the remains of the early Keshengzhuang 客省庄文化 Phase II; in the region east of the Taihang Mountain 太行山, there were the remains of the early Hougang Phase II 后岗文化; in the heartland of the Central Plains, there were the remains of the late Gushuihe type 谷水河类型 of the Yangshao culture, as well as the remains of the early Wangwan Phase III 王湾文化. Further outside, in the lower reaches of the Yellow River and the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, we find the powerful Longshan and Shijiahe cultures. 29 Gao, Tianlin, Zhang, Daihai, & Gao, Wei (1984), “The age and periodization of the Taosi Type of the Longshan culture”, Prehistory, 3; Zhang, Daihai (1989), “The Taosi and the Longshan eras”, Collection of Papers in Celebration of Su Bingqi’s 55 Years of Archaeological Research, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 245–251. 30 Han, Jianye (2006), “Phase II of the Miaodigou Era in southwestern Shanxi and the west of western Henan provinces: The periodization and pedigree of the Longshan culture”, Acta Archaeological Sinica, 2. 31 He, Nu lately proposed that the early and the middle phases (i.e. “the early phase” referred to in this chapter) of the Taosi culture were from 2300 to 2000 BCE. See He Nu (2006), “A review of the research on the pedigree of the Taosi culture”, Archaeological Collectanea, 16, Beijing: Science Press, 151–177.

174

J. HAN

Confined in the small Linfen Basin 临汾盆, the Taosi type might give the impression that its existential situation might have been harder than that of the Liangzhu culture. However, things were not what they seemed. Firstly, the political control of the Taosi type was not limited to the area it covered, but extended southward at least as far as to the banks of the Yellow River. For instance, both the burial custom and funerary jade objects excavated from the Qingliangsi Site 清凉寺墓地 in Ruicheng 芮城, Shanxi Province, were similar to those from the Taosi Site. The exquisite jade yue battle-axes, jade cong tubes, jade bi discs and jade yabi serrated-edged discs 玉牙璧, in particular, all testified to highprofile graves,32 a fact which suggests but does not prove the possibility that these jade objects might have been allocated from the ancient city of Taosi. Secondly, some of the cultural elements of the Taosi type, such as jade and lacquer objects, travelled westward into the early Qijia 齐 家 and Caiyuan 菜园 cultures.33 This indicates that its influence had at least extended west to the Gan-Ning (Gansu and Nixia) region 甘宁地 区. Thirdly, in terms of the cultural make-up, the relics of the Taosi type not only showed inheritance from typical traditions of Phase II of the Miaodigou type, such as the cauldrons 釜, stoves 灶, basin-shaped ding 盆形鼎, zeng utensils 甑, deep-bellied tube-shaped guan pot 深腹筒形罐, flat hu pot 扁壶 and so on, but also included cultural elements introduced from the east, such as complete sets of potteries with coloured painting, wooden objects with coloured painting 彩绘木器, jade stone tools 玉石 器, tuogu drums 鼍鼓, stone chime and so on. Its copper and bronze items, especially the techniques of casting copper arsenide vessels, implied that there might have been a link with the Hexi Corridor, Xinjiang, and

32 Shanxi Institute of Archeology, Yuncheng Cultural Relics Bureau, & Cultural Relics Bureau of Ruicheng County (2006), “The Neolithic graves at the Qingliangsi Site in Ruicheng, Shanxi Province”, Cultural Relics, 3. 33 For example, jade cong pendants, jade bi discs were found at the site of the Qijia Culture in Shizhaocun Phase VII in Tianshui, Gansu Province, and jade chan shovels, jade zao chisels, lacquer huang pendants, etc., were found at the Linziliang Site in Haiyuan, Ningxia Autonomous Region. See Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1999), The Shizhaocun and Xishanping Sites Sites, Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press; Ningxia Cultural Relics Research Institute, & Department of Archaeology of the Museum of Chinese History (2003), The Caiyuan Site in Ningxia: Excavation Report of the Neolithic Site and Graves, Beijing: Science Press.

9

THE ANCIENT CITIES OF LIANGZHU, TAOSI AND ERLITOU …

175

even the western region.34 These observations can be relied on to define the cultural traits of the Taosi type as open and inclusive, characterized by multiple cultural elements. If the speculation that the Taosi type has something to do with the ancient tribe of Taotang Shi 陶唐氏 is reliable, then the later phase (i.e. “the middle phase” according to the excavators) of the Taosi type should roughly correspond to the reign of Emperor Yao35 (who lived from about 2377–2259 BCE). According to the chapter “Cannon of Yao” 尧典 of the Book of Documents 尚书, during the reign of Emperor Yao (of the tribe of Taotang Shi), officials were sometimes appointed for the administration of the affairs in the vast Central Plains. This shows that the form of an early state had already existed with Taotang Shi as the ruling centre, and that the actual political influence of this state could have covered most of early China. However, given its superficial influence and weak administration, the Early China failed to form a hereditary sovereign supremacy; instead, it lay fragmented into numerous states, with fortress towns and cities. As a result, China was at most a kingdom in embryonic form then. According to most recent research, the absolute date of the Erlitou culture was about 3750–3550 BP.36 At that time, the Erlitou culture was surrounded by the following cultures or cultural types. In the region bordering northern Henan and southern Hebei provinces, we find the Xiaqiyuan culture 下七垣文化; in the Gansu-Qinghai District in the Guanzhong (the central Shaanxi plain) region, we find the late Qijia culture 齐家文化; in the north, we find the Zhukaigou culture 朱开沟 文化 and the lower Xiajiadian culture 夏家店文化; in the lower reaches of the Yellow River, there was the Yueshi culture 岳石文化 and in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River there was the Maqiao culture 马桥. Among them, the Erlitou culture covered the heartland of central China, encompassing most of Henan Province and southern Shanxi Province.

34 Mei, Jianjun: Copper and Bronze Metallurgy in Late Prehistoric Xinjiang, BAR International Series 865, Oxford: Archaeopress, 2000, 39–40; Qian, Wei, Sun, Shuyun, & Han, Rubin (2000), “A review of studies of ancient arsenic-copper”, Sciences of Conservation and Archaeology, 2. 35 Wang, Wenqing (1987), “The Taosi Site may be the site of the Taotang Shi culture”, Huaxia Wenming, Vol.1, Beijing: Peking University Press, 106–123. 36 Qiu, Shihua, & Cai, Lianzhen (2001), “The carbon-14 historical framework in the Xia-Shang-Zhou chronology project”, Archaeology, 1.

176

J. HAN

The rise of the Erlitou bronze civilization was based on the culture of the Central Plains, but also absorbed the indirect cultural influence from the western region. The Central Plains culture which had served as the foundation of the Erlitou culture was at that time the Xinzhai type 新砦类型 of Phase III of the Wangwan culture, which was characterized as a culture with multiple elements from other cultures. For instance, it had absorbed various ingredients from the Haidai culture 海 岱文化 and the Jianghuai culture 江淮文化, etc. These assimilations not only made the Erlitou culture ever more inclusive and open, but also enabled it to expand its influence with a strength for which both the Liangzhu and Taosi cultures could be no match. Especially during its second and third phase, the Erlitou culture expanded further in every direction. Southward, it extended to southern Henan, and further penetrated into the Jianghan (the Yangtze-Han Rivers) region. Eastward, it spread to the Jianghuai (the Yangtze-Huai Rivers) and Haidai regions. Westward, it reached eastern Gansu; and northward it permeated to central and southern Inner Mongolia and the West Liaohe River Basin 西 辽河盆地. From this geographical survey, it can be seen that the Erlitou culture had had a profound influence on the Early China as a whole. However, the ancient city of Erlitou, which was central not only to the Erlitou culture but also to the entire Early China, did not have any city walls itself. In fact, this might have been what distinguished it from other states as a kingdom. According to Zuo’s Commentary on the Spring and Autumn Annals《左传》 , “in ancient times, the defensive line of the Heaven-appointed king lay among the outlying Yi in all four directions[.] The people suffered neither from disturbances within the dominion nor from alarms originating outside. What use did they have for walls?”37 Moreover, there were far fewer fortress towns and cities in the Erlitou period than in the Longshan period, which should be an indication of the emergence of a centralized kingdom-like authority at that time. A reference to historical records reveals that the main body of the Erlitou culture did correspond to the Xia culture,38 however the late Xia, which was successively preceded by the early Xia culture as represented by the 37 Stephen Durrant, Li, Wai-yee Li & Schaberg, David (trans.). Zuo Tradition. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1625. 《左传·庄公二十三年》 [ 所言: “古者, 天子守在四 夷……民无内忧, 而又无外惧, 国焉用城?”]. 38 Zou, Heng (1980), “On the Xia culture”, Collection of Archaeological Papers on the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 95–182.

9

THE ANCIENT CITIES OF LIANGZHU, TAOSI AND ERLITOU …

177

Meishan type 煤山类型 of Phase III of the Wangwan culture and the middle Xia culture represented by the Xinzhai.39 Yet despite the fact that in the early and middle phases of the Xia culture, a kingdom-like dynasty with hereditary monarchical power had been established, and that the influence of this dynasty on the heartland of the Central Plains had grown ever larger, there was still a great number of city-states, so that there was no substantial difference between the Erlitou culture and the Taosi type. It was not until the late Xia time when the culture became centred on the ancient capital of Erlitou that a kingdom was really established with domination reaching as far as the corners of the four seas.

9.3

The Decline of the Three Ancient Cities

The rise and fall of the cities of Liangzhu and Taosi, and the capital of Erlitou, together with their respective cultures, had undergone different processes against different backgrounds. According to research, about 5500 BP, the climate of Eurasia began to turn cold gradually, and precipitation began to decrease. Up to 5000 BP, the temperature became the lowest.40 The cold temperature caused the climate zone and vegetation zone to move southward, resulting in a large-scale adjustment in cultural patterns. From then on, the Early China entered the early Chalcolithic Age. Whereas this climate event put the development of agricultural culture along the Great Wall regions in the north to serious test, it brought down the water level in the Jianghuai (the Yangtze and Huai Rivers) region in the south, turning large areas of flat land dry and suitable for farming. This provided the Jianghuai region with an extremely good opportunity for cultural development. While the Liangzhu culture took shape about 5300 BP, the ancient city of Liangzhu rose about 5000 BP, which happened to correspond to this climate event. What is especially noteworthy is the sharp contrast between the scarcity of the remains of the Songze culture 崧泽文化 (6000–5300 BP) and the abrupt and abundant appearance of the remains of Liangzhu culture in

39 Han, Jianye (2009), “On the rise of the Erlitou bronze civilization”, Journal of National Museum of China, 1. 40 Wu, Wenxiang, & Liu, Dongsheng (2002), “The role of the climatic event in 5500 BP in the evolution of three ancient civilizations and cultures”, Earth Science Frontiers, (9), 1.

178

J. HAN

the Liangzhu region 良渚地区. This had undoubtedly been related to the drastic decline of water levels in this area.41 Although the emergence of the ancient city of Liangzhu and its settlement clusters relied on its local culture, it should, broadly speaking, have been related to the southward movement of the late Songze culture on the northern bank of the Taihu Lake. However, as far as the whole Liangzhu culture is concerned, it basically evolved on the basis of the local Songze culture, absorbing few elements from other regional cultures. Being rather introverted and conservative, the Liangzhu culture focused almost exclusively on its internal social affairs and created in a short period of time a civilized society which was not only relatively sophisticated and advanced but also indulged in the practices of excessive ghost- and spirit-worship, extravagance and waste. The latter feature serves as a hint foreshadowing the future collapse of the ancient state of Liangzhu.42 It goes without saying that the main reason for the decline of the ancient state of Liangzhu lay in the change of the natural environment. Shortly after the climatic event which taking place around 5000 BP, the temperature and precipitation gradually rose again, reaching a new peak of about 4500 BP. This change resulted in the re-organization of the cultural pattern of the Early China and ushered it into the late Chalcolithic Age, i.e. the Longshan Era.43 This critical period saw the decline of Liangzhu culture and the ancient state of Liangzhu, which was probably related to the rise of the water level in the Jianghuai (Yangtze and Huai Rivers) region. According to archaeological investigations, the accumulation of sediments during the late Liangzhu culture covered the land by a layer of pale yellow silt sand, indicating that the region might have been

41 The sea level during the period of the Songze culture was several metres higher than that during the periods of the Majiabang and Liangzhu cultures. See Wang Jingtai, et al. (1981), “The development of the Yangtze Delta during the Holocene epoch”, Acta Geologica Sinica, 1. 42 Zhao, Hui (1999), “Some special features of the Liangzhu culture: On the cause for the decline of one site of Chinese prehistoric civilization”, Research on the Liangzhu Culture: Collection of Papers at the International Symposium Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Liangzhu Culture, Beijing: Science Press, 104–120. 43 Han, Jianye (2008), The Natural Environment and Cultural Development in Northwest China during the Pre-Qin Period, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

9

THE ANCIENT CITIES OF LIANGZHU, TAOSI AND ERLITOU …

179

flooded in the last phase of the Liangzhu culture.44 But even without a sudden disaster, the Liangzhu residents might have chosen to migrate to other places while the water level rose gradually. In fact, in the last phase of the Liangzhu culture, the Dawenkou culture had already encroached on the regions along Nanjing,45 so that the pressure from an intruding culture might also account for the decline of the Liangzhu culture. In any case, the Liangzhu civilization declined on the threshold of the Longshan Era. The rise of the water level at the beginning of the Longshan Era was unfavourable for the Jianghuai region but had benefited the Central Plains. It was against this background that Taosi type rose in the Jinnan region, i.e. the southern Shanxi Province, and this is obviously reflected in the objects excavated from the Taosi type. The main types for pottery used for daily purpose, such as fuzao cauldron stoves 釜灶, jia wine vessels, deep bellied tube-shaped guan pots, flat hu pots, basin-shaped ding tripod cauldrons 盆形鼎, etc., all showed traces of the local cultural type of the early Miaodigou Phase II. In contrast, both its pottery and jade objects, such as zun vase-like wine vessels with a high neck and a carinated shoulder 高领折肩尊, zun with a carinated belly 折腹尊, ping vases with a high neck and a carinated shoulder 高领折肩瓶, pen basins with a carinated belly 折腹盆, guan pots with a flaring mouth and a bulging belly 侈口鼓腹罐 and guan pots with a carinated belly 折腹罐, pointedbottom zun 尖底尊, pottery drums 陶鼓, tuo drums, yue battle-axes 钺, kitchen knives 厨刀, cong tubes 琮, bi discs and huang pendants 璜, jade pendants, as well as the coloured paintings on the pottery and wooden objects, even the large- and small-sized burials, all reflected marked differences from the those in Phase II of the Miaodigou type. Instead, they manifested features which corresponded rather nicely with the Liangzhu culture, or even an eastern culture as represented by the late Dawenkou culture. This shows clearly that the emergence of the Taosi type was the result of an eastern culture moving west and blending with the local culture. In my opinion, the key to this major cultural transformation lay in the 44 Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2008), “The 2006–2007 excavation of the site of the ancient city of Liangzhu in Yuhang District, Hangzhou”, Archaeology, No. 7. 45 Nanjing Museum 1993), The Northern Yinyangying Site: Excavation Report of the Relics of the Neolithic Age and Shang and Zhou Dynasties, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

180

J. HAN

replacement of the Phase II of the Miaodigou type in the Linfen Basin by the Taosi type, which was characterized by features of the eastern culture. The event corresponded to the historic event of “the conquest of Xia by Tang of Shang” 唐伐西夏 as recorded in the Superfluous Chapters of the Book of Zhou《逸周书》 .46 In this manner, the decline of the Liangzhu culture coincided with the rise of the Taosi type in the Jinnan (southern Shanxi Province) region, and some of the cultural elements of the former were also transmitted into the latter. It is probable that this transformation process was accompanied by the migration of part of the Liangzhu population. And this might also account for the relation between the two huge ancient cities of Liangzhu and Taosi. Compared with the Liangzhu culture, the Taosi type was not insulated or self-contained. But it paid less attention to the making of luxurious ritual objects, such as jade vessels, and revealed essentially similar attributes of “the Northern Pattern” 北方模式 as characterized by the Liangzhu culture: much obsession with social stratification and the division of labour, and a way of life of extravagance.47 This kind of society was traditionally in diametrical contradiction to the cultures of the Central Plains and the Northern China, which attached importance to a simple and unadorned way of life. The difference might explain why Taosi type did not last long. The fundamental reason for the decline of the Taosi type lay in climatic change. Around 4200 BP, with the advent of an obvious frigid and dry age, the northern culture swept southward successively.48 With the forceful southward invasion of the Laohushan culture from central Shanxi, and from central and southern Inner Mongolia, etc., the Taosi type vanished, and the late Taosi type appeared. This shift found direct expression in the general loss of the eastern cultural elements in Taosi and other sites, and the appearance of jia-type li tripods 斝式鬲, a symbolic pottery

46 Han, Jianye (2001), “The Tangtao Clan’s conquering of the West Xia and Houji the Ancestor of Zhou Tribes exiling Danzhu the son of Emperor Yao”, Journal of Peking University (Humanities and Social Sciences), 3. 47 Han, Jianye (2003), “The general tendency and different modes of societal development in the Chalcolithic age”, Ancient Civilization, Vol. II, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 84–96. 48 Han, Jianye (2006), “The impact of climate events on the culture of Northern China about 5000–4000 BP”, Environmental Archaeology, Vol. III, Beijing: Peking University Press, 159–163.

9

THE ANCIENT CITIES OF LIANGZHU, TAOSI AND ERLITOU …

181

of the Laohushan culture, in great numbers, which later evolved into the li tripods. We once associated this cultural shift with the historic event of “Houji the Ancestor of Zhou Tribes exiling Danzhu the son of Emperor Yao” 稷放丹朱. Later, excavators found that significant events might have occurred between the interval of the middle and late phase of the Taosi culture, as indicated by the demolition of city walls, the destruction of burials and the atrocity at women.49 Similar violences were even found in the burials of the Xiajin Site in Linfen and the Qingliangsi Site in Ruicheng, two cemeteries closely related to the ancient city of Taosi. Along the sweeping trend of the southward advance of northern cultures, a similar replacement occurred when Phase III of the Wangwan culture took over most of the regions of the Shijiahe culture 石家河文 化. Historically, this replacement corresponded to the event of “the Great Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes”, which marked the founding of the Xia Dynasty.50 At that time, the political centres might be located at Wangchenggang 王城岗 in Dengfeng 登封 and Wadian 瓦 店 in Yuzhou 禹州. Situated in the interior of the Songshan Mountain 嵩山 in Henan Province, these two places belonged to the Meishan type of Wangwan Phase III. The political centre later shifted to the east of the Songshan Mountain, which resulted in the appearance of the Xinzhai type represented by the Xinzhai Site in Xinmi 新密. Around 3800 BP, as the climate became warm-humid again,51 the Xinzhai cultural type began to move westward, and encountered in the Luoyang Basin the seminomadic western culture in the aftermath of its eastward expansion. The two cultures merged and formed the brand-new Erlitou culture, giving rise to the Erlitou bronze civilization. It can be seen that whereas a major climate event presented a culture an opportunity for change, the outcome

49 He, Nu, Yan, Zhibin & Song, Jianzhong (2003), “Signs of violence shown by the excavation of the ancient city of Taosi in Xiangfen”, Weekly of China’s Cultural Relics, 31 January, 01–02). 50 Yang, Xingai, Han, Jianye (1995), “Exploration into ‘Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 51 Department of Archaeology of Peking University & Zhumadian Cultural Relics

Protection and Management Station (1998), The Yangzhuang Site in Zhumadian: Cultural Relics and Environmental Information in the Upper Reaches of the Huaihe River during the Middle Holocene Epoch, Beijing: Science Press; Luoyang Cultural Relics Team (2002), The Zaojiaoshu Site in Luoyang: Report of the 1992–1993 Excavation of the Erlitou Cultural Settlement Site in Zaojiaoshu, Luoyang, Beijing: Science Press.

182

J. HAN

of the change differed greatly. In this case, the culture of the Central Plains became triumphant, eclipsing the cultures of the surrounding areas. According to Su Bingqi’s 苏秉琦 classification of cultural regions and systems, the early Chinese culture can be divided into two large regions, the inland-oriented and the ocean-oriented regions.52 Centred on the upper and middle reaches of the Yellow River, the culture of the inlandoriented northwest region had many connections with the central and western parts of Eurasia; in contrast, the culture of the ocean-oriented southeast region, being situated in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River and the lower reaches of the Yellow River, had quite an amount of contact with southeast Asia and the Pacific islands. The rise of Erlitou culture in the Central Plains symbolizes a culmination of the convergence of the eastern and western cultural traditions. It is the advantageous geographical position of the Central Plains as the “middle of the world” that had provided the precondition for the rise of the inclusive Erlitou civilization.

9.4

Concluding Remarks

A survey of the history of the ancient cities of Liangzhu and Taosi and the ancient capital of Erlitou may give us a glimpse of the evolution of early Chinese civilization as a whole. At first, around 5000 BP, various states had emerged with their own civilizations. These civilizations, extradentary as they were, had comfortably located themselves in a peripheral region, without deeper links to each other, of which the ancient state of Liangzhu was a typical example. The Central Plains culture was relatively backward at this time. Then, at 4500 BP, the Taosi type appeared when the ancient tribe of Taotang Shi finally approached the heartland of the Central Plains, turning its influence from local to general. However, due to the limitations of its influence both in scope and depth, the Taosi failed to establish a hereditary monarchical power, ending with merely a kingdom in embryonic form. Later, there appeared the early and middle Xia culture in the heartland of the Central Plains, which was represented by the large-sized sites in Wangchenggang in Dengfeng, Wadian in Yuzhou, Xinzhai in Xinmi, etc. In terms of its historical development, however, this Xia culture was still not very different from that of the 52 Su, Bingqi & Yin, Weizhang (1981), “On the systems and types of archaeological cultures”, Cultural Relics, 5.

9

THE ANCIENT CITIES OF LIANGZHU, TAOSI AND ERLITOU …

183

ancient state of Taotang Shi or Taosi. Finally, there appeared the late Xia Dynasty, i.e. the Erlitou bronze civilization, at around 3800 BP in the heartland of the Central Plains. With an open mind to absorb the best from other cultures and disseminate its own elements, this civilization greatly enhanced its influence in both range and degree, and established a firm hereditary monarchical power, entering the stage of a real kingdom. The development of a Chinese civilization from a state to a kingdom not only accorded basically with the pattern of “ancient state – regional state – empire” 古国—方国—帝国 proposed by Su Bingqi to account for the evolution of the Chinese civilization; it fitted more nicely the revised pattern of “ancient state – kingdom – empire” 古国—王国—帝 国, as proposed and revised by Yan Wenming.53 (This section was originally published in Issue 11 of Archaeology in 2010.)

53 Yan, Wenming (1997), “The emergence and development of civilizations in the Yellow River reaches”, Huaxia Archaeology, 1.

CHAPTER 10

Liangzhu: An Early State with Regional Sovereign Power

The Liangzhu Site 良渚遗址 in Yuhang 余杭, Zhejiang Province, is the first Neolithic (Chalcolithic) Site in China to be listed as a World Heritage Site. The Liangzhu Site is viewed as a strong proof of the 5000-yearlong history of Chinese civilization. As the World Heritage Committee points out, “The Archaeological Ruins of the Liangzhu City reveal an early regional state with rice-cultivating agriculture as its economic base, and social differentiation and a unified belief system, which existed in the Late Neolithic period in China”. Archaeologists Yan Wenming 严文明 and Zhang Zhongpei 张忠培 believe the Liangzhu Site reveals a unified state and civilization. British archaeologist Colin Renfrew 科林·伦福儒 and Liu Bin 刘斌, Director of the Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, call the Liangzhu culture “the earliest state societies in East Asia”.

10.1

The Liangzhu Culture: A Civilization

Civilization is the most evolved manifestation of culture and an advanced stage in the development of human culture and society. The emergence of a state is generally regarded as the most important criterion for a civilization. The ruins of the ancient city of Liangzhu had a walled palace complex of about 300,000 metres2 , an inner city of three million metres2 , an outer city of 6.3 million metres2 , as well as more than ten high and low dams. No site of this scale had been excavated before. Colin Renfrew and © China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_10

185

186

J. HAN

Liu Bin believe the water conservancy project of the Liangzhu ancient city might have been larger than that of Egypt and Sumer. According to Wang Ningyuan 王宁远 at the Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, the earthworks of Liangzhu might have involved a total of more than 10 million cubic metres. In addition, a large number of precious jade, lacquer, ivory and pottery objects were found in the Liangzhu Site, and the number of people needed to make these artefacts must have been impressive. Therefore it can be deduced that the Liangzhu City must have had a very strong power of social organization and mobilization, and it clearly revealed a state with centralized power. According to Zhao Hui 赵辉 at Peking University, the site of the Liangzhu clusters, which covered an area of about 1000 kilometres2 , might have been composed of about 3000 villages, which would have in turn produced enough rice to feed a population of about 20,000 in the ancient city of Liangzhu. Based on this estimate, in the whole Liangzhu cultural area at that time, which was tens of thousands of square kilometres large, there would have been tens of thousands of settlements, with a population reaching approximately one million. However, the ancient city of Liangzhu was the only central settlement as well as the only political and cultural centre of the area. There was a clear boundary between the urban and the rural, and a high degree of unity, both being characteristics of a state. Zhang Zhongpei divides the graves in the Liangzhu Site into four grades. In grade one graves, funerary objects including jade cong 玉琮 and jade yue 玉钺 were found. Therefore it can be inferred that the grave occupants had both religious and military authority, like those who could be called “god-kings” 神王. They were the paramount rulers of the Liangzhu society. The occupants of grade two graves might be those who had only military authority, for in the graves only jade yue were found. The occupants of grade three graves probably were part-time warriors entrusted with the task of handling military affairs. In their graves, stone yue 石钺 were found. The occupants of grade four graves were ordinary peasants, and they were not buried with stone yue. The classification of the graves revealed an obvious social stratification and a relatively strict ritual system in the Liangzhu society. The engraving of a “sacred emblem” featuring a combination of a divine figure and a beast’s face 神人兽面徽 纹 on the Liangzhu jade objects was evident only in the highest-ranking large tombs, such as those in Fanshan 反山 and Yaoshan 瑶山 cemeteries, while only a simplified form of the emblem was found in the graves

10

LIANGZHU : AN EARLY STATE WITH REGIONAL SOVEREIGN …

187

of lower ranks. Zhao Hui thinks the pattern of a divine figure and a beast’s face represented “the highest and even the only deity worshiped by the Liangzhu people”. Fang Xiangming 方向明 at the Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology thinks the pattern is “the only sign to ensure social stability in Liangzhu”. The highly unified and strictly hierarchical structure of religious worship was a powerful vehicle for maintaining the stability and unity of the Liangzhu society, and for organizing and mobilizing manpower. This religious authority was combined with the military power, which was symbolized by the jade yue. The two were unified and complemented each other. The exquisite jade objects, lacquer objects inlaid with jade 嵌玉漆器, ivory objects with incised design 刻纹象牙器 and potteries with incised design 刻纹陶器, as well as high-quality woodwork found in the Liangzhu Site, demonstrated excellent craftsmanship under the control of the aristocracy. Undoubtedly, craftsmen of various professions had emerged. As Qin Ling 秦岭 at Peking University puts it, the “standardization” of the production of jade objects, and the institutionalization of their use in the Liangzhu culture was more advanced than in any other culture in China’s Neolithic Age. Definitely, the remains of Liangzhu bespoke a civilization. In addition, symbols similar to characters were common on Liangzhu potteries. Many of the symbols were complex in structure, and some were lined up in a row. It is possible that the symbols were characters in primitive form. This kind of primitive writing was probably mostly written on bamboo wood and silks, so it could hardly be preserved. Therefore we do not know yet whether the Liangzhu culture was a civilization without writing. Even by standards first proposed by Western scholars, the Liangzhu society was, at about 5000 years ago, at its height had all the signs of a civilization and an early state, like the Sumerian civilization and Egyptian civilization.

188

J. HAN

10.2

A State with Regional Sovereign Power

Looking from a wider perspective, we can assume that in the time after 5000 years BP, there were at least three cultures in the Yellow River Basin and the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, standing at the threshold of civilization, while Liangzhu culture was at its peak. They are the Dawenkou culture 大汶口文化, the Qujialing culture 屈家岭文化 and the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化. Like the Liangzhu culture, these cultures had ancient cities, large tombs, and “palace-like” buildings as well. However, unlike the Liangzhu culture which had one single centre, the three cultures did not present an internal unity, and the level of their material culture was not as developed as that of the Liangzhu culture. Needless to say, there were differences among the four cultures in terms of civilization mode. For example, the Yangshao culture and the Dawenkou culture in the Yellow River Basin both attached great importance to the secular world and ancestor veneration, and emphasized social order. However, the polarization between the rich and the poor in the Dawenkou culture was obvious. While both the Liangzhu culture and Qujialing culture in the Yangtze River Basin had a strong religious colour, and a polarization between the rich and the poor was also quite obvious, the Liangzhu culture had a much stricter social order than the Qujialing culture. Thus, different modes of civilization also affect the evaluation of the levels of civilization. Although the Dawenkou culture, the Qujialing culture, and the Yangshao culture represented slightly lower levels of civilization than the Liangzhu culture, they were equally as powerful and influential as the Liangzhu culture. In fact, the latter could not be compared with the former three cultures in terms of both the degree of the communication between the former three cultures, and of their external influence. For example, the elements of the Dawenkou culture, such as zun cups 尊 and bei cups 杯, spread westward to the Guanzhong region 关中地 区, i.e. central Shaanxi Province. The elements of the Qujialing culture, such as xiefu (sloping-bellied) bei cups 斜腹杯, spread northward to the south of Shanxi Province. The elements of the Yangshao culture, such as the lanwen (basket impressions) pattern 篮纹reached the Haidai 海 岱 region in the east and the Jianghan 江汉 region in the south. Even the decline and fall of the Liangzhu civilization may have to do with the southward movement of the Zaolütai culture 造律台文化 in Yongcheng County, Henan Province, some 4300 BP.

10

LIANGZHU : AN EARLY STATE WITH REGIONAL SOVEREIGN …

189

Comparatively speaking, the affluent and confident Liangzhu culture seemed somewhat “introverted”. The heads of the ancient city of Liangzhu mainly ruled within the Liangzhu cultural area, and stood in confrontation and competition with other cultures in the Yellow River Basin and the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, with limited communication with other cultures. By comparison, the Sumerian civilization was characterized by “city-states”, each being a small monarchy. In the early dynastic period of Egypt, the ruler had reigned the vast areas of Upper and Lower Egypt. In the period of the early Erlitou State, i.e. the late Xia Dynasty, the ruler had also controlled most of early China as a plural, though unified society. Both the early Egyptian Dynasty and the early Erlitou State are regarded as “vast-territory states” or “vast-territory monarchies” exercising monarchical power on a large scale. The Liangzhu ancient state was larger than a Sumerian city-state, but smaller than the Egyptian early dynasty or the early Erlitou State, so it might be aptly called a “state with regional sovereign power”. Su Bingqi 苏秉琦 proposes a theory of the evolution of ancient Chinese civilization in three stages: ancient state, regional state and empire, a theory Yan Wenming and Wang Zhenzhong 王震中 respectively revise as “ancient state, kingdom and empire” and “city-state, kingdom and empire”. Seen from the perspective of the cultural circle of early China as a whole, the early Liangzhu State, as a “state with regional sovereign power”, was equivalent to the early form of “ancient state” or “city-state”. The kingdom with “all land under heaven being the king’s land” emerged only after the Erlitou culture.

10.3 The Liangzhu Culture Nourished by the “Early China” Geographically, China was relatively isolated; as a result, early Chinese culture displayed distinct local identities but was also marked by unity, two features which have not only contributed to but ensured its longterm stable and continuous development. Chinese culture has had certain characteristics since the Paleolithic Age. By the Peiligang Era 裴李岗 时代 about 8000 BP, the “Early Chinese Cultural Circle” had already appeared, with characteristics such as stability, introversion and ancestor veneration. In the Miaodigou Era 庙底沟 about 6000 BP, under the large-scale expansion of the Yangshao culture and its strong influence, the

190

J. HAN

cultural unity over most parts of China, including Jiangsu and Zhejiang Provinces, increased remarkably, and the pluralistic and unified “Early Chinese Cultural Circle” or the cultural “Early China” with the Central Plains at the core was well established. At the same time, the early Chinese civilization commenced and quickly made headway in the Central Plains, influencing and leading most other parts of China into civilization. For example, shortly after 6000 BP, in the Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture in southern Shanxi Province, western Henan Province and the eastern Guanzhong (Shaanxi) region, i.e. in the three regions of the heartland of the Central Plains, there appeared great houses of 200–500 metres2 , and large-sized settlements of millions of metres2 , from both of which brought in a higher degree of complexity in social structures. Later, the light of civilization shone lavishly on the valleys of the Yellow River and the Yangtze River. To illustrate, we can list a few achievements below: around 5300 BP, there appeared “palace-style” buildings of over 400 metres2 in the Dadiwan Site 大地湾遗址 in Qinan 秦安, Gansu Province, exquisite large tombs of nearly 20 metres2 in the Xipo Site 西坡遗址 in Lingbao 灵宝, Henan Province, magnificent facilities for sacrifice, including “temples, altars and tombs”, in the Niuheliang Site 牛 河梁遗址 in Lingyuan 凌源, Liaoning Province, we also find large luxurious tombs containing many precious jade objects in the Jiaojia Site 焦 家遗址 in Zhangqiu 章丘, Shandong Province, in the Lingjiatan Site 凌 家滩 in Hanshan 含山, Anhui Province and in the Dongshancun Site 东 山村遗址 in Lianyungang 连云港, Jiangsu Province, etc. The relics excavated from these sites show that cultures like the Yangshao, Hongshan 红山文化, Dawenkou and Songze 崧泽 all have approached the edge of civilization. Also at around 5300 BP, the Songze culture transformed into the Liangzhu culture. Later, a large number of people migrated to the Liangzhu area. Although due to the dry and cold climate at that time, the groundwater levels in the Liangzhu area decreased, creating the natural conditions fit for human settlement. “Water control” perhaps remained the top priority in such a low-lying small area of flat land. Besides, the influx of a large population required more food, spurring the rapid development of irrigated rice agriculture. The large-scale construction of civil engineering and water conservancy projects as well as the development of irrigated rice agriculture not only rapidly increased the levels of productivity in the Liangzhu society; moreover, it greatly enhanced the

10

LIANGZHU : AN EARLY STATE WITH REGIONAL SOVEREIGN …

191

capacities of the Liangzhu society for organization and mobilization, and increased the power of the chieftains from the aristocracy. All these factors contributed to the emergence of the splendid Liangzhu civilization. The process was similar to the formation of the Sumerian civilization. In the final analysis, the Liangzhu civilization resulted from the continuous civilizing process which had been underway in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River since the Miaodigou era. The initiation of the process was also related to the influence of the Central Plains and to the interaction with surrounding areas. Therefore, the Liangzhu civilization was formed in the context of the integration and interaction of plural but unified regional cultures in early China, and it was an important part of the early Chinese civilization.

10.4 The Influence of the Liangzhu Civilization on the “Early China” The Liangzhu civilization expanded mainly southward; for example, the Haochuan culture 好川文化 in southern Zhejiang Province and the Shixia culture 石峡文化 in northern Guangdong Province were deeply influenced by the Liangzhu civilization. To the north of Liangzhu was the powerful Dawenkou culture. In the Huating Graves 花厅墓地 in Xinyi 新 沂, Jiangsu Province, graves were found where the living were buried alive with the dead, indicating that the Liangzhu people once migrated northward to this place and fought wars with the Dawenkou people. This was, however, the farthest point the Liangzhu culture had reached in its northward expansion. Further to the west and northwest of Liangzhu was the dominant Qujialing culture and the Yangshao culture, areas which could not be penetrated by the Liangzhu culture. In any case, the influence of the Liangzhu civilization, even at its flourishing days, on the Yellow River Valley and the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, which constituted the main area of the “Early Chinese Cultural Circle”, was still limited. It was not until the Liangzhu civilization was in its last phase that it began to exert a great impact on the Yellow River Valley. About 4500 BP, the Taosi culture 陶寺文化 appeared in the Linfen Basin 临汾盆 地 in southern Shanxi Province. In this culture, jade and stone objects, including cong, bi, yue and, V-shaped kitchen knives V 字形厨刀 were found, which displayed clearly elements from to Liangzhu culture. Even the ancient city of Taosi itself in the Central Plains, which covered nearly

192

J. HAN

3 million metres2 and had never been inhabited previously, might have been inspired by the architectural concepts of the Liangzhu civilization. Also deeply influenced by the Liangzhu culture were the graves of the Qingliangsi Site 清凉寺 in Ruicheng 芮城, Shanxi Province, and the Lushanmao Site 芦山峁 in Yan’an 延安, Shaanxi Province, where a large number of exquisite jade and stone objects were excavated. The profound influence of the Liangzhu civilization was not confined to material life only. For people in the Yellow River Valley, the jade objects with the Liangzhu style were a perfect symbol of high social status. Along with the appearance of the Liangzhu-style big cities, the political and administrative modes of the Liangzhu civilization might have also permeated the regions in the Central Plains and northern China. Seen from this perspective, the Liangzhu culture helped to promote the civilizing process in the Central Plains and northern China during the Longshan Era. What is more important, based on the Taosi culture, cong, bi and other jade items spread northward and influenced the Shimao type 石 峁类型 of the Laohushan culture, and spread westward and influenced the Qijia culture 齐家文化 in Gansu and Qinghai Provinces, and Ningxia Autonomous Region, with a gentle and softening effect on the roughness of the northern and northwestern cultures. Needless to say, the Liangzhu jade items had a more noticeable influence on the neighbouring Dawenkou and Longshan cultures. In fact, in the Longshan culture, there had emerged in the late Longshan period a unique style of jade artefacts, with its deep influence on the Xiaojiawuji culture 肖家屋脊 in the Jianghan Plain. The jade culture of Liangzhu culture was also passed down, through the Taosi culture, the Longshan culture, the Xiaojiawuji culture and the Shimao type, etc., to the later Erlitou culture (the late Xia culture) and even to the cultures of the Shang and Zhou Dynasties. Although the Liangzhu culture is not the immediate precursor to the cultures of the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties, and the Liangzhu civilization had declined before the establishment of the Xia Dynasty, the Liangzhu civilization itself constituted an important part of the plural though unified early Chinese civilization. The great contribution the Liangzhu civilization had made to the formation and development of early Chinese civilization can never be forgotten.

10

LIANGZHU : AN EARLY STATE WITH REGIONAL SOVEREIGN …

193

(This section was originally published in China Social Sciences News on 5 August, 2019, and was later reprinted in Issue 20 of Xinhua Digest in 2019.)

CHAPTER 11

Shimao: Its Significance in the Development of Chinese Civilization

In recent years, the discovery of the Shimao Ancient City 石峁古城 in Shenmu, Shaanxi Province, has become an astonishingly great event.1 Some of the questions which might arise on top of others might include: how could there have been a huge 4000-year old city covering an area of 4 million m2 in such a dry place crossed with gullies in the north of northern Shaanxi consisting of hilly loess areas? How could it possess such high levels of architecture and exquisite jade artefacts? Where did its cultural roots come from? How had it interacted with the surrounding 1 The Shaanxi Institute of Archaeology, et al. (2013), “The Shimao site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology, 7; ibid., (2015), “Brief report on the trial excavation in the Houyangwan and Hujiawa sites of the Shimao Site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology, 5; ibid. (2016), Discovering the Ancient City of Shimao, Beijing: Wenwu Press; ibid. (2016), “Brief report of the excavation in Hanjiagedan site of the Shimao Site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 4; ibid. (2017), “The imperial city platform in the ancient city of Shimao in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology, 7; ibid. (2019), “Breakthroughs in the excavation of the imperial city platform at the Shimao Site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Newspaper of China’s Cultural Relics, 11 January, page 8; Sun, Zhouyong, Shao, Jing, Di, Nan, et al. (2019), “Report on the excavation of the Shimao Site in 2018”, Newspaper of China’s Cultural Relics, 23 August, page 5; Li, Zheng (2019), “The Shimao Site: Great new discoveries change conventional understandings”, Newspaper of China’s Cultural Relics, 27 September, page 5.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_11

195

196

J. HAN

regions? Which stage of civilization had it reached? What is its position in the civilizing process of the Early China? This chapter will briefly discuss these issues.

11.1

The Shimao City: Its Origin in the Central Plains and Connection to Eurasia

In the field of archaeology, potteries are important for archaeologists to discern the cultural properties of the material remains, because potteries are common objects, fragile and susceptible to change, though often reflecting cultural customs. The most typical kind of potteries found in the Shimao Site are li tripods with two tiny handles 双鋬鬲 and contractingmouthed yan cookers 敛口甗. Li 鬲 is one of the most characteristic type of Chinese pottery utensils for cooking which has been invented in the cultures of the regions along Central Shanxin Province and central and southern Inner Mongolia. Compared with jia tripods 斝, li has three big hollow feet. While cooking food, people put the food into the hollow feet to maximize the heating area, with the effect of improving efficiency but saving energy at the same time. Therefore, li was fit to be used by the farming population in semi-arid regions, such as central and southern Inner Mongolia, central and northern Shanxi, northern Shaanxi and northwestern Hebei, that is, the “northern region” in the narrow sense of the term. Although the yan 甗 originated in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River, as they spread to the north, they changed from three solid feet to three hollow feet. Its upper part can be used for steaming food and the lower part for boiling food, hence more convenient and efficient. The Shimao type, which belonged to the predominantly agricultural Longshan culture in the “northern region”, can be termed a Laohushan culture 老虎山文化2 in the narrow sense. The Laohushan culture varied greatly from place to place, and can be divided into several local types or “subcultures”.3 The Shimao Site which is typical of the sites in northern

2 The Inner Mongolia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2000), Daihai Archaeology (I): Collection of Reports on the Excavation of the Laohushan Site, Beijing: Science Press; Han, Jianye (2003), A Study of the Neolithic Culture in Northern China, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 3 Tian Guangjin first proposed the name “the Laohushan culture”, but it was only used to refer to the Longshan Sites in central and southern Inner Mongolia. See Tian Guangjin (1997), “On the prehistoric archaeology in Central and Southern Inner Mongolia”, Acta

11

SHIMAO: ITS SIGNIFICANCE IN THE DEVELOPMENT …

197

Shaanxi has certain characteristics. For example, the three-legged weng urns 三足瓮, which appeared early and were highly developed, belonged to the Shimao type of the Laohushan culture, or the Shimao culture for short.4 The main phases of the ancient city of Shimao can be divided into two: the early and the late phase. In the early phase, wide crotch jia-type li tripods 宽裆的斝式鬲 were in vogue, and in the late phase typical li tripods with acute-angled crotches 尖角裆的典型鬲, and other potteries such as a new type of three-legged weng and he wine vessels 盉 were popular. The absolute dates of the early and late phases were about 4300–4100 BP and 4100–4800 BP respectively,5 which is roughly equivalent to the late part of the early phase and the late phase of the Laohushan culture according to our division. The predecessor of the Laohushan culture is the Yangshao culture in the Central Plains in its broad sense. In the middle of the Holocene epoch, about 4500 BP, when the climate was favourable, in the loess hilly area of the northern region, the conditions of water and heat were much better than those at present, and the landscape was probably much flatter; therefore, it was better suited to dry farming. The people of the Hougang type 后岗类型 of the Yangshao culture moved northwest from the area east of the Taihang Mountains, and the people of the Banpo type 半坡类型 of Yangshao culture moved northeast from the Guanzhong 关中 region. The two groups met in the north, merged,6 and formed the Yangshao culture with its own characteristics, which lasted for about 2000 years. By the Longshan 龙山 period (4500 BP), pottery Archaeological Sinica, 2. Wei Jian called the Longshan Sites in the area along Ordos “the Yongxingdian culture”. See Wei Jian (2009), “On the Yongxingdian culture”, Cultural Relics, 9. Zhang Zhongpei called the Longshan Sites in central Shanxi “the Xinghua culture”. See Zhang Zhongpei (2004), “Pottery li tripods with two tiny handles in the Xinghua culture”, The Palace Museum Journal, 4. 4 Sun, Hongyan & Sun, Zhouyong (2002), “An analysis of the Shimao site”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 1; Gong, Qiming (2018), “Important achievements in prehistoric archaeology in Shaanxi in the new century (II)”, Relics and Museolgy, 5. 5 Shao, Jing (2016), “On the date and construction of the city of Shimao”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 4. 6 Zhang, Zhongpei & Guan, Qiang (1990), “Study on the Neolithic remains in the

Hetao Area”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1; Yan, Wenming (1991), “Issues on the primitive culture in central and southern Inner Mongolia”, Collection of Papers on the Primitive Culture in Central and Southern Inner Mongolia, Beijing: Haiyang Press, 3–12; Tian, Guangjin (1997), “On prehistoric archaeology in central and southern Inner Mongolia”, Acta Archaeological Sinica, 2.

198

J. HAN

jia 陶斝 spread from the south of Shanxi to the north, and became li, and yan 陶甗 type of pottery was also introduced from Hougang Phase II in the Hebei Plain 河北平原, thus contributing to new developments of Laohushan culture. We can say that the Laohushan culture, including Shimao, originated in the Central Plains and was deeply influenced, in its development, by the Central Plains culture. On the other hand, the Laohushan culture had its unique features in its adaptation to the natural environment of northern China. Its main cultural basis comprises Ashan type 阿善类型, Baiyan type 白燕类型, etc. of the Yangshao culture.7 In addition, the cultural integration in the north was also an important contribution to the formation of the Laohushan culture. For example, the cave-style dwelling architecture with whitewashed walls spread from northern Shaanxi and central Shanxi to central and southern Inner Mongolia, northern Shanxi, northwestern Hebei and other places; the stone-city style spread from Ordos and northern Shaanxi to central and northern Shanxi, the Daihai 岱海 region and northwestern Hebei. The jade objects and beast-faced pattern on stone carvings of Shimao should have their cultural origin in the Central Plains, and they can be traced to a much earlier source in eastern China. A large number of jade objects, including jade dao blades 刀, jade yue 钺, jade bi 璧, jade huan hoops 环, were excavated from Shimao and the nearby Xinhua 新华 Site in Shenmu 神木.8 They did not originate in the northern part of northern Shaanxi, but were similar to the jade objects of the earlier Taosi culture in southern Shanxi; therefore they might be introduced from the Taosi culture.9 The Lushanmao 芦山峁 Site in Yan’an 延安 in the southern part of northern Shaanxi also had pottery and jade objects similar to those of the Taosi Site,10 so the Lushanmao Site whould 7 Han, Jianye (2003), A Study on the Neolithic Culture in Northern China, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 8 Shaanxi Institute of Archaeology & Yulin Cultural Relics Protection Research Institute (2005), The Xinhua Site in Shenmu, Beijing: Science Pres; Wang, Weilin & Sun, Zhouyong (2011), “On the date of Shimao jade artefacts and other issues”, Jianghan Archaeology, 4. 9 Han, Jianye (2008), Natural Environment and Cultural Development in Northwest China during the Pre-Qin Period, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 204. 10 Shaanxi Institute of Archaeology, School of Cultural Heritage of Northwest University, & Yan’an Institute of Cultural Relics (2018), “Breakthroughs made in the excavation of the Shimao site in Lushan, Yan’an, Shaanxi Province”, Newspaper of China’s Cultural Relics, 16 November.

11

SHIMAO: ITS SIGNIFICANCE IN THE DEVELOPMENT …

199

have been under the influence of the Taosi culture. It then follows that Shimao’s jade objects were introduced from Taosi through the southern part of northern Shaanxi. Furthermore, the jade objects of the Taosi culture were not indigenous to the Central Plains, but had their origin in the Dawenkou culture 大汶口文化 and the Liangzhu culture 良渚文 化 in eastern China. More jade yazhang blades 牙璋 were found in the late Shimao phase, but they did not appear in the Taosi Site, so they probably came from the Longshan culture in the Haidai region.11 In the Shimao Site, jade objects were found to stick on the walls and other places, indicating the use of jade artefacts as offerings to ancestors.12 This practice was not found in the Taosi culture, the Dawenkou culture or the Liangzhu culture. Obviously, great changes had taken place in the use of jade objects; however, the changes could not overturn the claim that the jade objects of Shimao had their cultural roots in the Central Plains and eastern China. The beast-faced pattern on stone artefacts unearthed at Shimao was characterized by boldness and roughness, and was similar to the pattern of jade carvings of Xiaojiawuji 肖家屋脊 culture in the Jianghan 江汉 region. It should have its origin in the Longshan culture in the Haidai region and can be traced to the earlier Liangzhu culture. Some of the stone figures showing a human face, bronze ware and the remains of livestock such as sheep and cattle at Shimao, reflected its connection with the Eurasian steppes. Some of the stone figures showing a human face found at Shimao13 were similar to the human-faced stone carvings of the Okunev culture, Karakol culture and Chemurchek culture in the Altai region in the broad sense of the term. Similar figures showing a heart-shaped or “water-drop-shaped” human face were also commonly seen on the rock paintings of the Altai Mountains, Tianshan Mountain, Helan Mountain and Yinshan Mountain,14 suggesting possible broad 11 Li, Boqian (1998), “The date and significance of the yazhang unearthed on Lamma Island, Hong Kong”, Studies on the Structural System of Chinese Bronze Culture, Beijing: Science Press, 254–259. 12 He, Nu (2018), “A study on jade ritual vessels of Taosi culture against the background of the jade artefacts of western China”, Cultural Relics in Southern China, 2. 13 Shaanxi Institute of Archaeology, et al. (2013), “The Shimao site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology, 7; Shaanxi Institute of Archaeology, et al. (2016), Discovering the Ancient City of Shimao, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 122. 14 Han, Jianye (2018), “On the image of Shaman-like figures in Xinjiang 4000 BP and the date of the rock paintings in Kangjiashimenzi”, The Western Regions Studies, 3.

200

J. HAN

cultural connections in those times between the northern region in its narrow sense, including Shimao, and the Eurasian steppes.15 It is claimed by some that these “water-drop-shaped” figures of human face had their origin in the earlier Xinglongwa-Hongshan culture 兴隆洼-红山文化 in northeast China.16 The huanshou dao blades mould 环首刀范 in the later Shimao phase, with an X-shaped pattern in Seima-Turbino style on the hilt, can be dated to around 1800 BP.17 J. Rawson thinks it is specifically related to the bronze blades 青铜刀 of the Elunino Culture in the Altai region.18 In addition, a large number of bones of domestic animals such as sheep, goats and cattle were found in Shimao and other ruins of the late phase of the Laohushan culture.19 Sheep, goats and cattle might come from either the Ganqing 甘青 region or the Altai region, which further demonstrates the initial cultural contact between the pastoral culture on the Eurasian steppes and the agricultural civilization in northern China, and the formation of a semi-agricultural and semi-pastoral form of subsistence, thus laying the foundation for the north in its narrow sense to become a cultural area based on animal husbandry after the late Shang Dynasty.

15 Guo, Wu (2013), “The communication between northern China and the Eurasian steppe during the Longshan Period: From the perspective of the stone sculptures of the Shimao Site”, Newspaper of China’s Cultural Relics, 2 August. 16 Around 2500 BCE, the Hongshan culture had long died out, and the tradition of human figure sculptures had disappeared. The reason the sculptures appeared in the Altai and Yinshan Mountains to the east during the Longshan period remains unknown. See Xiao Bo, Zaika, A.L. (2017), “Research on the date of the rock painting of figures with water-drop-shaped eyes in Northern Asia”, Northern Cultural Relics, 1. 17 Shaanxi Institute of Archaeology, et al. (2017), “The location of the imperial city platform of the site of Shimao city in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology, 7. 18 Rawson, J. (2017), “Shimao and Erlitou: New perspectives on the origins of the bronze industry in central China”, Antiquity, 91(355): 1–5. 19 Hu, Songmei, Yang, Miaomiao, Sun, Zhouyong, & Shao, Jing (2016), “A study on the animal remains excavated at the Shimao site in Shenmu, Shaanxi Province from 2012 to 2013”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 4; Yang, Miaomiao, Hu, Songmei, Guo, Xiaoning & Wang, Weilin (2017), “A study on the sheep bones at the Muzhuzhuliang site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Agricultural Archaeology, 3.

11

11.2

SHIMAO: ITS SIGNIFICANCE IN THE DEVELOPMENT …

201

Regional State and the Northern Mode

The stone-walled city of Shimao covered an area of more than four million m2 . It has a majestic and high imperial city platform, large and complex gates, exquisite jade and stone carvings and bronze wares, and showed super levels of city-wall-making techniques. All of these were evidence of a social organization and some division of labour in society, as well as higher degrees of social complexity. In the imperial city platform 皇 城台, which was the core of the ancient city, more than 60 stone carvings of different themes were excavated, including signs, human faces, animals, “deity faces”, “divine beasts”, as well as stone columns decorated with faces of deities, all of them serving to produce a solemn and frightening atmosphere. More than 20 bone kouhuang musical instruments 口 簧 were also excavated, which might be used for the occasion of ancestral worship. In addition, more than 20 large pottery eagles 陶鹰, divination bones 卜骨, etc., were found, testifying to the highly religious character of the imperial city platform. The ruins of Shimao suggest it was the religious and political centre of the Shimao type in northern Shaanxi, and it might even have dominated other types of Laohushan culture. They revealed an early state or a civilization in its primary stage. However, Shimao was at best a regional centre of the area from the northern region to southern Shanxi, that is, the rulers of Shimao exercised power merely over this area rather than most parts of early China. Regarding the development of states or cultures in China, Su Bingqi 苏秉琦 puts forward the threestage theory: ancient state 古国, regional states 方国 and empire 帝国. Yan Wenming 严文明 changes the three stages into ancient state, kingdom 王 国 and empire. Wang Zhenzhong 王震中 thinks they were regional state, kingdom and empire. Obviously, Shimao belonged to the ancient state or regional state type. Shimao, the Liangzhu culture and the Longshan culture in the eastern region all revealed the signs of a civilization, but there are great differences between them. The most obvious is there were relatively a few funerary objects in Shimao. For example, in a few large graves in Shimao, each covering an area of over 10 m2 , the remains of people buried alive with the grave owner were found along with only a small number of funerary objects, including jade artefacts, painted pottery and so on.20 20 For example, in the big grave M1 of Hanjiagedan韩家圪旦 at the Site of Shimao, and the big grave M7 at the Shengetaliang 神圪挞梁 Site in Shenmu County. See Shaanxi

202

J. HAN

Perhaps this was due to the influence of the Taosi culture. The big burial chamber and the practice of burying living people with the dead highlighted the high social status of the grave owner, while the disproportionately small number of funerary objects reflected the ethos of “valuing status over wealth”. In contrast, in the large graves of the Liangzhu culture and the Longshan culture in the eastern region, complete sets of coffins were found together with a large number of nice jade and pottery objects, showcasing the ethos of “valuing both status and wealth”. In addition, several pits of young women’s heads were also found at Shimao, revealing the cruelty of the Shimao people towards prisoners of war. I have pointed out that in the northern region, the Chalcolithic Age began about 5500 BP, especially after the Laohushan culture in the Longshan period, and since then, the number of stone cities increased rapidly, wars became frequent, patriarchal family systems emerged and great social changes took place, changes just like those in the eastern region. However, the gap between rich and poor and the division of social labour was not as significant as in the eastern coastal areas and the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River. There were fewer funerary objects in the graves, and most stone cities were just ordinary settlements surrounded by stone walls built to defend against the enemy.21 I have briefly described this prolonged structure of societal development and civilization as the “Northern Pattern” to distinguish it from the “Eastern Pattern” and the “Central Plains Pattern”.22 The excavation of the stone-walled settlements in Shimao offered a glimpse of a more complex northern China.

Institute of Archaeology, et al. (2016), Discovering the Ancient City of Shimao, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 69; Shaanxi Institute of Archaeology, et al., “Excavation report of the Shegetaliang site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 4. 21 I thought the belt-like distribution of stone towns in northern China around the time of the Longshan period might be related to the resistance against the encroachment by hunter-gatherers farther north. Recently, objects such as stone figures and copper knives (mold) found at the Shimao Site suggest that the Shimao people might have had connections with the people on the northern Eurasian steppe. The excavation of stone cities seems to indicate a strong resistance against the people on the Eurasian steppe. See Han Jianye (2008), “On the early belt of stone cities in northern China as the prototype of the Great Wall”, Huaxia Archaeology, 1. 22 Han, Jianye (2003), “The general trend and different modes of societal development in the Chalcolithic Age”, in Ancient Civilization (Vol. II), 84–96.

11

SHIMAO: ITS SIGNIFICANCE IN THE DEVELOPMENT …

203

11.3 Southward Movement to the Central Plains and Reconstruction of Chinese Civilization The early Laohushan culture and its surrounding cultures basically coexisted peacefully, but in the late phase, great changes took place. The reason may be that around 4000 BP, the climate became dry and cold, and the late Laohushan culture expanded vigorously southward. With Laohushan culture moving south, the cultural landscape of the Linfen Basin 临汾盆地 changed drastically.23 There used to be only jia vessels and no li tripod in this region; however, as a large number of pottery li tripods with two tiny handles 双鋬陶鬲 appeared in the Linfen Basin, the Taosi culture turned into its later stage. At the same time, large cities were destroyed, violent massacres occurred and graves were destroyed on a large scale.24 These and other occurrences indicated that fierce conflicts and wars had broken out between the northern region and southwestern Shanxi.25 The ruins of the city of Shimao and those of Taosi were both large settlements of three to four million m2 . They might coexist for a short time, but broadly speaking, Shimao thrived while Taosi declined. There should be some logical connection between the rise of Shimao in the north and the decline of Taosi in the south. I have done some research on the issue and proposed that the Shimao type might be the cultural relic of Beidi 北狄 (northern barbarians),26 the descendants of the Yellow Emperor, based on the connection between the southward movement of the Laohushan culture to Linfen and the story of “Houji’s exiling Danzhu”, and the northwest migration of the late Taosi culture and the

23 Han, Jianye (2006), “Miaodigou Phase II in Western Henan and Southwestern Shanxi: The periodisation and pedigree of the Longshan culture”, Acta Archaeological Sinica, 2. 24 Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Science, Shanxi Institute of Archaeology, et al. (2005), “Report of the 2002 of the site of Taosi city in Xiangfen, Shanxi Province”, Acta Archaeological Sinica, 3; Gao, Jiangtao (2017), “An analysis of the ‘destruction of graves’ at the Taosi site”, in Archaeology of the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties (Vol. 7), Bejing: Science Press, 345–354. 25 Han, Jianye (2001), “The Tangtao Clan’s conquering of the West Xia and Houji the Ancestor of Zhou Tribes exiling Danzhu the son of Emperor Yao”, Journal of Peking University (Humanities and Social Sciences), 3. 26 Han, Jianye (2018), “The ‘Shimao people’ may be the forebears of Beidi”, China Social Sciences News, 27 December; Han, Jianye (2019), “Exploration of the clan of the Shimao people”, Wenwu Chunqiu, 4.

204

J. HAN

story of Buzhu’s “fleeing to live between the southern and northern barbarians”. The imperial city platform at the Shimao Site might be the sacred platform for the worship of the Yellow Emperor, and the ancient city of Shimao was one of China’s sacred cities. The southward movement of the Laohushan culture, including Shimao, blocked the civilizing process of the Taosi culture in the southern Shanxi, and paved the way for central Henan and western Henan to become the core civilization areas in the Central Plains. Elements of the Laohushan culture, including pottery li tripods 陶鬲, microlithic arrowheads 细石器镞 and divination bones also seeped into the cultures such as Hougang Phase II and Wangwan Phase III.27 In the same manner, other western elements such as wheat, sheep and bronze vessels might also enter the Central Plains. They not only brought new elements to but also imposed a certain pressure on the Central Plains and other places. Later, the vigorous expansion of Wangwan Phase III into southern Henan and the Jianghan region, or the recorded event of “Yu the Great’s conquest of the Miao Man tribes”,28 could be regarded as the aftermath of the pressure from the north, and the event of “Yu the Great’s conquest of the Miao Man tribes” stood for the most important political unification before the founding of the Xia Dynasty. Later, the Erlitou culture, or the late Xia culture, evolved mainly on the basis of Wangwan Phase III, revealing the civilization of a kingdom. Therefore, the ancient city of Shimao was an important part of Chinese civilization, and Shimao and the Laohushan culture have made a very important contribution to the development of early China into a mature kingdom civilization and to the reconstruction of early Chinese civilization. (This section was originally published in Issue 6 of Journal of Chinese Culture in 2019.)

27 Han, Jianye (2007), “The expansion and influence of Laohushan culture”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 1. 28 Yang, Xingai & Han, Jianye (1995), “Exploration into ‘Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2.

PART II

The Three Regional Patterns of the Origin of Chinese Civilization

CHAPTER 12

The General Tendency and Different Patterns of Societal Development in the Chalcolithic Age

It has been a general consensus among scholarly circles that Chinese prehistoric culture was characterized by both unity and diversity.1 However, with regard to the evolution of the prehistoric society and the origin of the Chinese civilization, with the exception of a few books which have conducted in-depth research into some of the unique characteristics of certain types of the Chinese civilizations,2 few dialectical discussions have been conducted on the relationship between the general trend of social development in most parts of China and the different modes of development which might have appeared in different regions. This section intends to make some investigation into this issue from the perspective of settlement archaeology, with the aim to draw some scholarly attention to this aspect.

1 Yan, Wenming (1987), “The unity and diversity of Chinese prehistoric culture”, Cultural Relics, 3. 2 Zhao, Hui (1999), “Some unique features of the Liangzhu culture: On the cause of the decline of a prehistoric Chinese civilization”, Research on the Liangzhu Culture: Collection of Papers of the International Symposium Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Liangzhu Culture, Beijing: Science Press: 104–120.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_12

207

208

12.1

J. HAN

Three New Changes in the Chalcolithic Age

An important dividing line of the prehistoric culture in China is around 5500 BP. Before that time, Chinese society was in the Neolithic Age, and after that time, China entered the Chalcolithic Age 铜石并用时代.3 Compared with the Neolithic Age (about 10,000–3500 BCE), in the Chalcolithic Age (about 3500–1900 BCE), the society in most parts of China underwent general changes, which were mainly reflected in the following three aspects. 12.1.1

The Prominence of the Patriarchal Jiating Family and Jiazu Clan

In daily life and work, the independent patriarchal jiating family 家 庭 became mainstream, and the patriarchal jiazu clan 家族, which was composed of several patriarchal jiating families, gradually became dominant, eventually causing the collapse of the clan society 氏族社会. These were the major changes that took place in the Chalcolithic society in China.4 The Yuanzigou settlement 园子沟聚落 and the Dawenkou Cemetery 大汶口墓地 are two examples. The Yuanzigou settlement was located in the Daihai region 岱海地区, in Liangcheng 凉城 County, Inner Mongolia. The settlement belonged to the Laohushan culture 老虎山文化 in the later phase of the Longshan Era, and can be divided into two phases. In Yuanzigou, more than 100 houses were found, and most of them were about ten m2 in size. A house of this kind might be the residence of a nuclear jiating family, including a couple and their children. Two or three of these houses were joined to form a courtyard, including main rooms, wing-rooms and a common kitchen. The courtyard might be related to a big patriarchal jiating family, consisting of over three generations of family members. The courtyards 3 Yan, Wenming (1992), “A preliminary discussion on the origin of the Chinese civilization”, Cultural Relics, 1. 4 There are two main reasons why we call the society at that time “a patriarchal society”. Firstly, the situation of the burials and settlements then was similar to that of the Shang and Zhou Dynasties, which were two patriarchal societies. Secondly, in the Dawenkou culture and the Qijia culture, men and women were buried together in some graves. This burial practice was adopted not to highlight the possible existence of the relationship of husband and wife; instead, it revealed the superiority of man to woman, especially in the Qijia culture.

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

209

were relatively compacted in groups, with the houses in each group built in a symmetric and precise layout and uniform style. These groups might represent a big patriarchal jiating family. When more than two groups of houses were arranged in rows, the houses in rows adopted the same architectural style and were similar in size, which might correspond to a jiazu clan. The whole settlement composed of such groups of houses constituted a clan commune 家族公社. Generally speaking, the jiazu clans represented by the rows of houses were the most important social organization of the whole clan commune; while there were merely subtle differences in style and customs among different jiazu clans, full accord and order prevailed within the same jiazu clan; and whereas there began to appear some difference between rich and poor jiazu clans—limited as it may have been—fundamental equality was maintained within the jiazu clan itself, with only a clear differentiation in status among the clan members. Consanguinity might have served as the foundation of the cohesion of the jiazu clan members, drawing a critical demarcation line at the level of the jiazu clan between internal and external members: to be intimate internally and distant externally.5 The Dawenkou Cemetery was located in Tai’an 泰安, Shandong Province. The burials first excavated consisted of a total of 133 graves belonging to the late Dawenkou culture, which can be further divided into three phases. The graves in Phase I accounted for the majority and can be subdivided into four groups. In these groups, the number of the deceased ranged from less than ten to as many as 30–40, which might correspond to the amount of people in the jiazu clan in real life. Under the divisions of the burial group, a section representing the patriarchal jiating family could be discerned as well, and the site for the burials in the entire early phase corresponded to a single patriarchal clan commune. Similar to the small and medium-sized groups of graves in the early phase, cemeteries in Phases II and III had a small number of burials, and therefore they might merely be jiazu clan cemeteries. The replacement of the cemeteries of a jiazu clan commune by those of the jiazu clan

5 Inner Mongolia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2000), Archaeology in the Daihai Region (I): A Collection of Excavation Reports of the Laohushan Site, Beijing: Science Press.

210

J. HAN

vividly demonstrated the process whereby the jiazu clan broke through the shackles of the jiazu clan commune and gained more independence.6 There were other settlements which displayed a relatively clear layout and were comparable with the Yuanzigou settlement in their prominence in showcasing the patriarchal jiating family and jiazu clan organization, including the settlement of Qinwangzhai type 秦王寨类型 at the Dahecun Site 大河村遗址 in Zhengzhou 郑州,7 Henan Province, the settlement of the Late Dawenkou culture at the Yuchisi Site 尉迟寺遗 址 in Mengcheng 蒙城,8 Anhui Province and the settlement of Phase II of the Keshengzhuang Site 客省庄遗址 at the Kangjia Site 康家遗址 in Lintong 临潼,9 Shaanxi Province. As for their burials, in most cemeteries, the prominence of the jiazu family and the differences between the jiazu clan families were clearly noticeable in most of these cemeteries, although in some cemeteries, the graves were confined within the cemetery of the whole jiazu clan commune. For other cultures, such as the Liangzhu and Longshan cultures, only independent jiazu clan cemeteries could be found quite frequently. 12.1.2

The Spread of Jiazu Clan Commune Groups

Different from the naturally formed settlements which scattered around with random spacing, the settlement groups became widespread in the Chalcolithic Age,10 reflecting the strengthened connection between the people of various settlements. There might be a dozen or several dozens of settlement groups in the same region, each group covering 10–30 m2 , with a population ranging from several thousands to tens of thousands. 6 Shandong Cultural Relics Administration, & Jinan Museum (1974), The Dawenkou Cemetry: Excavation Report of the Neolithic Burials, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Han (1994), “An analysis of the Dawenkou Cemetery”, Cultural Relics of Central China. 7 Zhengzhou Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2001), The Dahezun Site in Zhengzhou, Beijing: Science Press. 8 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2001), The Yuchisi Site in Mengcheng: Excavation and Research of the Neolithic Settlement Site in Northern Anhui Province, Beijing, Science Press. 9 The Kangjia Archaeological Team of Shaanxi Institute of Archaeology (1988), “A brief excavation report of the Kangjia Site in Lintong, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 5 & 6. 10 Yan, Wenming (1989), “A study on the morphology of the houses and settlements of the Yangshao culture”, Studies of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press: 180–242.

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

211

Such settlement groups should represent a form of social organization on a higher level than that of the jiazu clan communes, and their emergence might be primarily based on the consanguinity relation of the members within a jiazu clan commune, which was, in essence, an enlargement and extension of the jiazu clan commune. The formation of such settlement groups might result from the common needs of the members of the jiazu clan commune, and therefore generally did not require much effort in social administration. At present, no term seems adequate enough to refer to the settlement group, thus I propose the tentative term “jiazu gongshe qun 家族公社群”, i.e. “clan commune group”. In fact, there had often appeared “super settlement groups” which were much larger in scale and higher in social organization than clan commune groups, for instance, the Laohushan settlement group 老虎山聚落群, the Yuanzigou settlement group 园子沟聚落群, the Liangzhu settlement group 良渚聚落群 and the Shijiahe settlement group 石家河聚落群. There were at least twenty settlements of the Laohushan culture scattering on the mountain slopes on the northern bank of the Daihai Lake 岱海湖, in Liangcheng County, Ulanqab, southern-central Inner Mongolia. Forming the Laohushan settlement group on the western side of the lake and the Yuanzigou settlement group on the eastern side respectively, each group had about ten settlements and covered an area of more than ten km2 . Internally, each settlement group was rather uniform, its components being closely connected and displaying almost identical cultural features, while there were certain differences between the two settlement groups. For instance, both the Mianpo settlement 面坡聚落 and Bancheng settlement 板城聚落 might have broken away from the Laohushan and the Xibaiyu 西白玉 settlements, a strong proof both of the actual existence of settlement groups, and of consanguinity relation as the main source of strength as a bond to maintain the settlement group as representation of the jiazu clan commune groups.11 Of course, the Laohushan settlement group, the Yuanzigou settlement group and others constituted the large settlement group in the Daihai region. 11 Inner Mongolia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2000), Archaeology in the Daihai Region (I): Collection of Excavation Reports of the Laohushan Site, Beijing: Science Press; Inner Mongolia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology & the Daihai Archaeological Team of the Kyoto Association of Chinese Archaeology of Japan (2001), “Excavation and investigation report of the Bancheng Site”, Archaeology in the Daihai Region (II): Collection of Reports on the Sino-Japanese Joint Investigation and Research of the Daihai Region, Beijing: Science Press: 206–277.

212

J. HAN

The Liangzhu settlement group was located near the Liangzhu Town 良渚镇 in Yuhang 余杭, Zhejiang Province. Lying on the southern bank of the Taihu Lake 太湖, this settlement group covered an area of more than thirty kilometres2 , and the most advanced of the settlements belonged to mid-phase of this group, of which there were estimated several dozens.12 Amidst the 100-plus sites of the Liangzhu culture excavated in this settlement group so far, most were cemeteries. The Liangzhu settlement group, together with other settlements nearby, formed a very large settlement group on the southern bank of the Taihu Lake. The Shijiahe settlement group was located near Shijiahe Town 石家河 镇 in Tianmen 天门, Hubei Province. While it covered an area of less than ten kilometres2 , nearly thirty settlements pertaining to the Shijiahe culture have been found,13 which, together with other nearby settlements, formed very large settlement group. The settlements (cemeteries) in the Liangzhu and Shijiahe settlement groups each shared a certain degree of similarity in their perspective cultural features, and indicated rather intimate internal connections in between their own settlements. The two settlement groups each represented a jiazu clan commune group of different size. In the meantime, several other settlement groups have been excavated and their archaeological information has also been registered to some extent. These groups include the Dadiwan settlement group 大地 湾聚落群 of the Late Yangshao culture in Qin’an 秦安, Gansu Province, the Dahecun settlement group 大河村聚落群 in Zhengzhou, Henan

12 Fei, Guoping (1996), “An overview of the group of Liangzhu Sites in Yuhang”, The Dawn of Civilization: The Liangzhu Culture, Hangzhou: Zhejiang People’s Publishing House; Shinichi Nakamura (2001), “The group of sites of the Liangzhu Culture”, paper submitted to the International Symposium on Settlement Evolution and Early Civilization, School of Archaeology and Museology of Peking University. 13 Department of Archaeology of Peking University, Hubei Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, & the Shijiahe Archaeological Team of Jingzhou Museum of Hubei Province (1993), “Investigation report of the group of the Shijiahe Sites”, Southern Ethnology and Archaeology, 5, Chengdu: Sichuan Science & Jishu Press: 213–294.

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

213

Province14 and the Liangchengzhen settlement group 两城镇聚落群 of the Longshan culture, in Rizhao, Shandong Province, etc.15 12.1.3

Frequent Wars

There is evidence that cities began to appear in large numbers around China ever since the Chalcolithic Age. At first, three groups of city sites were found respectively in Inner Mongolia, in the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River and in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River. Since the 1990s, another group of this kind has been found in the upper reaches of the Yangtze River.16 Despite their differences in features and functions, these cities all have one thing in common: they had very good defence capacities. This was clearly a reflection of both the increasing tension between community groups and of warfare as an important daily routine. The following discussion will focus on three groups of city sites as examples, including the city sites in central and southern Inner Mongolia, the Xishan Ancient City 西山古城 in Zhengzhou, Henan and the city sites of Qujialing-Shijiahe culture 屈 家岭-石家河文化. Although the dates of the city sites in central and southern Inner Mongolia ranged from Phase II of the Miaodigou Era to the Longshan Era, and although the sites can be divided into several small groups, they all shared similar features. For example, the cities were all built with walls piled up with stone blocks, and were generally located at a much higher altitude than that of the early Yangshao settlements, mostly on the top of a mountain or a mountainside so that they were easy to defend and hard to attack. Precipitous cliffs were often taken advantage of to strengthen defence, and walls were often built on relatively flat terrain. As far as the Zhaizita settlement 寨子塔聚落 in Junggar Banner, southeastern Inner 14 Yan, Wenming (1989), “A study on the morphology of the houses and settlements of the Yangshao culture”, Studies of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press: 180–242. 15 The Sino-US Joint Archaeological Team of the Liangcheng Site in Rizhao, Shandong (2002), “New achievements in a systematic regional survey of the Rizhao area in Shandong”, Archaeology, 5. 16 Yan, Wenming (1997), “A preliminary study on the city site of the Longshan Era”, An Integrated Study of Chinese Archaeology and History, Taipei: Institute of History and Language of Academia Sinica; Zhao, Hui & Wei, Jun (2002), “The discovery and research of the Neolithic city sites in China”, Ancient Civilizations (Vol. 1), Beijing: Wenwu Press: 1–34.

214

J. HAN

Mongolia, is concerned, not only two stone walls and two city gates were built in the north of the settlement on the only passage to the outside world. There was even an observation deck between sections of the stone walls; and the walls on both sides of the city gates were obviously broadened. The construction of barriers upon barriers and checkpoints after checkpoints, together with watch towers one after another, showed that no more importance could have been attached to the defence of the settlement.17 In fact, since the natural resources in central and southern Inner Mongolia were limited, wars might break out frequently between neighbouring settlements to grab for them. In addition, there might be threats from the nomadic ethnic groups in the north. Together, all these factors increased tension between different groups of people, making it imperative to do everything possible to strengthen defence. The Xishan Ancient City in Zhengzhou, Henan Province, was the earliest city site discovered in central China. It coincided entirely with the Qinwangzhai type of the Late Yangshao culture. In fact, the Qinwangzhai type emerged as a result of the clash and subsequent integration between the Dawenkou and the Yangshao cultures, and it was against this background that the ancient city of Xishan was built, with its primary function for defence.18 Likewise, most of the city sites in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River were created against the backdrop, when the Qujialing culture 屈家岭文化 was fighting with the Daxi culture 大溪文化 in an attempt to take the place of the latter, and were then left in ruins at the sudden and tragic time point when the Longshan culture from the Central Plains invaded the Shijiahe culture. Apparently, the destiny of ancient cities was bound up with wars.19 That wars broke out frequently can also be seen in the increase and popularity of specialized weapons, the most representative of which were 17 Inner Mongolia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (1997), “The Taizizhai Site in the Jungar Banner”, Collection of Papers on the Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Inner Mongolia (Vol. II), Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press: 280–326. 18 Training Class of the Archaeological Team Leaders of the State Cultural Heritage Administration (1999), “The excavation of the city site of the Yangshao Era in Xishan, Zhengzhou”, Cultural Relics, 7; Han, Jianye (1996), “An inquiry into the rise and decline of the ancient city of Xishan”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 3. 19 Zhang, Xuqiu (1994), “The discovery and preliminary research of the ancient city of the Qujialing culture”, Archaeology, 7; Yang, Xingai, & Han, Jianye (1995), “Exploration into ‘Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2.

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

215

bows and arrows, and yue battle-axes 钺. As a long-range weapon, the bow and arrow played an incomparable role in war. A sharp increase was found in the number of stone arrowheads at this time in many different places, and the arrowheads took different shapes. The yue battle-axes as a weapon also began to be found widely, especially in graves along the lower reaches of the Yellow River and the Yangtze River. In addition, unusual burials such as mass graves, headless graves, mutilated graves, etc. were frequently found, which too tell us about the cruelty of war and its disastrous consequences for people. The coexistence of the objects of both the Dawenkou and the Liangzhu cultures as well as the evidence of burying living people with the deceased in the Huating Cemetery 花厅 墓地 in Xinyi 新沂, Jiangsu Province, all give clear evidence of the military campaigns of the Liangzhu culture against the Dawenkou culture.20 Rather than skirmishes between adjacent settlements, wars were fought between at least two very large settlement groups or even on a larger scale. Impinging on all sides of the society, involving large numbers of people, wars often broke out abruptly with great cruelty. Therefore, a swift and effective response and mobilization was required to fight a war. One of the reasons for the widespread emergence of jiazu clan communes discussed above might have been to deal with wars; but the social chain reaction caused by wars was still far from this societal organization.

12.2

Obvious Differentiations in the Eastern Regions

The three important changes discussed above took a wide place in the Chalcolithic Age, indicating that the cultural development and social evolution in most regions of China were basically synchronous, and that the general trend of social evolution was roughly the same. In this sense, the early Chinese civilization can be assumed to have been developing as an integrated entirety. But on the other hand, there were obvious differences in different regions in terms of the pattern of societal development, the most noticeable being the differences between eastern China and northern China.

20 Yan, Wenming (1990), “Clash and conquest: Reflections on the burial situation in the Huating Cemetery”, Cultural Relics World, 6.

216

J. HAN

The eastern region was centred around the Yellow River and the lower reaches of the Yangtze River, and extended to the middle reaches of the Yangtze River and the valley of the West Liao River 西辽河. The major archaeological cultures of this region included the Late Dawenkou-Longshan culture, the Late Songze-Liangzhu culture, the Late Daxi-Qujialing-Shijiahe culture and the Late Hongshan-Xueshan culture Phase I. The social disintegration in this region had been very prominent and were manifested in the following three aspects. 12.2.1

The Widening Gap Between Rich and Poor

The quantity and quality of the material means of production directly affect the development of human society and people’s living standards. Therefore, although the possession of property varies from person to person and is not inherently fixed, it has a profound impact on human society. In the Chalcolithic Age, the eastern region saw the widening gap between rich and poor, which was reflected on a large scale in graves. In what follows, the graves of the Late Dawenkou culture and the Liangzhu culture shall be chosen as cases for study. The Late Dawenkou Cemetery can be divided into several burial groups, which represented different jiazu clans and showed prominent differences between the rich and the poor. Most of the graves in the burial groups of the jiazu clan in the northern part of the cemetery in Phase I were medium-size burials, and only one burial was a large-sized. These graves usually contained several dozens of funerary items. In contrast, most of the graves in the other burial groups of Phase I were small and many of them were empty. As for Phase III, there was only one cemetery which might pertain to a wealthy jiazu clan and which consisted mainly of large graves, with a few small or seemingly subordinate burials. Among these burials, the largest contained more than 180 funerary objects. Apart from these differences, there are noticeable differences in terms of coffins and the types and quality of funerary objects. Wooden coffins were found in large- and medium-size graves, while artefacts made of jade and ivory, as well as refined black potteries, white potteries and painted potteries were found only in the large graves. Furthermore, the Dawenkou Cemetery showed more signs of wealth than any other cemetery in the same settlement group, indicating the gap between the rich and the poor among the jiazu clan communes. On the other hand, the Dawenkou settlement group looked wealthier than any other settlement group in

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

217

the same very large settlement group, indicating the polarization between rich and poor jiazu clan commune groups. In the Liangzhu settlement group, there were not only a few aristocratic cemeteries, such as the Fanshan 反山 and Yaoshan 瑶山 cemeteries, which contained thousands (sets) of precious jade objects, but also a large number of jiazu clan cemeteries composed of medium-size or small graves, which might pertain to the common or poor jiazu clans. The graves provide concrete evidence of the polarization of wealth both between the jiazu clans and between the jiazu clan communes.21 The adjacent settlement group centred on Heyedi 荷叶地 in Haining 海宁, Zhejiang Province, was in general not as rich as the Liangzhu settlement group. This is indicated by the difference between the settlement group of the rich jiazu clan family communes and that of the poor. Such a difference even existed between greater regions. For example, the very large settlement group on the southern bank of the Taihu Lake which centred on the Liangzhu settlement group, was somewhat richer than both the very large settlement group on the eastern bank of the Taihu Lake which centred on the Fuquanshan settlement group 福泉山聚落群 in Qingpu 青 浦, Shanghai, and the very large settlement group on the northern bank of the Taihu Lake with the Sidun 寺墩 settlement group in Changzhou 常州, Jiangsu Province.22 12.2.2

The Striking Difference in Social Status

Difference in social status caused solely by an individual’s potential may have existed in all forms of human society. The status of the individual will change with the individual’s potential, and will disappear naturally with their death with limited social impact. The striking difference in social status in the eastern region during the Chalcolithic Age might still have something to do with the individual’s potential, but there was more to it. In general, social status then became rooted in the patriarchal jiazu

21 Fanshan Archaeological Team of Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (1988), “A brief excavation report of the Liangzhu Cemetery of the Fanshan Site in Yuhang, Zhejiang Province”, Cultural Relics, 1; Zhejiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (1988), “A brief excavation report of the altar site of the Liangzhu culture at the Yaoshan Site in Yuhang”, Cultural Relics, 1. 22 Yan, Wenming (2000), “The Liangzhu culture and the origin of civilization”, The Emergence of Agriculture and the Origin of Civilization, Beijing: Science Press: 186–190.

218

J. HAN

clan and was not entirely subject to changes in the individual’s circumstances. In fact, the social status of an individual was largely determined by the social status of the jiazu clan to which he belonged to. The jiazu clan which took possession of the highest social status might have become extremely powerful and exercise considerable influence in society. Moreover, social status was often associated with and influenced by the gap between the rich and the poor, which in turn would aggravate this gap. The difference in social status found its major expression in the possession of military and theocracy power. “The great affairs of the state lie with sacrifice and warfare” (国之大事, 在祀与戎,《左传·成公十三年》Zuo’s Commentary on the Spring and Autumn Annals ). If a person assumed military and theocracy power, it was easy to exercise political control. The following discussion will take as an example the Dawenkou culture, the Liangzhu culture, the Qujialing-Shijiahe culture and the Hongshan culture. With regard to the cemetery of the Late Dawenkou culture, the wealthiest of the graves in Phase I was the northern jiazu clan burial group. Apparently, this burial group had enjoyed a higher social status than other jiazu clan burial groups: it contained most of the stone yue battle-axes 石钺 and diaotong, i.e. carved cylinders 雕筒, and almost all of the few pieces of jade cong 琮. The yue battle-axe as a weapon not only had practical use, it was also endowed with symbolic military significance. Seen from this perspective, the occupants of the northern jiazu clan burial group apparently had assumed important military power. Since the jade cong was a typical sacrificial instrument, the occupants of the northern jiazu clan burial group also monopolized the religious power. Assembling both the military and religious power in one hand, the occupants of the northern jiazu clan burial group could be seen to have enjoyed the highest social status in the whole commune. The largest grave (M26) in this burial group contained the only stone yue battle-axe decorated with a bone diaotong carved cylinders at the end of the handle. M26 also had a jade cong as a burial object. It can be inferred that the occupant of this burial was probably the chief having plenipotentiary powers over the entire jiazu clan commune. The Phase III cemetery of the Late Dawenkou Cemetery was actually an aristocratic cemetery, with a few subordinate burials. Whereas in some burials, there were even as many as five stone yue battle-axes with the decoration of a bone carved cylinders diaotong at the end of the handle,

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

219

there were even jade yue battle-axes with the decoration of a bone diaotong carved cylinders in other burials. Besides, other funerary objects such as the jade cong and tuogu drum 鼍鼓 were also found. All these findings show that the social status of these graves in Phase III must rank higher than that of the northern jiazu clan burials in Phase I. Since no other cemetery with such a high-profile has been found in the central and southern part of Shandong Province, it can be assumed that the aristocratic occupants of the Dawenkou Cemetery might have been the power-holders of all the super-size settlement groups of the whole central and southern region of Shandong, not to mention the Dawenkou jiazu clan communes. Similar to the Dawenkou Cemetery is the Lingyanghe Cemetery 凌阳 河墓地 in southeastern Shandong’s Juxian County 莒县, both pertaining to the same historical period. The burial group lying on the riverbank of the Lingyanghe Cemetery was comprised of mostly large graves, in which were found stone yue battle-axes decorated with a bone diaotong carved cylinders at the end of the handle, and pottery horns 陶 号角, both symbolizing military power. Also found were pottery zun vessels 陶尊 with carved images and characters, which stood for theocracy power. The burials in the other burial groups of the Lingyanghe Cemetery were mostly small ones, in which neither yue battle-axes nor zun vessels were found. This indicates that the burial groups on the riverbank of the Lingyanghe Cemetery enjoyed an indubitably supreme status among all the burial groups of the cemetery.23 Moreover, the jiazu clan, as represented by these superior burial groups, might have possessed the highest status not only in the Lingyanghe settlement group but even in the very large settlement groups in the southeastern region Shandong. This observation is made because the special pottery zun vessels with carved characters excavated in the Lingyanghe Cemetery were not found in the Dawenkou Cemetery, indicating that a unified “kingdom” or monarchy had not appeared in either the central or the southeastern parts of Shandong at that time. Both the Fanshan Cemetery 反山墓地 and the Yaoshan Cemetery 瑶 山墓地, and the Mojiaoshan 莫角山 super-large architectural complex not 23 Shandong Institute of Archaeology, Shandong Museum, & Juxian Cultural Relics Administration Office (1987), “A brief excavation report of the graves of the Dawenkou culture at the Lingyanghe site in Juxian, Shandong Province”, Prehistory, 3; Wang, Shuming (1987), “On the Lingyanghe Cemetery”, Prehistory, 3.

220

J. HAN

only held a prestigious status among the Liangzhu settlement groups, but were also incomparable in the super settlement groups on the southern bank of the Taihu Lake, and even in the whole Liangzhu cultural area. While the large number of exquisite jade objects found in the graves of the Fanshan and Yaoshan Cemeteries embodied the painstaking effort of countless people, the construction of the Mojiaoshan super-large complex might have involved both manpower and material resources from more than one settlement group. This indicates that these settlement groups must have evolved into highly organized societies.24 Such a high degree of organization of a society entailed not only the appeal of a strong religious climate, but also coercion by armed personnel. Not only such funerary objects as both yue battle-axes—a symbol of military power—and jade cong or jade bi 璧—symbols of religious authority—were excavated in the Fanshan and Yaoshan Cemeteries, but also an erstwhile altar on which the Yaoshan Cemetery was built. These facts show that the members of the aristocracy were not only shamans in communication with deities, but also generals in charge of the “army”,25 two requisite identities qualifying a person as the supreme ruler of the Liangzhu settlement group and also ruler of the super-large settlement groups on the southern bank of the Taihu Lake. Furthermore, the wide discovery of the “sacred emblem” 神徽, bird pattern 鸟纹 and dragon head pattern 龙首形纹 on pottery objects implies that in the whole Liangzhu cultural area, there might have appeared a unified kingdom-like authority or “monarchy”.26 Given that the Liangzhu settlement group was the largest- and highest-ranking settlement group, and that the intact “sacred emblem” featuring a combination of a divine figure and a beast’s face excavated from the Fanshan and Yaoshan Cemeteries was not found anywhere else, it is probable that the Liangzhu Site might have been where the “capital of the kingdom” was located.27

24 Zhao, Hui (1999), “Some special features of the Liangzhu culture: On one cause of the decline of a Chinese prehistoric civilization”, Research on the Liangzhu Culture: Collection of Papers at the International Symposium Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Liangzhu Culture, Beijing: Science Press, 104–120. 25 Zhang, Zhongpei (1995), “The date and social stage of the Liangzhu culture”, Cultural Relics, 5. 26 Zhang, (1997), “An analysis of the large graves of the Liangzhu culture”, A Collection of Studies on Archaeology (Vol. III), Beijing: Science Press, 57–67. 27 Yan, Wenming (1996), “Essays on the Liangzhu culture”, Cultural Relics, 3.

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

221

At the centre of the Shijiahe settlement group in Tianmen City, Hubei Province, in the period of Qujialing-Shijiahe culture, there was another grand ancient city. Inside the city, there were signs showing some kind of planning and overall organization, indicating a high degree of social organization. The excavation of the Tanjialing Site 谭家岭遗址, i.e. “the palace area” in the north of the ancient city, also shows that an aristocratic or noble class might have existed at that time. Whereas the excavation of the Sanfangwan Site 三房湾遗址, i.e. “the sacrificial area” in the southwest of the ancient city, revealed tens of thousands of red pottery cups, the Dengjiawan Site 邓家湾遗址, another “sacrificial area” in the northwest of the city, unearthed thousands of pottery animals, both of which are signs showcasing the prestigious position religion enjoyed in the society in those days.28 Although the burials found at the Xiaojiawuji Site肖家屋脊 遗址 outside the city, not necessarily contained graves of those belonging to the city’s highest class, they can at least shed light on some aspects of this society. For example, in the largest and richest grave (M7), the only stone yue battle-axe of the cemetery was found, implying that the occupant of the grave might have some military power. The same is true of the carving excavated at the same site, which portrayed a man holding a large stone yue unearthed at the site.29 It can thus be speculated that the aristocratic or noble class in the city had control not only over the Shijiahe jiazu clan commune group, but also on the northern part of the Jianghan Plains, because the other city sites in this area were much smaller than that of the Shijiahe ancient city. The Niuheliang Site group 牛河梁遗址群 of the Late Hongshan culture in Chaoyang City, Liaoning Province, which included “temple, shrine and tomb”, had the grandeur and magnificence of a central settlement. The statue of the main deity in the temple was three times the size of an actual person. Large shrines were lined up along the mountain ridge; since their size and grandeur seemed inappropriate for the jiazu

28 Department of Archaeology of Peking University, Hubei Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, & the Shijiahe Archaeological Team of Jingzhou Museum, Hubei Province (1993), “Report of investigation of the group of the Shijiahe Sites”, Southern Ethnology and Archaeology (Vol. V), Chengdu: Sichuan Science Jishu Press, 213–294. 29 Jingzhou Museum, Hubei Province, Hubei Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, & the Shijiahe Team of the Department of Archaeology of Peking University (2000), The Xiaojiawuji Site: Archaeological Report of the Shijiahe Site in Tianmen (Vol. I), Beijing: Wenwu Press.

222

J. HAN

clan commune or the jiazu clan commune group,30 we can speculate that the Niulianghe Site group might have served as the centre of the super-large settlement group of the Hongshan culture in the region of west Liaoning Province. The large stone-piled tombs formed a unity with the shrines and temples nearby. In the cemetery, the large central tombs contained funerary objects, including exquisite jade artefacts with rather obvious religious symbolism. This indicates that not only the religious life of the community might have been monopolized by a small number of people, but that even an aristocracy of shamans might have existed which relied on theocracy. As for the Dongshanzui Site 东山嘴遗址, the scale of this sacrificial site was obviously smaller than that of the Niuheliang Site, indicating that the former was probably a symbol of a certain jiazu clan commune group.31 12.2.3

A Clear Social Division of Labour

Different from the natural division of labour between men and women, there was a clear social division of labour in the eastern societies during the Chalcolithic Age. This division was mainly focused on agriculture and handicrafts. Within the field of handicrafts, there was a further division between the production of pottery, jade, lacquer, bronze, silk as well as other types of products. While promoting innovation and creativity and enhancing social development, such a kind of social division also widened the gap between rich and poor and increased the complexity of social order, which in turn provided opportunities for the further differentiation in people’s social status. The following discussion will focus on the Longshan culture, the Songze-Liangzhu culture and the late Daxi culture as examples for analysis. In the large graves of the Longshan culture, many extremely exquisite “egg-shell” black pottery bei goblets “蛋壳” 黑陶杯 were found. The making of the bei goblets required superb techniques which was probably beyond the reach of ordinary farmers, but kept secret by some jiazu clans 30 Liaoning Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (1986), “A brief excavation report of the ‘Goddess Temple’ and the group stone graves in the Hongshan culture in Niuheliang, Liaoning Province”, Cultural Relics, 8. 31 Guo, & Zhang, Keju (1984), “A brief excavation report of the group buildings of the Hongshan culture at the Dongshanzui Site in Kezuo County, Liaoning Province”, Cultural Relics, 11.

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

223

or jiazu clan communes. There might be several production centres for the “egg-shell” black pottery bei goblets in the areas along Juxian 莒县Rizhao 日照 in the eastern coast in Shandong Province.32 The production of some of the finest jade artefacts in Longshan culture might also involve specialized techniques, as was demonstrated by the ruins of jade pits in the Liangchengzhen Site 两城镇 in Rizhao,33 Shandong Province. What makes the Songze-Liangzhu culture unique might be its production of jade artefacts. During the period of the Songze culture (including the so-called the Beiyinyangying culture 北阴阳营文化 and the Xuejiagang culture 薛家岗文化), there had already appeared a jade production area along Jiangsu and Anhui Provinces34 with several production centres such as the Mopandun Site 磨盘墩 and the Daijiashan Site 戴家山 in Dantu County 丹徒,35 Jiangsu Province. During the period of the Liangzhu culture, there might have appeared even larger and more technologically advanced production centres, even the possibility of some specialized venues for the production of particular types of jade items. The production of exquisite jade artefacts in the Liangzhu culture, from the mining of raw materials, to the manufacturing of finished products and the distribution of products, might have been carried out according to a strict set of procedures. As such, this profession must have been monopolized by the aristocratic class, thus ruling out the possibility of the free exchange of the artefacts. During the Late Daxi culture, there appeared clearly a more definite specialization in the production of stone artefacts. Many settlements in the Three Gorges-Jiangling County region 峡江地区 along the Yangtze

32 Wei, Jun (2002), A Study on the Prehistoric Graves in the Haidai Region, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, School of Archaeology and Museology of Peking University. 33 Liu, (1988), “Materials about the jade artefacts in the jade pits in the Liangchengchen Site in Rizhao”, Archaeology, 2. 34 Zhang, Chi (2000), “The stoneware and jade-ware professions in the Daxi, the North Yinyangying and the Xuejiagang sites”, A Collection of Studies on Archaeology (Vol. 4), Beijing: Science Press, 55–76. 35 Nanjing Museum, et al. (1985), “Excavation report of the Mopandun Site in Dantu, Jiangsu Province”, Prehistory, 2; Zhenjiang Museum, et al. (1990), “Report on the excavation of the Daijiashan Site in Zhenjiang, Jiangsu Province”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 1.

224

J. HAN

River might have been specialized in the production of stone artefacts,36 especially the typical stone workshops at the Honghuatao Site 红花套 遗址 in Yidu and the Yangjiawan Site 杨家湾遗址 in Yichang, both in Hubei Province. At these sites, not only sheds and tools, but also tens of thousands of pieces of stone raw materials, wastes, semi-finished stone products and finished stone products were found.37 The stone tools were ordinary production tools which were mainly produced to meet the needs of the Jianghan Plain in Central and Southern Hubei, and other places. The process of the production of the stone tools was not necessarily organized under strict control, and the products might have been primarily meant for exchange in the market. The polarization between rich and poor, the differentiation of social status and the clear division of labour on the basis of profession, gave rise to the emergence of classes in eastern societies, resulting in the hierarchy of the aristocracy, the commoners and the poor. In order to maintain class stability within the society, and to control the production and redistribution of important resources and precious products, it might have been necessary to resort to religious pressure and comparable primitive rites, or to adopt certain coercive measures. Externally, brutal force might have been employed for the purpose of territorial expansion. For such a complex society, its territory might have already exceeded the parameters of its settlement group or even a super-large settlement group, and within the confines of its territory, management measures would have been successively implemented. This kind of society was close to what is meant by the term of “state” or “kingdom”, and therefore can be called a guguo or “ancient state”.38

36 Zhang, Chi (2000), “The stoneware and jade-ware professions in the Daxi, the North Yinyangying and the Xuejiagang sites”, A Collection of Studies on Archaeology (IV), Beijing: Science Press, 55–76. 37 The Honghuatao Excavation Team (1990–1991), “A brief excavation report of the Honghuatao Site”, Prehistory, 309–317; Lin Bangcun (1994), “Important archaeological discoveries and research achievements of the Yangjiawan Site in Yichang, Hubei Province”, Newspaper of China’s Cultural Relics, 23 October, page 3. 38 Su, Bingqi (1998), New Exploration of the Origin of Chinese Civilization, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company.

12

12.3

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

225

Non-obvious Differentiations in the Northern Regions

In northern China which was centred around the middle reaches of the Yellow River, there were the Late Yangshao culture and Longshan culture, including the cultures or culture types of the Late Banpo type 半坡类型-Quanhu type Phase II 泉护类型-Keshengzhuang culture Phase II 客省庄文化, the Yijing type 义井类型-Baiyan type 白燕类型, the Haishengbulang type 海生不浪类型-Ashan type Phase III 阿善类型 and the Laohushan culture, etc. Among all these cultures and culture types in this region, no apparent social differences or differentiations were found as they were in the eastern regions discussed above, especially in the following three aspects. 12.3.1

A Lesser Degree of Social Polarization in Wealth

In northern China, the extent of polarization between both different social strata and different regions was rather limited: most of the graves were just big enough for the deceased, and had no funerary objects. In what follows, the Laohushan culture and Quanhu type Phase IIKeshengzhuang culture Phase II are analysed as examples. In the jiazu clan commune represented by the Yuanzigou settlement of the Laohushan culture in Ulanqab City, Inner Mongolia, i.e. the Daihai region, only a very slightly discernible gap between the rich and poor can be deduced from the differences in the rows of houses which represented the jiazu clan. For example, some houses were a little bigger and some were a little better decorated. While these subtle differences might reflect contemporary economic conditions of the time, they could hardly have a profound effect. The same observation is mostly true for the other settlements in the Daihai region. There is also insufficient evidence to conclude that there had a prominent polarization in wealth either between the Laohushan settlement group and the Yuanzigou settlement group in the Daihai area, or within the settlement groups. In these settlements, a small number of vertical coffin-pit burials 土坑竖穴墓 were found, which had just room enough for the body of the deceased but no funerary objects. The size and function of the houses in the Huxizhuang settlement 浒 西庄遗址 in Wugong County 武功县, Shaanxi Province, which belonged to the Quanhu type Phase II of the Yangshao culture, were almost the same, and the burials were only big enough for the body of the deceased.

226

J. HAN

Except for a few graves where only a bone arrowhead or several seashells were found, the great majority of burials contained no funerary objects or funerary instruments.39 Likewise, in the Kangjia 康家聚落 settlement of Keshengzhuang culture Phase II in Xi’an, Shaanxi Province, there was no obvious difference in terms of the size of the houses, and generally no funerary objects in the burials, except for a bone arrowhead in a few graves. Therefore, there was no evidence to suggest the existence of different, wealthier settlements or settlement groups in the area of the Quanhu type Phase II-Keshengzhuang culture Phase II cultures. However, jade and pottery funerary objects found in the sites in the western part of the Guanzhong region 关中地区, for example, in the Shizuitou Site 石嘴头遗址 in Baoji, Shaanxi Province, were related to the fact that these sites were close to the of premises the Qijia culture. 12.3.2

No Obvious Difference in Social Status

The following analysis also focuses on the Laohushan culture and Quanhu type Phase II -Keshengzhuang culture Phase II. In the Daihai region, the difference in social status within the same settlement was rather limited. The inhabitants all lived in similar houses, used similar things and were buried in a casual way, all these portraying a scenario of general social equality in the community then. It is only by means of the residential locality of the jiazu clan that can we discern with great difficulty some subtle differences, for instance the slightly higher status of some jiazu clans, and their leading role in the commune, etc. For some settlements, such as those in the Laohushan 老虎山 and Bancheng 板城 Sites, shrine-like facilities on hilltops were found, but with no special items inside, nor with any signs of their connection to any person or the jiazu clan. All this indicates that the shrine-like facilities might have been venues for religious ceremonies for the whole settlement, signifying the cordial unity of the whole jiazu clan commune. There was also no obvious difference in social status either between the Laohushan settlement group and the Yuanzigou settlement group, or within the two settlement groups. Ranging from 70,000 to 300,000 m2 , these settlements differed to a certain degree in their areas, without 39 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, (1988), Excavation in Wugong, Shaanxi Province: The Huxizhuang and Zhaojialai Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

227

a direct relation to the sizes of the houses inside the settlements. For example, the Xibaiyu settlement 西白玉聚落 in Ulanqab City, Inner Mongolia, was smaller itself but also comprised more larger houses, while the Yuanzigou settlement was the largest settlement but had more small houses. The stone walls surrounding the settlements, such as the Laohushan settlement had been built as a measure of defence against outside invaders rather than as a sign of higher social status. That is, whether or not a city wall should be built depended largely on the strategic position the settlement held in the overall defence of the settlement group. In the Huxizhuang and Kangjia settlements, the bone arrowheads excavated in the burials seemed somewhat unusual, which in fact might just as well indicate that the grave occupant had fought in battles, rather than point to his social status. 12.3.3

No Clear Division of Labour

In the northern region, there was a general lack of products made out of “highly complicated techniques” in the Chalcolithic Age, such as jade objects,40 exquisite potteries and lacquer wares, etc. The various kinds of objects common in this region did not require specialized production procedures. The case of the Laohushan culture is going to be analysed as an example below. About 300 houses have been found in the settlement of the Laohushan culture in the Daihai region, but almost all of them were very common. And the tools unearthed there were ordinary tools used in daily life, for agricultural, hunting, carpentry, architecture, stone processing, spinning and so on. There is insufficient evidence to prove that the house owners were specialized in any kind of profession. In the Yuanzigou settlement, there were even pottery kilns close to many houses, which indicated that pottery making, instead of being specialized, had become available to ordinary families which were mainly engaged in agriculture. For settlements such as the Laohushan and Mianpo 面坡, kilns were situated on the outer edge of the settlements. What this means is that pottery production of the whole settlement was concentrated in one place; it cannot be interpreted as strong evidence for the specialization of some jiazu clan in pottery production, let alone as proof of the existence of regional 40 Some of the jade artefacts of the Haishengbulang type in the Daihai region might be introduced from Hongshan culture.

228

J. HAN

pottery production centres at that time. In the Yuanzigou settlement, several stone spinning wheels of exactly the same style were found in the same house, but they were different from those found in another house. Semi-finished stone tools were also found on the floors of many houses, with one or two pieces in each house. It can be inferred that stone tools were also made primarily in families in those days, or at least the refining of stone tools was carried out within families. This kind of self-sufficient natural economy with no clear division of labour in society prevailed in the northern region. The absence of obvious polarization between the rich and the poor, differentiation in social status and division of labour in the production process, ensured a prevailing equality within the northern society. Internally, there was no class difference, and externally defence became the main task. This kind of society was generally confined to the territory of the super-large settlement group, and in some cases, only within the settlement group itself. The management of the society might have depended more on the awareness of its members concerning consanguinity or common interests. There was still a long way to go for such a society to develop into the so-called “state” or “kingdom”.

12.4

The Central and Northwestern Regions

Lying in between the eastern and northern regions were both the Central Plains region and the Ganqing region (i.e. Gansu-Qinghai Provinces), the former covering southern Shanxi Province, the major parts of Henan Province and central and southern Hebei Province. The various cultures and culture types of these two regions included Xiwang type 西王类 型-Miaodigou Phase II type 庙底沟二期类型, Qinwangzhai type 秦王 寨-Gushuihe type 谷水河类型-Wangwan culture Phase III 王湾三期文化, Dasikong type 大司空类型, Hougang culture Phase II 后岗二期文化, the Late Dadiwan-Yangshao culture 大地湾晚期仰韶文化-Changshan type常 山类型-Qijia culture 齐家文化 and Majiayao culture 马家窑文化, and so on. The pattern of social development around this vast area displayed characteristics of both the eastern and northern regions. Below we shall focus on the following cultures and culture types as examples of analysis: Phase II of the Miaodigou type, Phase III of the Wangwan culture, the Late Dadiwan-Yangshao culture, the Majiayao culture and the Qijia culture.

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

229

In the Zhouli Site 妯娌遗址 in Mengjin 孟津, Henan, settlement and graves belonging to Phase II of the Miaodigou type of Yangshao culture were found. In the settlement, not only no obvious difference was seen between the jiazu clans as represented by the house groups, but the graves had generally no funerary objects. In the only large-size burial in this settlement, which covered an area of about twenty m2 , there was only an ivory hoop found around the occupant’s arm. The fact that the grave occupant owned an ivory hoop meant that he could have afforded more funerary objects, which implied a certain extent of polarization between the rich and the poor in the society. Thus it is obvious that the reason why not more objects than an ivory loop were buried might be that instead of encouraging social polarization, the prevalent social morel conventions, intentionally or unintentionally, served to prevent it from aggravating. Nevertheless, the size of the larger grave, the layout of its second-level ledge 二层台 and the ivory hoop worn by the grave occupant, all highlighted the prestigious status and role the occupant had once enjoyed.41 In the Guchengzhai Site 古城寨古城 of Phase III of the Wangwan culture, an ancient city found in Xinmi, Henan Province, a well-organized city was excavated.42 Some exquisite black potteries were also excavated, which implied that the people there might probably have been capable of casting bronze wares. All this indicates that the society had acquired a certain degree of social mobilization and division of labour, and that there had appeared a noticeable difference in status among the settlements.43 In the Wangchenggang Site 王城岗遗址 in Dengfeng, Henan, and other city sites, it was obvious that the phenomenon of sacrificing living people and draft animals as foundation of burials was common, a clear indicator of the difference in social status among people in the settlements.44 However,

41 Culture Relics Bureau of Henan Province, et al.: Collection of Archaeological Reports of the Xiaolangdi Reservoir on the Yellow River, Zhengzhou: The Yellow River Shuili Press, 1998. 42 Cai, Quanfa, et al. (2000), “Great archaeological achievements of the Longshan

Era”, Newspaper of China’s Cultural Relics, 21 May, page 1. 43 Zhao, Chunqing (2001), The Evolution of the Neolithic Settlements in the ZhengzhouLuoyang Region, Beijing: Peking University Press. 44 Institute of Cultural Relics of Henan Province, & Department of Archaeology of the Museum of Chinese History, (1992), The Wangchenggang and Yangcheng Sites in Dengfeng, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

230

J. HAN

since the vast majority of the graves were devoid of funerary objects,45 there was no evidence of a wide gap between the rich and poor among the jiazu clans. To the south of the two ancient cities in Henan mentioned above, graves with a few potteries were found in the Meishan Site 煤山 遗址 in Ruzhou 汝州, Taiwang Site 台王遗址 in Xiangcheng 襄城 and Shilipu Site 十里铺 in Shangcai上蔡, etc. These sites might have been influenced by the Longshan and the Shijiahe cultures. The Dadiwan Site 大地湾遗址 of the Late Yangshao culture was impressively large in scale, and the largest house in it was already like a palace. While there were noticeable differences between a central settlement and an ordinary settlement, the polarization between them seemed quite limited.46 The graves in the Banshan type 半山类型 and Machang type 马厂类型 of the Majiayao culture, and the graves of Qijia culture showed a certain degree of polarization in wealth and status among the jiazu clans, but the differences were far less obvious than those in the eastern region. The discovery of many stone (jade) bi, jade cong, bronze ware and exquisite coloured potteries revealed a certain degree of division of specialized labour. While the Baigoudaoping Site 白沟道 坪 in Lanzhou, Gansu Province, was even more a pottery production centre,47 the extent of its professionalism and mechanization could not be compared with those in the eastern region. As can be seen from the analysis above, the society in the region of the Central Plains began to undergo a polarization in wealth, a differentiation of social status, and a division of labour, though to a lesser extent; under such circumstances, it was imperative to take measures in order to maintain the stability of class order within the society, and to take control of the important resources and precious products for their production and redistribution. Nevertheless, there was a general lack of religious appeal in the society, and external expansion was no less impressive than that in the eastern region. Generally speaking, such a society usually had influence which exceeded the parameters of a typical settlement group, even 45 Gao, Wei (1995), “A study on the burial system of the Longshan Culture in the

Central Plains”, Collection of Essays on Chinese Archaeology, Beijing: Science Press, 90–105. 46 The Cultural Relics Team of Gansu Province, (1986). “A brief excavation report of the site of House No. 901 at the Dadiwan Site in Qin’an, Gansu Province”, Cultural Relics, 2. 47 Yan, Wenming (1989), “A study on the morphology of houses and settlements of the Yangshao culture”, Studies of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 180–242.

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

231

beyond the confines of a super-large settlement group. That is, it should have entered the stage of a guguo or an “ancient state”. The Taosi type 陶寺类型 of culture in Linfen of Southern Shanxi Province was actually an exception. It exhibited clearly the difference between a central settlement and an ordinary one. In its central settlement, Taosi boasted a large city site and a cemetery. In the cemetery, the large burial groups represented extremely wealthy jiazu clans, with painted coffins as well as a large number of funerary objects, including painted wooden products, painted potteries, exquisite jade artefacts, etc. Especially noteworthy were the pottery basins decorated with coloured dragon patterns 彩绘龙纹陶盘, teqing musical instruments 特磬, jade yue battle-axes玉钺, tuogu drums. Items with symbolic connotations such as weapons, musical instruments and religious vessels were all equipped without exception. Bearing a certain significance as “ritual vessels”, these objects apparently expressed, without any conservation, at a glance, the omnipotence and elevated position of the grave occupant. These observations also indicate that there was a division of labour in the Taosi society beyond any doubt,48 and that the overall social achievements of the Taosi type were roughly comparable to that of the Liangzhu culture. However, the Taosi type was in no way the result of the natural development of Phase II of the Miaodigou type in southern Shanxi; instead, it represented the product of a culture from the eastern region moving westward. In fact, the Taosi type was exclusively confined to the Linfen Basin and existed for only two to three hundred years. This culture type, as an exception, could not represent the general trend of the social development in the Central Plains.

12.5

Concluding Remarks

Seen from the perspective of whether or not standing on the threshold of a guojia (“state”) or wenming (“civilization”), the three regions discussed above undoubtedly exhibited certain differences in terms of their respective pattern of development, i.e. “advanced” versus “backward”. The issue, however, is not as easy as being black and white, since:

48 The Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Linfen Cultural Bureau, (1983), “Brief report of the 1978–1980 excavation of the Taosi Cemetery in Xiangfen, Shanxi Province”, Archaeology, 1.

232

J. HAN

Firstly, since the Chalcolithic Age, most regions of China had experienced roughly similar trend of social development, rather than diametrically different modes of development such as “the advanced” as contrasted with “the backward”. Secondly, every pattern of social development in different regions lasted for about 1500 years, a span roughly equivalent to our present distance from the Wei, Jin and Southern and Northern Dynasties (i.e. 220–589). It is not sufficient to understand the long-term development of a society only by the time they entered the stage of civilization. Thirdly, each region had remained in a relatively stable condition for a long time. It was not the case that the culture from the eastern region had expanded so powerfully as to occupy and replace the cultures in the other two regions. This meant that the regional cultures each had their own way of survival and their own mechanism of regulation and operation. Fourthly, the features of each regional culture, which had left profound impact on the Chinese civilization, apparently began and sped up the process of integration with each other from the Bronze Age onwards, resulting in the general integration by the Qin and Han ynasties (i.e. 221 BCE to 220 AD). We have used such concepts as “the Eastern Pattern” and “the Northern Pattern” to describe the different modes of social development.49 Now in between the two patterns, it seems necessary to add a third term, “the Central Plains Pattern”. Although the formation of the three patterns was owed to their respective cultural and familial unity, the most fundamental cause lay in the nature of own natural environment. With regard to the eastern region, with the exception of the West Liao River, it was mostly plains and hills, with a warm climate and abundant rainfall. Since this environment was suitable for intensive farming, agriculture enjoyed a high level of development in the eastern region. This circumstance favoured the appearance of a polarization of wealth and a differentiation of labour, which in turn served as basis of social status and ultimately led to the rise of a conspicuous differentiation in people’s social status. In contrast, most parts of northern China consist of loess plateaus, with a dry and cold, and sensitive climate. Since such an environment is 49 Han, Jianye (2000), A Study of the Neolithic Cultures in Northern China, Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Beijing: Peking University.

12

THE GENERAL TENDENCY AND DIFFERENT PATTERNS …

233

only suitable for extensive farming, agriculture was not highly developed in this region. As a result, there was little stimulus for a social polarization in wealth, and neither a division of labour nor a differentiation of social status did emerge on a noticeable scale. The vast area of the Central Plains, except for the Ganqing (Gansu-Qinghai Provinces) region, had complex geographical conditions, featuring a mode of environmental and cultural development midway between the Eastern Pattern and the Northern Pattern. On the surface, the Northern Pattern of development seemed relatively slow and backward, but it adapted to the harsh natural environment by an effective use of resources and energy rather than an excessive waste of them, which was conducive to long-term development. In spite of the advance of new techniques and effectiveness in their development, the Eastern Pattern was liable to breed a culture of extravagance and waste and an ethos of idling and slackening, which would not be conducive to long-term development. Therefore, as the development of the various northern cultures had been continuous, without obvious interruption or decline, it had left a great influence on the surrounding areas even into the Late Longshan period. In contrast, in the eastern region, both the Hongshan culture and the Liangzhu culture had already collapsed before the Longshan Era, and the Shijiahe culture had also declined at the juncture of the early and late Longshan culture. Although some elements were inherited by their successors, these cultures became disrupted or effete as a whole. It was only the region of the Central Plains that had absorbed the advantages of both the eastern and northern regions: it promoted the existence of a certain degree of difference in social status but did not encourage a deep polarization in wealth; it emphasized social order but did not resort to harsh laws; it increased productivity on a gradual basis but did not indulge in sumptuous extravaganza; it was concerned with the here-and-now but did not become obsessed with religion; it relied on consanguinity but paid attention to collective interests; it pursued a healthy stability but guarded against haste and sluggishness. With these do’s and don’ts, the Central Plains region ultimately developed into a mature civilized society as represented by the Erlitou culture 二里头文 化, that is late Xia Dynasty. With reference to the Eastern Pattern and the Northern Pattern, when they benefited from each other, their major

234

J. HAN

components were inherited respectively by the later Shang and Pre-Zhou societies. (This section was originally published in Volume 11 of Ancient Civilization in 2003.)

CHAPTER 13

The Xipo Cemetery and the “Central Plain Pattern”

In 2005 and 2006, 34 Yangshao culture graves were excavated at the Xipo Site 西坡遗址 in Lingbao 灵宝, Henan Province.1 The grand scale of the burials was in sharp contrast with simple funerary objects, and they have drawn attention and discussion in the archaeological circles. In 2009, Li Boqian 李伯谦 proposed that the Xipo burials represented one of the two patterns of development for the Chinese civilization: “What we see here is the dominant position of the sovereign and the insignificance of the theocracy. It is the simple and unadorned manner of the superiors, and close connection between the superiors and the inferiors despite difference and separation”.2 In 2010, Li Xinwei 李新伟 and Ma Xiaolin 马萧 林 published their excavation report The Xipo Cemetery in Lingbao, which not only presented detailed information about the excavation, but also 1 Henan First Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social

Sciences, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, et al. (2007), “Large mid-Yangshao culture tombs excavated in 2006 at the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 2; Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, & Henan First Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, et al. (2008), “A brief excavation report of the graves at the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan Province, Spring, 2005”, Archaeology, 1; Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (2010), The Xipo Cemetery in Lingbao, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 2 Li, Boqian (2009), “Two patterns of evolvement of ancient Chinese civilization: Observations on the jade objects unearthed from the large graves of the Hongshan, Liangzhu, and Yangshao cultures”, Cultural Relics, 3.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_13

235

236

J. HAN

made a thorough analysis of the cemetery. They pointed out that, “the Miaodigou Type society represented by the Xipo Cemetery had chosen a simpler way of ‘materializing’ social hierarchy in that there were neither luxurious funerary objects nor a strong religious atmosphere found at the site. This tradition was formed at the early stage of social sophistication and had left a profound impact on the subsequent civilizing process in the Central Plain”.3 However, neither Li Boqian’s article nor The Xipo Cemetery in Lingbao gave this pattern a name. In my opinion, it might as well be called zhongyuan moshi 中原模式, or the “Central Plains Pattern”.4 In this section, I would like to make an analysis of the funerary ideology and the social conditions of the Xipo Cemetery through its periodization, composition and spacial arrangement, with an aim to elaborate on the distinctive connotations of the “Central Plains Pattern” and its process of evolution.

13.1

The Periodization of the Cemetery

According to the “Distribution Map of the Burials”, the 34 burials of the Xipo Cemetery were mainly concentrated burials and can be roughly divided into three groups, namely the northern group with 20 graves (M5, M6, M8–22, M30, M31, M34), the western group (M23–29) and the southern group (M1–4, M7, M32, M33). The groups were located at a distance of 11–28 m between each other (see Fig. 13.1).5 Since M2, M29 and M30 were close to the boundary of the excavation area, there is a great possibility that there might be other burials lying around the 3 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (2010), The Xipo Cemetery in Lingbao, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 208. 4 Han, Jianye 2003, “The general trend and different patterns of societal development

in the Chalcolithic Age”, Ancient Civilizations (Vol. II): 84–96. 5 The test pit of M34 at the western-most point of the northern group, and that of M28 at the northern-most point of the western group were connected with 15 metres space apart from each other. The test pits of M18 and M20, located in the southeasternmost part of the northern group, were connected with the test pit of M6, with a distance of 12 m between them. The test pit of M6 was connected with the test pit of M1 at the northern-most point of the southern group, with a distance of 22 m apart. Therefore, although there is still a large area in the middle of the cemetery that has not been excavated, it is possible that there are burials in the area, but the number of the possible burials must be small. The division of the burial groups might have reflected the actual situation of the cemetery.

13

THE XIPO CEMETERY AND THE “CENTRAL PLAIN PATTERN”

237

area, and that therefore the excavated graves might not have constituted a relatively complete cemetery. All the graves were beneath the second layer, without a sufficient superposition to allow periodization. The excavation report could only conduct a typological analysis of the potteries excavated from 16 graves, and then divided the burials into three groups. After this, a comparison was made between the findings about the funerary objects from these burials with the findings about similar remains from the neighbouring burials with more definite periodization, before a tentative speculation was made with regard to the possible chronological order of the three burial groups, which was basically in line with the real situation. However, since most of these buried potteries were meant only for the deceased, were few in

Fig. 13.1 Distribution Map of the Xipo Burial

238

J. HAN

number and rough in craftsmanship, not all of them were suitable for typological analysis. Take for instance the fuzao stoves and dan’er hu single-ear pots 单耳壶, which have undergone the most obvious changes. According to the classifications of the excavation report, Forms I and II fuzao stoves were obviously from those of Form III. As far as Form I and Form II fuzao stoves are concerned, the diameter of the mouth of the fu cauldron 釜 was smaller than the diameter of its stomach, and the mouth of the zao stove 灶 resembled an overturned basin, with the front and lower part forming a skewed curve; for Form III, the diameter of the cauldron is bigger than the diameter of its stomach, and the mouth of the stove is flat, with the front and lower part forming a skewed line. Dan’er hu single-ear pots are divided into two forms: Form I has a line of flange around the neck while Form II does not have a flange. Therefore, it might be more appropriate to divide the burials into two groups or two sections. Comparing the Xipo Cemetery with the Quanhucun Site 泉护村遗址 in Huaxian County 华县, Shaanxi Province, the excavators concluded that the relative date of the Xipo Cemetery could be set in the transitional period from the Miaodigou type to the Xiwang type of the Yangshao culture. However, to set the date, it is better to establish the periodization of the Xipo Site itself. According to the three excavation results from 2000 to 2002,6 the Xipo residential remains of the Yangshao culture can be divided into three groups. The first group is represented by H22, F102, F105, G102, etc. Typical potteries common in this group included double-lipped small-mouthed ping jars with a pointed bottom 双唇口小口尖底瓶, curved-bodied pen basins with petal designs 花瓣纹曲腹盆, concave-rimmed square-lipped deep-bellied jars 凹沿方唇深腹罐, etc. The bo bowls with a contracting

6 Henan First Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & the Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, et al. (2001),“A brief report of the trial excavation of the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 11; the Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeologyof Henan Province, & Henan First Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, et al. (2002), “A brief excavation report of the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan Province, Spring 2001”, Huaxia Archaeology, 2; the Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, & Henan First Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, et al. (2003), “Remains of House No. 105 of the Yangshao culture at the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan Province”, Cultural Relics, 8.

13

THE XIPO CEMETERY AND THE “CENTRAL PLAIN PATTERN”

239

mouth 敛口钵 featured a smooth passage from the mouth to the stomach, and re often decorated with petal or narrow strap designs. The fu cauldrons had a small mouth, a short and straight neck and an upper stomach decorated lavishly with vortex designs. There were also wan bowls with a slanted straight stomach 斜直腹碗, and bei cups 杯 with a fake round foot made by kneading and pressing. The second group is represented by H20, H110, H116, H133, etc. The lips of the small-mouthed ping jars with a pointed bottom 小口尖 底瓶 became pointed, the curved-bodied pen basins with petal designs were rare, the deep-bellied guan jars 深腹罐 had turned rims and pointed lips, the bo bowls with a contracting mouth 敛口钵 had a slightly folded mouth, the neck of fu cauldrons generally disappeared, the bei cups had a flat bottom and there are still wan bowls with a slanted straight stomach. The third group is represented by H143 and H144. The deep-bellied guan jars had narrow folded rims, pointed lips and two tiny handles with the decoration of pasted strap designs, the bei cups had a floral mouth and the decoration of rope designs, and there were the newly dailiu pen basins with a mouth 带流盆. As H116 of the second group broke the layer of F102 and F105 of the first group, it can be seen that the three groups were in chronological order and corresponded to three phases (see Fig. 13.2). A comparison of the two sections of the graves with the first two phases of the residential remains confirmed that the first section of the graves and the second phase of the residential remains are roughly linked. For example, the bo bowl with a contracting mouth from the former had a sharply folded mouth while the bo bowl from the latter had a slightly folded mouth. The fu cauldron from the former had a big mouth with no decoration of vortex designs while the fu cauldron from the latter had a small mouth but with decoration of vortex designs. Both the wan bowl with a slanted straight belly and the bei cup from both the graves and residential remains were similar (see Fig. 13.3). As for Phase III of both the graves and the residential remains, since only one kind of pottery, i.e. bei cup, was found, there is insufficient evidence to decide their periodization. Nevertheless, in one of the remains of the Late Yangshao culture on the northern bank of the Yellow River, i.e. H4 at the Xiwangcun Site 西王村遗址 in Ruicheng 芮城, Shanxi

240

J. HAN

Fig. 13.2 Classification of the potteries of the Xipo residential remains (pen basin [H22:71]; 2, 3, 9, 10. bo bowl [H22:76, H22:77, H20: 22, H20:17]; 4, 12, 18. bei cup [H22:5, H20:43, H 144:2]; 5, 14, 15, 19, 20. deep-bellied guan jar [H22:74, H20:6, H20:12, H143:1, H143:2]; 6, 11. fu cauldron [G102:1, H20:46]; 7. zao stove [H22:103]; 8, 16. small-mouthed ping jar with a pointed bottom [H22:102, H20:45]; 13. wan bowl [H20:25]; 17. dailiu pen basin [H144:3])

Province,7 bo bowls with a slightly folded mouth were found, which were basically the same as those found in the Xipo burials. Coexisting with this pottery were deep-bellied guan jias which had narrow and flat folded rims, two tiny handles and pasted strap patterns, dou pedestal plates 豆which had a contracting mouth and a folded plate, double-bellied pen basins 盆, small-mouthed, pointed-bottomed ping jars 瓶 whose lips had become flat, etc. Among these potteries, the shape of deep-bellied guan jars was basically the same as those from the Xipo residential remains in Phase III (see Fig. 13.4). 7 Shanxi Task Force of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1973), “Excavation of the Dongzhuangcun and Xiwangcun sites in Ruicheng, Shanxi Province”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1.

13

THE XIPO CEMETERY AND THE “CENTRAL PLAIN PATTERN”

241

Fig. 13.3 Comparison of the groups of potteries from the Xipo Residential Remains and the Xipo burials (1, 5, 9, 13. fu cauldron [G102:1, H20:46, M14:4–1, M29:3]; 2, 6, 10, 14. bo bowl [H22:77, H20:17, M14:7, M34:3]; 3, 7, 11, 15. wan bowl [H105:4, H20:25, M6:3, M13:4]; 4, 8, 12, 16. bei cup [H22:5, H20:43, M31:3, M24:4])

Therefore, it can be postulated that the Xipo burials were contemporaneous with both the Xipo residential remains in Phase III and the H4 of the Xiwangcun Site, and that the Xipo burials should have displayed the early Xiwang culture type; in contrast, the Xipo residential remains in Phase I and Phase II should display the middle and late Miaodigou culture type. Besides, the C14 dating analysis of the 13 human bone samples from the Xipo graves showed that the rectified date of the bones was 3300– 2900 BCE, which was basically within the range of the absolute date of the Xiwang type.

242

J. HAN

Fig. 13.4 Comparison of the potteries from the Xipo burials, the Xipo Phase III residential remains and H14 of the Xiwang type (1, 4. deep-bellied guan jar [H143:2, H4:2:19]; 2, 3, 6. bo bowl [M14:7, M34:2, H4:2:10]; 5. dou pedestal plate [H4:2:14]; 7. pen basin [H4:2:8]; 8. small-mouthed pointed-bottomed ping jar [H4:2:44])

13.2

The Composition of the Burials

These graves were rectangular vertical pits with second-level ledges 二层 台 made of raw earth. What kind of funerary thoughts did these graves reflect?8 In what follows we shall focus on M27, the best-preserved and largest of the Xipo Cemetery, as the example for our analysis (see Fig. 13.5). The opening of M27 is 5.03 m long and 3.36 m wide. The existing pit has a depth of 1.92 m. The open area of the burial covers 16.9 m2 , which, compared with the openings of other graves of the same period (i.e. approximately over one m2 ), was a large one in the real sense of the word. The existing opening is 1.3 m away from the second-level ledge, and the second-level ledge is only 0.55 m away from the bottom of the grave. Thus it can be speculated that the second-level ledge, the grave

8 For an analysis of funeral thought reflected by the graves, see Wu Hong (2005), “Fine arts in rites: Rethinking of the Mawangdui Toms”, in Fine Arts in Rites: Collection of Wu Hong ’s Works on the Ancient History of Chinese Fine Arts, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 101–122.

13

THE XIPO CEMETERY AND THE “CENTRAL PLAIN PATTERN”

243

Fig. 13.5 Profile Map of M27 in the Xipo Cemetery (1, 2. big-mouthed pottery gang jars; 3. pottery hu jars; 4. pottery bo bowls; 5, 6, 9. gui-shaped pottery vessels; 7. pottery fu cauldrons; 8. pottery zao stoves [7–9 cannot be recovered])

244

J. HAN

chamber and the foot pit 脚坑 roughly represented two spaces, one on the inside and the other on the outside but both being on the same plane. The inner space includes the grave chamber and the foot pit, which were covered with several wooden boards, with the boards covered with sackcloth. The inner space was empty inside. The grave chamber is 3.3 m long and 0.71 m wide. While the width was just enough width to accommodate the body, the chamber was equivalent in size to a coffin, and symbolized the grave owner’s underground living room and bed.9 The middle-aged male grave occupant lay flat with arms and legs straight, his arms close to the sides of his body and his feet close together with sole centres pointing to each other. Just as Li Xinwei 李新伟 concluded in his excavation report: the corpse was bound and wrapped, and then underwent some funerary procedures. Given the state of the corpse and the fact that none of the grave owner’s personal belongings were found in the grave, this burial might have put a particular emphasis on the message that the grave owner had been “dead”. With reference to the foot pit, it might symbolize the space for storage and sacrifice, similar to the foot case 脚箱 of later ages. In the pit, there were only nine pottery articles, including two neatly placed big-mouthed gang jars 大口缸, two gui-shaped vessels 簋形器, one hu jar 壶 and one bo bowl 钵, as well as some other items which were impossible to recover, such as fu cauldrons, zao stoves, gui-shaped vessels, etc. All of these items were imitations of articles for daily use, made especially for funerary purposes. Except for the big-mouthed gang jars, these funerary objects were short and crude, and in sharp contrast with the spacious and exquisite appearance of the grave pit itself. The funerary objects were probably not used as symbol of wealth, but rather as symbol of status, reflecting the ethos of “valuing status over wealth” at that time. Of the two big-mouthed gang jars, one had pasted decorative designs in the middle of the wall and the other did not. The gang jars might have been sealed with sackcloth smeared with cinnabar, and the few circles of light brown marks outside the mouth indicate that the gang jars might have been sealed and bound. In the middle of the wall of the gang jars, there were circular or diagonal traces on the red band, which might have been left behind after some sticky organic matter had fallen off. No matter whether the gang jars had been filled with alcoholics 9 The Chapter “Quli II” in the Book of Rites says: “The dead body on the bed is called shi corpse 尸, and the dead body placed in the coffin is called jiu coffin 柩”.

13

THE XIPO CEMETERY AND THE “CENTRAL PLAIN PATTERN”

245

or something else, it is obvious that they had been accredited as funerary objects of first and foremost importance. As for the articles of imitations for daily use, they implied their utilization for the grave owner “for life”. However, since these objects were basically funerary articles, there were not the most-often-used articles in the grave, such as pen basins 盆, weng urns 瓮 and guan pots 罐, etc. This might give us a clear conception of custom about the distinction between life and death. The outer space of the burial, i.e. M27, which was above the secondlevel ledge, was spacious, but did not have funerary objects. Instead, it was sealed with mud mixed with stems and leaves of various plants, which might symbolize the space outside the grave owner’s “dwelling”, for example, the courtyard. As for the burial ground above the grave pit, it belonged to the world of the living. Seen from this perspective, the sealing of the grave with earth signified a demarcation between yin and yang 阴阳, that is, the dead and the living. With their smaller size, the other graves in the Xipo Cemetery might not have a foot pit for special funerary objects, might not be sealed by wooden boards or might have few or no funerary objects. However, they all observed similar burial concept as M27 and followed the same general but rigorous burial rites: the corpse bound and wrapped, and the grave pit divided into inner and outer rooms with a second-level ledge. In M8, which was also a first-class large-size grave, there were also pairs of potteries funerary articles, including two big-mouthed gang jars, two gui-shaped vessels and two bo bowls, which were all neatly arranged. Compared with the situation in the burials in both the Dawenkou culture and the Songze culture in the eastern parts of China, the Xipo Cemetery exhibit both similarities and differences in terms of their spatial structure and funerary conceptions. For instance, M2005 in the Dawenkou culture in Tai’an 泰安, Shandong Province, which belonged to the late period of the early Dawenkou culture but was slightly earlier than the Xipo Cemetery,10 was also a vertical pit grave with a secondlevel ledge. In the middle of the grave pit was also a chamber just wide enough to accommodate the body of the deceased; while the chamber did not come with a foot pit, outside of it was a coffin-like space which was slightly higher than the chamber itself (see Fig. 13.6). Inside the chamber, 10 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Shandong Province, (1997), More on the Dawenkou Site: Report on the Second and Third Excavations, Beijing: Science Press, 121–123.

246

J. HAN

a hair-binding device made of some animal teeth 牙束发器, bone hairpins 骨笄 and other accessories were found near the head of the grave occupant; and at his feet lay a single-handled bo bowl 单把钵. All these indicate that this grave chamber, like that of M27 in the Xipo Cemetery, symbolized the dwelling and bed.

Fig. 13.6 Profile Map of M2005 of the Dawenkou culture (tooth hair-binding device 2, 3. bone hairpins; 4–9. river deer’s teeth; 10. handle of an ivory object; 11–17, 20. horn-stick-shaped pendants; 18, 19. tooth zu arrowheads; 21–44. two-edged bone objects; 45, 46, 50, 52, 100, 101, 103. pottery bo bowls; 47, 54. pottery hu jugs; 48, 51, 56 pottery ding tripod cauldrons; 49, 55, 82– 97, 102. pottery dou pedestal plates; 53, 104. lids of potteries; 57–70. pottery gui-shaped bei cups; 71–81. pottery goblets; 98. stone ben adzes; 99. stone axes)

13

THE XIPO CEMETERY AND THE “CENTRAL PLAIN PATTERN”

247

In the outer coffin-style chamber of the grave, there were groups of gu-shaped bei cups 觚形杯, high-handled bei cups 高柄杯, ding tripod cauldrons 鼎, dou pedestal plates 豆, bo bowls and other pottery articles, which were mainly placed on the left side of the outer chamber, which in turn perhaps symbolized a place for eating and sacrificing outside the “dwelling”, similar to the foot pits in the Xipo Cemetery. On the secondlevel ledge, there were groups of potteries, including dou pedestal plates and bo bowls, and some of them contained pig mandibles, cow skulls and so on, indicating clearly the function of religious sacrifice of the ledge. In addition, there were fu axes 斧, ben adzes 锛 and other stone tools, which all indicated the function of a kitchen, a barn, a courtyard, etc. While the opening of the grave is merely 8.2 metres2 , less than half the size of the Xipo M27, it contained 104 funerary objects, a sign of more luxury than that of the large grave of the Xipo Cemetery. The burial M90 at the Dongshancun Site 东山村遗址 in Zhangjiagang City 张家港, Jiangsu Province, belonged to the early Songze culture, and was also slightly earlier than the Xipo Cemetery.11 The opening of M90 covered an area of 5.3 metres2 , and contained 67 funerary objects, including painted stone yue battle-axes 彩绘石钺, jade huang pendants 玉璜 and big-mouthed pottery gang jars 陶大口缸, all together showing a marked dual emphasis on status and wealth. The burial 07M23 at the Lingjiatan Site 凌家滩遗 址 in Hanshan County 含山, Anhui Province, existed at about the same period of time as the Xipo Cemetery. In 07M23, there might have been a coffin. Despite an opening of merely 7.25 m2 , it contained 330 funerary objects, mostly yue battle-axes 钺, huan rings 环, zhuo bracelets 镯, huang pendants 璜, jue loops 珏 and bi discs 璧. These objects stacked layer upon layer both inside and outside the chamber of the grave, making an unrivalled sight of the degree of wealth and luxury they represented.12

11 Nanjing Museum, Zhangjiagang Municipal Bureau of Culture, Radio and Television, & Zhangjiagang Museum (2010), “The Neolithic Dongshancun Site in Zhangjiagang, Jiangsu Province”, Archaeology, 8. 12 The Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Anhui Province (2008), “New discoveries in the 5th excavation of the Lingjiatan Site in Hanshan County, Anhui Province”, Archaeology, 3.

248

J. HAN

13.3

The Distribution of the Cemetery

According to the excavation report, the 34 graves of the Xipo Cemetery were divided into four grades. From the “Grades of the Xipo Graves”, it can been seen that there was a certain degree of correspondence between the size of the grave opening, the number of funerary objects, and the “value” of the grave. There were some cases of deviation in the grading. For example, despite the fact that M27 and M11 both had 11 funerary objects, they differed greatly in the size of their opening, i.e. 16.9 m2 and 3.93 m2 , respectively. In terms of the “value” of their funerary objects, while M27 owned two “high-valued” big-mouthed gang jars, M11 boasted more and “higher-valued” objects, including one ivory zhuo bracelet and three jade yue battle-axes. For another example, although the size of opening of M5 and M12 was 6.95 m2 and 5.93 m2 respectively, the former contained one stone spinning wheel 石纺轮, but the latter nothing. In contrast, whereas both M9 and M22 had only a size of opening of one or two metres2 , each contained two funerary objects, both being jade yue battle-axes and jade huan loops. This being the case, it is advisable to rank the burials in accordance with their size as follows: the first grade, the large-sized, with an opening of more than 12 m2 (i.e. M8, M17 and M29); the second grade, the large- and medium-sized graves, with an opening of 8–9 m2 (i.e. M16, M18 and M34); and the third and fourth grades, with medium- and small-sized graves, with an opening of 5–7 m2 and 2–5 m2 , respectively. From the spatial distribution of the graves, it can be seen that Phase I of the Xipo Cemetery contained not only the five graves in the northern burial group, i.e. M6, M8, M14, M18 and M31, but also some small- and medium-sized graves which have not been assigned to any phase. These graves might have constituted a jiazu clan burials group. It is noteworthy that M8, the largest from Grade One, was meant for male, while the other four which pertained to Grade Two and Three respectively were female.13 The hierarchy might reflect differences in social status within the jiazu clan or male superiority over female, instead of the polarization of the rich and the poor.

13 The bottom of the only remaining chamber of M31 is 2.6 m long, and its original size may have been similar to that of M13 which had a foot pit of similar length and an opening size 6.19 m2 .

13

THE XIPO CEMETERY AND THE “CENTRAL PLAIN PATTERN”

249

M8 had a deep and spacious pit, a wide second-level ledge and a special foot pit. The funerary objects included a pair of big-mouthed gang jars unseen in any other graves in the same phase. At the place of the head position of the burial pit, there was an object which looked like an ivory hoop 象牙箍形器 for hair binding, and by the side of the right arm of the burial occupant, there was a jade yue battle-axe which might symbolize military power. Together, these funerary objects reflected the dignity and high status of the grave owner who might have been the head of a jiazu clan or even chief of a larger social organization. In Phase II, apart from the northern burial group (i.e. M16, M17, M13, M11, M30, M34), burials can be further divided into the western burial group (M24, M26, M27, M29) and the southern burial group (M3). The gender of the owner of M17, the largest Grade One burial in the northern burial group, cannot be determined due to the poor preservation of the human bones. But it is certain that M16 and M34, two Grade Two large-sized graves, were for females. In addition, there were some other Grade Three and Grade Four graves, which, together with the above-mentioned burials, should have constituted a senior jiazu clan burial group pertaining to a new phase. In the western burial group which was newly distinguished from other groups, there was the then largest Grade One grave, i.e. M27, which contained a pair of big-mouthed gang jars, and the other Grade One large grave, i.e. M29, which was second only to M27. Both M27 and M29 might have enjoyed a closer relation with the owner of M8.14 However, there was a lack of large- and medium-sized female graves in this burial group, and this might be attributed to the incompleteness of the graveyard. Together with some other Grade Three and Grade Four graves, these burials might have formed another senior clan jiazu grave group. In the southern burial group, only M3, the largest Grade Three burial in this group, clearly belonged to Phase II. The rest of the Grade Four graves cannot be assigned into any phase, but there is a possibility that they had belonged to Phase II. These were all male graves, therefore there is a possibility for some undiscovered female graves nearby, which might help to form a lower-status clan jiazu grave group. 14 Human bone tests showed that the skulls of the owners of the two graves were more similar to the skull of the owner of M8. See Institute of Archaeology of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & The Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (2010), The Xipo Cemetery in Lingbao County, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 130.

250

J. HAN

Seen together, the three burial groups in Phase II might have constituted a large clan jiazu grave group. Of the three, the western burial group might have enjoyed the highest status, with the owner of M27 as the head of the whole jiazu clan or chief of an even larger social institution. Whereas the northern burial group might rank second in status and the southern burial group the third rank, it might also reflect a certain degree of social stratification. In any case, however, the fact that the graves all had a second-level ledge and that the burial groups of different social status could share the same cemetery, indicates that the degree of social stratification was rather limited in general. The burials of the Xipo Cemetery were at the same period as those of the late Dawenkou Era. The graves in North I burial area of the Dawenkou Site exhibited both great wealth and high social status with their rich funerary objects. Some of the large-sized graves here, such as M26 and M13, contained dozens of potteries and more than a dozen pig heads, which is in stark contrast with the poor and lowly graves with no funerary object in South I burial area.15 A similar phenomenon can also be observed in the graves of the Songze culture at both the Dongshancun Site in Zhangjiagang City, Jiangsu Province, and the Lingjiatan Site at Hanshan County, Anhui Province. In general, the difference between the rich and the poor was more conspicuously represented by the burials of the eastern region than by those in the Xipo Cemetery.

13.4

The Connotations of Central Plains Mode

As can be seen from the above discussion, the Xipo Cemetery reflected an attitude towards life and death in the Central Plains region which was in strong contrast to the one represented by the burials in the eastern part of China. The former looked at life and death in a moderate way, paid more attention to status than wealth, observed ritual-oriented and orderly societal norms and lived a simple and mediocre lifestyle. The latter valued death as much as life, worshipped ghosts and gods, paid equal attention to status and wealth and pursued luxury and extravagance. Despite their difference, both attitudes shared some common features such as social 15 The Cultural Relics Management Office of Shandong Province, & Jinan Museum (1974), Dawenkou: Excavation Report of the Neolithic Graves, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Han, Jianye (1994), “An analysis of the Dawenkou Cemetery”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2.

13

THE XIPO CEMETERY AND THE “CENTRAL PLAIN PATTERN”

251

stratification, jiazu clan prominence and male and military authority, and both observed a set of complex and rigorous funerary rites. While these rites marked the beginning of the early Chinese ritual system, they would undergo drastic changes that have been taking place in the societies in both the Central Plains and the eastern part of China around 3500 BCE. I have proposed that since China entered the Chalcolithic Age in 3500 BCE, when a general tendency of the patriarchal jiating family, jiazu clan organizations and frequent warfare was prevailing the society in most parts of China, three different patterns of societal development began to emerge, i.e. “the Northern Pattern”, “the Eastern Pattern” and “the Central Plains Pattern”. As a pattern which ran intermediate between the Northern Pattern and the Eastern Pattern, the Central Plains Pattern seemed to come with the following connotations: “permission for some difference in social status without encouragement on rich-poor disparity, emphasis on orderly societal norms without resorting to severe punishment, stress on steady increase in productivity without pursuit of extravagance, attention to pragmatic life without indulgence in religion, reliance on consanguinity without negligence of collective interests, and steady and healthy pace of development with no haste”.16 These connotations not only fitted the features of the Xipo Cemetery we observed above perfectly, but also accorded with the pattern represented by the Xipo Cemetery which Li Boqian 李伯谦 has enunciated. Then, after all, as the representative of “the Central Plains Pattern”, where did the burial customs of the Xipo Cemetery originally come from? As pointed out above, the Xipo Cemetery might have entered the stage of the Xiwang type 西王类型 of Phase III of the Yangshao culture, that is, the late Yangshao Era.17 The Xipo Cemetery was located in the area along southwestern Shanxi and the western part of western Henan, an area which had once been the core area of the once brilliant Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture. It might be owing to this fact that, although the potteries in the Xipo residential area had already evolved into features of the Xiwang type, the funerary objects still maintained the tradition of the old Miaodigou type in a tenacious manner and with considerable

16 Han, Jianye (2003), “The general trend and different patterns of societal development in the Chalcolithic Age”, Ancient Civilizations (Vol. II): 84–96. 17 Yan, Wenming (1989), “On the origin of the Yangshao culture and the stages of its development”, Studies of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 122–165.

252

J. HAN

stagnancy, so much so that the Xipo Cemetery was classified by excavators into the Miaodigou type. In this case, the origin of the Xipo burials should first be traced to the graves of the Miaodigou type. At present, the number of graves which can be verified as pertaining to the Miaodigou type is very small, and can be roughly divided into two types. The first type is represented by M1 of Phase III of the Beigan Site 北橄遗址 in Yicheng County 翼城,18 Shanxi Province. The graves of this type were rectangular with a vertical earth pit, and some had second-level ledges, with the buried person lying flat, face up, arms and legs straight. The second type is represented by M2 of Phase II of the Yangshao culture at the Nanjiaokou Site 南交口 遗址 in Sanmenxia City 三门峡, Henan Province.19 The graves of this type were slightly square with a vertical earth pit, and many bodies were buried together for a second time. In both types of burials, there was usually no funerary object found. Whereas the Xipo Cemetery obviously showed most conformity with the first type of burials in terms of the shape, structure and burial methods, it exhibited similarity with both types of burials with regard to its simple and unadorned burial custom whereby few or no funerary objects were found. As such, the origin of the Xipo Cemetery might as well be traced back earlier, to the Dongzhuang type 东庄类型 and Zaoyuan type 枣园类型 of the Yangshao culture.20 The eye-catching yue battle-axes and big-mouthed gang vats with a round bottom 圜底大口缸 found in the Xipo graves might have already existed in the Miaodigou type graves, but have not been excavated earlier on. In fact, stone yue had been found in the residential sites of Phase 18 The Institute of Archaeology of Shanxi Province (1993), “Excavation report of the Beigan Site in Yicheng, Shanxi Province”, Journal of Chinese Antiquity, 4. 19 The Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (2009), The Nanjiaokou Site in Sanmenxia City, Beijing: Science Press, 92–94. 20 The precursor of the Miaodigou type of the Yangshao culture was the Dongzhuang type, which was formed on the basis of the Zaoyuan type and under the strong influence of the Banpo type. (See Tian Jianwen, Xue Xinmin, & Yang, Linzhong (1992), “New understanding of the archaeological culture of the Neolithic Age in Southern Shanxi”, Journal of Chinese Antiquity, 2.) The graves in Phase I of the Dongguan Site in Yuanqu County, Shanxi Province, which belonged to the Zaoyuan type, were all simple and unadorned, with no funerary objects. This feature sets the graves apart from the graves of the Banpo type, which mostly contained several funerary objects. (See Department of Archaeology in Museum of Chinese History, the Institute of Archaeology of Shanxi Province, & Museum of Yuanqu County (2001), The Dongguan Site of the Ancient City of Yuanqu Cpounty, Beijing: Science Press, 42–45.).

13

THE XIPO CEMETERY AND THE “CENTRAL PLAIN PATTERN”

253

I of the Maodigou type and Phase II of the Yangshao culture at the Nanjiaokou Site in Sanmenxia City, Henan Province. Both perforated stone yue battle-axes and pairs of big-mouthed gang vats with a round bottom have been found as funerary objects in the burials of the Laofengang Site 老坟岗遗址 in Xixia County 西峡, Henan Province, an ancient cemetery site which is similar in features to that of the Miaodigou type.21 The big-mouthed gang vats had pasted decorative patterns on the middle stomach, and were longer and thinner than the big-mouthed gang vats unearthed in the Xipo Cemetery. Besides, around the edge of the mouth of the gang vats, there were no marks of binding, but several circles of vortex patterns (see Fig. 13.7) to make binding stronger. In addition, in “the stork, fish, and stone axe design” 鹳鱼石斧图 which was excavated at the Yancun Site 阎村遗址 in Ruzhou County 汝州, Henan Province, the axe which was perforated was in fact a yue battle-axe and might have symbolized military power22 ; in fact, the perforated axe was yue, though it is uncertain whether the axe was stone or jade. Therefore, the design can also be called “the stork, fish and yue design”. This shows that the yue battle-axe had also existed in the Yancun type which was contemporaneous with and closely related to the Miaodigou type. In other words, the “Central Plain Pattern” represented by the Xipo Cemetery had already begun to show itself by the burials of the Miaodigou type. Comparatively speaking, around the same period, distinct sins of polarization between the rich and poor had begun to appear in the graves both of the later period of the early Dawenkou culture, and the early Songze culture, in eastern China. For example, in the large-sized graves such as M2005 in the Dawenkou Site and M90 in the Dongshancun Site, several dozens or sometimes even more than one hundred funerary objects were excavated, of which some were “high-value” items. This funerary custom, which actually betokened the prototype of the “Eastern Pattern”, ran in sharp contrast with the plain funerary custom of the Miaodigou type, where almost no funerary objects were buried. However, in northern China, the Bainiyaozi type 白泥窑子类型 of the Yangshao culture, which was represented by the 21 Institute of Archaeology of Henan Province, & The Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Nanyang City (2012), “Excavation report of the Laofengang Site of the Yangshao culture in Xixia County, Henan Province”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2. 22 Yan, Wenming (1981), “Postscript to the ‘Stork, fish and stone axe design’”, Cultural Relics, 12.

254

J. HAN

Fig. 13.7 The big-mouthed gang vats with a round bottom and yue battle-axes (1, 2. pottery big-mouthed gang vats with a round bottom [Laofengang M10: 2, 3]; 3, 4. stone yue battle-axes [Laofengang M3: 6, 7]; 5. yue in the painting [Yancun])

Wangmushanpoxia Settlement 王墓山坡下聚落 in Liangcheng County 凉城, Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region,23 not only was polarization between the rich and poor undiscernible, even social difference in status was not conspicuous. While this is clearly different from the distinct social stratification as showcased by the large-sized palace-style buildings found in Xipo Cemetery, features of “the Northern Pattern” had already began to emerge.24 Seen from this perspective, the general trend and different patterns of societal development in China during the Chalcolithic Age actually originated in the Miaodigou Era around 4000 BCE. At that time, cultures in most parts of China for the first time blended and established connections, forming the “Early China Cultural Circle” or cultural “Early China” with the Central Plains at the core.25 At the same time, in line with the general trend of social stratification, the emergence of the jiazu clan, the prominence of male and military power began to take shape. 23 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Inner Mongolia, et al. (2003), Archaeology in the Daihai Region (III): Collection of Excavation Reports of the Sites of Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Science Press. 24 Han, Jianye (2003), A Study of the Neolithic Culture in Northern China, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 25 Han, Jianye (2012), “The Miaodigou Era and ‘Early China’”, Archaeology, 3.

13

THE XIPO CEMETERY AND THE “CENTRAL PLAIN PATTERN”

255

Three different patterns of societal development were initially formed, ushering in the first stage of China’s early civilization. The formation of the different patterns was related to the natural resources and the degree of wealth accumulation in different regions, that is, the result of adaptation to different natural environments. The general trend and the different patterns of societal development not only reflected in a sense the features of early Chinese civilization, which was pluralist but unified with a cultural centre, but also constituted the source of the endless vitality and uninterrupted development of Chinese civilization.26 Of the different patterns, “the Central Plains Pattern”, which is characterized by a moderate attitude to life and death, more attention to status than wealth, a ritual-oriented and orderly society and a simple lifestyle that adhered to the golden mean, has later endowed Chinese civilization with its core characteristics. (This part was originally included in The Yangshao Culture and Her Times: Proceedings of the International Symposium on the 90th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Yangshao Culture published by the Wenwu Press in 2014.)

26 Yan, Wenming (1987), “The unity and diversity of prehistoric Chinese culture”, Cultural Relics, 3.

CHAPTER 14

The Middle Reaches of the Yellow River: Its Central Position in the Civilizing Process

The Yellow River is the “mother river” of the Chinese nation and the middle reaches of the Yellow River is the central vein of the pluralist but unified Chinese civilization. The middle reaches of the Yellow River, or the Central Plains region, as the major living area of the Yan and Huang tribes in historical legends, had been the stamen of the blooming flower of the prehistoric Chinese civilization. A correct understanding of the central position of the middle reaches of the Yellow River in China’s civilizing process has great significance not only to the objective recognition of the essential characteristics of early Chinese civilization but also to the promotion and reproduction of the excellent genes of Chinese civilization.

14.1 Debate on the Cultural Centre of China: The Yellow River Basin or the Central Plains In the 1950s and 1960s, with the rapid increase in the archaeological discoveries in the Yellow River Basin, theories of both the “Yellow-RiverBasin-centrism” and the “Central-Plains-centrism” became quite popular in the field of prehistoric Chinese archaeology. Archaeologists, including Xia Nai, An Zhimin and Shi Xingbang, etc., were among those who joined in this debate. In 1959, for example, An Zhimin argued, “the Yellow River Basin was the cradle of the Chinese civilization”, and the

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_14

257

258

J. HAN

prehistoric culture of the Yellow River Basin “have promoted and influenced the ancient culture of the neighboring regions”. In 1965, Su Bingqi insisted that during the period of the Yangshao culture, “there has formed a cultural main body with the Central Plains as its the centre”. However, in the early 1980s, Su put forward the theory of “regional systems and cultural types” “区系类型”, and began to challenge explicitly the theory of the Central-Plain-centrism. Based on the major discoveries of the Niuheliang Site 牛河梁遗址 and other sites, Su even claimed that the development pattern of the origin of the state represented by the Hongshan culture 红山文化 and other cultures in the West Liao River Basin 西 辽河流域 was “primordial”, and the development pattern in the Central Plains was instead “secondary”. He even advocated the theory of “the sky full of stars” “满天星斗” to account for the origin of Chinese civilization. Under the influence of Su Bingqi’s theory of “regional systems and cultural types”, many archaeologists began to devote themselves to sorting out the pedigrees of cultural development in different regions. Even Zhang Guangzhi, who was living abroad at that time, argued that the prehistoric “Chinese Interaction Circle” 中国相互作用圈 or “original China” 最初的中国 resulted from nothing but the profound cultural exchanges between the cultures from different regions which had “equal status”. In fact, Su Bingqi never flatly negated the special position of the middle reaches of the Yellow River or the Central Plains in the process of the Chinese civilization. Even as recent as in the late 1990s, he still believed that the “Y-shaped” cultural belt along the regions of Guanzhong, Shanxi, northwest Hebei and the West Liao River Basin was “the most important seed of the primordial system of the Chinese culture”, and that “the Miaodigou Type of the Yangshao culture may be the cultural remains which have constituted the core of the people of Chinese ancestry”. Yan Wenming is the first scholar who combined the theory of “regional systems and cultural types” with “the Central-Plains-centrism”. In 1986, Yan proposed the theory of a “double-flowered” 重瓣花朵式 pattern of the prehistoric Chinese civilization with the Central Plains as the relative centre, a theory Zhang Xuehai called as “the neo-Central-Plainscentrism”. Under the influence of Yan’s theory, Zhao Hui advocated that the historical trend whereby the Central Plains was playing a central role started “between 3000 and 2500 BCE”. I myself advanced the theory and proposed that as early as 4000 BCE, the cultural “early China” which centred itself on the Central Plains had already begun to take shape.

14

THE MIDDLE REACHES OF THE YELLOW RIVER: ITS …

259

In recent years, however, both “the double flower” theory, and “neoCentral-Plains-centrism” theory, and even the theory of “the cultural ‘early China’”, were called into question and criticized by Xu Hong, Li Xinwei and other scholars. According to Li Xinwei, these theories “belittle the impact of the achievements which the other societies outside the Central Plains have made on the formation of the Chinese civilization, and prevent us from presenting a more truthful, diverse, and magnificent picture of the origin of Chinese civilization”.

14.2 The Central and Leading Role of the Yellow River Basin in the Making of Chinese Civilization While the emergence of a guojia or state is a prominent sign of the unfolding of a wenming or civilization, a concept that cannot be equated with guojia or state. Wang Wei, pointed out that “wenming or civilization is a new stage in the development of a human culture and its society”. While a human culture enters a new stage due to the development of complex ideas and knowledge systems in the fields of astronomy, calendar, writing and rituals, a society steps into a new era with the emergence of a guojia or state, characterized by the power of a monarch. According to this definition of wenming or civilization, the Chinese civilization should have made its very first footstep at 8000 BP. This observation gets vivid representation in the Jiahu Site 贾湖遗址 of the Peiligang culture 裴李岗 文化 in Wuyang City 舞阳, Henan Province. The larger graves at the Jiahu Site contained special funerary objects such as bone guixing qi, i.e. compass-like bone artefacts 骨规形器, and turtle shells filled with cobblestones. These objects might have been related to astronomical observation for perfecting the calendar 观象授时, or to turtle-shell divination and the theory of images and numbers. Some turtle shells were carved with signs which resembled characters and they might be six-line diagrams 卦象 or records about whether the prophecies were fulfilled or not 验辞. The Peiligang culture had land specially designated as cemeteries, and the burials were deep, earthen pits. There were indications of grave sacrifices, revealing obviously the appearance of the concept of ancestral worship. The burials were divided into groups, which might have corresponded to the social organization at different

260

J. HAN

levels in the actual society. The graves were orderly arranged in rows, indicating that the custom of the zuzang clan burial or even the zu fenmu clan cemetery might have appeared by then. Some cemeteries were in use for hundreds of years and reflected a strong “historical memory” of the forebears of the clan. In the meantime, the Peiligang culture had exhibited a difference between religious centres and ordinary settlements, between religious leaders and average persons and the superiority of men over women. Around the same period, the Baijia culture 白家文化 in Gansu and Shaanxi Provinces, the Gaomiao culture 高庙文化 in Hunan Province, the Kuahuqiao culture 跨湖桥文化 in Zhejiang Province and the Xinglongwa culture 兴隆洼文化 in the West Liaohe River Basin in Inner Mongolia, also showed signs of the making of the Chinese civilization. Due to the strong influence of the Peiligang culture in the Central Plains region, there were certain interactions and exchanges between the cultures in most parts of China, and hence an emergence of the cultural “early China”. When China entered the era of the Yangshao culture at around 7000 BCE, moat-surrounded settlements 环壕聚落began to appear the Banpo Site 半坡遗址 in Xi’an 西安 and the Jiangzhai Site 姜寨遗址 in Lintong 临潼, both in Shaanxi Province, and this showed a further strengthening of social order. The “Clam-sculptured Dragon-Tiger Burial” 蚌塑 “龙 虎”墓 excavated at the Xishuipo Site 西水坡遗址 in Puyang 濮阳, Henan Province, according to Feng Shi 冯时, pushed back by thousands of years the date of the beginning of the Chinese astrological system of ershiba xiu or the twenty-eight lunar mansions system 二十八宿体系 and the birth of the ancient heaven-covering theory, i.e. the gaitian shuo or cosmic theory 盖天说. At around 6000 BP, in the region bordering the three provinces of Henan, Shaanxi and Shanxi, there appeared the powerful Miaodigou type 庙底沟类型 of the Yangshao culture. Large-sized ancestral temples and palace-like constructions covering an area of 200–500 m2 were found at sites such as the Xipo Site 西坡遗址 in Lingbao 灵宝, Henan Province, and the Xiahe Site 下河遗址 in Baishui County 白水, Shaanxi Province. Both the large-sized graves discovered at the Xipo Site, and the war-memorial-style “stork, fish, and stone-axe design” excavated at the Yancun Site 阎村 in Ruzhou County 汝州, both in Henan Province, suggested that the Central Plains had taken a lead in the process of social complexication.

14

THE MIDDLE REACHES OF THE YELLOW RIVER: ITS …

261

In the period of the Miaodigou type, the culture of the Central Plains expanded its influence enormously and pushed the nearby Dawenkou culture, Hongshan culture and Songze culture to accelerate their civilizing processes one after another, which resulted in the Miaodigoulization of the Yangshao culture and the unpresented convergence of the different cultures in the middle and upper reaches of the Yellow River. Therefore, the Miaodigou painted potteries decorated with petal designs 花瓣纹彩陶 spread all over the country, and most parts of China became culturally integrated, forming a super cultural community or a cultural circle. Seen from both the geographical and cultural perspective, this super cultural community not only laid the foundation for the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties, and even the whole country after the Qin and Han Dynasties. It also symbolized the formal emergence of “the early Chinese cultural circle” or the cultural “early China”, which might as well be called “the earliest China”. On the other hand, the large-sized burials in the Xipo Cemetery stood in obvious contrast with the simple funerary objects in them. This contrast shed first light on the special features of the “Central Plains Pattern” or “the Northern Pattern”, which includes: a moderate attitude to life and death, more attention to status than wealth, a ritual-oriented and orderly society and a simple lifestyle that adhered to the golden mean. Li Boqian regards this pattern as typifying the wangquan or “power of a ruler” 王权 pattern of the development of civilization, which is different from the shenquan or “theocracy” 神权 pattern of the Hongshan culture.

The Special Position of the Middle Reaches of the Yellow River in the Making of Chinese Civilization

14.3

About 5000 BP, China entered the Chacolithic Age. In the lower reaches of the Yangtze River, the Liangzhu culture had formed the great city of Liangchu at Yuhang District, Hangzhou City, Zhejiang Province, covering several million m2 , luxurious large-sized graves with buried jade, and large-scale water conservancy facilities, etc. All of these discoveries revealed that either an early guojia or state had appeared or a civilized society had taken shape. On the other hand, the Dawenkou culture 大 汶口文化 in the Haidai Site 海岱 of Tai’an County, Shandong Province, and the Qujialing culture 屈家岭文化 in the Yangtze-and-Hanjiang River

262

J. HAN

region 江汉地区 had also been powerful enough to expand their influence to the middle reaches of the Yellow River. Some archaeologists once thought that the middle reaches of the Yellow River or the Central Plains had by this time lost some of its strength and were at a low tide, a view which became a crucial argument some scholars resorted to in their repudiation of the position of the middle reaches of the Yellow River or the Central Plains. However, new archaeological evidence suggests that the issue is far from being simple. From 5300 BP, at the Dadiwan Site 大地湾遗址 in Qin’an County 秦 安 in central Gansu Province, there appeared both large-sized settlements of more than 100 m2 and palace-style buildings of more than 420 m2 . The buildings had a front hall with adjacent rear rooms 前堂后室, the inner space and the outer space were separate, the east wing chamber ran in symmetry with the west wing chamber 东西两厢左右对称, and the three gates on the left, in the middle, and on the right 左中右三门 were differentiated in terms of importance. All the features had initially exhibited the initial layout characteristic of classical Chinese architecture. The Shuanghuaishu Settlement 双槐树 in Gongyi City 巩义 in central Henan covered an area of more than one million m2 . There, a large triplex circular moat 三重环壕 and a large-scale rammed-earth foundation 夯土 基地 were discovered. While the long rows of palace-style buildings excavated here were different from the palace-style buildings excavated in the Dadiwan Site which had front halls and rear rooms, these two types of buildings had jointly set two different precedents for buildings in later generations. The Dadiwan and Shuanghuaishu settlements might have been the central settlements of the two guguo or “ancient states” in the Ganshan 甘陕 (Gansu and Shaanxi Provinces) region and central Henan Province during the era of the late Yangshao culture respectively. While both settlements have stood on the threshold of a civilized society or a society with the elementary features of civilization, they also lacked the luxury of a society like those in the eastern coastal regions as embodied by sumptuous jade wares and an elaborate burial custom. Therefore they belonged to the “Central Plains Pattern” 中原模式 or the Northern China Pattern 北方模式. After 4800 BP, when the “ancient state of the Heluo” 河洛古国 represented by the Shuanghuaishu Site had declined, many large-scale settlements were prospering in eastern Gansu and northern Shaanxi Provinces. For example, in the Nanzuo Site 南佐 in Qingyang 庆阳,

14

THE MIDDLE REACHES OF THE YELLOW RIVER: ITS …

263

Gansu Province, a palace-style building with front ting halls 厅 and rear tang living rooms 堂 covered an area of 630 m2 . Besides, there were nine rammed earth platforms on both sides of the front of the palace, each with a diameter of about 100 m. These features showed a higher level of social development than that in the Dadiwan Site. About 4500 BP, when China entered the Longshan Era, the central position of eastern Gansu and northern Shaanxi kept strengthening, and there appeared both the Qiaocun Site 桥村遗址 in Lingtai County 灵 台, Gansu Province, which covered an area of six million m2 , and the Lushanmao Site 芦山峁遗址 in Yan’an 延安, Shaanxi Province, with a core area of two million m. In both sites were found many plank-shaped tiles and tube-shaped tiles which might have been used to cover the ancestral temples and palace buildings. Jade objects were also found. In the Lushanmao Site, rammed earth foundations of 16,000 m2 were excavated, and the buildings on the foundations were axially symmetrical, with a distinction between the primary and secondary ones. Whereas the architectural pattern of these buildings could be traced to the same origin as those in the Dadiwan Site, the former exhibited a greater and more complex scale. At this time, the ancient city of Taosi emerged in southern Shanxi there with an area of nearly three million m2 , and a large-sized palace city with more than 100,000 m. In the palace city, there were a large rammed earth foundation of nearly 8000 m2 , some palaces, and a semicircular “observatory” which contained luxurious large burials with a great number of funerary objects such as jade, lacquer objects, dragon basins, etc. The excavation of these central settlements, palace-like buildings and large graves showed that the middle reaches of the Yellow River not only had already entered the stage of a guojia or state, or that of a civilized society, but also surpassed the contemporaneous Yangtze River Basin of the same period in terms of the degree of development. After more than 4000 BP, in northern Shaanxi Province, there appeared the ancient city of Shimao 石峁, which covered an area of more than four million m2 , with a majestic, tall and great imperial city platform, and grand and complex city gates, together with exquisite jade objects, and stone carvings with deity or beast faces. All these discoveries indicated the existence of an institution as guojia or a state and exhibited the character of a northern civilization. In central and western Henan Province, there also emerged several ancient cities, each with several hundreds of thousand m2 , such as the Wangchenggang Ancient City 王城岗古城 in

264

J. HAN

Dengfeng 登封, the Wadian Central Settlement 瓦店中心聚落 in Yuzhou 禹州 and the Guchengzhai Ancient City 古城寨古城 and Xinzhai Ancient City 新砦古城 in Xinmi 新密. If the southward movement of Laohushan culture 老虎山文化 with the Shimao Ancient City as its centre and its destruction to the Taosi Ancient City could as well be seen as a result of the struggle within the same group of people in the middle reaches of the Yellow River, the large-scale replacement of the Shijiahe culture 石家 河文化 in the Jianghan (Yangtze-Hanjiang Rivers) region by Phase III of the Wangwan culture as represented by the Wangchenggang and Wadian Sites served undoubtedly as best proof of triumph of the Central Plains group over the Jianghan group. Whereas this victory corresponded to the historic record of “Yu the Great quelling the unrest of the three Miao tribes” “禹征三苗”, it had laid the foundation of the Xia Dynasty. The late Xia culture represented by the Erlitou culture was merely a developmental advancement on the basis of Phase III of the Wangwan culture. With the fall of the Liangzhu culture and Shijiahe culture more than 4000 BP, the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River shifted into a low ebb, while the central position of the Yellow River Basin, especially the middle reaches of the Yellow River, became further strengthened. The prehistoric culture of China was inherently diverse, and the elements of Chinese civilization did not all owe their origin to the Central Plains region; however, after 8000 BP, when the central position of the middle reaches of the Yellow River or the Central Plains region became increasingly evident, the embryo of the cultural “Early China” began to appear, and the origin of Chinese civilization started its initial formation. Around 6000 BP, under the strong influence and drive of the culture from the Central Plains, cultures in most parts of China were deeply integrated. As a result, the cultural “Early China” became formally crystallized, marking the second step in the making of the Chinese civilization. About 5000 BP, when many guguo or ancient states emerged along the Yellow River and the Yangtze River Basins, the Chinese civilization took its initial shape, in the process of which the middle reaches of the Yellow River still played an important role. Around 4000 BP, when the influence of the middle reaches of the Yellow River grew, the culture of the region moved southward on a large scale, which led to the general decline of the Yangtze River Basin. After 3800 BP, the Chinese civilization reached maturity with the emergence of a vast monarchic state centred on the middle reaches of the Yellow River or the Central Plains. Generally speaking, the middle reaches of the Yellow River or the Central Plains

14

THE MIDDLE REACHES OF THE YELLOW RIVER: ITS …

265

region have indeed played a certain vital role in China’s civilizing process, and been the germ of the multi-branched but united Chinese civilization. (This part was originally published in China Social Sciences News on 2 November, 2020.)

CHAPTER 15

A Comparison of the Civilizing Processes in the Central Plains and the Jianghan Regions

The Central Plains 中原 discussed in this book mainly refers to the vast area centred on the Songshan Mountain in Dengfeng County, Henan Province, and the regions nearby, including a large part of Henan, the southern part of Shanxi Province and the eastern Guanzhong area 关中 地区, i.e. the central Shaanxi Province. The term, Jianghan (the YangtzeHanjiang Rivers) region 江汉地区 refers to the middle reaches of the Yangtze River with the Jianghan Plains 江汉平原 as the centre. The Yellow River Basin and the Yangtze River Basin had established mutual integration and mutual promotion from about 7000 BCE, and began to move towards civilization together after about 4000 BCE, forming the main body of the cultural “Early China”.1 As centres of the two river basins, the Central Plains and the Jianghan region have played an important role in the formation and development of the early Chinese civilization. To be specific, “the Central Plains has been playing a leading and prominent role during the whole process, i.e. from the first beginnings to the formation of the civilization”,2 whereas “the middle reaches 1 Su, Bingqi (1994), “Welcoming the new age of Chinese archaeology”, in The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, and the Chinese: In Search of the Roots through Archaeology, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 238; Han, Jianye (2015), The Early China: The Formation and Development of the Early Chinese Cultural Circle, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press. 2 Yan, Wenming (1987), “The unity and diversity of the prehistoric Chinese culture”, Cultural Relics, 3.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_15

267

268

J. HAN

of the Yangtze River has not only entered the early stage of civilization in its own way but also become the second centre of origin of the Chinese civilization in the Yangtze River Basin”.3 But how have the two original centres of civilization interacted with each other in their respective civilizing processes, what were their respective patterns of civilization, what has contributed to their rises and falls? These being the issues requiring further discussion, this part intends to make a brief investigation from a comparative perspective.

15.1 The Rise of the Central Plains and the Decline of the Jianghan Region Both the Central Plains and the Jianghan region have experienced several thousand years of civilizing process. Whereas the Central Plains has gone through volcanic upheavals and been ultimately rejuvenated in a tenacious and dauntless manner, the Jianghan region has finally gone into decline despite a mostly smooth and uneventful civilizing process (see Fig. 15.1). In the early Neolithic Age from 9000 to 7000 BCE, cultures in the Central Plains and the Jianghan region have both moved beyond the Paleolithic Age. This was a time when people tended to settle down, and potteries began to appear, which provided favourable conditions for the future civilizing process. Both the Lijiagou culture 李家沟文化4 in Xinmi County, the interior of the Central Plains, with its typical guan pots 罐 decorated with circular vortex patterns 圆窝纹 or rope patterns 绳纹, and the cultural sites in the area along the Dongting Lake 洞庭湖,5 with the

3 Yan, Wenming (2000), “The status and role of the Yangtze River Basin in the origin of the Chinese civilization”, in The Emergence of Agriculture and the Origin of Civilization, Beijing: Science Press, 95. 4 School of Archaeology and Museology of Peking University, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Zhengzhou City (2011), “A brief excavation report of the Lijiagou Site in Xinmi, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 4. 5 In the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, the Huadang Site in Linli and the Songjiagang Site in Lixian in Hunan Province may be dated back to 7000 BCE. In these two sites, rough brown pottery fragments decorated with rope lines were found; therefore, the two sites may belong to the “cultural system of round-bottomed fu decorated with rope patterns in southern China”, just like Phase II of the Zengpiyan Site in Guilin, Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. See Guo Weimin (2010), Culture and Society in the Liyang Plains and the Handong Region in the Neolithic Age, Beijing: Wenwu Pres, 44.

15

A COMPARISON OF THE CIVILIZING PROCESSES …

269

Fig. 15.1 The cultural development in the Central Plains and the Jianghan Regions during the Neolithic and Early Bronze ages

typical fu cauldrons 釜 decorated with rope patterns, had potteries decorated with rope patterns, indicating some cultural connection between the two regions. The middle Neolithic Age, i.e. about 7000–5000 BCE, witnessed the individual and vigorous development of the cultures in both the Central Plains and the Jianghan region as well as the appearance of their respective unique features. The Peiligang culture 裴李岗文化 in the Central Plains reached its peak around 6000 BEC.6 Not only did its production of potteries become more complex in shape and function, it even saw the invention of the ding tripod cauldrons 鼎, a cooking vessel which could be seen as a symbol of the “Early China”. Besides, during this period, the stone tools were neatly polished, and bone flutes 骨笛 and symbols carved on tortoise shells 龟甲刻符 were shining with the wisdom of the Chinese ancestors. When the Peiligang culture expanded and its influence 6 Henan Team One of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1984), “1979 excavation report of the Peiligang Site”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1; Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (1999), The Jiahu Site in Wuyang, Beijing: Science Press.

270

J. HAN

grew, the cultural unity of the early China gained strength in a conspicuous manner, and the early Chinese cultural circle or the cultural “Early China” came into being in embryonic form.7 In the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, the Pengtoushan culture 彭头山文化 first appeared8 in Lixian County, Hunan Province. Its pottery was limited in types, including chiefly fu cauldrons and bo bowls 钵 decorated with rope patterns, and its stone tools were still mainly made by hitting and polishing. Later, after 6000 BCE, influenced by the Kuahuqiao culture 跨湖桥文化 in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River, new artefacts such as round-footed basins 圈足盘 appeared in the Pengtoushan culture, which evolved into a series of sub-cultures with more similarities than differences such as the Lower Zaoshi culture 皂市下层 文化 in Shimen County of Hunan Province, the Chengbeixi culture 城 背溪文化 in Yichang City of Hubei Province, Gaomiao culture 高庙文 化 in Hongjiang City of Hunan and Nanmuyuan culture 楠木园文化 in Badong County of Hubei, etc. The white potteries 白陶, tusked-beastfaced designs 獠牙兽面纹 and octagonal star designs 八角星纹, etc.,9 which all originated in the Gaomiao culture, were exquisite, complicated, mysterious and have left far-reaching influence. At the same time, the cultural exchanges between the Central Plains and the Jianghan region gradually increased. For example, the emergence of the egg-shaped double-eared guan pot 卵形双耳罐, the doubled-eared hu jar 双耳壶 and the flat-bottomed bo bowl 平底钵 in the middle Peiligang culture might have something to do with the influence of the Pengtoushan culture, just as the later appearance in the Pengtoushan culture of such potteries as the unadorned double-eared hu jar 素面双 耳壶, the flat-bottomed or round-footed deep-bellied guan pot with two tiny handles 双鋬平底或圈足深腹罐, and the small-mouthed flat hu jar with raised shoulders 小口耸肩扁壶 owed their origin to the elements of the Peiligang culture.

7 Han, Jianye (2009), “The migration and influence of the migration of the Peiligang culture and the embryo of the early Chinese cultural circle”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 8 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Hunan Province (2006), The Pengtoushan and Bashidang Sites, Beijing: Science Press. 9 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Hunan Province (2000), “A brief excavation report of the Gaomiao Site in Qianyang, Hunan Province”, Cultural Relics, 4.

15

A COMPARISON OF THE CIVILIZING PROCESSES …

271

Towards the late Neolithic Age at about 5000–3500 BCE, cultural exchanges between the Central Plains and the Jianghan region became even more frequent, and the two regions began their respective civilizing processes from here. The Yangshao culture 仰韶文化 which had developed primarily on the basis of the Peiligang culture and gained momentum with hundreds of years of accumulation, ultimately flourished and thrived in the Miaodigou Era 庙底沟 around 4000 BCE. The Dongzhuang-Miaodigou type 东庄-庙底沟类型 of culture, represented by both the painted pottery decorated with petal patterns 花瓣纹彩陶 and the fu-shaped ding tripod cauldron 釜形鼎, spread from the core area of southern Shanxi and western Henan Provinces, and expanded outward vigorously, exerting strong influence. So strong was the influence of this culture that it brought the cultures in most parts of China into contact, promoted their integration, resulting in a three-tiered cultural community which had laid the foundation for the future Xia and Shang Dynasties, and even for Chinese society after the Qin and Han Dynasties. This multitiered cultural community is what we call “the Early Chinese Cultural Circle” 早期中国文化圈, or the cultural “Early China” 早期中国.10 In the Miaodigou Era, the society was becoming increasingly complex. Near the core area of the Central Plains, in the remains such as the Xipo Site 西坡 in Lingbao City 灵宝11 of Henan Province and the Xiahe Site 下 河 in Baishui County 白水 of Shaanxi Province,12 there were found large palace-like houses of 200–500 m2 . These discoveries showed that there had been a high degree of social complexity and that the Central Plains had arrived at the threshold of a civilized society. In the meantime, in the Jianghan region, the Tangjiagang culture 汤家岗文化 in Changde City of Hunan Province and the Daxi culture 大溪文化 in Wushan County of Chongqing (former Sichuan Province) rose one after another and 10 Han, (2012), “The Miaodigou Era and the ‘Early China’”, Archaeology, 3. 11 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, Henan Team One of

the Institute of Archaeology of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, et al. (2003), “House No. 105 of the Yangshao culture at the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan Province”, Cultural Relics, 8; Henan Team One of the Institute of Archaeology of Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, et al. (2005), “The discovery of an exceptionally big house of the Yangshao culture at the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan Province”, Archaeology. 3. 12 Institute of Archaeology of Shaanxi Province, et al. (2011), “A brief excavation report of the house remains of the Yangshao culture at the Xiahe Site in Baishui County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology, 12.

272

J. HAN

developed steadily. The ancient city of Chengtoushan 城头山 in Lixian County 澧县 of Hunan had featured the earliest city walls discovered in China so far,13 which indicated that the early Daxi culture had acquired a strong organizational ability and had obviously strengthened its social order. In fact, the white potteries and other cultural elements of the Tangjiagang culture and early the Daxi culture had once spread to the Central Plains, the lower reaches of the Yangtze River and even as far as southern China. After the Miaodigou Era, the painted potteries decorated with petal patterns, a cultural element inherent in the Central Plains, spread to the Jianghan region. Under the influence and stimulation of the cultures from the Central Plains, the Youziling type 油子岭类型 of the Daxi culture rose all of a sudden as a new force in the eastern Hanshui River 汉水region,14 laying the foundation for the advent of the cultural pinnacle of the Jianghan region. In the early period of the Chalcolithic Age, about 3500–2500 BCE, the Central Plains became relatively weak and its sphere of influence shrank, while the Jianghan region, having acquired the initial form of a civilized society, became strong and expanded northward in an aggressive manner. At this time, the late Yangshao culture in the Central Plains was gradually experiencing a low ebb, and its influence on the surrounding cultures significantly diminished. With the influx of foreign cultural elements, the interior of the Central Plains no longer retained its status as a cultural centre. However, judging from the Xipo Cemetery in Lingbao,15 the Xishan Ancient City 西山古城 in Zhengzhou 郑州,16 and other sites, it can be seen that the Central Plains still had considerable power and strength. In the Jianghan region, the Youziling type of the Daxi culture first expanded 13 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Hunan Province (2007), The Chengtoushan Site in Lixian: Excavation Report of a Neolithic Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 14 Some scholars even suggested that the sites east of the Han River might have formed a separate archaeological culture, i.e. the Youziling culture. See Guo Weimin (2010), Culture and Society in the Liyang Plains and the Eastern Han River Region in the Neolithic Age, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 76–86. 15 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (2010), The Xipo Cemetery in Lingbao, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 16 The Team Leaders Training Class of the State Cultural Heritage Administrations (1999), “Excavation of the city site of the Yangshao Era in Xishan, Zhengzhou”, Cultural Relics, 7.

15

A COMPARISON OF THE CIVILIZING PROCESSES …

273

to the utmost to northern Hubei, which used to pertain to the Yangshao culture; and then when the Jujialing culture 屈家岭文化 emerged in Jingzhou of Hubei in about 3000 BCE, it further expanded as far as to the southwest and even the southeast of Henan.17 Elements of the Qujialing culture can be found in most parts of the Central Plains.18 The graves at the Diaolongbei Site 雕龙碑遗址 in Zaoyang 枣阳19 of Hubei and the Qujialing Site in Jingshan 京山20 of Hubei, which both belonged to the Youziling type, contained a large number of funerary objects, including pigs’ lower jawbones 猪下颌骨 or potteries, and exhibited a huge gap between the rich and poor. In fact, the Qujialing culture had seen more than twenty city sites spring up, of which the Shijiahe Site 石家河遗址 was the largest, covering an area of 1.2 million square metres.21 Inside the ancient city, there were different areas designated for different functions, such as the palace area,22 the burial area, the sacrificial area, etc. Therefore, a multi-tiered settlement system in the Jianghan region had been established by then, with the Shijiahe City serving as the highest-level central settlement. Around 2500–1800 BCE, i.e. the late Chalcolithic Age, which was also the Longshan Era 龙山时代, the competition between the Central Plains and the Jianghan region became intense. Ultimately, it was the Central Plains that won a decisive victory. The Longshan Era can be divided into two phases. In the early phase, the Central Plains and the Jianghan region

17 The Qujialing culture was based on the Youziling type of the Daxi culture and formed by absorbing the elements from the Dawenkou culture and the Yangshao culture. See Han Jianye, & Yang Xingai (1996), “Exploration of the origin and formation of the Barbarian Miao group”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 4. 18 Han, Jianye (2002), “The oblique-bellied cup and the Miao tribal cultures”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1. 19 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2006), The Diaolongbei Site in Zaoyang, Beijing: Science Press. 20 The Qujialing Archaeological Team (1992), “The third excavation of the Qujialing Site”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1. 21 Department of Archaeology of Peking University, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Hubei Province, et al. (1993), “A survey report of the Shijiahe Site”, in Southern Ethnology and Archaeology (Vol. V), Chengdu: Sichuan Science Jishu Press, 213–294. 22 Jingzhou Museum of Hubei Province, Department of Archaeology of Peking University & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Hubei Province (2011), The Tanjialing Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

274

J. HAN

were in confrontation with each other. Phase III of the early Wangwan culture which was located in the interior of the Central Plains, boasted both city sites such as the Haojiatai Site 郝家台遗址 in Yancheng 郾城 of Henan, and the Taosi culture further north in the Linfen Basin in Shanxi Province, which even had the Taosi Ancient City with an area of nearly three million square metres.23 This indicates clearly that there was a rapid rebound of strength in the Central Plains. As for the Jianghan region, although the northern boundary of the Shijiahe culture 石家河文 化 remained to the north of southern Henan, its cultural elements permeated north to the Guanzhong and northern Shaanxi region. While many of the former cities were still in operation, religious sacrifices were in full swing, and the cultural patterns remained largely unchanged. In the late Longshan Era, Phase III of the Wangwan culture in the Central Plains, especially the Meishan type 煤山类型 in southern Henan, got greatly increased in its strength, and formed cities or large-sized settlements such as the Wangchenggang Site 王城岗遗址 in Dengfeng 登封,24 and the Wadian Site 瓦店遗址 in Yuzhou 禹州.25 The Meishan type expanded south on a large scale, not only taking the place of the Shijiahe culture in southern Henan, northern and western Hubei, but also leaving a profound impact on the hinterland of the Jianghan region and even transforming the Shijiahe culture into the Xiaojiawuji culture 肖 家屋脊文化. We once turned to the ancient legend of “Yu the Great quelling the unrest of the three Miao tribes” 禹征三苗 to account for such a massive cultural upheaval.26 However, the strong influence of the Central Plains

23 The Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Institute of Archaeology of Shanxi Province (2005), “2002 excavation report of the Taosi City Site in Xianfeng, Shanxi Province”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3; Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Bureau of Cultural Relics of Linfen City (2015), The Taosi City Site in Xiangfan: The 1978–1985 Archaeological Excavation Report, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 24 Institute of Cultural Relics of Henan Province, & Department of Archaeology of the Museum of Chinese History (1989), The Wangchenggang Site and the Yangcheng Cite in Dengfeng, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 205–210. 25 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (2004), The Wadian Site in Yuzhou, Beijing: World Publishing Corporation. 26 Yang, Xingai, & Han, Jianye (1995), “Exploration of ‘Yu the Great quelling the unrest of the three Miao tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. The point of view of this paper has clearly been raised in my Master’s Degree thesis which was completed

15

A COMPARISON OF THE CIVILIZING PROCESSES …

275

on the Jianghan culture did not result in a replacement of the ethnic group by the conquering group. Instead, most people living in the interior of Jianghan region might still belong to the native ethnic group.27 In the same vein, it is untrue to conclude that the Jianghan culture since then had failed to achieve anything significant. The discovery of exquisite jade objects from the Xiaojiawuji culture reflected considerable strength and great vitality of the Jianghan culture. However, these jade objects did not originate in the Jianghan region, but on the whole belonged to the Haidai-Central Plains tradition 海岱-中原传统.28 Seen from this perspective, it is safe to say that the Jianghan cultural tradition had after all declined. Later, when the Central Plains entered the Erlitou-Erligang Era 二 里头-二里岗时代, it regained the supreme status of a cultural centre. Specifically, the culture of the Central Plains which centred around the in 1994 and published in 1997. See Han Jianye (1997), “On the archaeological culture of the Longshan Era in southeastern Henan” (Vol. III), Beijing: Science Press, 68–83. 27 In the collection of papers published in 2006, I wrote in the fifth additional note to my paper “Exploration of ‘Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao tribes’”: “I addressed the issue of ‘Yu’s quelling’ mainly from the perspective of cultural changes. It is beyond my reach to investigate the follow-up issues, such as: ‘how many huaxia (ethnic Chinese) people moved to the Jianghan region, how many of the ethnic Miao people stayed in their homeland, and how many of them migrated to other places, and whether there was inter-racial marriage between members of the huaxia group and ethnic Miao tribes’, an issue which perhaps could only be answered with the help of technical means such as bone identification and DNA analysis”. See Han Jianye & Yang Xingai (2006), The Age of the Five Emperors: Archaeological Investigation of the System of Ancient History Centred on the Huaxia Ethnic Group, Beijing: Xueyuan Press, 16. 28 In the above collection (i.e. Note 27), I added a Note 4 which writes: “The small jade objects of the late Longshan Era found in the graves of sites such as the Shijiahe Site in Tianmen of Hubei, the Liuhe Site in Zhongxiang of Hubei, the Sunjiagang Site in Lixian of Hunan, and the Zaolingang Site in Jingzhou of Hubei, have no connection with either the Shijiahe culture or the much earlier Qujialing culture. Instead, they show similarity with the jade objects of Longshan culture in the Central Plains. For example, the eagle-shaped hairpin which was similar in shape, were found not only in the Xiaojiawuji Site, the Sunjiagang Site and the Zaolingang Site, but also at the Wadian Site in Yuzhou of Henan and even in northern Shaanxi. Moreover, the beast-faced crown-shaped ornament which was also similar, were found in the Xiaojiawuji Site and Liuhe Site as well as at the Zhufeng Site in Linqu of Shandong Province and in the big graves of Taosi Site. Therefore, not only did the Huaxia Culture of the Central Plains moved southward, the Dongyi Culture also penetrated into the Central Plains before and after Yu’s conquest of the three Miao tribes”. See Han Jianye & Yang Xingai (2006), The Age of the Five Emperors: Archaeological Investigation of the System of Ancient History Centered on the Huaxia Ethnic Group, Beijing: Xueyuan Press, 16.

276

J. HAN

Erlitou Site and the Shang Capital Site in Zhengzhou, became exceedingly powerful and expanded its influence to most parts of China. In contrast, the Jianghan region, which had been at a low ebb up to the Erligang period, regional central settlements, had formed some central settlements such as the Panlongcheng Site 盘龙城遗址 in Huangpi 黄陂 in Wuhan of Hubei Province, under the direct influence of the Central Plains.

15.2 The Central Plains Pattern and the Eastern Pattern Around the Chalcolithic Age, although the Central Plains and the Jianghan region were both experiencing roughly the same noticeable trend of social change, they were forming two different modes of societal development or patterns of civilizational evolution with certain regional characteristics, namely “the Central Plains Pattern” 中原模式 and “the Eastern Pattern” 东方模式.29 However, the Jianghan pattern exhibited differences from the “Eastern Pattern” to which the Liangzhu and Hongshan 红山文化 cultures and itself all belonged to,30 and can be seen a sub-type of “the Eastern Pattern”, thus called “the Jianghan Sub-Pattern” 江汉亚模式. The social changes which were taking place in a widespread manner in both the Central Plains and the Jianghan region around the Chalcolithic Age manifested themselves mainly in four respects. Firstly, institutions or organizations in the form of the patriarchal jiating family 家庭 and jiazu clan 家族 became increasingly prominent. In the cemeteries of the Xipo Site in Lingbao of Henan and the Huachenggang Site 划城岗遗址 in Anxiang 安乡31 of Hunan, for example, graves of different classes were distributed in different burial

29 Han, Jianye (2003), “The general trend and different modes of societal development in the Chalcolithic Age”, in Ancient Civilizations (Vol. II), 84–96. 30 Li, Boqian (2009), “Two patterns of development of ancient Chinese civilization: Thoughts upon watching the jade objects excavated from the large graves of the Hongshan, Liangzhu and Yangshao cultures”, Cultural Relics, 3. 31 Museum of Hunan Province (1983), “The Huachenggang Neolithic Site in Anxiang County”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 4; Zhang, Chi (2003), Study on the Prehistoric Settlements in the Middle and Lower Reaches of the Yangtze River, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 58–62.

15

A COMPARISON OF THE CIVILIZING PROCESSES …

277

areas. At the Diaolongbei Site in Zaoyang32 of Hubei, the Baligang Site 八里岗遗址 in Dengzhou 邓州33 of Henan, Dahecun Site 大河村遗址 in Zhengzhou34 of Henan, etc., the houses were distributed in groups and rows and formed complete sets. The existence of these burials and houses probably indicate a connection with the prominence of the patriarchal jiating family and jiazu clan in the Central Plains and the Jianghan region.35 Secondly, the division of labour in society became increasingly clear. Both the exquisite black potteries, painted potteries, jade objects and bronze objects, etc. of Phase III of the Wangwan culture, the Taosi culture and other cultures in the Longshan Era in the Central Plains, and the elegant jade and stone objects of during the late Daxi culture and the Shijiahe culture in the Jianghan region, all indicate that their appearance had some relation with the existence of specialized craftsmen in these fields. What is different is that in the Central Plains, the raw materials for the production of these high-profile objects and utensils might primarily come from the locality and involved chiefly the control and distribution of the relevant raw materials and products, whereas in the interior of the Jianghan region, since the raw materials for jade objects were unavailable, it would be reasonable to assume some long-distance trade with places like Xiajiang County 峡江 of Jiangxi Province, etc.36

32 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2006), The Diaolongbei Site in Zaoyang, Beijing: Science Press. 33 Zhang, Chi (2003), Study on the Prehistoric Settlements in the Middle and Lower Reaches of the Yangtze River, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 32–39. 34 Yan, Wenming (1989), “A study on the morphology of houses and settlements of the Yangshao Culture”, in Studies of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 180– 242; Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Zhengzhou (2005), The Dahecun Site in Zhengzhou, Beijing: Science Press. 35 Based on the analysis of the graves and settlements of the Daxi culture in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, Zhao Hui proposed the following four formulae of correspondence: 1. a group of graves = a complete set of rooms = a core jiating family; 2. a cluster of graves = a house = an extended jiating family; 3. a burial area = a row of houses = a big jiazu clan; 4. a cemetery = a settlement = a shizu clan society. See Zhao Hui (2000), “Neolithic graves in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River”, in Archaeological Studies (Vol. IV), Beijing: Science Press, 23–54. 36 Yan, Wenming (1989), “An investigation of the settlement patterns in the Neolithic China”, in Collection of Papers in Celebration of Prof. Su Bingqi’s 55 Years of Archaeological Research, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 24–37; Zhang, Chi (2000), “The stoneware and

278

J. HAN

Thirdly, the society became increasingly complex, with many small states emerging and coexisting with each other. Upon entering the Chalcolithic Age, the settlements broke up into central settlements, and the society became increasingly complex. Especially when it came to the Longshan Era, both the Central Plains and the Jianghan region were dotted with walled cities, a situation significantly different from the sole dominance of the Liangzhu Ancient City in the Liangzhu culture. Although there was, in the Taosi culture of the Central Plains, the large city of Taosi, this town might not have substantial capacity to control and command the numerous walled city settlements of Phase III of the Wangwan culture, Phase II of the Hougang culture in Phase II and Zaolvtai culture 造律台文化, etc. What it could have acquired from them might be no more than a recognition of it as a centre. Although the Shijiahe Ancient City was the largest in the Shijiahe culture of the Jianghan region, it was surrounded by various cities of different sizes, indicating that it did not have absolute power over the whole settlement. Therefore, this era was in general a period of guguo or “ancient states” coexisting with each other.37 Fourthly, conflicts intensified and wars broke out frequently. The increase in walled cities 城垣, jade and stone yue battle-axes 玉石钺, arrowheads 箭镞 and mass burial pits 乱葬坑 might all be attributed to frequent conflicts and wars among groups of people. The difference in the pattern of civilizational development between the Central Plains and the Jianghan region, or the difference between the Central Plains Pattern and the Jianghan Sub-Pattern of the Eastern Pattern, finds its most concentrated expression in three respects. Firstly, status was valued over wealth in the Central Plains while both status and wealth were valued in the Jianghan region. For example, whereas in the Central Plains the large-sized graves in the Xipo Cemetery contained exquisite funerary objects such as jade yue battle-axes, pairs of big-mouthed gang jars, gui-shaped objects 簋形器 and other potteries, the amount of these objects was usually less than a dozen in

jade-ware industries in the Daxi, the North Yinyangying and the Xuejiagang sites”, in Archaeological Studies (Vol. IV), Beijing: Science Press, 55–76. 37 Su, Bingqi (1994), “Welcoming the new age of Chinese archaeology”, in The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, and the Chinese: In Search of Our Roots through Archaeology, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 236–251; Yan, Wenming (1997), “The origin and development of the civilization in the Yellow River valley”, Huaxia Archaeology, 1.

15

A COMPARISON OF THE CIVILIZING PROCESSES …

279

one burial, and most of them looked crude in form and were obviously just used for funerary purpose. Although both the large-sized burials and their funerary articles displayed the exalted status of the buried, both the number and crude nature of the burial objects implied certain features of the society, such as a moderate attitude to life and death, more attention to status than wealth, a ritual-oriented and orderly society, and a simple lifestyle adhering to the golden mean.38 In contrast, the rich burials at the sites of the Jianghan region, such as the Diaolongbei Site, the Qujialing Site and the Xiaojiawuji Site, etc., were filled with potteries and sacrificed pigs in their small pits, which showcased a feature of the society whereby extravagance and equal emphasis on both status and wealth were prevalent. Secondly, although ancestral veneration was observed in both the Central Plains and the Jianghan region, excessive worship of spirits and deities was more popular in the Jianghan region. In both regions, not only were the graves basically vertical pits, implying permanent underground dwellings for the forebears of the family. Even the customs of having the head position of the buried in the same cemetery generally pointing roughly to the same direction and having members of the same jiazu clan buried together were both practised. These practices reflected both a respect for the ancestors and an emphasis on social order. However, at the Shijiahe Site group in the Jianghan region, including the Dengjiawan Site 邓家湾遗址, the Xiaojiawuji Site 肖家屋脊遗址 and Yinxintai Site 印 信台遗址,39 abundant sacrificial remains in the phase of the QujialingShijiahe culture were found, such as tens of thousands of red pottery bei cups 红陶杯, red pottery animals and figurines, taozun nesting vats 套尊, daoli zun inverted vats 倒立尊, kouwan inverted bowls 扣碗 and “sacrificial platforms” 祭坛, etc. The similar situation was found at the Qujialing Site. 38 Han, Jianye (2014), “The Xipo Cemetery and ‘the Central Plains Pattern’”, The Yangshao and Her Times: Proceedings of the International Symposium on the 90th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 153–164. 39 Jingzhou Museum of Hubei Province, Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Hubei Province, & Department of Archaeology of Peking University (1999), The Xiaojiawuji Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Hubei Province, Department of Archaeology of Peking University, & Jingzhou Museum of Hubei Province (2003), The Dengjiawan Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Hubei Province (2016), “Major achievements in the 2015 excavation of the Shijiahe Site”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1.

280

J. HAN

Thirdly, the Central Plains were more militarily developed than the Jianghan region. The city walls in the Central Plains were generally built through banzhu 版筑, i.e. with earth pressed solidly between two wooden boards; therefore, and the walls were more regular, steeper and thus more effective for defence purposes than the city walls in the Jianghan region, which were mostly piled-up walls. In both regions, there were jade and stone yue battle-axes, but the jiancu arrowhead 箭簇, as a long-range weapon, was more advanced in the Central Plains. In Phase III of the Wangwan culture, “the stone arrowheads as weapons were not only abundant and well-polished, but also diverse in shape, ranging from three-, four-, six-edged, to cone-, and willow-leaf-shaped, etc. In contrast, in the Shijiahe culture of the Jianghan region, […] arrowheads were primarily an outdated wide and flat willow-leaf-shaped version inherited from the Qujialing culture, and were not only small in number and shape, but also lacked adequate grinding and polishing”.40

15.3

“Life Out of Sorrow and Calamity, Death from Comfort and Joy”

Life in the Central Plains had been more difficult, and its culture had experienced more twists and turns. As a result, this region could have, for a long time, maintained an awareness of misery and hardship and striven for continuous self-renewal. By contrast, the Jianghan region had long enjoyed an affluent and favourable environment, and its culture had developed in a rather steady manner. As a result, this region had ineluctably indulged itself in comfort, without much thought about forging ahead. It might be that here lies the reason for the prosperity of the former and the decline of the latter, just as the proverb goes: “out of sorrow and calamity life is born, while from comfort and joy comes death”.41 40 Yang Xingai, & Han, Jianye (1995), “Exploration of ‘Yu the Great quelling the unrest of the three Miao tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 41 Mencius 6B: 15: “People commonly err, but later they are able to reform; their minds are troubled and their thoughts perplexed, but then they become capable of acting. This becomes evident in their expressions, emerges in their voices, and, finally, they understand. Thus, in the absence of law-abiding families and worthy counselors within and hostile states and external challenges, a state will often perish. From this we may know that out of sorrow and calamity life is born, while from comfort and joy comes death”. See De Bary, T. & I. Bloom (eds.) (1999): Sources of Chinese Tradition (Vol. I), New York: Columbia University Press, 155.

15

A COMPARISON OF THE CIVILIZING PROCESSES …

281

During the Longshan Era, the customarily called wugu “five grains” 五谷, including rice 稻, millet 黍, broomcorn millet 稷, wheat 麦 and beans 菽, had already existed in the Central Plains,42 whereas rice had been the main crop in the Jianghan region. Some scholars argued that because Jianghan area depended monotonously on rice, in the cold and dry period around 2000 BCE, the grain supply in this area was not as stable as that in the Central Plains in the north, and had resulted in the decline of the Jianghan region. The fact of the situation in the Central Plains was that, in spite of the bless of the “five grains”, the millet and broomcorn millet were the dominant grains since the newly introduced wheat only accounted for a small proportion of the grain production. In the south, in the Jianghan Plain area, rice was the staple food crop, with a small proportion of millet production as well.43 In the areas of northern Hubei and southern Henan which had long belonged to the Jianghan tradition in terms of agriculture, there had been a more obvious practice for a mix of rice and millet planting. Besides, the Jianghan region was rich in fish and aquatic produce. Therefore, the agricultural production had been quite varied in both the Central Plains and the Jianghan region. On the other hand, if climate change had caused an agricultural crisis in the Jianghan region, the crisis would have endangered the part of the Central Plains closely north of the Jianghan region. From this counterargument it can be seen that to account for the decline of the culture of the Jianghan region in terms of its monotonous reliance on rice production is indefensible. In fact, the opposite might be true: the reliance on the wugu zaliang, i.e. “five grains and various cereals”, in the Central Plains had not only generally made life harder, but also caused the threat of starvation and death when the climate worsened, while the “land of fish and rice” in the Jianghan region had provided a long-term stable economy and a better life. Due to its special geographical location and sensitive climate conditions, the culture of the Central Plains was destined to experience many setbacks during the process of its development. At the time of prosperity, its power radiated in all directions, while at the time of adversity, it was besieged on all sides by rivals. “When the climate became dry and cold, 42 Zhao Zhijun (2005), “Archaeobotany and its recent advances”, Cultural Relics, 7. 43 Deng, Zhenhua, Liu, Hui, & Meng, Huaping (2013), “An analysis of plant remains

excavated at the Sanfangwan and Tanjialing sites of the Shijiahe Ancient City in Tianmen, Hubei Province”, Archaeology, 1.

282

J. HAN

the northern culture would move southward on a large scale to seek opportunity for survival, and the eastern and southern cultures would expand rapidly with an attempt to escape from the miseries caused by swamps and floods. Under such conditions, the farming conditions in the Central Plains would become less advantageous than before, and its internal conflicts would intensify while its external pressure increase, with an adverse effect on the strength of the culture. When the climate became warm and wet, the northern culture would become content with the things as they had been or even move back northward, while the eastern and southern cultures would suffer from the swamps and floods and become affected. At this time, the farming conditions in the Central Plains would improve conspicuously, its internal conflicts would be reduced, and its culture would even extend outside with visibly enhanced strength”.44 In contrast, the Jianghan region, now with a stabilizing climate and a steady development, would march northward to the Central Plains. The culture of the Central Plains, after a long time of tempering and accumulation, had become apt to develop such features as inclusiveness, resourcefulness, flexibility, endurance, mindfulness of the potential danger and unremitting self-improvement, while the Jianghan culture had tended to foster a style of relative closedness, self-complacency and pleasure-indulgence. The above-discussed differences between the culture of the Central Plains and that of the Jianghan region anticipated the rise of the former and the decline of the latter.45 Therefore, it made every sense when at around 2000 BCE, the culture of Jianghan region was defeated by the incoming northern culture which moved southward with a domino effect as a result of the arrival of a cold-and-dry climate in the Central Plains. About 2000 years later, “Qin, a small and remote state” in northern China succeeded in conquering the state of Chu in the southern China, which was an event comparable to that of “Yu the Great quelling the unrest of the three Miao tribes”. 44 Han, Jianye (2004), “The historical position of Central Plain cultures in Neolithic China”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1. 45 Zhao Hui also attributes the decline of Liangzhu culture mainly to its customs of

worshipping ghosts and gods, and to extravagance and waste. See Zhao Hui (1999), “Some characteristics of Liangzhu culture: On one cause for the decline of Chinese prehistoric civilization”, in Research on Liangzhu Culture: Collection of Papers at the International Symposium Commemorating the 60th Anniversary of the Discovery of Liangzhu Culture, Beijing: Science Press, 104–120.

15

A COMPARISON OF THE CIVILIZING PROCESSES …

283

(This part was originally published in Issue 6 of Jianghan Archaeology in 2016.)

CHAPTER 16

The Central Plains and the Northern Region in the Longshan Era: A Comparison of Their Civilizing Processes

Here in this part, “the Central Plains” is used to refer to districts such as central and western Henan Province, northern Henan Province and southern Hebei Province, southern Shanxi Province and eastern Guanzhong (i.e. central Shaanxi Province); and “the northern region” refers to the areas north of the Central Plains, including the central and southern Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, northern Shaanxi, northern Shanxi and northwestern Hebei Provinces.1 Generally speaking, the northern region is topographically higher and its climate is cold and dry, while the Central Plain is topographically lower and its climate warm and wet. However, although the natural environment in the northern region is slightly different from that in the Central Plains, there is no line of demarcation between the two regions, but instead a gradual transition. In the Longshan Era, i.e. about 2500 to 1800 BCE,2 the culture of the Yellow River Basin clashed with that of the Yangtze River Basin, and a new cultural pattern was formed, resulting in a number of states and leading to a restructuring of the cultural landscape, the rise of numerous

1 Su, Bingqi (1994), “On the archaeology of the ‘Shanxi culture’”, in The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, and Chinese: In Search of the Roots through Archaeology, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 22–30. 2 Yan, Wenming (1981), “The Longshan culture and the Longshan Era”, Cultural Relics, 6.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_16

285

286

J. HAN

small states, and the seeding and germination of Chinese civilization.3 In such a turbulent age, the Central Plains and the northern region were at loggerheads with each other, which provoked them to change and adjust to the new situation. This is what constituted the crux of the making of early Chinese civilization. What follows will be a brief comparison of the civilizing process in the Central Plains and the northern region in the Longshan Era from the perspectives of developmental achievement, patterns of civilization and motives behind these adjustments.

16.1

Achievements of Development

In what follows, the term “the culture of the Central Plains” 中原文化 in the Longshan Era includes Phase III of the Wangwan culture 王湾文 化 in central and western Henan, Phase II of the Hougang culture后岗 文化in northern Henan and southern Hebei, the Taosi culture 陶寺文 化 and the late Taosi culture 陶寺晚期文化 in southwestern Shanxi, and Phase II of the Keshengzhuang culture 客省庄文化 in the Guanzhong District关中地区, etc. In terms of the northern culture in the Longshan Era, there was only the Laohushan culture老虎山文化. In fact, all these cultures belonged to the Longshan culture in the Central Plains in its broad sense.4 The emerging cultures in the Central Plains in the Longshan Era were all based on the Yangshao culture 仰韶文化, being influenced by the Longshan culture in the Haidai region 海岱地区 in Tai’an City of Shandong. They can be arranged in sequence both in terms of the intensity (from the strongest to the least) and in terms of distance (from the nearest to the farthest), as Phase II of the Hougang culture, Phase III of the Wangwan culture, the Taosi culture and Phase II of the Keshengzhuang culture. What merits attention as well, is that the Shijiahe culture 石家 河文化 from the Jianghan region also contributed to the initial development of Phase II of the Wangwan culture. It is worth noting that the formation of the Taosi culture, especially the emergence of the huge Taosi 3 Han, Jianye (2015), The Early China: The Formation and Development of the Early Chinese Cultural Circle, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press. 4 Yan, Wenming (1989), “On the origin of the Yangshao culture and the stages of its development”, in Studies of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 122–165; Han, Jianye (2003), A Study of the Neolithic Culture in Northern China, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 127.

16

THE CENTRAL PLAINS AND THE NORTHERN REGION …

287

Ancient City, the large-sized burials, as well as the jade objects, and tuogu drums 鼍鼓, should not only be indebted to the Dawenkou culture 大汶 口文化 and the Liangzhu culture 良渚5 in particular, but also implied the possibility of people migrating from the eastern part of the country.6 The predecessor of the Laohushan culture was also the Yangshao culture. Since the potteries typical of the Laohushan culture were the pottery li tripods 陶鬲 originating from jia vessels 斝 in southern Shanxi, without any trace of influence from the Longshan culture in the Haidai region, the Laohushan culture might be seen as a “purer” descendant of the Yangshao culture. In terms of regional difference, the Laoshushan culture can be further divided into the Laohushan type of the Daihai region, the Yongxingdian-Baicaota type 永兴店-白草塔类型 of the Ordos region of Inner Mongolia, the Shimao type 石峁类型 of northern Shaanxi, the Youyao type 游邀类型 of central and northern Shanxi and the Shaizilingluo type 筛子绫罗 in northwestern Hebei, etc. However, in the narrow and eventual sense of the word, what set the Laohushan culture apart from the Longshan culture in the Central Plains, are the li tripod with two tiny handles 双鋬鬲 as the representative of the pottery groups, and the settlement groups with stone cities as their key feature. It thus follows that besides cultural differences, there should have been frequent conflicts between people from these two cultures. The ancient stone city of the Shimao Site 石峁遗址,7 which has attracted huge attention, might belong to the Laohushan culture, but the large number of jade objects excavated here do not betoken the northern tradition at all, but indicate an influence from the Taosi culture,8 pointing in essence to the eastern region of China. That is to say that without the intervention 5 Han, Jianye (2001). “The Tangtao Clan’s conquering of the West Xia and Houji the

Ancestor of Zhou Tribes exiling Danzhu the son of Emperor Yao”, Journal of Peking University (Humanities and Social Sciences), 3. 6 Han, Jianye (2010), The Liangzhu, Taosi and Erlitou sites: Route of evolution of the early Chinese civilization, Archaeology, 11. 7 Institute of Archaeology of Shaanxi Province, et al. (2013), “The Shimao Site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology, 7. 8 Many jade objects were found at the Taosi Site in Xiangfen, the Xiajin Site in Linfen,

and even in the Qingliangsi Cemetery (which belonged to Phase II of the Late Miaodigou type-Sanliqiao type) in Ruicheng of Shanxi Province along the Yellow River. Apparently, under the influence of the eastern region, special centres for jade production had been founded in southern Shanxi. See Institute of Archaeology of Shanxi Province, et al. (2016), The Prehistoric Cemetery in the Qingliangsi Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

288

J. HAN

of the cultures from the Central Plains and the eastern region, such an advanced, large-scale settlement like the Shimao Site was unimaginable to have been erected independently in the locality of northern China. The above-mentioned cultures of the Longshan Era in the Central Plains and the northern region can be divided into two periods,9 with the year of 2200 BCE as a dividing line, and the most drastic change between the first and the second periods took place in the Linfen Basin10 of southeastern Shanxi Province. Here, there used to be only jia vessels and no li, while a large number of pottery li tripods with two tiny handles appeared in the late Longshan Era. This change thus transferred the Taosi culture into the late Taosi culture. I once attributed this drastic change to the vigorous southward movement of the Laohushan culture, which might have resulted in conflicts and wars between the northern region and the southwestern part of Shanxi.11 This observation was based on the excavated potteries available, but subsequent archaeological evidence such as the ruins of destroyed large cities, violent massacres and the rampantly ruined burials findings justified it.12 The ancient cities of Shimao and Taosi were both large-sized settlements covering three to four million metres2 , and they might have coexisted with each other for a short period of time. However, against the general background, whereby the Shimao Ancient City rose while the Taosi City fell, there must have been some reason for this contrast, i.e. a southern city versus a northern city, a rise versus a fall. Pits of human heads 人头坑 were found in the Shimao Site, and graves showing people buried alive as sacrifice were found in the Qingliangsi Site 清凉寺遗址. Whereas there is not enough evidence to

9 Han, Jianye & Yang, Xingai (1997), “A study on Phase III of the Wangwan Culture”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1. 10 Han, Jianye (2006), “Phase II of the Miaodigou Site in western Henan and southwestern Shanxi: The periodisation and pedigree of Longshan Culture”, Acta Archaeological Sinica, 2. 11 I used to designate the culture centred in the Linfen Basin in the early and late Longshan Era respectively as “the Taosi Type” and “the late Taosi Type”. Later I changed them into “the Taosi culture” and “the late Taosi culture”. See Han Jianye (2001), “The Tangtao Clan’s conquering of the West Xia and Houji the Ancestor of Zhou Tribes exiling Danzhu the son of Emperor Yao”, Journal of Peking University (Humanities and Social Sciences), 3. 12 Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Institute of Archaeology of Shanxi Province, et al. (2005), “2002 excavation report of the Taosi City Site in Xianfeng, Shanxi Province”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3.

16

THE CENTRAL PLAINS AND THE NORTHERN REGION …

289

prove the possibility of a mutual slaughter between the two groups, the pits and graves in the two sites verify previous claims about the intense relation between them. The southward movement of the Laohushan culture did not stop when it reached southwestern Shanxi. The pottery li tripods, microlith arrowheads 细石器镞 and divination bones卜骨 also penetrated into Phase II of the Hougang culture in southern Hebei and northern Henan Provinces, and Phase III of the Wangwan culture in central Henan,13 which should have impinged on the relevant areas. Later on, the Wangwan culture expanded to southern Henan and the Jianghan region in a drastic manner, which might be seen as a repercussion of the impact from the northern region. It seems that even though the northern culture originated from the culture of the Central Plains, it gradually alienated from it and clashed with it, so much as to eventually “conquering” it and assuming a dominant position for a period time.

16.2

Modes of Civilization

The northern region entered the Chalcolithic Age at around 3500 BCE. Since then, especially during the Laohushan culture of the Longshan Era, stone cities cropped up in increasing numbers, wars broke out frequently and patriarchal families became predominant. While all of this indicated that social change was going on in the northern region, as was the case in the eastern region, neither a polarization between the rich and the poor nor a social division of labour was clearly noticeable: no funerary objects were found in the great majority of the burials in the northern region in this period, and most of the stone cities were merely common stoneencircled settlements to guard against invaders.14 I have simplistically

13 Han, Jianye (2007), “The expansion and influence of the Laohushan culture”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 1. 14 I once advocated that the belt-like distribution of the stone towns in northern China around the time of the Longshan Era might have something to do with the resistance against the encroachment by the hunter-gatherers in the further north region. Recent excavations of the stone statues and copper knives (mould) at the Shimao Site suggest that the Shimao residents might have had connections with the groups on the Eurasian grassland in the further north region. Specifically, the emergence of the stone cities further justifies beyond doubt the possibility of their purpose as a measure of resistance against the northern groups. See Han Jianye (2008), “On the early stone cities belt in northern China as the prototype of the Great Wall”, Huaxia Archaeology, 1; Guo, Wu (2013), “The

290

J. HAN

categorized this long-term pattern of social development and civilizing process in northern China as “the Northern Pattern”, so as to distinguish it from “the Eastern Pattern” in eastern China and “the Central Plain Pattern” in the Central Plains region.15 However, recent excavations of large-sized stone-city settlements such as the Shimao Site in Shenmu City of Shaanxi Province has revealed a more complex picture of the civilizing process in the northern region. Covering an area of more than four million metres, the ancient city of Shimao presented a grand imperial city platform, magnificent city gates and pile-built walls with extradentary workmanship. These, together with the exquisite jade and bronze objects excavated, demonstrated a strong capacity for manpower mobilization, a certain degree of labour division and a high level of social sophistication, indicating that such a society had stepped into an initial civilization. Therefore, the Shimao settlement should have been the centre of the Shimao type at least in northern Shaanxi,16 and had most probably left some impact over the other types of the Laohushan culture. While this observation does not seem to fit nicely with the features of “the Northern Pattern”, a careful examination of the large number of jade objects excavated—a phenomenon very peculiar to the northern culture as well—might attribute this observation to the influence from the eastern region culture. It goes without saying that the scale of the huge Shimao Ancient City itself might also be a manifestation of the influence of the eastern city-building ideas. The great capacity for manpower mobilization which underpinned the construction of grand buildings of the Shimao City might primarily reflect the collectivism of people in the northern region. The discovery of several burial pits with young women’s heads could reveal the brutal nature in

communication between northern China and the Eurasian steppe during the Longshan Era from the perspective of the stone sculptures of the Shimao Site”, Newspaper of China’s Cultural Relics, 02 August, page 06. 15 Han, (2003), A Study of the Neolithic Culture in Northern China, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Han, Jianye (2003), “The general trend and different patterns of societal development in China in the Chalcolithic Age”, Ancient Civilizations, II: 84–96. 16 The central position of the Shimao settlement has long been acknowledged, but the

huge size of the site is beyond expectation. I once proposed that, “Covering an area of 900,000 square metres2 , with complete defence facilities and precious jade objects, the settlement could most probably have been the centre of the super settlement groups in northern Shaanxi.” See Han Jianye (2003), A Study of the Neolithic Culture in Northern China, Beijing: Wenwu Press: 254.

16

THE CENTRAL PLAINS AND THE NORTHERN REGION …

291

which prisoners of war were treated at the time, and cannot be seen as evidence of a hierarchy within the society itself. In fact, the available excavations of houses, graves, etc. have failed to show any obvious social stratification. It can thus be concluded that the Shimao Stone City had maintained the essential quality of “the Northern Pattern” but only exhibited some signs of influence in the Central Plains and the eastern region. In the Central Plains, the process of social sophistication and civilization commenced in the earlier Miaodigou Era 庙底沟时代,17 and accelerated significantly in the Chalcolithic Age.18 The large graves in the Xipo Cemetery as discussed in Chapter 12 had shown its own features, i.e. a moderate attitude to life and death, more attention to status than wealth, a ritual-oriented and orderly society and a simple lifestyle that adhered to the golden mean. These features exhibited “the Central Plains Pattern” as one which was different from but lay halfway between “the Eastern Pattern” and “the Western Pattern”.19 As for the cemeteries in the Longshan Era, they were mostly jiazu clan cemeteries with a small number of burials, which basically continued the burial style of the Central Plains as before. The settlements of this era displayed not only a variety of sizes, but also the emergence of large central settlements or city sites, such as the Taosi City, Wangchenggang City, the Wadian City and the Xinzhai City, etc., thus forming quite a number of centres. With regard to the edifices in this era, there appeared a differentiation between large palace-like buildings and ordinary houses. This tells us that the Central Plains was at that time experiencing a certain degree

17 Su Bingqi pointed out that 6000 BCE was “a turning point from the clan society to the state society”. See Su Bingqi (1994), “Welcoming the new age in Chinese archaeology”, The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, and the Chinese: In Search of the Roots through Archaeology, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 238. See also Han Jianye (2012), “The Miaodigou Era and ‘the Early China’”, Archaeology, 3. 18 Yan, Wenming (1989), “An investigation of the settlement patterns in the Neolithic China, Collection of Papers in Celebration of Su Binqi’s 55 Years of Archaeological Research, Beijing: Wenwu Pres, 24–37. 19 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Institute of

Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (2010), The Xipo Cemetery in Lingbao County, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Han, Jiaye (2014), “The Xipo Cemetery and ‘the Central Plains Mode’”, The Yangshao Culture and Her Times: Proceedings of the International Symposium on the 90th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 153–164.

292

J. HAN

of polarization between the rich and the poor and a growing class stratification. As far as the production of jade articles, sophisticated potteries, bronze objects, etc. are concerned, a certain level of specialization in craftsmanship could be observed. In terms of weaponry, apart from yue battleaxes, spears were introduced, and stone arrowheads became refined and appeared in large quantity and diverse form, indicating not only the frequency of warfare, but also the unprecedented increase in the specialization and brutality of wars. These findings once again proved that the Central Plains in the Longshan Era had been following the Central Plains Pattern in the course of its development, despite the fact that it had entered an initial stage of civilization. One slight exception is perhaps the burials in the Taosi Ancient City in Xiangfan and the Qingliangsi Cemetery in Ruicheng, both in southern Shanxi Province. Similar to the Shimao Site, the Taosi Ancient City covered an area of nearly three million metres. In both the Taosi and Qingliangsi Sites, a striking difference was found not only between the big graves and small ones. Only the big graves contained a large number of funerary objects, such as jade objects. This difference might have been the result of the contact of “the Central Plains Pattern” in this area with “the Eastern Pattern”. As for the large number of people buried alive as sacrifice in the Qingliangsi Cemetery, a more likely explanation might lie in the fact that the Qingliangsi Site was situated on a strategically important trade route where wars had broken out frequently. The phenomenon of human sacrifice could be compared to the pits of human heads in the Shimao Site, and the cups made from human skulls and foundation sacrifice in cultures such as Phase II of the Hougang culture and Phase III of the Wangwan culture.

16.3

Motives for Development

As a subculture of the Central Plains cultures, the northern culture had remained basically in a subordinate position during the long period from 5000 to 3000 BCE, and developed mainly under the push and influence of the Central Plains cultures. However, after 2200 BCE, the northern culture rapidly gained power and produced a strong imprint on the Central Plains cultures. The fundamental reason should be sought in the gradual evolution of the natural environment. Compared with the Central Plains, the northern region had colder and drier winters, which restricted the development of agriculture and

16

THE CENTRAL PLAINS AND THE NORTHERN REGION …

293

made hunting-gathering and animal husbandry significantly more indispensable than it was in the Central Plains. The northern region was also sensitive to weather conditions, since the impact of weather change on animal and plant resources and the economy based on these resources was more significant than it was in the Central Plains. These two factors made the northern region less prone to conspicuous gap between the rich and the poor, to a more pronounced division of labour, and to an increased stratification in status. Instead, they mitigated differences and shaped the people in the northern region with such collective features as social mobility, indomitable perseverance and intrepid gallantry. The Central Plains, in contrast, had been situated at the heart of the early China, experienced a moderate annual temperature and precipitation, as well as a moderate susceptibility to climate change. These “mild” factors had gradually fostered in the Central Plains the following characteristics: There was some difference in social status, but without emphasis on the gap between the rich and the poor; the society was in perfect order, though without resorting to cruel punishment; productivity was gradually increasing, but without pursuit of sumptuous extravagance; people were pragmatic about everyday life, and did not indulge in religion on a large scale; there was reliance on consanguinity, but without negligence of the wider community; there was an emphasis on the pursuit of progress with steadiness; however with neither haste nor tardiness. With these features, the Central Plains ultimately evolved into a mature civilized society as represented by the Erlitou culture—the late Xia Dynasty.20

Having gone through all kinds of difficulties and hardships, the Central Plains cultures absorbed the best aspects from other cultures, and became more resilient. This resilience, however, when compared with that of the northern culture, especially with the pressure of survival when confronted with the extreme weather conditions, appeared more at ease with itself. It is therefore understandable to see how the northern culture moved southward during the transition from the early to the late Longshan Era, and exerted a strong influence on the Central Plains cultures at one fell swoop. In the same period, the nomadic cultures on the Eurasian steppe were moving southward, invading the southern agricultural cultures and

20 Han, Jianye (2003), “The general trend and different patterns of societal development in China in the Chalcolithic Age”, Ancient Civilizations, II: 84–96.

294

J. HAN

leaving their stamp on them. The impact of this southward movement was most drastic on the Linfen Basin, which might probably be due to the fact that the Linfen Basin was closer to the regions of “the Eastern Pattern”. In explaining “the triumph” of the Central Plains over the Jianghan region in the transition from the early and to the late Longshan Era, I used a quote from the Mencius, i.e. “…out of sorrow and calamity life is born, while from comfort and joy comes death”. There seems to be some element of truth if the same quote was to be applied to account for the temporary “triumph” of the northern region over the Central Plains.21 While the northern region could get the upper hand temporarily, given its peripheral geographical position and limited cultural sediment, it had failed to take the lead in the development of the Chinese culture in the long run. Instead, it was gradually absorbed into the Central Plains cultures as elements. The Central Plains, on the other hand, was situated “at the centre of the heaven” and enjoyed the favourable geographical advantage enabling it to influence the whole country in times of prosperity, and take the best of other cultures on board in times of adversity. It is here that lay the secret of emergence and development of the central position of the Central Plains in the early China.22 (This part was originally published in No. 4 of The Central Plains Culture Research in 2017.)

21 Han, Jianye (2016), A comparative study on the civilizing processes in the Central Plains and the Jianghan Region, Jianghan Archaeology, 6. 22 Han, Jiany (2004), “Historical position of the Central Plains cultures in the Neolithic China”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1.

CHAPTER 17

The Central Plains and the Haidai Region in the Longshan Era: A Comparison of Their Civilizing Processes

“The Central Plains” has both a broad and narrow sense. In the broad sense, it includes the Haidai region 海岱地区, i.e. the area from Tai’an of Shandong to the Bohai Sea, and in the narrow sense, it is roughly equivalent to what Su Bingqi 苏秉琦 calls “the area which stretched over the three provinces of Shaanxi, Henan, and Shanxi”.1 In this part of the discussion, “the Central Plains” is used to refer to the area ranging from central, western and northern Henan, to southern Hebei, and then to southern Shanxi, and to the east of the Guanzhong region 关中地区 (i.e. central Shaanxi). “The Haidai region”, according to Su Bingqi, includes “Shandong and part of its neighbouring provinces” with the Taishan Mountain 泰山 at the centre.2 Located in the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River, the Central Plains and the Haidai region boasted the highest levels of cultural continuity in China, have served as the “key centres” of the early Chinese cultural circle and have played a vital role in

1 Su, Bingqi (1984), “On the regional genealogy and cultural types of archaeological cultures”, in Selected Works of Su Bingqi on Archaeological Studies, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 225–237. 2 Ibid., 225–237.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_17

295

296

J. HAN

the process of the early Chinese civilization.3 The two regions also accommodated the two earliest Neolithic archaeological cultures in China, namely the Yangshao culture and the Longshan culture.4 The studies on the relationship between the two cultures, or the relationship between the Central Plains and the Haidai region,5 have constituted the most important and remarkable chapter of prehistoric Chinese archaeological research in the first half of the twentieth century. Since the twenty-first century, more in-depth assessment has been made of this relationship with special reference to the pre-Qin period.6 The following part intends to make a further comparative analysis of the civilizing processes in the two regions in terms of their cultural patterns, patterns of civilization and motives of development.

3 Yan, Wenming (1997), “The origin and development of the civilization in the Yellow River Valley”, Huaxia Archaeology, 1; Zhao, Hui (2006), “The prehistoric foundation of China: Another discussion on the Central Plains-centred historical trend”, Cultural Relics, 8; Han, Jianye (2015), The Early China: The Formation and Development of the Early Chinese Cultural Circle, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press. 4 Andersson, J. G. (1923), “An early Chinese culture”, Yuan Fuli (trans.), Bulletin of the Geological Survey of China (5), Beijing: Jinghua Yinshuju; Fu, Sinian, Li, Ji, Dong, Zuobin, Liang, Siyong, Wu, Jinding, Guo, Baojun, & Liu, Yuxia (1934), The Chengziya Site: The Black Pottery Site of Longshanzhen in Licheng County, Shandong Province, Beijing: Institute of History and Language, Academia Sinica. 5 Liang, Siyong (1933), “The sites of Xiaotun, Longshan and Yangshao”, Supplement to the Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica: Collection of Papers in Celebration of the 65th Birthday of Cai Yuanpei; Fu, Sinian (1933), “The Eastern Yi and the Western Xia” 夷夏东西说, Supplement to the Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica: Collection of Papers in Celebration of the 65th Birthday of Cai Yuanpei; Chen, Xingcan (1997), Studies on the History of Prehistoric Archaeology in China: 1895–1949, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company. 6 Luan, Fengshi (2003), “The role of the Haidai culture in the making of the Chinese civilization: On the relationship between the two major cultural systems in the Haidai region and the Central Plains”, The Formation and Development of the Huaxia Civilization, Beijing: Daxiang Pres, 99–10; Han, Jianye (2004), “Historical position of the Central Plains cultures in the Neolithic China”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1; Jin, Song’an (2006), The Exchange and Integration of the Archaeological Cultures in the Heluo and Haidai Regions, Beijing: Science Press.

17

THE CENTRAL PLAINS AND THE HAIDAI REGION …

17.1

297

Cultural Patterns

For about 10,000 years, the Central Plains and the Haidai region had been situated in the west and east of China respectively, had communications with each other and both evolved with ups and downs (Fig. 17.1). Both the Central Plains and the Haidai region entered the early Neolithic Age at about the same time, i.e. over 10,000 BP. But despite the possibility that the emergence of their potteries might have been inspired by the pottery making in southern China, their potteries exhibited distinctly different types and shapes. In the Central Plains, the potteries excavated in the Lijiagou Culture 李家沟文化 in Xinmi City of Henan were pottery guan pots 陶罐 stamped with circular vortex patterns 圆窝纹 or rope patterns 绳纹,7 whereas in the Haidai region, the potteries

Fig. 17.1 Diagram of the civilizing processes in the central plains and the Haidai Region from the Neolithic Age to the Bronze Age 7 School of Archaeology and Museology of Peking University, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeologyof Zhengzhou City (2011), “A brief excavation report of the Lijiagou Site in Xinmi, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 4; Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Zhengzhou City, & Centre for the Study of Chinese Archaeology of Peking University (2013), “2009 excavation report of the northern area of the Lijiagou Site in Xinmi, Henan Province”, Ancient Civilizations (Vol. 9), Beijing: Wenwu Press, 208–239.

298

J. HAN

found in the Bianbiandong Site 扁扁洞遗址 in Yiyuan County of Shandong were unadorned round-bottomed pottery fu cauldrons 圜底陶釜.8 Starting from here, the cultural patterns of the western and eastern parts of China had thus been initially formed and started to coexist with each other in a separate manner. In the middle of the Neolithic Age from 7000 to 6000 BCE, the Peiligang culture 裴李岗文化 in the Central Plains exhibited “a pottery system represented by deep-bellied guan jars 深腹罐, double-eared hu jars 双耳壶 and bo bowls 钵”, while the Houli culture 后李文化 and Shunshanji culture 顺山集文化 in the Haidai region and the region south of the Haidai belonged to the “a pottery system symbolized by unadorned round-bottomed fu cauldron 素面圜底陶釜”. The two cultural systems, i.e. the Peiligang and the Houli, one in the west and the other in the east, which ran roughly parallel to each other in strength at their initial stage, began to assume an appearance of “the west stronger and the east weaker” by about 6000 BCE. At the Jiahu Site 贾湖遗址 in Wuyang 舞阳 of Henan, relatively large graves with funerary objects including bone flutes 骨笛, carved sheets of ivory 象牙雕板, turquoise ornaments 绿松石饰品 and tortoise shells with marks of divination 刻符龟甲 were found.9 This discovery not only provided evidence for the strength of the middle Peiligang culture as surpassing that of the Houli culture. It also indicated that by this time the embryo “the Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” 早期中国文 化圈 with the Central Plains as the centre might have appeared.10 More importantly, the eastward spread of the late Peiligang culture facilitated the transformation of the Houli and other cultures in the middle reaches of the Huaihe River 淮河 and even in the region southwest of the Taiyi Mountains (i.e. Mount Tai and Mount Yi) 泰沂山 into the Shuangdun culture 双墩文化 at Bengbu City of Anhui Province,11 resulting in the 8 Sun, Bo (2009), “Introduction to the Bianbiandong Site”, Study of Cultural Relics (Vol. 16), Hefei: Huangshan Shushe Press, 51–60. 9 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (1999) The Jiahu Site in Wuyang, Beijing: Science Press, 465–519. 10 Han, Jianye (2009), “The influence of the migration of the Peiligang culture and the embryo of the Early Chinese Cultural Sphere”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 11 Luan Fengshi thinks “the Peiligang culture was one of the main sources of the Beixin culture in the valleys of the Wenshui and Sishui rivers”. As a matter of fact, the Peiligang cultural elements in the Beixin culture originated from the Shuangdun culture which lay between the Peiligang and Beixin cultures. See Luan Fengshi (1998), “A study of the Beixin culture”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3; Han, Jianye (2012), “The northward

17

THE CENTRAL PLAINS AND THE HAIDAI REGION …

299

Houli culture being restricted to a small and narrow area north of the Taiyi mountains. Around 5000 BCE, when the late Neolithic Age began, the cultures in the Central Plains, under the influence of the Beixin culture 北溪文 化 from the Haidai region, consolidated itself into a new culture, i.e. the early Yangshao culture.12 The deep fusion of the cultures from the Central Plains and the Haidai region gave rise to the “cultural system of ping bottle (hu jia) 瓶 (壶)-bo bowl (pen basin) 钵 (盆)-guan pots 罐-ding tripod cauldrons 鼎”, despite of certain differences. From then on, the Yangshao culture stepped into its first phase and entered a period whereby it faced the Bexin culture 北辛文化 in the east and developed side by side. Around 4000 BCE when the Central Plains entered the Miaodigou Era 庙底沟时代, the Yangshao culture of the Miaodigou Era, which was centred in southern Shanxi and western Henan, expanded vigorously,13 and exerted great influence on the emerging early Dawenkou culture in Tai’an of Shangdong in the east. Contemporary with this influence, the Central Plains elements, such as painted potteries decorated with petal designs 花瓣纹彩陶 and the second burial of several people together 多人二次合葬 became spread widely in the Haidai region. It is obvious that the eastern region had got the upper hand over the western region during this period, and it was at this time that “the Early Chinese Cultural Sphere”, or “the Early China” in the cultural sense was basically formed.14 Since about the second half of the 40th century BCE, i.e. the early Chalcolithic Age, great changes had taken place in respect to the landscape of the cultures: the Central Plains underwent a relatively decline while the Haidai region rose abruptly with great strength. As a result, expansion of the Shuangdun culture and the formation of the Beixin culture: On the Zhangshan Site of the Beixin culture” in Ji’ning, Jianghan Archaeology, 2. 12 Han, Jianye (2010), “A study of the early Yangshao culture”, Ancient Civilizations (Vol. VIII), Beijing: Wenwu Press, 16–35. 13 Su, Bingqi (1965), “Some issues about the Yangshao culture”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1; Yan, Wenming (1989), “On the origin of the Yangshao culture and the stages of its development”, Studies of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 122–165; Zhang, Zhongpei (1991), “Some issues about the archaeology in eastern Inner Mongolia”, Collection of Papers on the Archaeological Cultures in Eastern Inner Mongolia, Beijing: Haiyang Press, 3–8; Wang, Renxiang (2011), The Artistic Waves in Prehistoric China: A Study on the Painted Potteries of the Miaodigou Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 14 Han, Jianye (2012), “The Miaodigou Era and ‘the Early China’”, Archaeology, 3.

300

J. HAN

the elements of the Dawenkou culture spread into every corner of the Central Plains and disseminated into the Yangshao culture. For example, there were even burials pertaining to the Dawenkou type in the area along Zhengzhou 郑州 and Luoyang 洛阳, indicating the westward movement of the population15 from the Haidai region. By the second half of the thirtieth century BCE, when the Central Plains region entered the Longshan Era at the late Chalcolithic Age, the Haidai region remained stronger than the Central Plains. In fact, the Longshan culture in the Central Plains owed to a great extent its formation to the Longshan culture from the Haidai region.16 In the late Longshan Era, the Central Plains revived and entered the early Xia Dynasty when a myriad of states stood side by side. But the Central Plains still did not gain a conspicuous advantage over the Haidai region, standing only face to face with the latter in the west. At the beginning of 2000 BCE, the Haidai culture moved westward again and brought about the appearance of the Xinzhai type 新砦类型 of Phase III of the Wangwan culture, that is the middle Xia (Dynasty) culture. It then drove further west and gave rise to the Erlitou culture, that is, the late Xia culture.17 The Erlitou culture, which had entered the Bronze Age, was noted for complete sets of bronze ritual vessels and a Xia capital covering an area of millions of metres2 . At this time, the influence of the Erlitou culture had spread throughout most of China and formed an overwhelming supremacy over the Haidai region. The western dominance over the eastern region gained further momentum in the period of the Erligang culture 二里岗文化, that is, the early Shang Dynasty. This momentum continued to the late Erligang culture, when the boundary between the east and west regions was pushed eastward to the area along Central Shandong Province, so much so that at the time of

15 Du, Jinpeng (1992), “On the Yingshui Type of the Dawenkou culture”, Archaeology, 2; Luan, Fengshi (1996), “On the relationship between the eastern region and the Central Plains in the Yangshao Era”, Archaeology, 4. 16 Han, Jianye (2006), “Periodization and pedigree of the cultures from Phase II of the Miaodigou Era to the Longshan Era in southwestern Shanxi and the westernmost part of Henan”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2. 17 Zou, Heng (1980), “On the Xia culture”, Collection of Archaeological Papers on the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 95–182; Li, Boqian (1986), “The cultural features of the Erlitou Type and the its clan relationship”, Cultural Relics, 6; Han, Jianye (2009), “A study of the rise of the bronze civilization of the Erlitou culture”, Journal of National Museum of China, 1.

17

THE CENTRAL PLAINS AND THE HAIDAI REGION …

301

the Western Zhou Dynasty, the tribes in the eastern region had to retreat to the Shandong Peninsula. In summary, the development of the cultures in the Central Plains had experienced many twists and turns, while the development of the cultures in the Haidai region had gone through a stable process. However, it was the Central Plains cultures that had ultimately triumphed. Whereas the pace of development of the Haidai region was roughly similar to that in the Jianghan region,18 its final decline would come several hundred years later.

17.2

Patterns of Civilization

The Central Plains and the Haidai region went along side by side and echoed each other in the process of their civilization. While both had originated from the Miaodigou Era, a careful comparison showed that it was after all the Central Plains that had took the initiative, though it was later surpassed by the Haidai region, and that at the long last it was the Central Plains that became the culmination of all cultures and grew into the seed of the early Chinese civilization. In the Miaodigou Era, there appeared large settlements of more than one million metres2 , and huge “palace-like” houses of several hundred metres2 in the places where the three provinces of Henan, Shanxi and Shaanxi met, such as Lingbao 灵宝 of Henan, and Shaanxi’s Baishui 白水, Huaxian 华县 and Xianyang 咸阳.19 While these settlements and

18 Han, Jianye (2004), “The historical position of the Central Plains cultures in the Neolithic China”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1. 19 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, & Henan Team One of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, et al. (2003), “The remains of House No. 105 of the Yangshao culture at the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan Province”, Cultural Relics, 8; Henan Team One of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, et al. (2005), “The discovery of the exceptionally big house remains of the Yangshao culture at the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 3; Henan Team One of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, et al. (2015), “Excavation of the remains of two large houses of the Miaodigou Type at the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 5; Institute of Archaeology of Shaanxin Province, et al. (2011), “A brief excavation report of the house remains of the Yangshao culture at the Xiahe Site in Baishui County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology, 12.

302

J. HAN

buildings symbolized the earliest start of the Chinese civilization,20 the conspicuous impact of the Miaodigou type on the Dawenkou 大汶口 culture might have offered an opportunity for the Haidai region to launch its first step towards civilization. Later, both the Central Plains and the Haidai region entered the Chalcolithic Age, and experienced further social disintegration. This can be seen from the appearance in both regions of ancient cities and large-sized burials as well as multiple regional centres. In the Central Plains, regional centres varied from time to time: at the late Yangshao culture period, the whole region consisted of several sub-regions, such as the region along the borders of Henan, Shanxi and Shaanxi Provinces, the area along Zhengzhou and Luoyang of Henan, and the area of northern Henan and Southern Hebei, etc. During Phase III of the Yangshao culture period, its regional centres mainly appeared in the bordering area along the Henan, Shanxi and Shaanxi Provinces, as represented by the Beiyangping Site 北阳平遗址 and the Xipo Site 西坡 in Lingbao of Henan.21 Much later on, during Phase IV of the Yangshao culture, the regional centres had probably switched to the area along Zhengzhou and Luoyang of Henan, with the Xishan Ancient City 西山古城 in Zhengzhou and the big graves of the Zhouli Site 妯娌遗址 in Mengjin 孟津 as representatives.22 As for the Haidai region, it had formed at least three sub-regions during the middle and late Dawenkou culture: the area of central and southern Shandong with the Dawenkou Cemetery 大汶口墓地 in Tai’an 20 Both Su Bingqi and Zhang Zhongpei pointed out emphatically that around 4000 BCE, some social changes took place. See Su Bingqi (1998), New Explorations of the Origin of the Chinese Civilization, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company; Zhang, Zhongpei (1997), “The Yangshao Era: The prosperity of prehistoric society and its transformation into a civilization” Journal of Chinese Antiquity, 1. 21 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, & Henan Team

One of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, et al. (1999), “Archaeological report of the Zhudingyuan Site and its surrounding area in Lingbao, Henan Province”, Huaxia Archaeology, 3; Henan Team One of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, et al. (1999), “Investigation of the Beiyangping Site in Lingbao, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 12. 22 The Archaeological Team Leaders Training Class of the National Cultural Heritage Administration of China (1997), “Excavation of the city site of the Yangshao Era in Xishan, Zhengzhou”, Cultural Relics, 7; Relics Management Bureau of Henan Province (2006), Archaeological Report of the Xiaolangdi Reservoir on the Yellow River (II), Zhengzhou: Zhongzhou Guji Pres, 6–156.

17

THE CENTRAL PLAINS AND THE HAIDAI REGION …

303

泰安 as its centre,23 the area of southeastern Shandong which centred on the Lingyanghe Cemetery 凌阳河墓地 in Juxian 莒县24 and the area of northwestern Shandong represented by the Jiaojia Cemetery 焦家墓 地 in Zhangqiu 章丘.25 The large-sized burials in the Dawenkou Site seemed to be the richest and most powerful, but there we find neither funerary objects with character-like signs as those found in the graves of the Lingyanghe Site, nor the sophisticated jade artefacts as those excavated in the Jiaojia Site. Apparently, these three areas advanced on parallel tracks and independently. At this time, both the Central Plains and the Haidai region had reached the early stage of the guguo or “ancient state” period 古国,26 which preceded the “kingdom” period, or the primary stage of civilization, or the advanced stage of chieftain-state 酋邦. As for the burials in both regions, the great graves in both the Xipo Site in Lingbao and the Zhouli Site in Mengjin were spacious and exquisite but with few funerary objects, whereas the large burials at both the Dawenkou Site in Tai’an and the Jiajiao Site of Zhangqiu were relatively small-scaled but with inner and outer coffins and rich and delicate burial objects. The burials in these two regions presented a sharp contrast: while the former featured an emphasis on status over wealth, the latter symbolized attention to status and wealth. This difference indicated that there had already appeared different modes for the making of the early Chinese civilization. For the former type of burials, it might refer to “the Central Plain Pattern”, and for the latter to

23 Cultural Relics Management Office of Shandong Province, & Jinan Museum (1974),

The Dawenkou Site: Excavation Report of the Neolithic Graves, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 24 Institute of Archaeology of Shandong Province, Shandong Museum, & Cultural Relics Administration Office of Ju County (1983), “A brief excavation report of the graves of the Dawenkou culture at the Lingyanghe Site in Ju County, Shandong Province”, Prehistory, 3. 25 Department of Archaeology and Museology of Shandong University, & Museum of the Chengziya Site in Zhangqiu District, Jinan City (2018), “The Jiaojia Neolithic Site in Zhangqiu District, Jinan City”, Archaeology, 7. 26 Su, Bingqi (1994), “Welcoming the new age in Chinese archaeology”, in The Hua People, Descendants of the Dragon, and the Chinese: In search of Roots through Archaeology, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 236–251; Yan, Wenming (1997), “The origin and development of the civilization in the Yellow River valley”, Huaxia Archaeology, 1.

304

J. HAN

“the Haidai Sub-Pattern” of “the Eastern Pattern”.27 There are scholars who argue that since both regions were characterized by stable development and a lack of religious belief, they should belong to the same pattern.28 In the early Longshan Era, there were in the Central Plains at least several powerful cultural types, including the Taosi culture, the early Wangwan culture in Phase III and the early Hougang culture in Phase II. As for the Taosi culture, in the Linfen Basin 临汾盆地 of Shanxi Province where the Taosi culture was located, no other super central settlement comparable to the Taosi Site in Linfen has been found. Therefore, the Taosi Ancient City might most probably have been the centre of the whole Taosi culture.29 In fact, the cultural influence of the Taosi Ancient City had reached Henan, central Shanxi, Northern Shaanxi, the Guanzhong 关中 region of Shaanxi and even the boarder area of the Gansu, Qinghai and Ningxia Provinces.30 Presumably, its political influence—limited as it may have been—must also have spread to these regions, just as it was recorded briefly in the “Cannon of Yao” in the Book of Documents《尚书·尧典》 . In the late Longshan Era, when the Taosi culture in the Linfen Basin was replaced by the late Taosi culture,

27 In 2000, I proposed in my doctoral dissertation “the Northern Pattern” and “the Eastern Pattern” to account for the origin of civilization. In 2003, I proposed a halfway pattern, i.e. “the Central Plains Pattern”. Now it seems that further differentiation can be made. For instance, “the Eastern Pattern” can at least be divided into different subpatterns, such as the Hongshan, the Haidai, the Liangzhu and the Jianghan, etc. See Han Jianye (2003), “The general trend and different patterns of societal development in the Chalcolithic Age”, Ancient Civilizations, II, 84–96. 28 Luan, Fengshi (2004), “The civilizing process in ancient Chinese society and relevant issues”, East Asia Archaeology (Vol. I), Beijing: Science Press, 302–312. 29 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Bureau of Cultural Relics of Linfen City (2015), The Taosi Site in Xiangfan: The 1978–1985 Archaeological Excavation Report, Beijing: Wenwu Press; He, Nu (2013), “A brief analysis of the archaeological exploration of the earliest ‘China’”, Studies of Early China (Vol. I), Beijing: Wenwu Press, 36–43; Gao, Jiangtao (2010), “A preliminary study of the relics of the settlement pattern at the Taosi Site”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 3. 30 A case in point is the appearance of jade objects at the Shimao and Bicun Sites of the Laohushan culture, and at the sites of the Qijia culture in the boarding area of Gansu, Qinghai Provinces and the Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region. See Han Jianye (2010), “The Liangzhu, Taosi and Erlitou sites: The evolution route of the early Chinese civilization”, Archaeology, 11.

17

THE CENTRAL PLAINS AND THE HAIDAI REGION …

305

and the Taosi settlement no longer played a central role in the area,31 there may have emerged several central settlements in the southwest of Shanxi. When it came to the period of the late Wangwan culture in Phase III, we find large-scale settlements such as the Wangchenggang 王城岗 in Dengfeng 登封 and Wadian 瓦店 in Yuzhou 禹州,32 both of which were adjacent to the Songshan Mountain 嵩山 in Henan Province and were considered the capital of Yu and Qi respectively in the early Xia Dynasty. While the hub of the cultures in the Central Plains should also have moved to the region of the Songshan Mountain, the influence of the Wangwan culture in Phase III was primarily displayed in places around the Jianghan (i.e. the Yangtze and Han Rivers) region in the south, with less influence on northern China as compared to that of the Taosi culture. If the late Wangwan culture in Phase III was basically related to the early Xia culture, its political influence on the southern region should be limited.33 As for the Longshan culture in the Haidai region, whether in its early or late period, a multi-centred structure had remained in place since the period of the Dawenkou culture, and many cities sited and largesized settlements had appeared. The Liangchengzhen Site 两城镇遗址 in Rizhao 日照,34 a coastal region in southeast Shandong, and the Tonglin Site 桐林遗址 in Linzi 临淄35 in northwest Shandong, seemed to have a 31 Han, Jianye (2011), “The Tangtao Clan’s conquering of the West Xia and Houji the Ancestor of Zhou Tribes’ exiling Danzhu the son of Emperor Yao”, Journal of Peking University (Humanities and Social Sciences ), 3. 32 Institute of Cultural Relics of Henan Province, & Department of Archaeology of the Museum of Chinese History (1992), The Wangchenggang and Yangcheng Sites in Dengfeng County, Beijing: Wenwu Press; School of Archaeology and Museology of Peking University, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (2007), Archaeological Excavation and Research of the Wangchenggang Site in Dengfeng (2002– 2007), Zhengzhou: Daxiang Pres; Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (2004), The Wadian Site in Yuzhou City, Beijing: World Tushu Corporation. 33 As is recorded in Xia” in the Records of already covered much line with the situation

“The Tribute of Yu” in the Book of Documents and “Annals of the the Grand Historian, the political control of the early Xia Dynasty of the Yellow and Yangtze rivers valleys. However, this is not in revealed by archaeological discoveries.

34 The Sino-US Joint Archaeological Team, & Luan, Fengshi, et al. (2016), The Liangchengzhen Site: 1998–2001 Excavation Report, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 35 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Shandong Province, & School of Archaeology and Museology of Peking University (2012), “Archaeological report of the features of the settlement at the Tonglin Site in Linzi”, Archaeology in Haidai (Vol. V), Beijing: Science Press, 139–157.

306

J. HAN

superior-subordinate relationship with each other—even their relationship with other ancient city sites in the region was complicated and confusing as well. In a nutshell, during the whole Longshan Era, the Central Plains and the Haidai region—one in the west, the other in the east—were both dotted with many small and coexisting “states”, and were evolving side by side with similar strength. As for the burials in both regions, the larger graves of the Wangwan culture in Phase III, such as those of the Meishan Site 煤山遗址 in Ruzhou 汝州36 of Henan, were built with second-level ledges in the grave chamber, which were relatively big and exquisite, but there were few funerary objects in them, featuring again the tradition of status emphasis over wealth. As for the sites of the Longshan culture, such as the Xizhufeng Site 西朱封遗址 in Linqu 临朐37 and the Yinjiacheng Site 尹家 城遗址 in Sishui 泗水,38 both of Shandong, we find burials with coffins consisting of one inner coffin 棺 and one outer coffin 椁 or even two outer coffins. Buried inside the coffins were a large number of exquisite jade and pottery objects. Both the burial custom and the objects of these sites showed plainly the tradition of dual emphasis on status and wealth. Whereas the same observation applies to the large-sized graves of the Taosi culture, the underlying reason lies in Taosi’s upper class culture, which had some elements originating from the eastern region. After the transitional period of the Xinzhai culture 新砦文化, the Central Plains entered the Erlitou-Erligang Era 二里头-二里岗时代, or the late-Xia-and-early-Shang Period 晚期夏-早商时期. There appeared in the area along Zhengzhou and Luoyang of Henan Province some super large settlements, like the Erlitou Site 二里头遗址 in Yanshi 偃师 and the

36 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, School of History of Capital Normal University, & School of History of Zhengzhou University (2011), “A brief excavation report of the graves of the Longshan culture at the Meishan Site in Ruzhou, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 6. 37 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Shandong Province, & Office for the Preservation of Cultural Relics of Linqu County (1989), “Excavation of the multiple outer-coffin graves of the Longshan culture at the Xizhufeng Site in Linqu County”, Excavation in the Haidai Region (Vol. I), Jinan: Shandong University Press, 219–224; Shandong Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1990), “Graves of the Longshan culture at the Zhufeng Site in Linqu, Shandong Province”, Archaeology, 7. 38 Archaeology Teaching and Research Section of the Department of History at Shandong University (1990), The Yinjiacheng Site in Sishui, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

17

THE CENTRAL PLAINS AND THE HAIDAI REGION …

307

Shangcheng Site 商城遗址 in Zhengzhou. In the meantime, the other areas of the Central Plains saw a sharp decrease in the number of city sites, with such sites as the Shangcheng Site in Yuanqu 垣曲 of southern Shanxi and the Panlongcheng Site 盘龙城 in Huangpi 黄陂 of Hubei becoming the remote frontier strongholds or bases of the early Shang period. However, the influence of the Erlitou-Erligang culture spread over most parts of China,39 reaching the Haidai region in the east, the West Liao River 西辽河 region in the north, the basins of the Yangtze River and the Xiangjiang River 湘江 in the south and Qinghai Province in the west. In contrast, the Yueshi culture 岳石文化 or the Dongyi culture 东夷文化 in the Haidai region declined without any recovery and retreated. Of course, with the long-term contact and communication between the two regions, the Central Plains and the Haidai region became less distinguishable from each other. For example, the larger graves of the Erligang culture were similar to those of the Longshan culture in the Haidai region in terms of their dual emphasis on both status and wealth.

17.3

The Motivating Forces of Development

The Central Plains and the Haidai region, conventionally termed as “Xia” 夏 (or “Huaxia” 华夏, i.e. China, the heartland of the Chinese civilization) and “Yi” 夷 (“foreign” or “barbarian”, i.e. ethnic groups which did not belong to the core origin of the Chinese civilization) respectively, had long been facing each other in an east-seeing-west manner, with the dominant role shifting between the two sides from time to time. However, it was the Central Plains that finally won a sweeping victory, and the external causes merit more consideration. Lying along the Yellow River valley, the Central Plains and the Haidai region both related to the East Asian monsoon region, with similar conditions of water and heat. It seems that the prosperity of the Central Plains and the decline of the Haidai region cannot be accounted for in geographical terms, a conception which is in fact mistaken. Firstly, lying further away from the sea, meaning that the Central Plains did not enjoy as favourable a hydrothermal condition as the Haidai region, it was also immune from the immediate impact of sea level fluctuations which had affected the coastal areas of the Haidai region. This had

39 Xu, Hong (2009), The Earliest China, Beijing: Science Press.

308

J. HAN

betokened the fact that although the cultural development in the Central Plains was not as rapid as that in the Haidai region, it evolved in a steadier manner instead of erratic ups and downs. Secondly, while both the Central Plains and the Haidai region had cultural exchanges with their surrounding cultures, the Central Plains, located at the “centre of the earth”, could effectively radiate its cultural influence in all directions in times of prosperity and absorb elements from other cultures in times of a low ebb. This situation had cultivated the Central Plains cultures with qualities of openness and accommodation. In contrast, the Haidai region, situated in the remote eastern corner, was restricted in its capacity to either spread its own culture or to absorb from other cultures. Thirdly, although both the Central Plains and the Haidai region were affected by the surrounding cultures, especially the northern culture, due to their different geographical bearing—one in the west, the other in the east—the impact on them also differed. To the north of the Central Plains lay the Shanxi-Shaanxi Plateau, and beyond it in different directions stretched respectively the Mongolian Plateau, the Hexi Corridor 河西走廊, Xinjiang and Central Asia. Generally characterized by relatively arid conditions of grassland oasis, the people in these vast areas would most probably move southward either for hunting or for animal husbandry gathering when the climate turned dry and cold and vegetation zones shifted southwards. This was especially the case in the early 2000 BCE when the climate was dry and cold, the grassland culture, which had entered the Bronze Age, expanded towards the southeast, bringing techniques of animal husbandry and bronze casting to the Qijia 齐家 and Zhukaigou 朱开沟 cultures in Gansu, Qinghai, Inner Mongolia and other places.40 This event had indirectly spurred the great adjustment in the overall structure of the cultures in the Central Plains,41 40 Lin, Yun (1994), “Some problems about the chronology of the early bronze ware of the northern region”, Collection of Papers on the Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Inner Mongolia (Vol. I), Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press, 291–295; Fitzgerald-Huber, Louisa G. (1995), “Qijia and Erlitou: The question of contacts with distant cultures”, Early China 20, 17–67; Li, Shuicheng (2005), “Regional characteristics and interaction of early metallurgy between northwestern China and the Central Plains”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3. 41 Wang, Wei (2004), “A study of the causes of cultural changes in the vast territory of China around 2000 BCE”, Archaeology, 1; Wang, Shaowu, (2005), “The abrupt climate change of 2200–2000 BCE and the decline of ancient civilizations”, Progress in Natural

17

THE CENTRAL PLAINS AND THE HAIDAI REGION …

309

and brought about the rise of the Erlitou bronze civilization.42 To the north of Haidai region lay the Bohai Sea and the Hebei Plain 河北平原, and further outward were the West Liao River Basin and the Northeast Plain. These areas enjoyed relatively dry and wet climate, and engaged in hunting and gathering as well as in agricultural economy. Since there was not much variation in temperature and humidity, people here were less motivated to move southward. As a result, animal husbandry and bronze technology, which originated in the western region, only indirectly affected the Haidai region through the Central Plains. The cultural impact had not only facilitated the Central Plains in their absorption of valuable elements from the civilization in the western region, but also tempered a firm and indomitable character in its collision with many other cultures. In conclusion, the archaeological cultures in both the Central Plains and the Haidai region ever since the Neolithic Age had exhibited their respective unique characteristics. Facing each other from the west and the east respectively, the two cultures had been communicating with and echoing each other, and had evolved in different paces and upheavals in their civilizing process. While they had both constituted the centres of early Chinese civilization and jointly initiated the formation and emergence of early Chinese civilization, it was the Central Plains culture that ultimately triumphed in full vigour. The underlying reason of this triumph lay in the characteristics this culture had accomplished: being moderate and steadfast; being resilient and perseverant, being open and accommodative and taking advantage of its geographical position. (This part was originally published in Issue 4 of Social Sciences in 2019.)

Science, 9; Han, Jianye (2012), “On China’s ‘bronze age revolution’”, The Western Regions Studies, 3. 42 I once pointed out that the late Qijia culture had spread eastward to the Guanzhong region, introducing new cultural elements such as flower-edged guan jars and bronze technologies to the Erlitou culture and contributing to the birth of the Erlitou bronze civilization. Han, (2008), The Natural Environment and Cultural Development in Northwest China during the Pre-Qin Period, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Han, Jianye (2009), “A study of the rise of the bronze civilization of the Erlitou culture”, Journal of National Museum of China, 1.

CHAPTER 18

The Three Burial Traditions in the Longshan Era

Burial tradition refers to long-standing burial practices and customs. Burial tradition embodies people’s thoughts about burial, which can be revealed through the analysis of the shape and size of the grave as well as the funerary objects it contains. I have proposed the three patterns whereby early Chinese civilization had evolved, i.e. the Northern Pattern, the Central Plains Pattern and the Eastern Pattern. The primary basis upon which my distinction was established was the analysis of the characteristics of the relevant graves, though my analysis stopped short of an in-depth discussion of the traditions behind the burials.1 Through an analysis of the large-sized graves and their corresponding burial customs in the sites of Hongshan 红山, Liangzhu 良渚 and Yangshao 仰韶, Li Boqian 李伯谦 proposed two patterns in the evolution of ancient Chinese civilization, but laid his emphasis on the Yangshao Era.2 Zhang Chi 张弛 has analysed many cases of prehistoric Chinese burial rites, while he put his focus on the overall evolution of Chinese society in connection with their forms of power.3 Liu Li 刘莉 was earlier in her 1 Han, Jianye (2003), “The general trend and different patterns of societal development

in the Chalcolithic Age”, Ancient Civilizations (Vol. II): 84–96. 2 Li, Boqian (2009), “Two patterns of development of ancient Chinese civilization: Thoughts upon watching the jade objects unearthed from the large graves of the Hongshan, Liangzhu, and Yangshao cultures”, Cultural Relics, 3. 3 Zhang, Chi (2015), The Origin of Social Rights: The Society and Concept in Prehistoric Chinese Funerals, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_18

311

312

J. HAN

research into the features of ancient burials and their ceremonial activities, though she concerned herself only with the Longshan culture.4 By focusing myself on the Yellow River and Yangtze River regions during the Longshan Era, I shall, in what follows, investigate the major differences between these two regions in terms of their burial customs, with the aim to throw some light on the relationship between the burial traditions with both the pattern of civilization and the legendary tribal groups.

18.1

The Longshan Era

The Longshan Era refers to the period of the cultures roughly contemporary with the Longshan culture which was distributed over most areas of the Yellow River and the Yangtze River valleys. The absolute date of the Longshan Era is approximately from the late 3000 BCE to the early 2000 BCE. This is not merely a concept of time, but also comes with special connotations. That is, except the Qijia culture, “all the (sub-) cultures which pertained to this period were connected into a whole”, with the black grey pottery 黑灰陶 as the predominant artefact of this period. That is why these (sub-)cultures were once called the Longshan culture.5 However, both the Banshan type 半山类型 and the Machang type 马厂类型 of the Majiayao culture 马家窑文化 also existed during this time period; but as the painted pottery 彩陶 prevailed then, they disqualified as belonging to “the Longshan Era” and hence were not included in the following discussion. The burial traditions under review below will be restricted to observations of large- and medium-sized earth pit graves, with the exclusion of small-sized graves and urn coffins for infants. The reason for this selection is that the relatively large-sized graves usually had a more complex chamber structure, that the dead were buried with more funerary objects, and that these graves would therefore exhibit more differences from culture to culture, especially in terms of burial ideas. An analysis of the large- and medium-sized graves shows there existed a rather common mainstream burial tradition in the Longshan Era. For example, most of the graves were vertical earth pits dug on the ground, 4 Liu, Li (1999) “A study on the morphology of the graves of the Longshan culture in Shandong: An archaeological analysis of the social division, ritual activities, and exchange relations in the Longshan Era”, Journal of Chinese Antiquity, 2. 5 Yan, Wenming (1981), “The Longshan culture and the Longshan Era”, Cultural Relics, 6.

18

THE THREE BURIAL TRADITIONS IN THE LONGSHAN ERA

313

and most of the bodies were buried flat, face up, arms and legs straight. These features reflected the concept of “laying the dead beneath the earth to ensure they rest in peace” 入土为安.6 Moreover, the graves in the same cemetery or graveyard tended to observe the same custom, and were arranged in a proper order, thus constituting the “zu clan cemetery” 族墓地 based on blood relationship.7 These features indicated the ideas of ancestral veneration 祖先崇拜, careful attention to funeral rites and the pursuit of due sacrifices 慎终追远, and cherishing historical memories 珍 视历史记忆. The burial tradition had become widespread in most parts of China since at least the period of the Peiligang culture 裴李岗文化 in the seventh century BCE, and continued to the Longshan Era, and had crystallized as one important cultural gene of early China.8 On the other hand, a more careful examination also shows many regional differences among the Longshan graves, which can be further categorized into three regional traditions.

18.2

The Haidai Tradition

The first sub-category of the Longshan Era concerns the Haidai region, with the Longshan culture as its representative. In what is currently known, the graves of the highest level in the Longshan culture were the three large-sized graves at the Xizhufeng Site 西朱

6 Wu Hong thinks the Mawangdui Han tombs embodied the idea of the dead making their “home” underground, and that this idea dates back to prehistoric times. See Wu Hong (2005), “Fine arts in rites: Rethinking the Mawangdui tombs”, in Fine Arts in Rites: Collection of Wu Hong ’s Works on the Ancient History of Chinese Fine Arts, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 119. 7 “Office of Earth” in the Rites of Zhou speaks of zu fenmu, or “the cemetery of a zu

clan (which consisted of a hundred families)”. In the Shang and Zhou dynasties, there were many cemeteries of this kind. One example is the western cemetery at the site of the Yin Ruins in Anyang City, Henan. See Han Jianye (1997), “Analysis of the western cemetery of the Yin Ruins”, Archaeology, 1. 8 By “Early China”, I mean the early China in the cultural sense, or the early Chinese cultural sphere, that is, “the relative cultural community formed by the integration of and links with cultures in most parts of China before the Qin and Han dynasties”. I think this cultural togetherness took shape in the Miaodigou Era in the fourth millennium BCE. See Han Jianye (2012), “The Miaodigou Era and ‘the Early China’”, Archaeology, 3; Han, Jijian (2015), Early China: The Formation and Development of the Early Chinese Cultural Sphere, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press.

314

J. HAN

封遗址 in Linqu 临朐, Shandong Province.9 Of these, M202, a small part of which had been destroyed, covered an area of about 40 metres2 when its outer chamber surrounded by wide and tidy second-level ledges 二层 台 was restored. Its inner chamber was about 11 metres2 when restored, and contained an outer coffin 椁, an inner coffin 棺 and a side case 边 箱. The outer burial wall, which was decorated with colourful paintings, looked exquisite and fastidious. There were abundant funerary objects in this burial, including delicate jade objects such as dao blades 刀, yue battle-axes 钺, ji hairpins 笄, heads of ji hairpins 笄首, exquisite potteries such as eggshell cups 蛋壳杯, gui tripod ewers 鬶 and lei wine vessels 罍. Besides, there were painted wooden basins 彩绘木盘, and nearly a thousand pieces of turquoise 绿松石片 (probably the remnants of high-grade wooden artefacts embedded with turquoise), dozens of crocodile bone pieces 鳄鱼骨板 (probably the remnants of the decorations on wooden cases or the crocodile skin of tuo drums 鼍鼓). M203, which was slightly smaller than M202, shared a similar situation with M202, but had two outer coffins 重椁 and one inner coffin. What is worth our attention is that between the two outer coffins there were painted wooden objects and 25 low-heat painted funerary articles 低火候彩绘明器. The burial of M1 which was the first to be excavated is rather extraordinary. In the grave, there were two outer coffins and one inner coffin, a side case and a foot case 脚箱, with both the outer and inner coffins colour-painted. The funerary objects were rich and precious, indicating that this burial should correlate to a level equivalent to that of M203 and M202. However, with only about 11 metres2 of chamber area, this burial looked rather cramped. It is possible that the outer chamber of M1 had been destroyed and what remained was merely its inner chamber. The five large graves at the Yinjiacheng Site 尹家城遗址 in Sishui 泗水, Shandong Province, were of a slightly lower level than the Xizhufeng 西朱 封 graves. The size of the grave chambers ranged from 10 to 20 metres2 , and the largest chamber, i.e. that of M15, covered an area of about 25 metres2 . In this grave, there were two outer coffins, one inner coffin and a large number of crocodile bone pieces as well as small clay cones which might be the remnants of the crocodile skin of the tuogu drums and drum 9 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Shandong Province, et al. (2018), The Xizhufeng Site in Linqu: Excavation and Research of the Graves of the Longshan Culture in Shandong Province, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

18

THE THREE BURIAL TRADITIONS IN THE LONGSHAN ERA

315

nails. All the other graves had both an outer and an inner coffin, and contained funerary objects ranging from delicate potteries to sets of lowtemperature potteries. In some graves, there were more than 30 lower pig jawbones 猪下颌骨, but generally no jade article was found. In addition, there were more medium-sized graves of three to five metres2 , which had a second-level ledge and a wooden inner coffin and 20 to 30 potteries as well as a small number of lower pig jawbones, but mostly without high-grade articles such as tuogu drums.10 From the foregoing observations, it can be seen that the large- and medium-sized graves of the Longshan culture in the Haidai region were clearly stratified in the following aspects. The chamber of the large-sized graves was spacious and had second-level ledges on four sides of the chamber. In the chamber there were multiple-layered coffins which were standardized and fastidious, indicating most possibly the initial institutionalization of the outer and inner coffin practice.11 There were also relatively large amounts of funerary objects, such as the delicate black pottery hu pots 黑陶壶, guan jars 罐, bei cups 杯 and pottery gui tripod ewers 陶鬶 most of which might have belonged to vessel sets for holding, heating and drinking wine,12 jade artefacts of yue battle-axes, musical instruments of tuogu drums, exquisite painted wooden artefacts, etc. These aspects all exhibited both the prestigious status the grave owner had once been held in and something of an atmosphere of rites and music. On the other hand, a large variety of the funerary objects belonged to household potteries or “articles of life” 生器, and a relatively large number were lower jawbones of pigs. These objects implied that either the grave owner and his jiazu clan had been quite wealthy, or that many people had attended the funeral to express their condolence.13 In fact, the large grave chambers and multiple layers of coffins also pointed to a relatively

10 Section of Teaching and Research of Archaeology, the Department of History of Shandong University (1990), The Yinjiacheng Site in Sishui, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 11 Luan, Fengshi (2006), “The origin, development and institutionalization of the prehistoric outer and inner coffins”, Cultural Relics, 6. 12 Mai, Gewen, Fang, Hui, & Luan, Fengshi et al. (2005), “A chemical analysis of the Longshan culture fermented beverage unearthed from the Liangchengzhen Site in Rizhao City, Shandong: With reference to the cultural significance of fermented beverages in prehistoric times”, Archaeology, 3. 13 Wang, Renxiang (1981), “The Religious significance of pig burial in the Neolithic Age: Notes on the study of the cultural sites of primitive religion”, Archaeology, 2; Liu,

316

J. HAN

substantial wealth. As for the small amount of pottery funerary articles,14 they were buried for a distinction between life and death. In general, in the eastern region, i.e. the Longshan culture in the Haidai region, a burial concept which placed equal emphasis on status and wealth had stood out in a distinctive way and represented itself as the Haidai tradition. This dual emphasis on status and wealth of the Longshan culture can be traced back to Dawenkou culture in Tai’an of Shandong. As early as in the late stage of the early Dawenkou culture, some of the burials in Tai’an 泰安 had begun to have two-level ledges and wooden inner coffins, with more than 100 funerary objects.15 In the Jiaojia Site 焦家遗址 in Jinan City of Shandong, related to the middle and late Dawenkou culture, there even appeared multiple-layered coffins and a large number of jade funerary objects. As such, it is safe to say that the Longshan culture inherited and carried on the burial tradition of the Haidai region, that is the combined stress on both status and wealth, from the Dawenkou culture.

18.3

The Jianghan Region

The second sub-tradition covers the Jianghan (the Yangtze and the Han rivers) 江汉地区 region, as represented by the Shijiahe culture 石家河文 化. Of the known burials of the Shijiahe culture, the largest in size is grave M7 at the Xiaojiawuji Site or “the Xiao Family’s Residence Ridge” 肖家

Li (1999), “A study on the morphology of the graves of the Longshan culture in Shandong: An archaeological analysis of the social disintegration, ritual activities, and exchange relations in the Longshan Era”, Journal of Chinese Antiquity, 2. 14 “Obsequies of an Ordinary Officer II” in Etiquette and Rites stays: “Mingqi

(funerary articles) were placed west of the funerary carriage”. These words show clearly mingqi were made for funerary purposes and buried in the grave. “Discourse on Ritual Principles” in the Xunzi says: “Thus, shengqi (“articles of life”) have the proper form, but not the function; mingqi have the appearance but not the use”. As can be seen from the words, shengqi is contrasted with mingqi, and mingqi refers to articles made for funerals only. See Wu Hong (2005), “Fine arts in rites: Rethinking the Mawangdui Burials”, in Fine Arts in Rites: Collection of Wu Hong’s Works on the Ancient History of Chinese Fine Arts, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company: 119. 15 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Shandong Province (1997), More on the Dawenkou Site: The Second and Third Excavation Reports of the Dawenkou Site, Beijing: Science Press: 121–123.

18

THE THREE BURIAL TRADITIONS IN THE LONGSHAN ERA

317

屋脊 in Tianmen 天门, Hubei Province.16 The opening of M7 covered an area of 6.6 metres2 and there were two-level ledges on both sides of the grave owner’s feet. There might have been a wooden inner coffin in the inner chamber.17 Of the 102 funerary objects, except for one stone yue battle-axe, all were potteries which can easily be divided into two groups, one on the second-floor ledges and the other next to the grave owner. On the second-level ledge close to the feet of the grave owner, there were 62 high-collared guan jars 高领罐. Beside the grave owner were hu-shaped vessels 壶形器 and small ding tripod cauldrons 小鼎, and under the grave owner’s feet were 29 bei cups with a slanted stomach 斜 腹杯. Even though the grave M54 at the Xiaojiawuji Site covered only an area of 2.7 metres2 , there were 99 high-collared guan jars neatly stacked in three layers beside the deceased. In terms of size and scale, the large-sized graves of the Shijiahe culture were equivalent only to the medium-sized graves of the Longshan culture. While there were also second-level ledges in the former, they did not necessarily appear on four sides of the chamber, nor were they strictly standardized; there might be wooden inner coffins, though they did not compare to the multi-layered coffins of the Longshan culture. Together with the lack of precious funerary objects, these features indicate that no particular attention had been paid to advertise the status of the grave owner. As far as the funerary objects are concerned, the large-sized graves of the Shijiahe culture contained a relatively large number of them. By the side of the deceased were bei cups with a slanted stomach, hushaped vessels, small ding tripod cauldrons, all of which might have been associated with food and beverages or “banquets”.18 What is especially noteworthy are the many high-collared guan jars, which were neatly laid out on the second-level ledges and other places. These jars had the function of storage, and might have contained grain or wine at the time of

16 Jingzhou Museum of Hubei Province, Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Hubei Province, & Department of Archaeology of Peking University (1999), The Xiaojiawuji Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 17 Impressions of a wooden coffin were found in the small grave M55 at the Xiaojiawuji Site. It is assumed that larger graves here also had wooden coffins, but they were difficult to find because of their poor preservation. 18 Zhang, Chi (2014), “New funerary concepts in the thriving period of the Shijiahe Settlement”, Archaeology, 8.

318

J. HAN

interment, showing a strong inclination to “store wealth” or “display wealth”. There were a small number of special low-temperature funerary potteries in the Shijiahe culture, highlighting to a certain extent the distinction between life and death. The burial idea whereby wealth was valued over status as exemplified by the Shijiahe culture, can be called the Jianghan tradition. The Jianghan tradition can be traced at least back to the Youziling type 油子岭类型 of the Daxi culture 大溪文化 and the Qujialing culture 屈家 岭文化. In the Jianghan Plains, the relative large graves at the Dengjiawan 邓家湾遗址 and Xiaojiawuji sites, related to the Qujialiang culture, there were dozens of high-collared guan jars on the second-level ledges, a situation similar to that of the Shijiahe culture. However, some graves contained jade yue battle-axes and other articles, showing some difference from the Shijiahe culture. In the grave M2 at the Qujialing Site in Jingshan 京山, Hubei Province, which belonged to the earlier Youziling type of the Daxi culture, there were over 70 potteries, mostly small funerary articles for the dead.19 In the grave M16 at the Diaolongbei Site 雕龙碑 in Zaoyang 枣阳 of Hubei, there were as many as 72 lower pig jawbones, but no other funerary object,20 showing clearly the burial idea of valuing wealth over status.

18.4

The Central Plains

The third sub-tradition covers the Central Plains in its broad sense, with Phase III of the Wangwan culture 王湾文化 in the interior of the Central Plains, the Laohushan culture 老虎山文化 from central and southern Inner Mongolia, to northern Shaanxi and central-northern Shanxi, etc., and the late Taosi culture 陶寺文化 in southwest Shanxi as its representative. As for Phase III of the Wangwan culture, the largest grave known so far is the grave M7 at the Meishan Site 煤山遗址 in Ruzhou 汝州 of Henan Province. The chamber of the grave covered an area of three metres2 , and had two-level ledges on the four sides, with a wooden inner coffin in the inner chamber, and 14 funerary objects, including a jade fu axe 玉 19 The Qujialing Archaeological Excavation Team (1992), “The third excavation of the Qujialing Site”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1. 20 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2006), The Diaolongbei Site in Zaoyang, Beijing: Science Press.

18

THE THREE BURIAL TRADITIONS IN THE LONGSHAN ERA

319

斧, 11 low-temperature pottery hu jars 壶 and dou pedestal plates 豆 with red paint.21 As for the Laohushan culture, the large grave of M7 at the Shengedaliang Site 神圪垯梁遗址 in Shenmu 神木 of Shaanxi Province covered an area of about thirteen metres2 , but in the grave no secondlevel ledge was found. In the wooden coffin, a middle-aged male body lying flat and face up, with arms and legs straight, who should probably have been the owner of the grave. Outside the coffin, there lay a young female body on her side with legs bent. In the niche of the burial, there were six potteries, each covered by a stoneware lid 石器盖.22 With regard to the late Taosi culture, the large grave of M2384 had a chamber of about three metres2 , with only five funerary objects, including three potteries and one jade yue battle-axe in the niche as well as one jade arm ring 玉臂环.23 In terms of size and scale, the known large-sized burial of the Longshan culture in the Central Plains was equivalent only to the mediumsized grave of the Longshan culture. While it had two-level ledges and wooden coffins, but they were not as spacious and elegant as those of the Longshan Culture. The funerary objects, though few, were precious, which implied a preference for social status to wealth. This observation is especially true of the female body lying outside the coffin of the male grave owner in M7 at the Shengedaliang Site: be she a wife or a concubine, her subordination to the male is as clear as day.24 In addition, the funerary objects in the graves of the Longshan Culture in the Central Plains which included both practical utensils and special low-temperature 21 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province, School of History of Capital Normal University, & School of History of Zhengzhou University (2011), “A brief excavation report of the graves of the Longshan culture at the Meishan Site in Ruzhou, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 6. 22 The Institute of Archaeology of Shaanxi Province, et al. (2016), “Excavation report of the Shengedaliang Site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 4. 23 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Linfen Municipal Cultural Relics Bureau: The Taosi Site in Xiangfen: 1978–1985 Archaeological Excavation Report, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 24 The custom whereby a male and a female were buried together, with the female

subordinate to the male, and the male lying flat with arms and legs straight and the female lying with legs bent, is often seen in the Qijia culture. Therefore, this should be the result of the influence of the Qijia culture when it spread eastward to the Central Plains. See Tian Guangjin & Han Jianye (2003), “Study on the Zhukaigou culture”, Archaeological Studies (Vol. V), Beijing: Wenwu Press, 227–259.

320

J. HAN

potteries for the dead served to highlight the belief in a distinction between life and death. Seen in this light, it can be said that the burial thought as reflected by the Longshan culture in the Central Plains had been characterized by an emphasis of status over wealth, and thus “the Central Plains tradition”. The Central Plains tradition can be traced at least back to the Miaodigou type 庙底沟类型 of the Yangshao culture, as represented by the Xipo Cemetery 西坡 in Lingbao 灵宝, Henan Province, which belonged to the late Miaodigou type or the early Xiwang type 西王类型. Its large-sized graves ranged from 12 to 17 metres2 , and the chamber was covered and sealed with a wooden board. In the chamber, there were specially made foot pits 脚坑, and delicate jade yue battle-axes and potteries such as big-mouthed gang jars 大口缸 and gui-shaped vessels 簋形器. Whereas these features highlighted the high status of the grave owners, the small number of funerary objects—less than ten in each burial, and mostly crude articles for the deceased—signified such ideas as a moderate attitude to life and death, preference for status to wealth, a ritual-oriented and orderly society, and a simple lifestyle that adhered to the golden mean.25 These ideas were maintained and manifested more conspicuously in the largest grave M50 at the Zhouli Site 妯娌遗址 in Mengjin 孟津 of Henan, which pertained to a later culture type, i.e. the Gushuihe type 谷水河类型. The burial occupied an area of more than 20 square metres26 had second-level ledges, and the grave owner, with an ivory hoop 象牙箍 on his arm, was likely to be an important figure. But there were no other funerary objects in the burial and this again corroborated the burial concept of status over wealth.

25 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Henan Province (2010), The Xipo Cemetery in Lingbao, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Han, Jianye (2014), “The Xipo Cemetery and ‘the Central Plains Pattern’”, in The Yangshao Culture and Her Times: Proceedings of the International Symposium on the 90th Anniversary of the Discovery of the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 153–164. 26 Cultural Relics Management Bureau of Henan Province (2006), Archaeological Report of the Xiaolangdi Reservoir on the Yellow River (II), Zhengzhou: Zhongzhou Guji Press, 6–156.

18

18.5

THE THREE BURIAL TRADITIONS IN THE LONGSHAN ERA

321

The Exceptional Case of the Taosi Culture

The Taosi culture in the Linfen Basin in the southwest of Shanxi is a special case. There were six large-sized “Grade I Type A” graves of the early Taosi Culture at the Taosi Site, each with a chamber of seven to eight metres2 . Whereas the second-level ledges and wooden coffins had existed, they were almost destroyed, leaving a large number of precious funerary objects in the chamber. For example, the grave M3015 covered an area of about eight metres2 and had a wooden coffin which had been ruined. In the ruins, there remained more than 200 funerary objects, including painted tuogu drums, pottery drums 陶鼓, chime stones 石磐, jade yue battle-axes 玉钺, V-shaped stone kitchen knives “V” 形石厨刀, painted pottery hu jars 彩绘陶壶, painted wooden dou pedestal plates 彩绘木 豆, wooden zu chopping boards 木俎, painted wooden granary-shaped funerary articles 彩绘木仓明器, pigs’ bones 猪骨, etc. In the other graves of this type even more important and valuable objects were found, such as painted pottery basins decorated with curled-up dragon patterns 彩 绘蟠龙纹陶盘. Below this grade of burials, there were other large- and medium-sized graves at different levels. Among them, M2172, a “Grade II Type A” grave, contained as many as 58 pairs of lower jawbones of pigs, and M2200, a “Grade II Type B” grave, had 132 pairs of lower pig jawbones neatly placed at the foot of the grave owner.27 At the Taosi Site, there was also a large-sized grave, i.e. M21, which belonged to the late Taosi culture. Covering an area of about 18 metres, the grave had 11 niches at the bottom of the four walls and a wooden coffin. In the earth filling the seriously ruined burial there was a young male skeleton, indicating the possible practice of burying living people as a sacrifice. In the ruins there were also more than 100 funerary objects, including painted pottery gui food vessels 彩绘陶簋, pottery dou pedestal plates 陶豆, stone kitchen knives 石厨刀, wooden chopping boards, pig bones, and jade artefacts such as cong jade pendants 琮, bi jade disks 璧, yue batter-axes, qi weapons 戚, beast-faced crown-shaped ornaments 兽面形 冠状饰, huang jade pendants 璜, etc. In addition, there were ten pigs,

27 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & The Municipal Bureau of Cultural Relics of Linfen (2015), The Taosi Site in Xiangfen: The 1978–1985 Archaeological Excavation Report, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 400–530.

322

J. HAN

each chopped open in half, which symbolized a highly ritualistic practice at the time of the interment.28 The large-sized graves of the Taosi culture were rich in funerary objects ranging from a large number of precious artefacts such as jade articles, painted potteries, and painted wooden objects, to many common and practical potteries and pig bones. These funerary objects reflected customs of people’s diet, etiquette and music at that time, and exhibited the concept of importance attached to both status and wealth, which distinguished the Taosi culture obviously apart from the late Taosi culture and other types of the Longshan culture in the Central Plains. The reason behind this difference was the migration of the Dawenkou culture and the Liangzhu culture from east to west and their subsequent fusion with local cultures that gave rise to the Taosi culture.29 Not only the jade objects, painted objects, tuogu drums and kitchen knives of the Taoso culture came from the eastern region, but its burial conventions were deeply influenced by the eastern tradition. Although the scale of its graves and the system of its inner and outer coffins cannot be compared with those of the Longshan culture, the Taosi culture manifested its own characteristics. That is to say, the burial custom of putting dual emphasis both on status and wealth reflecting the large-sized Taosi graves resulted in the integration of the cultures in the Central Plains and the eastern region.

18.6

Concluding Remarks

The afore-discussed three burial traditions in the Longshan Era show some correspondence to the three patterns which I have proposed about the origins of the Chinese civilization: the Haidai tradition corresponding to the Haidai sub-pattern of the Eastern Pattern, the Jianghan tradition to the Jianghan sub-pattern of the Eastern Pattern,30 and the Central Plains 28 According to the excavators’ understanding of the Taosi culture, the grave belonged to its middle period, which, according to me, is related to the late Taosi culture. The Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & the Institute of Archaeology of Shanxi Province, et al. (2003), “Tombs of the middle Taosi culture discovered on the Taosi City Site”, Archaeology, 9. 29 Han, Jianye (2001), “The Tangtao Clan’s conquest of the West Xia, and Houji, the Ancestor of Zhou Tribes, exiling Danzhu the son of Emperor Yao”, Journal of Peking University (Humanities and Social Sciences), 3. 30 Han, Jianye (2016), “A comparative study on the civilizing processes in the Central Plains and the Jianghan Region”, Jianghan Archaeology, 6.

18

THE THREE BURIAL TRADITIONS IN THE LONGSHAN ERA

323

tradition to the Central Plains Pattern and the Northern Pattern. While the burial tradition itself serves as an important but special constituent of the pattern of a civilization, the latter is also comprised of more components, including settlement patterns, social organization, division of labour and so on: meaning that the former does not always identify with the latter. It so happened that the geographical areas covered by the three burial traditions in the Longshan Era discussed above also corresponded to the areas where the ancient “three ethnic groups” “三民族” proposed by Meng Wentong 蒙文通 or the “three tribal groups” “三集团” of the age of legend 传说时代 proposed by Xu Xusheng 徐旭升 once lived.31 To be specific, the Haidai tradition corresponded to the Haidai people or the Dong Yi or “the eastern barbarian” tribal group 东夷集团, the Jianghan tradition to the Jianghan people or the Miao Man tribal group 苗蛮集 团, and the Central Plains tradition to the Heluo people or the Huaxia or the Chinese group, i.e. 华夏集团, which is an interesting thought. Genealogical lineage and geographical region, which have been conventionally employed by scholars to distinguish the “three ethnic groups” or the “three tribal groups”, have offered the conditions for the formation of different cultural customs, burial conventions and traditions. From a different perspective, this also proves that the ancient Chinese history of the age of legends had indeed a real historical background. (This section was originally published in Issue 4 of Jianghan Archaeology in 2019.)

31 Meng, Wentong (1999), Probes into Ancient History, Chengdu: Bashu Publishing House; Xu, Xusheng (1985), The Legendary Era of the Ancient History of China, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

PART III

Environmental Evolution, War and Conflict, and the Evolving Mechanism of Civilizations

CHAPTER 19

Holocene Loess: The Material Foundation of Early Chinese Civilization

After discovering the Malan loess and the Yangshao culture nearly eight decades ago, the Swedish geologist Johan Gunnar Andersson called the people who created the prehistoric Chinese culture “children of the yellow earth”.1 Yan Wenming regarded the Yangshao culture as the “baby of the Loess Plateau”.2 Liu Dongsheng, who devoted his whole life to loess research, maintained that Chinese people have “a close affinity with loess”, and that the sandstorm and the dust fall that brought loess to China are “gifts” which nature has bestowed on man; in addition, he put forward the concept of “loessal lithic industry”.3 Zhou Kunshu vividly described the sandstorm and the dust fall as “the Nile in the air”, and the Chinese culture as “the Loess Culture”.4 He also pointed out that “loess, as the main material foundation for the survival of the Huaxia nation,

1 Andersson, J.G. (1934), Children of the Yellow Earth—Studies in Prehistoric China, London: Kegan Paul, Trench, Trubner. 2 Yan, Wenming (1989), “A brief discussion on the origin and development stages

of the Yangshao culture”, in Research of the Yangshao Culture. Beijing: Wenwu Press, 122–165. 3 Liu, Dongsheng (1999), “Loessic lithic industry”, in New Advances in Prehistoric Archaeology—Proceedings of the International Symposium in Celebration of the 90th Birthday of Academician Jia Lanpo, Beijing: Science Press, 52–62. 4 Zhou, Kunshu (2007), Environmental Archaeology, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 179–181.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_19

327

328

J. HAN

i.e. the Chinese people, is a red thread running through the Chinese civilization”.5 To sum up, it can be said that the Pleistocene loess is the cradle of the Chinese Paleolithic cultures, and the Holocene loess is the main material foundation of Chinese civilization since the Neolithic. This paper aims to further argue that the Holocene loess is the main material foundation not only of the Huaxia civilization, but also of the entire early Chinese civilization; and that the characteristics of early Chinese civilization, such as agriculture-based, stable and modest, continuously evolving, and pluralistically integrated, are all closely related to its important material foundation, the Holocene loess.

19.1

The Potou Loess and the Zhouyuan Loess

The Holocene loess refers to the wind-formed loess deposits and paleosols formed during the Holocene epoch. The loess is mainly distributed in the Loess Plateau and its peripheral areas, including the lower reaches of the Yellow River, the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, the Heilongjiang River basin, the Liaohe River basin and southern China, which essentially correspond to most areas of present China.6 However, due to differences in geographical location and altitude, there are also obvious variations between these regions, and the loess mainly consists of the Potou Loess and the Zhouyuan Loess of Shaanxi Province, which are generally about one to three metres thick. The Potou loess refers to the underground dark loessal soil formed in the Holocene epoch and its overlying loess layer. It is named by Liu Dongsheng and other scholars after the Potou Site in Luochuan, Shaanxi. This type of loess is mainly distributed in the part of the Loess Plateau that is over 1000 metres above sea level. The dark loessal soil may have been formed in a cool-and-dry or cool-and-slightly-humid, forest-steppe environment.7 The Zhouyuan loess refers to the variegated loess, the brown–red surface underground soil, the brown surface underground soil 5 Zhou, Kunshu (2002), Pollen Analysis and Environmental Archaeology, Beijing: Xueyuan Press, 256. 6 Zhou, Kunshu (2007), Environmental Archaeology, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 179–181. 7 Liu, Dongsheng, et al. (1985), Loess and the Environment, Beijing: Science Press;

Zheng, Honghan (1984) “Holocene Loess in the middle reaches of the Yellow River”, Geochemistry, 3.

19

HOLOCENE LOESS: THE MATERIAL FOUNDATION …

329

formed in the Holocene epoch and the overlying loess layer. It is named by Zhou Kunshu after a typical soil profile from the Zhouyuan area in Shaanxi. And this type of loess is mainly distributed in the southeastern edge of the Loess Plateau, where the brownish-red buried soil was formed in a warmer and wetter climate.8 The Holocene loess is not only different in spatial distribution, but also variant in time, among which, the Zhouyuan loess can be classified into at least five different sedimentary layers (see Fig. 19.1).9 1. Cultivated soil: dark grey to greyish yellow silty soil, about 0.2–0.4 metres thick 2. Recent loess: (approximately 2000 BP), light yellow silty soil, about 0.3–0.5 metres thick. 3. Brown surface buried soil, (approximately 3000–2000 BP), brown clayey silty soil with thin clayey colloidal layer and many calcium carbonate crystals, a type of brown soil, and about 0.4–0.5 metres thick. 4. Brown–red surface burial soil: (approximately 8000–3000 BP), brown–red clayey silty soil with a thick clayey colloidal layer, containing iron agglomerates, a type of brown loam, and about 0.6–1.5 metres thick 5. Variegated loess, (approximately 10,000–8000 BP), brown-yellow, brown–red or grey-yellow silty soil, rich in calcium carbonate crystals, and about 0.2–0.5 metres thick. The formation of paleosols required various conditions, including raw material for loess, temperature, moisture and biological effects, and the Holocene climatic fluctuations could directly cause changes in these conditions, resulting in the formation of loess deposits with different textures and colours: the variegated loess and brown–red paleosols corresponding to the rising-temperature period of the early Holocene and 8 Zhou, Kunshu, & Zhang, Guangru (1991) “A briefing of the environmental archaeological survey of the Guanzhong Region”, in Environmental Archaeology, Beijing: Science Press, (S1): 44–46; The Integrated Scientific Expedition to the Loess Plateau of the Chinese Academy of Science (1991) The Natural Environment and Its Evolution in the Loess Plateau Region, Beijing: Science Press, 94–107. 9 Zhou Kunshu. (1995), “The relationship between the Zhou Yuan Loess and its cultural layers”, Quaternary Research, 2.

330

J. HAN

Fig. 19.1 Diagram of the relationship between the Zhouyuan Loess and its cultural layers (Adapted from Figure 1 of article “The relationship between the Zhouyuan Loess and its cultural layers by Zhou Kunshu)

the suitable climate period of the middle Holocene, while the brown paleosols and recent loess corresponding to the cool and arid period of the late Holocene.10 Specifically, at the beginning of the Holocene, the climate rapidly turned warm and humid. Melting snow and ice, abundant precipitation, and surging torrent had a strong erosion effect upon the loess areas with poor vegetation, which created new valleys and brought gravel deposits, thus resulting in a partial inconsistency in the lower

10 Shi, Yafeng, Kong, Zhaochen, & Wang, Sumin, et al. (1992), “The basic characteristics of climate and environment during the Holocene warm period in China”, in The Climate and Environment during the Holocene Warm Period in China, Beijing: Haiyang Press, 1–18; Zhou, Kunshu (1995), “The relationship between the Zhou Yuan Loess and its cultural layers”, Quaternary Research, 2.

19

HOLOCENE LOESS: THE MATERIAL FOUNDATION …

331

Holocene boundary, which was known as the Banqiao-period erosion.11 Afterwards, Holocene loess was deposited on top of it, and due to the warm and humid climate and the gradually increasing biological action, variegated loess was formed. In the middle Holocene, a suitable climate period, warm and humid climatic environment and the unprecedentedly enhanced biotic action both accelerated the soil formation rate significantly and formed brown–red paleosols with grain structure on the basis of loess. With the gradual lowering of temperature and increasing aridity in the late Holocene, the soil-forming conditions worsened and brown paleosols were formed. Especially after about 2000 BP, aridity became more and more obvious and soil formation became difficult, resulting in the recent loess deposit. The Potou loess should also have sedimentary layers similar to the Zhouyuan loess: the Heilu soil or dark loessal soil and the overlying loess of the former roughly corresponded to the brownish-red paleosols and recent loess of the latter. As for the sedimentary layers of the former that corresponded to variegated loess and brown paleosols of the latter, this still needs to be confirmed. The causes behind the formation of the different sedimentary layers should also be similar to each other. In addition, the brownish-red paleosol layer in the Zhouyuan loess is often more than one metre thick. Further there were several small-scale climatic fluctuations during the middle Holocene, including several cold periods of 7000, 5000 and 4000 BP, which should be reflected in this layer of paleosol and be further explored.

19.2

The Agriculture of the Holocene Loess

The most direct contribution of the Holocene loess to early Chinese civilization is manifested in the economic form. Holocene loess, as well as paleosols, is largely composed of silty sediments, which are loosely connected, highly porous and traversed by vertical capillaries that permit the sediments to fracture and form vertical bluffs. The brownish-red paleosols in particular have a grain-like structure, which can trap water and air well for plants to absorb nutrients and grow roots through capillary action. Within it, there are as many as 50 kinds of clastic minerals, which 11 Zhou, Kunshu (1997), “Local unconformity in the Lower Holocene of Northern China—Discussion on the Banqiao Erosion”, in Quaternary Geology and Environment of China, Beijing: Haiyang Press, 36–43.

332

J. HAN

are rich in nitrogen, phosphorus, potassium and contain more than forty plus types of trace elements and more than twenty types of amino acids.12 Most areas in Eastern China which are covered with Holocene loess and its secondary deposits are largely located in the mid-latitude region, and have either a temperate or subtropical climate. Also, under the heavy influence of the monsoon climate during hot and rainy seasons, these areas are thus cold and dry in winter, and hot and rainy in summer. The annual seasonal precipitation could meet the basic needs of plants. Therefore, the Holocene loess had indeed been a good breeding ground for early Chinese agricultural culture, which had become the most extensive agricultural-based civilization in the world at that time. Agriculture of early China mainly included dry farming of foxtail millet and common millet in the Yellow River and western Liaohe River basins, and rice-based farming in the Yangtze and Huaihe River basins, with dry farming of wheat appearing only in the Yellow River basin over 4000 years BP. In the profile of Beijing East Hulin Site,13 grey-yellow or light brown-yellow silty soil deposits and light brown paleosol layers were found on the lower Holocene unconformity surface, which corresponds to the Early Neolithic cultural layers containing pottery. Early Holocene variegated loess is also commonly found in the Central Plains area. The presence of loess and paleosol layers in the early Holocene pushes the origin of dry farming of foxtail millet and common millet in northern and Central Plains back to as early as 10,000 years BP, while the origin of rice farming in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River and the junction areas of southern China should be even earlier.14 In the Middle Holocene, the rise of rice-dry farming in both the Peiligang culture, and the subsequent development of the Yangshao culture,

12 Liu, Dongsheng, et al. (1966), The Material Composition and Structure of Loess, Beijing: Science Press; Wen, Qizhong, et al. (1989) Geochemistry of Loess in China, Beijing: Science Press. 13 Hao, Shougang, Ma, Xueping, & Xia, Zhengkai, et al. (2002), “The loess profile of the early Holocene Site of Zhaitang East Hulin, Beijing”, Geology Journal, 76(3). 14 Yuan, Jiarong (2002), “The rice and pottery from 10,000 years BP at Yuchanyan, Dao County, Hunan Province”, in Rice, Pottery and Urban Origins, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 31–41; Zhang, Chi (2000) “The early pottery and rice phyllosilicate remains from 10,000 BP in Jiangxi Province”, in Rice, Pottery and the Origin of the City, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 43–49.

19

HOLOCENE LOESS: THE MATERIAL FOUNDATION …

333

the Longshan culture, and the cultures of the late Xia and Shang dynasties were based on the brown–red paleosol layer.15 The Weihe River basin, the Fenhe River basin, the Hebei Plains and the lower reaches of the Yellow River were no exception. Meanwhile, there were also different types of soils in other regions, such as the Heilu soils or the dark loessial soils of the Loess Plateau and the dark brown paleosols of central-south Inner Mongolia, and these soils had all constituted the basis for the vigorous development of local agricultural culture in the middle of the Holocene. Even the contemporaneous cultural prosperity of the western Liaohe River basin 西辽河流域 and the Li River basin 澧水流域 was closely related to the paleosol layer formed mainly by the loess parent material then.16 This phase was also the most critical period for the rise, formation and development of early Chinese civilization, and to a certain extent, it can be said that it was these brown–red paleosols that had nurtured early Chinese civilization. In the late Holocene, when the growth of paleosols in the Guanzhong region significantly weakened17 and the Zhouyuan loess developed into brown paleosols, the agricultural conditions in the Guanzhong region gradually deteriorated, which may have been one of the reasons for the Zhou people to move east to replace the Shang Dynasty. In the northern regions, the soil condition then was even worse and significantly hindered agricultural development. As a consequence, most of the former farming lands became semi-agricultural and semi-pastoral areas. The northern tribes hence moved southward frequently and imposed great pressure on the already struggling agricultural tribes, which resulted in the rebellion of Quanrong 犬戎之乱 (referring to a historical war that took place at the end of the Western Zhou Dynasty: Quanrong, a nomadic tribe during the Zhou Dynasty, killed King Yu of Zhou and destroyed the Western Zhou) and the migration of the King Ping of Zhou to the east 平王东迁.

15 Zhou, Kunshu, et al. (2009), “An environmental analysis of the rise of agriculture in the Peiligang culture”, Study of the Chinese Civilization and the Songshan Civilization, Beijing: Science Press; Cultural Relics Team of Luo Yang (2002) Report of the 1992– 1993 Excavation of the Erlitou Cultural Settlement Zaojiaoshu Village of Luoyang, Beijing: Science Press. 16 Zhou, Kunshu (2002), Pollen Analysis and Environmental Archaeology, Beijing: Xueyuan Press, 263. 17 Huang, Chunchang (2000), “Resource degradation and the evolution of human-land relations in the Weihe River Basin over 3100 BP”, Scientia Geographica Sinica, 20(1).

334

J. HAN

(In 770 BCE, after the death of King You of Zhou, his son King Ping of Zhou was crowned as the emperor of Zhou Dynasty and moved the capital from Haojing to Luoyi to avoid the invasion of Guanzhong region by the Quanrong tribe.)18 Obviously, the deterioration of Holocene loess was closely related to the arrival of a period of agricultural hardship, which would affect the adjustment of cultural patterns and the transformation of civilizational stages.

19.3 The Appearance of the Early Chinese Civilization Hunters would move with animals, and herders would seek areas with adequate water and grass. Migration, expansion and search for new resource areas were both regular occurrences in hunting and herding societies and effective ways to sustain their survival. In the long term, this pattern of life would even give rise to an extroverted and expansive social character, even after the migrants’ settlement. However, things are different for a farming society. Agricultural production needs more time. The selection of seeds, the maintenance of land fertility, the preparation of production tools and facilities, and the transmission of production experience, all require long-term stability of the habitat and society. In the long run, a stable and introverted social character would be cultivated. The Early Chinese Cultural Sphere or the Cultural Early China began to take shape in the Peiligang Era around 8000 BP, came into being in the Miaodigou Era of the Yangshao culture, was followed by the strong Xia Dynasty in the late Longshan Era, and developed with new achievements during the Shang and Zhou periods.19 Although the Early China had experienced a long history of development for thousands of years, its main scope was limited to the areas to the east of the present-day Hexi Corridor in China, and there has, in principle, been no large-scale outward expansion. It was not because this civilization could not expand

18 Han, Jianye (2008), The Natural Environment and Cultural Development of the Pre-Qin Period in Northwest China. Beijing: Wenwu Press. 19 Han, Jianye (2005), “On the ‘division’ and ‘merger’ of the early Chinese cultural cycles”, Historical Review, (Supplement issue); Han, Jianye (2009), “The migratory influence of the Peiligang culture and the formation of the Early Chinese Cultural Sphere”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2.

19

HOLOCENE LOESS: THE MATERIAL FOUNDATION …

335

outward, but because it did not intend to do so, which also reflects the stable and introverted nature of the early Chinese society. Starting from the Miaodigou Era of the Yangshao culture, around 6000 BP, the Early China took its first step towards civilization, and after 2500 BCE, i.e. the Longshan Era, it should have entered the stage of the early guojia or “state” with the Central Plains as the core, which was then followed by the three generations of mature civilization. In general, the process of “civilization” of a society is always accompanied by brutal wars and class oppression, and the Early China was no exception. But the creation of rituals added harmony and elegance to the early Chinese civilization, and some scholars even suggested that rituals were the most important feature of the “Chinese model” of the origin of civilization.20 In contrast, bronze smelting technology was mainly used for weapons and tools in the west, but in China, it was mainly used for casting ceremonial vessels, especially those of large size. The ritual system and common knowledge were the keys to the long-term stability of the complex and vast early Chinese society, which could not have been achieved through power alone. The emergence of the ritual system was in turn a result of the long and stable development of the early Chinese society. Both the formation of a stable and introspective character in Early China and the emergence of the ritual system must have been related to the fact that this large, relatively enclosed area of land was generally covered with Holocene loess, thus supporting a huge and stable agricultural society.

19.4 The Continuity of Early Chinese Civilization Around 5000 BP, a temperature drop caused an overall southward shift of the vegetation zone, which led to the deterioration of environmental conditions for soil and crop in northern China. In the meantime, the hunting populations from the north migrated southward and occupied areas controlled by the former agricultural culture along the eastern part of the Great Wall, forcing the agricultural population of these areas to migrate southward. Contemporaneously, the river basins of the

20 Bu, Gong (2007), The Chinese Model of the Origin of Civilization, Beijing: Science Press.

336

J. HAN

Yangtze and Huai River entered a period of prosperity and development, and exerted some influence on its northwest direction. In these times, the early Chinese society was fated to experience complex turmoil and frequent wars, though the result was a gradual advance into an early civilization.21 Around 4000 BP, the dry and cold climate intensified, and the pastoralists, who originated in the southeast of the Urals and typically used by horse-drawn chariots 马拉战车 (a chariot with two wheels, towed by two horses, mainly found in the nomadic tribes), ran around attacking and invading, leading to the decline of civilizations in the Two River basins, the Nile Basin and the Indus Basin.22 Even though they also gave rise to the increase of the livestock elements in the cultures of Qijia, Zhukaigou and Lower Xiajiadian, they did not in the end pose a direct threat to early Chinese civilization. On the contrary, the introduction of bronze technology, the horse-drawn chariots, and other factors stimulated the rise of the Erlitou bronze civilization.23 After 3000 BP, the incursions of nomadic tribes caused widespread political and cultural restructuring in Eurasia, and the southward expansion of nomads along the Great Wall of China also threatened the stability of the Zhou Dynasty occasionally, but did not, in essence, shake the foundations of the early China. The reason behind this situation was that since the early China was vast in size, the impact of the cooling climate on natural environment and culture varied from place to place and would not cause an overall decline of the whole country. Agricultural people would also migrate, but in general they could easily found familiar loess, which would not cause a fundamental shift in production methods and ideologies. Although hunting and herding people often moved south at times, they usually only influenced the agricultural population close to the northern borders, and could not fundamentally shake the solid foundation of the early Chinese

21 Han, Jianye (2006), “The influence of the climatic events on the culture of northern China 5000 and 4000 BP”, in Research in Environmental Archaeology, Beijing: Peking University Press, 3: 159–163. 22 Wu, Wenxiang & Liu, Dongsheng (2001) “The cooling events around 4000 BP and the birth of Chinese civilization”, Quaternary Sciences, 21(5); Wang, Shaowu (2005), “The sudden climate change of 2200–2000 BCE and the decline of ancient civilizations”, Progress in Natural Science, 15(9). 23 Han, Jianye (2009), “The rise of the Erlitou bronze civilization”, Journal of National Museum of China, 1.

19

HOLOCENE LOESS: THE MATERIAL FOUNDATION …

337

agricultural society. Apparently, it was the relatively closed geographical situation of China which was covered with a huge volume of Holocene loess that gave the early Chinese agricultural society more options and room when it faced considerably great changes in the natural environment, enabling the Chinese civilization to develop continuously without interruption. Zhang Guangzhi has pointed out that the ancient Chinese civilization “when seen from an ideological perspective, was created within the framework of a holistic cosmology”. Since this cosmology emerged early and continued throughout whole ancient China, he thus called Chinese civilization a “continuity” in order to distinguish it from the “ruptures” of the Western civilizations.24 In fact, the development of the Early China itself was itself continuous, which provides a historical account for the continuity of this holistic cosmology.

19.5

Concluding Remarks

Yan Wenming held that the early Chinese culture was characterized by homogeneity and diversity, and exhibited a “double-flowered” pattern 重 瓣花朵式 with the Central Plains in the centre of the flower.25 We can also ascribe to the early China a “centralized pluralistic” pattern. Of course, the formation of this pattern should first be attributed to the geographical traits of China, but it was also related to the distribution of Holocene loess. China itself is a large and relatively independent geographical unit, which determines the indigenous nature of its prehistoric cultural origins and the relative independence of its developmental path. The widespread distribution of Holocene loess across China provided people with a relatively consistent production basis and a more convenient channel of for the communication of production methods, thus forming a more common cultural accumulation and value standard. This was the basis for the unity of the early Chinese culture.

24 Zhang, Guangzhi (1990), “Continuity and rupture: A draft of a new theory of the origin of civilization”, in Chinese Bronze Age (2 vols.), Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 131–142. 25 Yan, Wenming (1987), “The unity and diversity of the prehistoric Chinese culture”, Cultural Relics, 3.

338

J. HAN

However, China’s topography is complex, its climate is complicated, and its Holocene loess is varied in thickness and properties, so that the economic methods and customs of the people from different regions are also distinctive. For example, in the north, both the intensive dry farming with merger harvest, and the hunting- and livestock-centred economy have played an importance role, whereas in the south, the fine cultivation of rice-based farming and the gathering- and fishing-oriented economy have long lasted. All of these have constituted the fundamental reasons for the cultural diversity of the early China. The Central Plains were situated right at the heart of the early China, with a favourable annual average temperature, precipitation and sensitivity to climatic change. Under these moderate climatic conditions, the potential of Holocene Zhouyuan loess could evolve to the maximum.26 As the “centre of the world under heaven”, the Central Plains area was the only place that had the special conditions to influence the whole world when prosperous and to take advantage of the strengths of others when at a low ebb. This was the reason for the core position which the Central Plains had played in the formation and development of the early China.27 In the mind of the ancient Chinese people, the great earth was originally yellow in colour. “The sky is dark and the earth is yellow”. (The Book of Changes ·Classical Chinese) “天玄而地黄” 《周易·文言》 ( ) Heaven and earth 天地乾坤 nurture all things. Even Emperor Huang 黄帝, the first of the Five Emperors, was thus called “because he possessed the properties of loess”. (This is an ancient saying of the five elements, referring to the role of the Yellow Emperors in initiating and developing agriculture. He was called the Yellow Emperor because the colour of the earth was yellow.) (Records of the Grand Historian·Chronicles of the Five Emperors ) ( 《史记·五帝本纪》 ). (This section was originally published in the China Heritage Newspaper on 24 April 2009).

26 Zhou, Kunshu, Zhang, Guangru & Cao, Bingwu (1993), “The ancient culture and environment in the Central Plains”, in Study on the Historical Evolution of Chinese Living Environment (Vol. 1), Beijing: Haiyang Press, 111–122. 27 Han, Jianye (2004) “Study on the historical status of the Central Plains culture in the Neolithic”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1.

CHAPTER 20

The Impact of the Climatic Events of 5000 to 4000 BP on the Culture of Northern China

Previous studies have shown that the Holocene climate has also experienced fluctuations between warm and cold temperatures and between humid and arid conditions.1 Though there was the well-known “Megathermal period” from 8500 to 3000 BP, the “Megathermal period” itself was not consistently stable.2 There appeared at least two distinct and brief cold and arid periods in 5000 BP and 4000 BP, respectively. The “Megathermal period” coincided with contemporaneous human cultural development at its zenith. It is thus worth examining how the short periods of extremely cold and arid climate had affected the development of human culture, how human cultures had responded to the climate change, and how effective those measures had been. Answers to these questions may also serve as a warning to modern people who are accustomed to favourable climate. To this end, this part chooses to focus on the northern region of China, which is sensitive to climate change.

1 Zhu, Kkezhen (1972), “A preliminary study of the climate changes in China in the last five thousand years”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1. 2 Shi, Yafeng, et al. (1992), “The climate fluctuations and important events during the Holocene warm period in China”, Scientia Sinica (Series B), 12.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_20

339

340

J. HAN

20.1

The Cold and Dry Climate at About 5000 BP

The extremely dry and arid period around 5000 BP has been studied with quite a lot of revealing findings in several prior studies. When that climate struck, the coastal areas of China were below sea level3 ; the Ordos 鄂尔多 斯 region, which lies in the south-east of Inner Mongolia, met with cold and dry weather conditions4 ; the water level of the Daihai-Huangqihai 岱海-黄旗海 lakes area in Ulanqab 乌兰察布 of Central Inner Mongolia plummeted to unprecedented low, and a periglacial climate appeared,5 so much that its cooling effect could even have been felt around the globe.6 In fact, the growing cold and arid tendency had started as early as about 5500 BP, but reached its peak at around 5000 BP. To date, the significant impact of this climatic event on the cultures of northern China can be observed in at least the following three aspects. Firstly, the southward shift of the climate zone led to substantial changes to the cultural landscape, especially the appearance of many “blank” areas within the former agrarian culture-based region. During the late Yangshao period7 around 5500–5000 BP, the Haishengbulang type 海生不浪类型 of the Yangshao culture showed up 3 Zhao, Xitao & Zhang, Jingwen (1985), “The basic characteristics of the Holocene sea surface changes along the Chinese coast”, Quaternary Sciences, 6(2). 4 Shi, Peijun (1991), Theory and Practice of Geographic Environment Evolution Research: Research of the Geographic Environment Evolution of the Ordos Region since the Late Quaternary, Beijing: Science Press. 5 Liu, Qingsi., Wang, Jiaxing & Li, Huazhang (1991), “The evolutionary characteristics of the Holocene lakes in the northern agrio-pastoral interlacing zone”, Regional, Environmental and Natural Disaster Geography, Beijing: Science Press; Liu, Qingsi & Li, Huazhang (1992), “The Holocene environmental evolution of the agrio-pastoral interlacing zone (the Daihai-Huangqihai region) in northern China”, The Holocene Environmental Evolution and Prediction of the Agrio-Pastoral Interlacing Zone in Northern China, Beijing: Dizhi Press. 6 Shi, Peijun & Fang, Xiuqi (1992), “A comparative study on the Holocene environmental evolution of the Agrio-pastoral mosaic belt zone in northern China and the Sahar Belt in Africa”, in The Holocene Environmental Evolution and Prediction of the Agrio-Pastoral Interlacing Zone in Northern China, Beijing: Dizhi Press; Zhou, Shangzhe, et al. (1991), “A preliminary study on the millennial-scale environmental changes in the Holocene of western China”, in Environmental Archaeology Research (Vol. 1), Beijing: Science Press. 7 Yan, Wwenming (1989), “An investigation of the settlement patterns in the Neolithic period of China”, in Essays in Honour of 55 Years of Su Bingqi’s Archaeological Research, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

20

THE IMPACT OF THE CLIMATIC EVENTS OF 5000 TO 4000 …

341

in the Daihai 岱海, Huangqihai 黄旗海 and Shangdu 商都 regions of central-south Inner Mongolia; the late Hongshan culture 红山文化 and Phase I of the Xueshan culture 雪山文化 was scattered in the Haihe River basin along northern Shanxi, central and northern Hebei, and the Beijing-Tianjin regions, and the western Liaohe River basin along the southeastern Inner Mongolia and western Liaoning regions8 ; in the region between the Second Songhua River and the eastern Liaohe River lay Phase III of the Zuojiashan culture 左家山文化 and so on; in the eastern Liaohe River basin, there was the Pianbaozi culture 偏堡子文化; and on the Liaodong Peninsula there was the Xiaozhushan Middle Layer culture 小珠山中层文化.9 Where these cultures had originally been essentially sedentary and predominantly agriculture-based, they became largely desolate after 5000 BP for a long time insofar as the agrarian culture was concerned. Of course, no potteries or settlements were found pertaining to this period (see Fig. 20.1). It can thus be surmised that the southward shift of the climate zone caused by this extreme temperature drop must have adversely affected the agricultural development in this region; and both the limited productivity and the lack of effective countermeasures at that time might have led to the abandonment of agriculture. In addition, the southward movement of the northern nomadic tribes might have also accelerated the depletion of agricultural culture in this region. Research evidence shows that people from some tribes in Phase I of the Xueshan culture had migrated westward to regions in Gansu and Qinghai provinces at that time, prompting the transformation of the Majiayao type 马家窑 类型 into the Banshan type 半山类型—the ultimate destination of the agrarian culture of this region remains unknown till today, though. Secondly, the southward shift of the climate zone and the sharp decrease in natural resources brought about unprecedented tensions and frequent warfare between tribes. Around 5000 BP, despite the lack of signs of cultural depletion in the regions of Baotou 包头 and Ordos of Inner Mongolia, a multitude of stone cities suddenly appeared there. Erected on either hilltop or hillside, these cities were easy to defend and difficult to attack. Whereas these facts

8 Han, Jianye (2003), Research on the Neolithic Cultures in Northern China, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 9 Su, Bingqi, Yan, Wenming & Zhang, Zhongpei. eds. (1994), A General History of China (Vol. 2), Shanghai: Shanghai Remin Press.

342

J. HAN

Fig. 20.1 Oscillation of the northern boundary line of pottery between 6000 and 4000 BP

show a predominant defensive function10 and reveal an unprecedented tension between tribe groups, they also serve to tell the story that primitive warfare had been an important thing in people’s daily life. Along with the cold and arid climate, there appeared a sharp decrease of resources; and frequent warfare would then ensue between neighbouring settlement clusters or adjacent regions to gain control of limited resources. In the meantime, the climate change would force the northern nomadic tribes to migrate southward, which could also become the cause of constant warfare.11 In this sense, war would become one of the means to which people resorted in response to the extreme climate events. On the other 10 Tian, Guangjin (1993), “A study of the sites of the stone city settlements along the Great Wall of Inner Mongolia and other related problems”, in Proceedings of the International Symposium in Honour of the 60th Anniversary of the Excavation of the Chengziya Site, Jinan: Qilu Shushe Press. 11 The rise in the number of fine stone yue arrowheads might have been related to the growing influence of the hunting tribes.

20

THE IMPACT OF THE CLIMATIC EVENTS OF 5000 TO 4000 …

343

hand, warfare would require powerful organizers, increase social polarization and stimulate social progress to some extent—but it could also inflict dreadful disasters upon people’s life. Thirdly, the increasing forest degradation led to drastic changes in people’s settlement patterns. The emergence of the above-mentioned stone cities and the elevated location of the settlements were, in essence, important manifestations of the changes in people’s settlement patterns. In addition, there had appeared other relevant changes, including the prevalence of stone-walled 石墙 houses in the regions of Baotou and Ordos at that time, and the dissemination of kiln-styled or cave dwellings 窑洞 from central Shanxi to most areas of the Loess Plateau 黄土高原. Unlike the previous semicrypt 半地穴式 wooden dwellings, stone-walled and kiln-styled dwellings would require little wood. Such a choice should not have been made for the protection of the environment but rather out of necessity, and might have been related to the increasing forest degradation.12

20.2

The Cold and Dry Climate at About 4000 BP

Around 4000 BP came another cold and arid period, the beginning of which dates back to approximately 4300 BP. At that time, China’s coastal areas came below sea level once again.13 Seen from the cross section data from the rivermouth of the Muhuahe River 苜花河 of the Daihai region of Inner Mongolia, the temperature in the Daihai region dropped to almost 0 °C at around 4300 BP, the precipitation dropping significantly.14 The temperature drop was also established in Europe, Canada, Africa and other parts of the world, thus being a global climate event. The 12 Yan, Wenming (2000), “The implications of the Daihai archaeology (Preface)”, in Daihai Archaeology (I): Collection of Excavation Reports of the Laohushan Cultural Sites, Beijing: Science Press. 13 Zhao, Xitao & Zhang, Jingwen (1985) “Basic characteristics of the holocene sea surface changes along the Chinese coast”, Quaternary Sciences, 6 (2). 14 Liu, Qingsi., Wang, Jiaxing & Li, Huazhang (1991), “The evolutionary characteristics of the Holocene lakes in the northern agrio-pastoral interlacing zone”, in Regional, Environmental and Natural Disaster Geography, Beijing: Science Press; Liu, Qingsi & Li, Huazhang (1992), “The Holocene environmental evolution of the agrio-pastoral interlacing zone (the Daihai-Huangqihai region) in northern China”, in The Holocene Environmental Evolution and Prediction of the Agrio-Pastoral Interlacing Zone in Northern China, Beijing: Dizhi Press.

344

J. HAN

impact of this extreme climate change on the culture of northern China was reflected in at least the following four aspects. Firstly, the southward shift of the climate zone led to a series of chain reactions in cultural patterns, resulting in small-scale “blank areas” in the areas formerly dominated by the agrarian culture. With the temperature rise at the early Longshan Era (around 4500 BP), the agrarian culture eventually rose once again in the “blank areas” located along the Daihai-Zhangjiakou-Beijing-Tianjin-Dalian line 岱 海-张家口-京津-大连 and grew stronger. But till about 4300 BP, the Laohushan culture essentially disappeared in the Daihai region, leaving the region a “blank” state of agricultural culture again.15 It is likely that under the dual pressure of the southward migration of the nomadic tribes and the deteriorating conditions for agricultural development, the Laohushan culture, which had been distributed in the south-central Inner Mongolia, northern Shaanxi, north-central Shanxi and northwestern Hebei, rapidly expanded southward replacing the highly developed Taosi type 陶寺类型 in the Linfen Basin 临汾盆地, and featured elements such as the pottery li cauldrons 鬲, the microlithic yue 钺 arrowheads, and the divination practice to the south of the Yellow River and even to parts of Shandong Province. It is also likely that due to the same climatic influence, along with the pressure from the Laohushan culture, Phase III of the Wangwan culture which was mainly located in central and western Henan expanded southward on a massive scale and replaced the Shijiahe culture. It can be seen that in coping with the extreme climate, the northern cultures adopted more proactive strategies, achieving the intended results. Secondly, warfare became fiercer and more frequent. The replacement of the Taosi type by the Laohushan culture and the replacement of the Shijiahe culture by Phase III of the Wangwan culture were not only drastic in extent, but also large in scale. Such replacements were clearly the consequence of wars, and records of such warfare were preserved in the legends of later generations. While one of them corresponds to the event of “Ji’s banishment of Danzhu”,16 which marked 15 Inner Mongolia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2001), The Daihai Archaeology (I): Collection of Excavation Reports of the Laohushan Cultural Sites, Beijing: Science Press. 16 Han, Jianye (2001), “The Tangtao Clan’s conquering of the West Xia and Houji the Ancestor of Zhou Tribes exiling Danzhu the son of Emperor Yao”, Journal of Peking University (Philosophy and Social Science Edition), 4.

20

THE IMPACT OF THE CLIMATIC EVENTS OF 5000 TO 4000 …

345

the decline of the Tangtao clan, the other deals with the well-known “Yu’s conquest of the Miao Man tribe”,17 which symbolized the birth of the Xia Dynasty. In addition, the frequent outbreak of warfare is mainly manifested in the increase and popularity of specialized weapons, with bows and arrows and yue battle-axes being the most representative. Besides, the repeated discovery of certain usual excavations, such as graves containing multiple corpses, decapitated corpses and mutilated bodies, also reveals the catastrophe inflicted on people by brutal wars. On the other hand, these large-scale wars had generated a group of powerful military chiefs, thus laying the foundation for the Chinese society to emerge as a mature state and then enter a civilized stage. Thirdly, climate fluctuations caused constant flooding and inflicted severe damage on human culture. In the topographic profile of the Daihai region, a 50-cm-thick gravel layer had formed after the Laohushan culture (about 4300 BP), indicating that there had occurred large-scale flooding and alluvial processes. The sudden disintegration of the Laohushan culture in the Daihai region might have been related to either the climate fluctuation or the sudden outbreak of flash floods. While there is no contradiction between the general cold-and-arid tendency in climate change and the sudden increase of rainfall in the short term, the latter happens to correspond to the socalled Great Flood in the legendary era of Emperor Yao and Emperor Shun. Fourthly, environmental degradation eventually led to a change in economic forms and patterns. After 4000 BP, there emerged the Gaotaishan culture 高台山文化 in the East Liaohe River basin; the Lower Xiajiadian culture 夏家店 下层文化 in the West Liaohe River basin and the north and south of the Yanshan Mountains18 ; the Zhukaigou culture 朱开沟文化 in central and southern Inner Mongolia, northern Shaanxi and northern-central

17 Yang, Xingai, & Han, Jianye (1995), “Yu the Great quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 18 Li, Boqian (1990), “On the Lower Xiajiadian culture”, in Collection of Papers in Celebration of the 30th Anniversary of the Founding of Archaeology at Peking University, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

346

J. HAN

Shanxi19 ; and the Xindian culture 辛店文化, the Siwa culture 寺洼文 化 and the Siba culture 四坝文化 in regions of the Gansu and Qinghai provinces.20 Although these cultures were mostly based on agriculture, the portion of animal husbandry increased significantly, and the use of large pastures for grazing cattle and sheep had become common practice in the northern region. The change in the economic pattern may have been linked to the environmental degradation and southward shift of the steppe belt at that time. It is on this basis that the agro-pastoralist and animal husbandry-based cultural belt, which featured elements such as potteries with snake pattern 蛇纹陶器 and the Ordos bronzes, gradually came into being along the Great Wall in the north. In response to the extreme climate, the northern agrarian cultures, lying in a sensitive zone, had apparently adopted new and effective strategies: instead of leaving their destiny to chance or migrating to faraway places, they changed their economic patterns to accommodate the climatic transformation; and instead of being disagreeing with the foraging or nomadic cultures from the north, they amalgamated increasingly with these outsiders. These measures had contributed to both cultural continuity and the protection of the environment.

20.3

Implications from the Two Extreme Climate Events

The comparison of the effects of these two climatic extremes leads to the following five implications. Firstly, the impact of the climatic extreme around 5000 BP was extremely dramatic. This might be attributed to the suddenness or magnitude of the climate event or the lack of experience in response to such events. In comparison, the impact of the climatic extreme around 4000 BP was milder, which might be attributed to the fact that this change had come slightly slower or attacked less severely, or that people had already gained experiences in effectively responding to these events. 19 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region, & the Ordos Museum (2000), The Zhukaigou Site: Excavation Report of the Early Bronze Age Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 20 Shui, Tao (2001) “A study on the cultural structure and economic form in the Gansu-Qinghai region in the Bronze Age”, in Northwest China in the Bronze Age, Beijing: Science Press.

20

THE IMPACT OF THE CLIMATIC EVENTS OF 5000 TO 4000 …

347

Secondly, despite the fact that they were all situated in the north, the cultures had responded differently to the extreme climate events. In the regions of Gansu and Qinghai provinces, the response was moderate; the Loess Plateau mostly ranked next in severity; the Daihai-Huangqi region, the Sangan River basin 桑干河流域 and the east of the West Liao River basin the most intense. This difference might be attributed to the fact that the eastern region was more sensitive to climate change than both the central and western regions. Thirdly, in case of extreme climate, different responding strategies may bring about entirely different consequences. Appropriate adaptation to environmental changes and adjustment of economic structure and resource consumption are obviously effective ways to cope with climate extremes. Negligence of environmental conditions and stubborn adherence to the traditional economic mode will only lead to self-destruction. Fourthly, extensive social unrest and landscape restructuring may occur during an extreme climate. Societies with imbalanced internal control mechanisms are much more prone to destruction amid climatic changes than those with low levels of productivity. Fifthly, the periods of extreme climate coincided with the periods of rapid social development in China. Around 5500 BP when the climate became increasingly cold and arid, China began to move towards civilization and entered the Chalcolithic age.21 About 5000 BP, when the extreme dry and arid climate struck, a country still in its embryonic state emerged and China crossed the threshold of civilisation. At approximately 4000 BP, a country in its mature state appeared and China stepped into the Bronze Age. Frequent warfare during times of extreme climates, accompanied by large-scale human migration and relatively concentrated population, may serve to stimulate human creativity, which, to a certain extent, will promote social productivity. All these effects will, moreover, serve to spur people’s desire for wealth and power, thus helping to create a group of powerful organizers and cause radical social complexity.

21 Yan, Wenming (1992), “A brief discussion on the origin of the Chinese culture”, Cultural Relics, 1.

CHAPTER 21

Heroes in Chaotic Times, Civilization Out of Turbulent Age: Formation of the Early Chinese Civilization and Cold-Dry Climate Events

The claim about the Chinese civilization as one with five thousand years of history has been increasingly validated by archaeological evidence. Su Bingqi held that Chinese civilization essentially developed into either a guguo “ancient state” 古国 stage (i.e. the first step of an ancient country—fangguo vassal state 方国—diguo empire 帝国 trajectory) or an early civilized society around 5500 BP. Yan Wenming further pointed out that the origin of Chinese civilization commenced at the dawn of the Chalcolithic Era, at about 5500 BP. These conclusions have already become the consensus among many Chinese archaeologists. Recently, the State Council Information Office 国务院新闻办公室 held a press conference on the “Comprehensive Research Project on the Origin and Early Development of Chinese Civilization” (i.e. the Exploration of the Origin of Chinese Civilization) “中华文明探源工程”, a national research programme launched in 2002 with an aim to trace the origins of Chinese civilization. At the press conference, it was clearly stated that “all regions of China successively entered the stage of civilization from 5300 BP”. Among the symbols that would display the formation of the early Chinese civilization more than 5000 years ago, the most prominent is the Liangzhu culture in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River. The magnificent and complex dams and hydraulic systems, large-scaled city sites covering millions of square metres, grand palatial and religious © China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_21

349

350

J. HAN

areas, “grave mountains” exclusively enjoyed by noble chieftains, “king’s graves” containing hundreds of precious jade wares, and complex but explicit hierarchical divine emblems shared across a vast region, they all indicated that a “regional monarchical power” 区域王权 of the Taihu region had emerged in the Liangzhu culture, with a strong capacity for social organization and management. Thus, the Liangzhu culture leapfrogged the “chiefdom” 酋邦 stage and stepped into the stage of either an early guojia state 国家 or an early civilization. Previously, Su Bingqi, Yan Wenming, Zhang Zhongpei, Zhao Hui and others have discussed the entry of the Liangzhu culture into a civilized society; and recently Colin Renfrew, a British scholar, and Liu Bin, the excavator of the Liangzhu Site, collaboratively published an article, further arguing that the Liangzhu society is “the product of the earliest state as a society in East Asia”. In general, the emergence of a civilization would always be accompanied by the interaction with other civilizations or cultures, and the Liangzhu civilization is no exception. Around 5000 BP, the Dawenkou culture in the Haidai region and the Qujialing culture in the middle reaches of the Yangtze River were highly influential, too. Both cultures featured big cities and large-sized burials and entered or were about to enter a civilized society. When these cultures met on the border at the height of their expansion, they would have inevitably collided with each other. For instance, the presence of human sacrifices in the burials clearly proves that wars had broken out in northern Jiangsu Province between people from the Liangzhu and Dawenkou cultures. In contrast, the culture of the Central Plains, which dates back to more than 5000 BP, was experiencing a relatively low ebb, lacking super-large ancient cities, luxurious tombs and precious funerary objects comparable to those of the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River and the Haidai region. In fact, the radiating effect of the Qujialing and Dawenkou cultures had reached most areas of the southeastern Central Plains. Thus while we employed the concept of “the Central Plains Pattern” 中原模式 to emphasize the plain and reserved qualities of the Central Plains, there is no denying the fact that the Central Plains was experiencing a relative decline. It should be noted that around 6000 BP the strong expanding effect of the core area of the Central Plains led to the intermingling of most regions in the present-day China and the formation of the original “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere”. Slightly later, there appeared in the Central

21

HEROES IN CHAOTIC TIMES, CIVILIZATION OUT …

351

Plains regions both large settlements covering the several million square metres and “palatial” buildings measuring several hundred square metres, which further demonstrated that this region had indeed once been strong and prosperous for a while and taken the initiative to stepping into a civilized society as early as 6000 years ago. The pressure that the Central Plains then faced came not only from the south and the east, but also from the north. From 6000 BP, due to continuous north-bound human migration from the Central Plains to central and northern Inner Mongolia, northern Shaanxi, northern and central Shanxi, and northwestern Hebei, which were collectively known as “the northern region” in a narrow sense, the Yangshao culture, similar to the contemporaneous culture of the Central Plains, came into existence. However, around 5500 BP, this north-bound migration gradually subsided; conversely, regional features grew rapidly within the northern culture, some elements of which such as painted pottery even penetrated southward and reached the northern boundary of the Central Plains. Around 5000 BP, in the vast area ranging from Xilinguole, Inner Mongolia to the Daihai and Huangqihai regions, which were once controlled by agricultural cultures, there appeared cultural fault lines 文 化断层 and desolation 空白. It is most likely that the population in these areas had migrated southward on a large scale, placing the Central Plains under great pressure. In fact, the northern culture itself might have faced an even bigger challenge. Around 5000 BP, many “stone cities” were erected in Erdos in Inner Mongolia and northern Shaanxi. Most of these cities did not host high-level buildings, but were built on the top of steep hills, equipped with solid gates, and featured prominent military defence functions. These cities were in essence stone-walled fortresses. It is very likely that these “stone cities” were built to respond to the threat from the south-bound people from the northern region, such as Xilinguole, and the Daihai and Huangqihai regions, and even those south-bound hunting groups from the steppe located on the north of the Yinshan Mountains. Around 5000 BP, there was a state of turmoil all across the present-day China. As for the cause, it should be closely related to the contemporaneous dry and cold climate. This cold-dry event started from about 5500 BP and reached its peak in about 5000 BP. The water level of many lakes such as Daihai, Huangqihai, Gonghai and Tiaojiaohai, etc., dropped to unprecedented lows, an ice-age climate emerged, and a short, cold and dry period of loess development prevailed among the Holocene paleosols.

352

J. HAN

This cold-dry climatic event led to the degeneration of vegetation and agricultural conditions in the inherently sensitive northern areas. The appearance of cave-styled and stone-walled buildings might be attributable to the deterioration of forest resources. The sudden increase of bone-stemmed stone-blade knives 骨梗石刃刀 and micor-litholithic zu arrowheads 细石器镞 indicated an increase in hunting activities. In the further northern region, the living conditions became even worse. In places such as the Daihai-Huangqihai region, there even occurred cultural “barrenness” 中断, resulting in a chain reaction of multiple southward migrations. On the contrary, in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River and the lower reaches of the Yellow River, the seas receded and exposed vast fertile plains, offering unprecedented opportunities for the cultural development of these regions and giving birth to the splendid Liangzhu civilization. The rise of Liangzhu settlement groups and the emergence of settlement groups in the late Dawenkou culture in southeastern Shandong were directly related to the drop of the sea surface. In contrast, the situation in the Central Plains was in between that of the northern and southeastern regions: limited by its agricultural conditions, this region was experiencing a temporal cultural decline. The south-bound migration of people from the north and the westbound migration of people from the southeast led to fierce cultural clash followed by intermingling in most regions of present-day China, known as “times of chaos” 乱世. Nevertheless, this was also an era when states flowered, coexisting in great numbers and heroes mushroomed. Wars became the top preoccupation that people needed to face on a daily basis, and erecting cities, building defences and improving apparently mostly defensive weapons. Further, the prominence of patrilineal families, the elevation of military chieftainship, and the widespread emergence of central settlements became the requisite responses to challenges in social organization. Consequently, the end result was that from then on, China entered the copper-and-stone age, i.e. the Chalcolithic Age, and most regions of present-day China entered the initial stage of a civilized society, with regional civilizations such as the Liangzhu civilization emerging. For the early China, with its vast and diverse geographical conditions, a warming or cooling climate will have left noticeable effects of varying degrees on different regions, and different cultures may have responded in their own ways. Therefore, the evolution of climatic environment itself did not directly lead to the prosperity or decline of the whole early Chinese culture, but only brought an opportunity for cultural change.

21

HEROES IN CHAOTIC TIMES, CIVILIZATION OUT …

353

The formation of the early Chinese civilization was, to some extent, attributable to this climate change moment around 5000 BP. (This section was originally published in China Social Science Today on 28 September 2018.)

CHAPTER 22

Neolithic Wars and the Evolution of Early Chinese Civilization

Undoubtedly, there existed warfare in China during the Neolithic period. This is a conclusion which is supported by archaeological evidence,1 such as weapons (e.g. zu arrowheads 镞 and yue battle-axes 钺), defence facilities (e.g. moats and city walls), mass graves and so on, as well as legendary and ancient historical accounts.2 From an archaeological point of view, the large-scale wars of the Neolithic Age should have started around 4000 BCE, followed by similarly noteworthy ones around 3000 BCE and 2000 BCE, which coincided with the three critical stages of the early Chinese civilization, i.e. the germination, formation and maturation. So, what is the relationship between warfare and the evolution of civilization; did 1 Yan, Wenming (1997), “The birth and development of civilization in the Yellow River

basin”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 1; [JP] Okamura, H. (1997), “Warfare in the Neolithic period of China”, translated by Zhang, Yushi, Huaxia Archaeology, 3; Qian, Yaopeng (2000), “An examination of prehistoric weapons and their military significance”, Relics and Museology, 6; Qian, Yaopeng (2003), “An examination of the social significance of prehistoric defense facilities in China”, Huaxia Archaeology, 3; He, Deliang (2005), “A preliminary study of prehistoric warfare in China”, Prehistory (2004), Xi’an: Sanqin Press, 195–212; Qian, Yaopeng (2009), “A preliminary study of the axe and battle-axe system in ancient China”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1; Song, Kexin (2018), “A preliminary study of warfare in the chiefdom period in Shandong”, Yindu Journal, 1. 2 Xu, Xusheng (1985), The Legendary Age in Ancient Chinese History (new ed), Beijing: Wenwu Press.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_22

355

356

J. HAN

warfare enhance civilization, or did civilization abet warfare? This is a key question concerning the mechanism of civilizational evolution, which deserves further exploration.

22.1

Warfare at 4000 BCE

The Miaodigou 3 Era, dating back to around 4000 BCE, is the first phase that witnessed large-scale warfare in China during the Neolithic, or, more specifically, the Late Neolithic. Warfare of this phase was mainly triggered by the rapid expansion of the core area of the Central Plains, and was manifested in at least the following three aspects. Firstly, it involved a large area. At that time, the DongzhuangMiaodigou type of the Yangshao culture expanded further from the core area of Central Plains which included southern Shanxi Province, western Henan Province and eastern Guanzhong region, resulting in an unprecedented unification of the entire Yangshao culture4 within a short period of time. Meanwhile, the Yangshao cultural elements such as the petal patterns of pottery spread to the Yellow River valley, the middle and lower Yangtze River valley, and the western Liao River valley,5 thus forming a centralized cultural pattern with multiple streams 有中心多元一支 in most parts of China and giving birth to “the Early China Cultural Sphere” or “the Early China” in a cultural sense.6 It is unlikely that such a widespread and dramatic change in the cultural landscape was the result

3 The Miaodigou Culture is a type of Yangshao culture. Centred on the provinces of Henan, Shaanxi, and Shanxi, it had a great influence on the culture of the surrounding areas. 4 The Yangshao culture refers to an important Neolithic culture distributed in the middle reaches of the Yellow River from Gansu Province to Henan Province, which lasted from about 5000–3000 BCE. 5 Su, Bingqi (1965), “Some issued about the Yangshao culture”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1; Yan, Wenming (1989), “A brief discussion of the origin and development stages of the Yangshao culture”, Research on the Yangshao Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 122–165; Zhang, Zhongpei (1991), “Several issues about the archaeology of the Eastern Inner Mongolia Region”, Essays on the Archaeology and Culture of the Eastern Inner Mongolia Region, Beijing: Haiyang Press, 3–8; Wang, Renxiang (2011), The Wave of Art in Prehistoric China: A Study of the Painted Pottery of the Miaodigou Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 6 Han, Jianye (2012), “The Miaodigou Era and “the Early China”, Archaeology, 3.

22

NEOLITHIC WARS AND THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY …

357

of normal cultural exchange, and therefore, it should be associated with large-scale warfare. Secondly, the change was magnificent in extent. The peripheral sites of the Dongzhuang-Miaodigou type, as well as other sites of the Yangshao culture in the middle and upper Yellow River valley and the surrounding areas, basically all evolved into a cultural landscape similar to that of the core area in the Central Plains. And in some areas, there were even traces of sudden cultural “collapse” 崩溃. For example, with the strong influence of the westward movement of the Dongzhuang 7 -Miaodigou type, the Banpo type8 in Shaanxi and Gansu provinces evolved into the Shijia-Quanhu type, which bore a great semblance to the DongzhuangMiaodigou type. Such sites may be found as far west as in eastern Qinghai Province and in northwestern Sichuan. For another instance, in the northwestern region of Hebei, the remains of the Hougang 9 type were completely replaced by other cultural types which were similar to the Miaodigou Type; further, in the plain area of Hebei, the once prosperous Hougang type of the Yangshao culture disappeared abruptly, leaving only a few remains of the Diaoyutai type which were similar to the Miaodigou culture. Thirdly, there appeared specialized weapons. At that time, the specialized weapons of stone or jade yue battle-axes 钺, developed on the basis of the stone fu axes 斧, began to become popular in the Central Plains. The best-known example is the guan yu shifu tu 鹳鱼石斧图 or guan yu yue tu 鹳鱼钺图, the colour painting of a big-eyed stork holding a fish in its beaks, with a pretty axe which symbolized military power on its right side on the “Yichuan jar10 ” 伊川缸 (see 1 in Fig. 22.1) found in Yan Village, Ruzhou, Henan. According to Yan Wenming, this depiction might have been used to commemorate the victory of the White Stork Clan over the Silver Carp 7 The Dongzhuang Site, located in Yuncheng City, Shanxi Province, is one of the important sites for the study of the Yangshao culture. 8 The Banpo type is the earliest dated local type of the Yangshao culture in the middle and lower reaches of the Wei River. 9 The Hougang type mainly refers to the remains of the Longshan culture represented by the culture of Hougang site Phase II in Anyang, Henan Province. 10 The Yichuan jar is a Yangshao cultural relic.

358

J. HAN

Fig. 22.1 “Th stork, fish, and stone-axe design”, and the jade and stone yue battle-axe. (1. “Th stork, fish, and stone-axe design” [from the Yancun Site]; 2. The Stone yue battle-axe [from the Laofengang Site M3:6]; 3 & 4. The jade yue battle-axe [from the Xipo Site M6:1 & M34:7])

Clan,11 or it might have been a “monumental” picture of the celebration of the victory of a bird worshiping culture, i.e. the Maidodigou type, over a fish worshiping culture, i.e. the Banpo type. Whichever might it have been, the “axe” or “battle-axe” was already endowed with the symbolic meaning of military power. The discovery of the perforated stone yue battle-axes (see 2 in Fig. 22.1)12 in the burials at the Laofengang Site in Xixia, Henan, and

11 Yan, Wenming (1981), A Preface to The Stork-Fish-and-Stone-axe Design, Cultural Relics, 12. 12 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, & Nanyang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2012), “The excavation report of the Laomenggang Site of the Yangshao culture in Xixia, Henan”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2.

22

NEOLITHIC WARS AND THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY …

359

the perforated jade yue battle-axes13 (see 3 and 4 in Fig. 22.1) in the burials at the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan, further proved that people at the Miaodigou Era began to put stone yue battle-axes in large burials in order to indicate the status of a military chief which the grave owners might have attained. The expanding cultural influence of the core area in the Central Plains began around 4200 BCE, that is after the formation of the Dongzhuang type. The cultural expansion was obviously accompanied with the migration of people. For example, the Wangmushan Poxia 王墓山坡下 type of the Yangshao culture, which suddenly appeared in the Daihai region, was almost identical to the Dongzhuang culture in southwest Shanxi. This phenomenon must be the result of a human migration from southwest Shanxi to the north along the Fen River.14 Meanwhile, there seemed to be no significant social complication in the core area of the Central Plains; instead, there was only a significant increase in the density of sites. It is thus presumed that the optimum climate of the mid-Holocene allowed for the relatively rapid development of millet-based agriculture and a sharp increase in population, which then prompted the human migration from the Central Plains to other regions. Slightly later, in the 4th millennium BCE, large-sized houses measuring hundreds of metres2 —public “palatial halls”, which also served as the residences of chiefs—appeared at multiple remains such as the Xipo Site, in Lingbao, Henan, and the Xiahe Site in Baishui, Shaanxi, suggesting an early emphasis on difference in social status in the Central Plains. The salience of the chiefs’ status was thus highly likely to be associated with their leadership in warfare.

13 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2010), The Xipo Cemetery in Lingbao, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 14 Tian, Guangjin (1997), “On the prehistoric archaeology of south-central Inner Mongolia”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2; Inner Mongolia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, et al. (2003), The Archaeology of the Daihai Region (III)—Collection of Excavation Reports on the Yangshao Culture Sites, Beijing: Science Press.

360

J. HAN

The large-sized burials of the early Dawenkou culture in Tai’an, Shandong15 and those of the Songze 16 culture at the Dongshancun Site in Lianyungang, Jiangsu17 show that there appeared, in the early 4th millennium BCE, a noticeable social polarization between the rich and the poor and increasing social complexity in the lower valleys of both the Yellow River and the Yangtze River. This is also the next region that saw the dawn of civilization after the core area in the Central Plains. The painted potteries with petal-shaped decorative patterns from the early Dawenkou large burials constituted the physical evidence that the Dawenkou culture was heavily influenced by the eastward expansion of the Miaodigou type. It is thus presumed that the inception of its civilization may also be linked to the influence and stimulation of the Miaodigou type. The Songze culture was also once influenced by the Miaodigou type. Thus, the influence of the Miaodigou type on these areas may be attributed to warfare, as well. Later, from the beginning of the Chalcolithic Age in 3500 BCE, especially after 3300 BCE, under the further influence from the Central Plains and the Hadai regions, the Yellow River valley, the Yangtze River valley and the western Liaohe River valley were moving in the direction of civilization. In addition to the large-sized burials of the Xipo Site in Lingbao, Henan, and the palatial building complexes in Gongyi, Henan, other representative remains include the “palatial hall-styled” houses at the Dadiwan Site in Qin’an, Gansu, the ritual remains consisting of “temple, altar and mound” at the Niuheliang Site in Lingyuan, Liaoning, as well as the large burials at the Jiaojia Site in Zhangqiu, Shandong, and the large-sized burials luxuriously furnished with jade at the Lingjiatan Site in Hanshan, Anhui.

15 Such as M2005 covered an area of 8.2 metres2 and had 104 pieces of funerary objects. See Shandong Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (1997), Sequel to the Dawenkou Site—Report on the Second and Third Excavations of the Dawenkou Site, Beijing: Science Press, 121–123. 16 The Songze culture is about 6000–5300 years old and belongs to the transition stage of Neolithic matriarchal society to patriarchal society. 17 Suzhou Museum, & Zhangjiagang City Cultural Relics Management Committee (2000), “Excavation brief of the Dongshan Village Site of Zhangjiagang City”, Cultural Relics, 10.

22

NEOLITHIC WARS AND THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY …

22.2

361

Warfare at 3000 BCE

The last phase of the Yangshao culture, i.e. around 3000 BCE, saw the second phase of large-scale warfare in China’s Neolithic period, more specifically, the late phase of the early Chalcolithic period. At that time, the culture of the Central Plains was not as influential as that in the Miaodigou Era, while the power of the Loess Plateau region of Gansu and Shaanxi provinces increased. With the southward movement of northern cultures, the westward expansion of eastern cultures, and the northward advance of southern cultures, many states appeared in Central Plains, existing with each other and competing for the leadership of this vast land. Two phenomena in the northern region are particularly noteworthy. One is that the Daihai and Huangqihai regions, which once comprised many Haishengbulang 18 type 海生不浪类型 sites of the Yangshao culture, as well as the further northern regions including Shangdu, Huade and Sonid Right Banner 苏尼特右旗 suddenly became “deserted” by about 3000 BCE.19 Judging from the large amount of human bones found inside and outside the dwellings from the Miaozigou Site 庙子沟遗址 in the Chahar Right Front Banner20 察哈尔右翼前旗 of the Yellow Banner Sea area 黄旗海地区, even though there were many burial pits and burial goods and the human bones were flexed in line with the local custom, there can be little secret about the cause of their death. Probably there had been outbreaks of sudden disasters such as plague21 and blizzard at that time, causing large numbers of people to perish. And the survivors, after hastily burying the deceased, had to migrate either southward or

18 Haishengbulang is the collective name for the sites excavated in the south-central region of Inner Mongolia, and an archaeological culture of the late Neolithic period. 19 Han, Jianye (2006), “The influence of the climate events of 5000 and 4000 PB on the culture of northern China”, Research in Environmental Archaeology, the 3rd series, Beijing: Peking University Press, 159–163. 20 Chahar Right Front Banner is located in the central part of the Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region and the south-central part of Ulanqab City. 21 Wei, Jian (1991), “A preliminary analysis of the issue related to the Miaozigou and Dabagou sites”, Collection of Studies on the Primitive Cultures in South-Central Inner Mongolia, Beijing: Haiyang Press, 113–118; Inner Mongolia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2003), The Miaozigou and Dabagou Sites, Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press.

362

J. HAN

westward.22 Following the migration of large numbers of people in the northern region, unrest and warfare would ensue inevitably. The other noteworthy phenomenon is that, at that time (3000 BCE), people of the Ashan-III-type 阿善三期 of the Yangshao culture suddenly erected many stone fortresses on the hills in Ordos of Inner Mongolia and northern Shaanxi Province. These fortresses were generally defended on three sides by cliffs, with the side of the entrance protected by solid stone walls 石墙, urn gates 瓮城 and watchtowers 瞭望台, suggesting outstanding military defence capacity (see Fig. 22.2).23 It is also possible that several fortresses might have been combined in a linear fashion to provide an overall defence effect similar to that of the Great Wall in later times.24 These fortresses may have served as defence against people from further northern regions and neighbouring groups. The underlying cause for this defence might be attributed to a significant dry-and-cold climatic event25 in the eastern monsoon region of China around 3000 BCE. Due to the change of climate, it might have been difficult to sustain agriculture in the Daihai and Huangqihai areas and the further northern regions. Additionally, with natural disasters rampant, large numbers of

22 There is evidence that the formation was related to the westward migration of type of the Yangshao culture and Phase I “The formation of the Banshan Type and Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 3.

of the Banshan type of the Majiayao culture eastern cultures such as the Haishengbulang of the Xueshan culture. Han, Jianye (2007), the westward migration of eastern cultures”,

23 Inner Mongolia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (1997), “The Zhaizita Site in Zhunger”, Collection of Studies in Cultural Relics and Archaeology in Inner Mongolia, 2nd series, Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press, 280–326. 24 Su, Bingqi (1994), “The significant cultural traces of Liaoning that symbolize

China”, The Hua People, Heirs of the Dragon, the Chinese People—Archaeological Roots, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 92; Han, Jianye (2008), “A preliminary discussion on the early stone city Northern China as the ‘prototype’ of the Great Wall”, Huaxia Archaeology, 1. 25 Liu, Qingsi, Wang, Jiaxing & Li, Huazhang (1991), “The characteristics of the Holocene lake evolution in the northern agrio-pastoral interlacing Zone”, Regional, Environmental, and Natural Disaster Geography, Beijing: Science Press, 1–7; Liu, Qingsi & Li, Huazhang (1992),“Holocene environmental evolution of the agiro-pastoral interlacing zone (the Daihai-Huangqihai region) in northern China”, The Holocene Environmental Evolution and Prediction of the Agrio-Pastoral Interlacing Zone in Northern China, Beijing: Dizhi Press, 16–54.

22

NEOLITHIC WARS AND THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY …

Fig. 22.2 Layout of the Zhaizita settlement

363

364

J. HAN

people would have to resort to migration, which consequently would trigger warfare. Contemporaneously, the Dawenkou culture in the east and the Qujialing culture 屈家岭文化 in the south forcefully expanded westward and northward, respectively. As a result of its eastward expansion, the eastern border of the Dawenkou culture once spread to most of eastern Henan and its artefacts such as zun tripod cauldrons 尊26 and bei cups 杯 were brought to southern Shanxi and the Guanzhong region. As for the Qujialing culture, its northern border covered most of southwestern Henan and most of southeastern Henan, and its artefacts such as xiefubei cups with a slanted belly 斜腹杯 were extended to southern Shanxi. Meanwhile, the Miaodigou type II of the Yangshao culture in the western Central Plains extended southeastward to Luoyang, Henan, with its elements such as basket-strip pattern 篮纹 reaching the Haidai region27 in its east and the Jianghan (the Yangtze and Han rivers) region28 in its south. Thus, the central region of Henan, which had previously been relatively self-contained, became the frontline of the confrontation between the three major cultures: the Dawenkou, the Qujialing 29 and the Yangshao cultures, and it would thus be plausible for the people from these three cultures to clash and battle with each other. Of course, the Dawenkou culture itself had several ancient cities such as the Dantu Site 丹土遗址 in Wulian, the Jiaojia Site 焦家遗址 in Zhangqiu. The Qujialing culture had about twenty ancient cities such as the Shijiahe Site 石家河遗址, and the Yangshao culture had even more ancient cities, indicating that there also might have been frequent conflicts and wars within these cultures. The Liangzhu culture from southeast China should not have had a direct confrontation with the cultures from the Central Plains because in between them lay the Dawenkou Culture. However, during its northward expansion, the Liangzhu culture must have had fierce warfare with the Dawenkou culture. Yan Wenming maintained that the burials in the Huating Cemetery 花厅墓葬 in Xinyi, Jiangsu, where human sacrifice was found, were attributable to the “collision and fusion” of the 26 Ancient wine containers. 27 The zone between the Bohai Sea and Mount Tai in Shandong Province. 28 The Jianghan Plain, located in the south-central part of Hubei Province, is named

after the alluvial accumulation of the Yangtze and Han rivers. 29 The Qujialing culture is a Neolithic culture of the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River first discovered in 1954 in Qujialing, Jingshan City, Hubei Province.

22

NEOLITHIC WARS AND THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY …

365

Liangzhu and the Dawenkou cultures.30 Within the Liangzhu culture, there appears to have been only one super-sized central settlement, i.e. the Liangzhu Ancient City, suggesting that it was highly unlikely for internal warfare to occur during its zenith. However, its rapid occupation of the Liangzhu region in its formative period may have been accompanied by wars, a possibility which can be supported by the large number of burial items such as jade and stone battle-axes which might demonstrate the importance of military power. The widespread social unrest and warfare around 3000 BCE would further accentuate the status of the chief leader, strengthen his military power, widen the social stratification and reinforce social organization. As a whole, this situation might have been the historical background against which different regions across central and eastern China were generally developing their civilizations at that time. Among them, the Liangzhu culture which was situated in the east, primarily devoted itself to the development of its internal economy and the maintenance of its social order. Its large-scale civil and hydraulic projects and irrigated rice farming strengthened the power of its chief, making it a pioneer in the development of a single-centred civilization in the Liangzhu region, or a guguo “ancient state” civilization with regional kingship power. Nevertheless, the Liangzhu culture only waged a limited number of wars in the process of its expansion, and was therefore mainly confined to the Jiangnan (southeastern China) region, situating it far behind the Dawenkou and Qujialing cultures in territorial expansion. Within these latter two cultures, however, there stood many ancient cities which might have failed to form a unified centre. Furthermore, the scale of their burial sites and the value of their funerary items were slightly inferior to those of the Liangzhu culture, indicating that these two cultures might only stand on the threshold of a rudimentary regional civilization. In the largesized settlement site located in Nanzuo Village, Qingyang, eastern Gansu Province, there appeared a palatial building measuring more than 600 square metres, showing that the degree of social development in the western Loess Plateau then was no less than that of both the lower Yellow River valley and the middle Yangtze River valley. As for the northern region, due to the dry and cold climate and difficult living conditions, it had undergone limited social stratification and 30 Yan, Wenming (1990), “Collision and fusion—Reflections on the burial situation in the Huating Cemetery”, Cultural Relics World, 6.

366

J. HAN

labour division. However, similar to the eastern cultures, the jiazu clan as a social institute was given particular emphasis. In the meanwhile, wars had given rise to large-scaled social institutions. The situation in the Central Plains region lay between the eastern and the northern regions. After 2500 BCE, on the basis of the solid local culture, and thanks to the contribution of the eastern cultures including the Liangzhu, the Dawenkou and the Longshan, primitive civilizations such as the Taosi 31 and the Shimao 32 regional civilizations emerged in both central and northern China.

22.3

Warfare at 2000 BCE

During the late period of Longshan culture, i.e. around 2000 BCE, China entered the third phase of large-scale Neolithic wars (in the Late Copperand-Stone or Chalcolithic Age exactly). Within this phase, there emerged at least three massive waves of southward cultural expansion and human migration (see Fig. 22.3). Amid the large-scale conflicts of this phase, the Central Plains region gradually reclaimed its core status. The first wave of southward movement came from the Laohushan culture in the northern region. Due to the extreme dry and cold climate33 around about 2200 BCE, people of the late Laohushan culture were forced to move down south on a large scale. The Pre-Longshan period: (a) the Laohushan Culture, (b) the Taosi Culture, (c) Phase III of the Wangwan culture, (d) the Shijiahe

31 The Taosi Site which is located in Xiangfen, Shanxi, is a site of the Taosi type of the Longshan culture in the middle reaches of the Yellow River in China. 32 The Shimao Site is the largest discovered city site in China from the late Longshan culture to early Xia Dynasty period, located in Yulin City, Shaanxi Province. 33 Tian, Guangjin & Shi, Peijun (1997), “A preliminary study on the environmental archaeology of the Great Wall zone in Northern China”, Inner Mongolia Cultural Relics and Archaeology, 2; Fang, Xiuqi & Sun, Ning (1998), “The cooling vent: Possible reasons for the disruption of the Tiger Mountain culture at Daihai 4.3 ka BP”, Human Geography, 1.

22

NEOLITHIC WARS AND THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY …

367

Fig. 22.3 The southward moving trend of the late Longshan Culture

Culture, (e) the Yuchisi type of the Dawenkou Culture, (f) the Liangzhu culture The Post-Longshan period: (A) the late periods of the Laohushan and Taosi cultures, (B) Phase III of the Wangwan Culture and the Xiaojiawuji Culture, (C) the Zuolvdai Culture and the Guangfulin Culture Pottery: (1) jia vessel 斝 (Taosi M3002:32), (2, 3) li cooking vessel 鬲 (Youyao H186:1, Taosi III H303:12), (4) high-collar guan jar 高 领罐 (Xiaojiawuji H80:2), (5, 6) short-collar urn 矮领瓮 (Wadian IV T3H30:5, Xiaojiawuji H254:8), (7–9) ding tripod 鼎 (Guangfulin H128:3, Wangyoufang Hl6:1, Guangfulin TD9:5)

368

J. HAN

The once prosperous Daihai region, along with the area to its north, became culturally “desolate” again. Meanwhile, a multitude of stone fortresses were erected on the hills in Ordos of Inner Mongolia, northern Shaanxi, and northern and central Shanxi once again. Among these stone fortresses, the stone city at the Shimao Site in Shenmu City of Shaanxi is the most representative. It had triple city walls, magnificent city gates, the mamian-bastion or barbicans and protruding ramparts 瓮城马面 (see Figs. 22.4 and 22.5),34 which strengthened its defence to the utmost. Against the backdrop of the southward migration of the northern people, it is conceivable that the war was a common event then; and therefore, even a super-central settlement like the Shimao Site had but to strengthen its defence. It is also highly likely that as a powerful northern “state” formed by absorbing the essence of the culture of Central Plains, Shimao would wage wars against foreign tribes or clans. The numerous pits full of young female skulls found near the city walls were probably used to bury the skulls of the female captives. After all, the most obvious evidence for the southward expansion of the Laohushan culture is that a large number of potteries such li cooking vessels 鬲 with a big mouth, a round belly and three bagged feet, were brought into the Linfen Basin in southern Shanxi, pushing the Taosi culture into its late period.35 Meanwhile, there also occurred violent scenes such as massacres, mass burials, abuse of women and destruction of large burials (see Fig. 22.6).36 Apart from the ancient city of Taosi, destruction of burials was also seen in Xiajin, Linfen and the Qingliangsi Site in Ruicheng. The Laohushan culture further expanded southward, to the vast areas in the middle and lower Yellow River valley, disseminating its pottery li cooking vessels with

34 Shaanxi Provincial Archaeological Research Institute, et al. (2013), “The Shimao Site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archaeology, 7; Sun, Zhouyong & Shao, Jing (2016), “Tracing the origin of the mamian-bastion—Focusing on the eastern gate of the outer city of the Shimao City Site”, Archaeology, 6. 35 Han, Jianye (2006), “The periodization and genealogy of the Miaodigou IILongshan culture in Southwest Shanxi and West Henan”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2. 36 Shanxi Team of the Institution of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social

Sciences, & Shaanxi Provincial Archaeological Research Institute, et al. (2005), “Report on the excavation of the Taosi Site in Xiangfen, Shanxi in 2002”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3; Gao, Jiangtao (2017), “A preliminary analysis of the phenomenon of ‘tomb destruction’ at the Taosi Site”, Archaeology of the Three Dynasties (Vol. 7), Beijing: Science Press, 345–254.

22

NEOLITHIC WARS AND THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY …

369

Fig. 22.4 Plan of the eastern gate of the outer city of the Shimao Site

a big mouth, a round belly and three bagged feet 陶鬲, microlithic zu arrowheads 细石器镞, divination bones and other artefacts.37

37 Han, Jianye (2007), “The expansion and external influence of the Laohushan culture”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 1.

370

J. HAN

Fig. 22.5 Orthophotos and contour superposition of the mamian-bastions and corner towers at the eastern gate of the outer city of the Shimao City Site

Fig. 22.6 Human bone remains in the Taosi Site (From: “Report on the excavation of the Taosi Site in Xiangfen, Shanxi in 2002”) (1. IHG8 human skulls [partial]; 2. IHG8 a female skeleton)

The second wave of southward expansion came from the Wangwan culture38 in the Central Plains. Around 2100 BCE, the late Wangwan culture advanced southward on a large scale, incorporating the vast area in southwestern and southeastern Henan, and northern Hubei into the 38 The Wangwan Site is located in the western suburbs of present-day Luoyang, and spans five thousand years from the Yangshao culture to the North and South Dynasties (589 AD).

22

NEOLITHIC WARS AND THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY …

371

Wangwan culture,39 and turning the cultural landscape of the Jianghan Plains and even the regions along the Dongting Lake into one much similar to that of the Wangwan culture. The range of this cultural change covered an area larger than the whole area of the present-day Hubei Province. As the main centre of the original Shijiahe culture, the ancient city of Shijiahe was destroyed, and there occurred a large number of urn burials. Hundreds of thousands of red pottery cups and red pottery statues, which were once extremely characteristic, basically disappeared. Apparently, a radical change had taken place here.40 The weapons used by the people of the Wangwan culture in their fight against those of the Shijiahe culture included mainly yue battle-axes, mao spears 矛, gongjian bows and arrows 弓箭, etc. Of these weapons, the mao spears were a new type, and the stone jianzu arrowheads were in various forms and well-polished (see Fig. 22.7). The third wave of the southward expansion occurred after the formation of the Zaolvtai culture in eastern Henan around 2000 BCE. This culture then expanded in the southeast direction to the Jianghuai region,41 leaving sites in multiple places in Jiangsu Province, including the Nandang Site at Xinghua County42 and the Zhoubeidun Site at Gaoyou County,43 and exerting profound impact on the inception of the Guangfulin culture in the Jiangzhe region.44 Although the decline of the Liangzhu culture should be inherently attributed to environmental changes, its demise might be related to the wars caused by the southward expansion of the Zaolvtai culture. 39 The Wangwan culture refers to the archaeological culture of the Central Plains hinterland in the late Longshan Period after about 2400 BCE., also known as Henan Longshan culture. 40 Yang, Xingai & Han, Jianye (1995), “Exploration of ‘Yu’s the Great quelling the unrest of the three Miao tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 41 The Jianghuai region is the area between the Yangtze River and the Huai River. 42 Archaeological Research Institute of Nanjing Museum, et al. (1995), “The Nandang

Site in Daijiashe Village, Xinghua, Jiangsu Province”, Cultural Relics, 4. 43 Archaeological Research Institute of Nanjing Museum, et al. (1997), “Excavation report of the Zhoubeidun Site in Gaoyou, Jiangsu Province”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 4. 44 Archaeological Research Department of Shanghai Museum (2002), “Excavation brief of the Guangfulin Site at the Songjiang District, Shanghai, 1999–2000”, Archaeology, 10; Archaeological Research Department of Shanghai Museum (2008), “Excavation brief of the Guangfulin Site at the Songjiang District, Shanghai, 2001–2005”, Archaeology, 8.

372

J. HAN

Fig. 22.7 Stone weapons of the Wangwan (III) and Shijiahe cultures. (1– 8. The Shijiahe Culture, the Xiaojiawuji Site [AT1205:1, H84:4, AT2019:4, AT1506:11, AT1408:10, AT603:6, H37:1, H42:168]; 9–16. Phase III of the Wangwan culture, the Haojiatai Site [M45:8, T11B:113, T43:24, T10D:50, T9A:46, T12D:5, T11A:21, T55A:6] [1 & 9 were yue, 3–8 & 11–16 were zu])

The series of cultural expansion from north to south and the subsequent wars around 2000 BCE had occurred with a domino effect, leading directly to the restructuring of China’s landscape of civilization. The cultures of the Jianghan plains and the Jiangzhe (Jiangsu-Zhejiang provinces) regions rapidly declined, and three main cultures, including the Central Plains, the Haidai region and the northern region, began to emerge with a tripartite confrontation and the Central Plains enjoying

22

NEOLITHIC WARS AND THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY …

373

an obvious core status. Later, around 1800 BCE, the Erlitou 45 bronze civilization arose in the Central Plains. When its influence reached most parts of China, the Chinese civilization entered the stage of a mature wangguo or “kingdom” 王国 characterized by a vast territory and extensive power.46 In this sense, the wars in the late Longshan Era around 2000 BCE laid the foundation for the glorious civilization of the next three generations.

22.4

Concluding Remarks

The wars of the Neolithic period in China can be roughly corroborated by some of the legendary and ancient historical accounts. Xu Xusheng has systematically sorted and delineated the warfares among the Huaxia (the Chinese ethnic groups), the Dongyi (the eastern barbarian groups) and Miao Man tribes on the basis of relevant written documents.47 Ye Shuxian held that tribal conflicts and conquering wars played a critical role in enhancing the evolution from chiefdoms to guojia ancient states.48 Based on archaeological findings, the author also proposed that it is communication and mutual influence (including wars) among the three major ethnic groups 三大集团 that promoted the formation of the early Chinese civilization. In particular, the findings with regard to the third stage of warfares around 2000 BCE fits rather well with the legendary and ancient historical legends. For instance, the southward advance of the Laohushan culture to Linfen, Shanxi, might correspond to the legendary story of “Ji fang Danzhu”, i.e. “Houji the Ancestor of Zhou Tribes exiling Danzhu the son of Emperor Yao” 稷放丹朱,49 and the southward penetration 45 The Erlitou Culture is located in Yanshui, Luoyang City, Henan Province, and its age is about 3800–3500 BCE, which is equivalent to the Xia and Shang Dynasty period in ancient literature. 46 Xu, Hong (2009), The Earliest China, Beijing: Science Press; Han, Jianye (2010), “The cultures of Liangzhu, Taosi and Erlitou—The evolutionary path of the early Chinese civilization”, Archaeology, 11. 47 Xu, Xusheng (1985), The Age of Legends in Ancient Chinese History, 1st ed., Beijing:

Wenwu Press. 48 Ye, Shuxian (1993), “Tribal conflict and wars of conquest: The opportunity for the evolution of chiefdoms into states”, Journal of Historical Science, 1. 49 Han, Jianye (2001), “The Tangtao Clan’s conquering of the West Xia and Houji the Ancestor of Zhou Tribes exiling Danzhu the son of Emperor Yao”, Journal of Peking University (Philosophy and Social Science Edition), 3.

374

J. HAN

of Phase III of the Wangwan culture into the Jianghan Plains accords with the legend “Yu zheng sammiao”, i.e. “Yu the Great quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes” 禹征三苗.50 Through these two great conquests, not only were the powerful three Miao Man groups subjugated but also the core area of the Central Plains had shifted from southwest Shanxi Province to central Henan Province, initiating the new political and cultural landscape of the early Xia Dynasty. In summary, there existed such a relationship between the warfare in Neolithic China and the origin of civilization: first of all, the suitable climatic conditions would lead to rapid agricultural development and drastic population growth, which would then prompt the expansion of the Central Plains region, engeder subsequent wars and enhance the emergence of civilization in the Central Plains; secondly, the expansion of the Central Plains region brought about the social sophistication and civilizing process in the regions of lower Yellow River, the middle and lower Yangtze River, and western Liao River; later, the dry and cold climate then triggered large-scale and frequent wars, which stimulated most regions in China to enter the primitive and mature civilizations successively.51 Dai Xiangming maintained that warfare constituted the main determinant for the formation of early guojia or states in central and northern China, while economic factors caused the formation of early guojia or states in the lower reaches of the Yangtze River.52 However, if viewing the early China as a whole, one can see that warfare had excited an overwhelming impact on the demolition of the old landscape and the consolidation of a new and larger topography. Rooted in a vast and profound agrarian economy, the early Chinese civilization was not good at outward expansion, but excelled in maintaining its own internal order. Whereas every large-scale civil war meant an extreme act of destruction of the old order and establishment of a new 50 Ibid.; Yang, Xingai & Han, Jianye (1995), “Yu the Great quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 51 Wu, Wenxiang & Liu, Dongsheng (2002), “The role of climate events in 5500a BP in the evolution of ancient civilizations and ancient cultures in the Three Ancient Civilizations”, Geoscience Frontiers, 1; Wu, Wenxiang & Ge, Quansheng (2005), “The climatic events of the recent epoch and their influence upon the development of ancient culture”, Huaxia Archaeology, 3. 52 Dai, Xiangming (2018), “A brief discussion on the dynamic mechanism of the formation of early Chinese states”, Collection of New Research (II)—Essays in Celebration of Mr. Lin Dou’s 80th Birthday, Beijing: Science Press, 118–135.

22

NEOLITHIC WARS AND THE EVOLUTION OF EARLY …

375

one, the Neolithic warfare served to raise the status of chiefs, enhance class differentiation and labour division. While these wars led to a deep intermingling of cultures and bloodlines over a wide area in a short period of time and in a violent manner, they also largely advanced the process of the origin, formation and development of the early Chinese civilization, the growth of which in turn stimulated more large-scale warfare. That is to say, each step forward in the civilization process would induce and accelerate warfare: they interacted and reciprocated with each other as cause and effect. It is here that lies the explanation for the reason why warfare had become one of the two most important features in ancient China, just as it was documented in the chapter “13 Years of Duke Cheng of the Stata of Lu in the Zuo Commentary on the Spring and Autumn Annals: “the great matters of the state lie with sacrifice and war” 国之大 事, 在祀与戎 《左传·成公十三年》 ( ). (This part was originally published in No. 10 of the Social Science Front in 2020)

PART IV

Origin of the Chinese Culture and Its Outbound Interactions

CHAPTER 23

On the Dawn of the Erlitou Bronze Civilization

The rise of the Erlitou area (historical sites and cultures located in Luoyang, Henan) as a bronze civilization in the early period of the second millennium BCE was the most crucial cultural and social transformation that had occurred in East Asia since the Neolithic period. Based on previous research, this section intends to discuss the cultural foundations, external influence and environmental context behind the change, and their links to relevant ancient texts.

23.1

The Cultural Foundations

Even in the early stage of the excavation of the Erlitou remains, the archaeologist Fang Yousheng proposed that “the Erlitou Type emerged and matured by inheriting the Longshan culture of the Central Plains of Henan Province and absorbing elements from the Longshan culture in Shandong Province”.1 Specifically, he pointed out the sanzupan threelegged plates 三足盘 and gui tripod ewers 鬶 as typical pottery of the Longshan culture of Shandong Province which were found in the Erlitou remains. Later, Zou Heng and Li Boqian further identified jue tripod cups 爵, gu trumpet-shaped cups 觚, dou pedestal carinated plates 折盘豆

1 Luoyang Excavation Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (1965), “Excavation brief of the Erlitou site in Yanshi, Henan Province,” Archaeology, 5.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_23

379

380

J. HAN

and single-eared cups 单耳杯 from the Erlitou Site as cultural elements from the east.2 The 1979 pilot excavation of the Xinzhai Site at Xinmi of Henan took a significant step towards unfolding the transition from Phase III of the Wangwan culture (i.e. the Longshan culture in Henan) to the Erlitou culture.3 The excavator Zhao Zhiquan referred to the remains of the transitional period found at the Xinzhai Site as “the Erlitou culture of the Xinzhai period”, noting that this type of culture should be slightly earlier than Phase I of the Erlitou remains.4 Extensive excavations of the Xinzhai Site since the year of 1999 have once again demonstrated that the remains of the Erlitou Phase II, i.e. the Xinzhai period, constituted the bulk of the site. Some excavators, such as Zhao Chunqing, split this type of remains into the early and late phases, suggesting that based on stratigraphy and pottery genealogy, the Xinzhai phase should have appeared later than Phase III of the Wangwan culture but earlier than Phase I of the Erlitou culture, and that the eastern area of the Song Mountain should have been among the first to evolve into the Erlitou culture through the Xinzhai period.5 However, there are also other views. For instance, Li Weiming split Phase I of the Erlitou culture into two periods: the early and the late ones, holding that the remains of the Xinzhai period are only a local type of the early period of Phase I.6 Although the early and late periods of Phase II of the Xinzhai culture were represented by 2000T4H26 and 2000T6➇, respectively,

2 Zou, Heng (1980), “A preliminary discussion on the culture of the Xia Dynasty”,

Essays on the Archaeology of the Xia-Shang-Zhou Periods, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 95–182; Li, Boqian (1986), “The cultural nature and ethnicity of the Erlitou Type”, Cultural Relics, 6. 3 Henan Team II of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1981), “A trial excavation of the Xinzhai Site in Mi County, Henan”, Archaeology, 5. 4 Zhao, Zhiquan (1985), “A brief discussion of the Erlitou culture of the Xinzhai period”, Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Conference of the Chinese Archaeological Society (1983), Beijing: Wenwu Press, 13–17. 5 AURORA Research Centre for Ancient Civilizations of Peking University, & Zhengzhou Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2008), Field Archaeological Excavation Report from 1999 to 2000 in the Xinzhai Site of Xinmi, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 541. 6 Li, Weiming (2001), “The Phase I remains of the Erlitou culture and the beginning of the Xia culture”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 1.

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

381

they have in fact only slightly differences in a few aspects. For example, the shenfuguan deep-bellied jar 深腹罐 of the former had the more pronounced zheyan tuleng folded rim with convex edges 折沿凸棱 than that of the latter; and the yuanjian zhilingweng round-shouldered and straight-necked urn 圆肩直领瓮 was seen in the former, while only the zhejian zhilingweng folded-shouldered and straight-necked urn 折 肩直领瓮 were present in the latter. Further, although II·VT104➅ and II·VT104➄ from Phase I both exhibited a superimposing relationship between them, the distance from the decoration to the rim of huanbianguan jar with decorative patterns 花边罐 in the former is slightly farther than that of the latter, and the lip of the pingdipen flat-bottomed basin 平 底盆 of the former is not as ostentatious as that of the latter, suggesting that there indeed existed subtle differences between the early and the late periods; but, in general, the features of the two periods are not highly distinctive. It is thus not feasible to categorize the Erlitou culture into the early and the late periods on the basis of published data; rather, it would be more plausible to consider Phase I of the Erlitou culture as a whole for the time being so as to get an easier overview of the whole picture.7 In comparison, the remains of the Erlitou Phase I and those of the late Xinzhai Phase II look similar indeed. They shared a variety of common potteries, including shenfuguan deep-bellied jars, shenfugang deep-bellied vats 深腹缸, guanxingding jar-shaped tripods 罐形鼎, pengxingzeng basin-shaped steamers 盆形甑, hufupen, curved-bellied basins 弧 腹盆, pingdipen flat-bottomed basins, penxing leibo basin-shaped mortars 盆形擂钵, zhilingweng straight-necked urns 直领瓮, zunxingweng tripodshaped urns 尊形瓮, zhefudou ridged-bellied dou plates 折腹豆, san- (si-) zu pan three- (four-) footed plates 三 (四) 足盘, zhefuqigai lids for ridge-bellied utensils 折腹器盖, pingdiwan flat-bottomed bowls 平底碗, gu wine cups and gui ewers, which constituted the bulk of the pottery assemblages of the two remains. There are, however, ubiquitous differences in shape between the potteries from the two remains. The clay bodies 胎体 of the potteries from late Xinzhai Phase II are of more even thickness; a large portion of them are made using a potters’ wheel 轮制 with obvious angles formed at the folded edges, some of which even have 7 The Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1999), Archaeological Excavation Report from 1959 to 1978 in Erlitou, Yanshi County, Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press.

382

J. HAN

convex edges, and deep bellies. In contrast, the clay bodies of the potteries from Erlitou Phase I are of uneven thickness. Most of them are handmade and wheel-trimmed 轮修 and have plastered edges 贴边 around the lip and comparatively shallower bellies, but without obvious angles 棱角 or flanges at the folded edges. In addition, there are also visible differences regarding the specific features of each type of vessels from the two sites. For example, the shenfuguan, the deep-bellied jar, from the former has a rounded, swelling belly 中腹圆鼓, with the lower part tucked in slightly 下腹略内收 to form a small flat base, while its counterpart of the latter has a flatter midriff 中腹较平直 with less smooth transition to the lower belly, and a larger base; the liankou guanxingding, the inverted-rim jar-shaped tripod 敛口罐形鼎 of the former has a distinctive zimukou, a fitted mouth rim 子母口, and the zheyan guanxingding, the jar-shaped tripod with folded rim 折沿罐形鼎 of the former, has a deeper belly with a rounded and projecting-outwards bottom; while the liankou guanxingding, the inverted-rim jar-shaped tripod of the latter has no zimukou fitted mouth rim, and the zheyan guanxingding, the jar-shaped tripod with folded rim of the latter has a slightly curved belly and a flat base. The penxingzeng, the basin-shaped steamer, of the former has a deep belly, a small base, a circle of small willow-leaf-shaped holes 柳叶形箅孔 near the base, and five or six small round holes at the base, while the counterpart of the latter has a shallow curved belly, a large bottom, a big round hole in the centre of the base, around which there are four or five large willow-leaf-shaped, oval or triangular holes. The shuangpan hufupen, the curved-bellied basin with double handles 双鋬弧腹盆, or shuanghuaner hufupen the curved-bellied basin with double ring handles 双环耳弧腹盆 of the former has a deep and swelling belly and a small flat base, while the counterpart of the latter has a shallow and large flat base. The zhilingweng, the straight-necked urn, and the zunxingweng, the vase-shaped urn, of the former have a suddenly-tucked belly, while the counterparts of the latter are more smooth in profile. Three types of zhefuqi lids, i.e. lids for utensils with a ridged belly, are known from the former, including trumpet-shaped 喇叭状, flat-top-shaped 平顶状 and mushrooms-shaped 蘑菇状 ones, while only the mushrooms-shaped lid is present from the latter, with the top of the lid rising high. The pingdipen, flat-bottomed basin of the former has no rim around the lip, while the counterpart of the latter has a rim around the lip. Whereas both the mortars 擂钵 and pingdiwan flat-bottomed bowls of the former have a small flat base and exhibit an obvious rim around the lip and belly, their counterparts in the

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

383

latter share a large flat base and an invisible rim at the lip and belly. But there is an exception with the zhepandou ridged pedestal plates, which exhibits a more remarkable transition from belly to base than the former (see Fig. 23.1). Potteries of the late Xinzhai Phase II differ from those of the Erlitou Phase I in many aspects. For example, they are made of thin clay body with a potter’s wheel, have remarkable edges, round and swelling midriffs, small and convex bases, as well as deep bellies, and include artefacts such as the aizuding short-legged tripods 矮足鼎. All of these artefacts happened to be analogous to those from the Meishan type 煤山类型 of the Wangwan Phase III culture. Meanwhile, its zimukouqi, vessels with fitted mouth rim 子母口器 (vats with fitted mouth rim 子母口缸, ding tripods 子母口鼎, urns 子母口瓮, bowls 子母口钵, etc. included), gaozu guanxingding, high-foot jar-shaped tripods 高足罐形鼎, zhebiqigai, lids for vessels with ridged walls 折璧器盖, pingdipen flat-bottomed basins, yan steamers 甗 and other potteries are directly related to the Zaolvtai type from eastern Henan.8 The evidence typologically proves that the remains of the late Xinzhai Phase II should predate the Erlitou Phase I instead of being a local type of the Erlitou Phase I. The similarities in the main pottery types of the two suggest that the Erlitou Phase I should have primarily originated from the late Xinzhai Phase II, and that the eastern elements of the Erlitou Phase I culture should be largely derived from the Xinzhai culture. Given that the Xinzhai Phase II remains are more closely associated with the Wangwan Phase III culture and the Zuolvtai type of the Longshan period, and that the typical elements of the Erlitou culture, such as pottery jue wine cups, pottery huabianguan jars with decorative rims, or bronze ritual vessels, were not present then, it is thus more appropriate to locate them at the end of the late Wangwan Phase III culture9 and to lable it as the Xinzhai type of the Wangwan Phase III culture. This cultural type was primarily located around Zhengzhou, Xinmi and Gongyi of Henan Province. Compared with the Meishan type, its distribution “habited northwards- and southeastwards-moving 8 AURORA Research Centre for Ancient Civilizations of Peking University, & Zhengzhou Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2008), Field Archaeological Excavation Report from 1999 to 2000 in the Xinzhai Site in Xinmi, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 540. 9 Han, Jianye & Yang, Xingai. (1997), “A Study of Phase III of the Wangwan culture”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1.

384

J. HAN

Fig. 23.1 Comparison of pottery from the late Erlitou I and the late Xinzhai II phases (1 & 15. deep-bellied jar 深腹罐 [IIH216:13, 2000T6➇:930]; 2 &16. deep-bellied vat 深腹缸 [VIIIH53:14, 2000T6➇:784]; 3 & 17. converging-mouth jar-shaped ding 敛口罐形鼎 [IVH106:12, 2000T6➇:772]; 4 & 18. folded-rim jar-shaped ding 折沿罐形鼎 [II·VT104➅:51, 2000T6➇:779]; 5 & 19. flat-bottomed basin 平底盆 [II·VT104➅:28, 2000T6➇:598]; 6 & 20. zun-shaped urn 尊形瓮 [IIH216:17, 2000T11➆B:41]; 7 & 21. vessel cover 器盖 [II·VT104➅:48, 2000T6➇:211]; 8 & 22 leibo motar and pestle 擂钵 [II·VH148:15, 2000T6➇:637]; 9 & 23. straight-collar urn 直领瓮 [II·VH148:12, 2000T6➇:810]; 10 & 24 zhepandou ridged pedestal plates 折 盘豆 [II·VH148:20, 2000T11➆A:28]; 11 & 25. flat-bottomed bowl 平底碗 [II·VT203➆:13, 2000T6➇:616]; 12 & 26. curved-bellied basin with double pan [handles] 双鋬弧腹盆 [II·VT104➅:47, 2000T5➇:22]; 13 & 27. arched belly basin with two handles 双耳弧腹盆 [II·VH105:18, 2000T11➆A:56]; 14 & 28. zeng 甑 boiler for steaming rice [IXH1:12, 2000T6➇:827])

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

385

trends”,10 while sites at Ruzhou, Yuzhou and Dengfeng of Henan were still largely a continuation of the Meishan type. However, during its formation, the Erlitou culture had also apparently absorbed cultural elements from the Luoyang Basin and the adjacent areas. For example, the jue, pottery wine cup unique to the Erlitou culture, was not seen in the Xinzhai type, nor was it likely to have come directly from the east. Instead, it should have evolved from the pingdi shizu guixingqi, flat-bottomed, solid-footed, tripod ewer-shaped artefacts 平底实足鬶形器, found at the sites of the late Wangwan Phase III culture such as Wangwan in Luoyang and Xiaopangou 小潘沟遗址 in Mengjin of Henan. Du Jinpeng directly named them as primitive pottery jue wine cups 陶爵.11 In particular, one high-footed primitive pottery jar from the Xiaopangou Site is extremely similar to that from the Erlitou Phase I culture.12 One earliest of these primitive pottery jue wine cups is known from the Shilipu Site 十里铺遗址 in Shangcai of Henan,13 which belonged to the early Wangwan Phase III. It would probably be a product of the localization of the pottery gui tripod ewers of the early Longshan culture of the Haidai region which then expanded westward into central and southern Henan (see Fig. 23.2). Looking beyond the potteries from Phase I of the Erlitou culture and examining potteries from the Erlitou culture as a whole, we can find ample elements from this culture which indicate that the Erlitou culture primarily developed on the basis of the Xinzhai-centred cultures from the Central Plains, and these elements include the huge palatial buildings, the jade ritual objects such as yue battle-axes 钺, qi axes 戚, zhang jade tablets 璋, gui jade tablets 圭, duolongdao multi-hole knives 多孔刀, bingqingqi handle-shaped vessels 柄形器, as well as animal mask motifs. In Phase II 10 AURORA Research Centre for Ancient Civilizations of Peking University, & Zhengzhou Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2008), Field Archaeological Excavation Report from 1999 to 2000 in the Xinzhai Site in Xinmi, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 537. 11 Du, Jinpeng (1990), “The pottery jue—A study of one of the ancient Chinese wine vessels”, Archaeology, 6. 12 Luoyang Museum (1978), “Briefing on the trial excavation of the Xiaopangou Site in Mengjin”, Archaeology, 4. 13 The Cultural Management Committee of Zhumadian District, Henan Province (1983), “The Shilipu Neolithic Site of Shangcai, Henan Province”, Archaeological Collectanea, 3; Beijing: China Shehui Science Press, 69–80. The site also yielded a pottery gu (M5:1) belonging to the Pre-Phase III of the Wangwan culture.

386

J. HAN

Fig. 23.2 A comparison of the primitive pottery jue from the Wangwan III Culture with that from the Erlitou I Culture (1. The Shilipu Site [H5:1]; 2. The Xiaopangou Site [T5 H44:52]; 3. The Erlitou Site [II·VM54:7])

of the Xinzhai culture, large sub-terrain buildings were found, and in the earlier Guchengzhai Site in Xinmi of Henan, there was even a palatial complex of more than 380 square metres14 At the Huadizui Site in Gongyi of Henan, contemporaneous to the early Xinzhai Phase II, jade ritual vessels such as yue battle-axes, chan spades 铲, zhang jade tablets and jade cong tubes 琮were present and its zhang jade tablets with a flank tooth 扉齿 at the lower end is basically identical to that of the Erlitou culture. Besides, the vermilion-painted urn with animal mask motifs and zimukou mouth rim is also found here.15 Chen Shengyong and Lv Qichang emphasized that the important elements of the Erlitou culture, such as the ceramic gui ewers 陶鬶 and ceramic he spouted pots 盉, the jade artefacts of yue battle-axes 玉 钺, cong tubes, bi disks 璧, jade huang semicircular pendants 璜, and duokongdao multi-holed knives, and the animal mask motifs, should have

14 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, et al. (2002), “Briefing on the excavation of the site of the Longshan culture at the Guchengzhai Site, Xinmi City, Henan Province”, Huaxia Archaeology, 2. 15 Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Zhengzhou City & School of Archaeology and Cultural Studies of Peking University (2005), “The remains of the Xinzhai period at the Huadizui Site, Gongyi City, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 6; Gu, Wen & Zhang, Songlin (2004), “A study of the vermilion-painted pottery urns from the Xinzhai period at the Huadizui Site”, Ancient Civilizations Research Bulletin, 23: 9–21.

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

387

all originated from the Jiangzhe (Jiangsu-Zhengjiang provinces) region.16 Admittedly, the pottery gui and he, stone yue, and jade huang first came into being in the late Neolithic Longqiuzhuang and Majiabang cultures, and the animal mask motif probably spread from the middle reaches of the Yangtze River to the Kuahuqiao culture as early as the end of the middle Neolithic period. To the time of the Chalcolithic period, the cultural features, including potteries such as gui and he, jade artefacts such as yue, cong, bi and huang, and animal mask motifs which contained complex historical information, were integrated into the glorious early civilization of the Liangzhu culture. However, it should be noted in respect to these elements that the pottery gui and he, stone yue and jade huang had already spread around from around 3000 BCE. The jade cong and bi, as well as animal-face motifs, on the other hand, spread to the Haidai and southern Shanxi regions after the decline of the Liangzhu culture around 2600 BCE. These facts reveal a considerable delay to the origin of the Erlitou culture. These elements fanned out and then converged successively in the Central Plains, eventually becoming an integral part of the Erlitou culture, mainly through the Xinzhai type. The elements directly linked to the Jiangzhe region in Phase I of the Erlitou culture were probably few duck-shaped pottery pots, so that it is not feasible to conclude that the provenance of the Erlitou civilization is mainly from southeastern China.

23.2

External Influence

Phase I of the Erlitou culture witnessed the sudden appearance of large numbers of shujing yuanfu guan round-bellied pottery jars with wasted necks 束颈圆腹罐. Among them, the ones whose rims were ringed with a circle of additional piled pattern or whose lips were directly impressed with decorative patterns are called huabian guan. Some of these jars have a single handle (or ear), while few also have three feet attached below, becoming what is known as shujing yuanfu guanxingding, jar-shaped

16 Chen, Shengyong (1991), “The southeast as place for the emergence and rise of the

Xia culture—Exploring the Xia culture from a comparative study of the major cultural spheres in the late Neolithic China”, Southeast Culture, 1; Lv Qichang (2007), Study of The Secret of Bronze Jue and Jia: From Prehistoric Pottery Gui to the Origins of the Xia and Shang Culture and the Problem of Generation Breaking, Hangzhou: Zhejiang University Press.

388

J. HAN

tripods with waisted necks and round bellies 束颈圆腹罐形鼎. These waisted-neck and round-belly jars, while totally different in style from the shekou shenfuguan jars with flaring mouths and round bellies 侈口深 腹罐 from the Central Plains and the east, are essentially similar to their popular counterparts in the northwestern regions. The practice of adding decorative pattern outside the mouth rim or around the neck of roundbellied jars with waisted necks had been common since the late Yangshao period in the Haishengbulang type of Yangshao culture, and the practice of impressing decorative patterns on the surface was first seen in Phase III of the Ashan type of the Yangshao culture, equivalent to Phase II of the Miaodigou culture, and had been widespread by the early Longshan period among the Laohushan culture in central and southern Inner Mongolia and northern Shaanxi, and the Caiyuan culture in southern Ningxia (see Fig. 4.1),17 even affecting Phase II of the Keshezhuang culture (see Fig. 4.2)18 and the Qijia culture (see Fig. 4.3). In the late Longshan period, its influence had reached the entire Qijia culture in the Ganqing area (i.e. the Gansu and Qinghai provinces and the Ninxia Autonomous region) (see Figs. 4.4 and 4.5)19 and Phase II of the Keshezhuang culture in the Wei River Valley.20 It is only in the late stage of Phase III of the Wangwan culture that sparse jars with a waisted neck, a round belly and decorative patterns were found at the remains such as the Cuoli Site 矬 李遗址 at Luoyang,21 which should naturally have come as a result of

17 Ningxia Institute of Cultural Relics, & thee Archaeological Department of the

Chinese History Museum (2008), The Caiyuan Site of Ningxia—Report on the Excavation of Neolithic Sites and Burials, Beijing: Science Press. 18 The Archaeological Team of the Gansu Provincial Museum (1980), “Excavation brief

of the Qijia culture site at Lingtaiqiao Village in Gansu”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 3. 19 The Archaeological Team of the Cultural Relics Administration of Qinghai Province, & the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1984), The Liuwan Site of Qinghai—The Primitive Society Cemetery of Liuwan, Ledu, Beijing: Wenwu Press; The Archaeological Fieldwork Team of Beijing University, et al. (1997), “Excavation report of the Yehezi Neolithic Site in Longde”, Studies in Archaeology (III), Beijing: Science Press, 158–195. 20 Han, Jianye (2008), The Natural Environment and Cultural Development of the Pre-Qin Period in Northwest China, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 21 Luoyang Museum (1978), “Briefing on the trial excavations of the Cuoli Site in Luoyang”, Archaeology, 1.

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

389

the further eastward penetration of similar type of wares from the northwest (see Fig. 4.6). Thus, the origin of the jars with a waisted neck and a round belly (the ones with decorative patterns included) of the Erlitou culture would have been from the northwestern region. But had this tradition come directly from the northwest during the formative years of the Erlitou culture, or had it been inherited indirectly from Phase III of the Wangwan culture of the Luoyang Basin? Let us start with an analysis of the remains of the Erlitou culture from the Guanzhong area, i.e. the central Shaaxin Province. These include the remains from the Chuankouhe Site 川口河遗址 in Longxian County,22 H16 and H24 from the Laoniupo Site 老牛坡遗址 in Xi’an,23 both M451 from the Yuanjunmiao Site 元君庙遗址24 and H12 from the Nansha Village Site 南沙村遗址 in Huaxian County,25 and M9 from the Hengzhen Site in Huayin.26 Their potteries, in addition to the large number of single-handled, double-handled, triple-handled or handless waist-necked jars (see Fig. 23.3, 7–9), include also jars with double large handles, jars with a large mouth and a long neck, and jars with folded shoulders. These jars in fact were more or less the same as those from the Qijia culture as represented by the Qinweijia 秦魏家遗址27 and Dahezhang 大何庄遗址 sites28 in Yongjing, Gansu. If we split the Qijia culture 齐家文化 into an early, middle and late phases, this type

22 Yin, Shengping (1987), “The Qijia pottery from the Chuankouhe Site in Longxian, Shaanxi”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 5. 23 Liu, Shi’e (2002), The Laoniupo Site, Xi’an: Shaanxi Renmin Press. 24 The Archaeological Teaching and Research Section of the Department of History

of Peking University (1983), The Yangshao Cemetery at the Yuanjunmiao Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 45–46. 25 The Huaxian Report Writing Group of the Archaeological Teaching and Research Section of Peking University (1980), “Survey and trial excavation of ancient sites in Huaxian and Weinan counties”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3. 26 The Shaanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1984), “Report on the excavation of the Hengzhen Site in Huayin, Shaanxi”, Archaeological Collectanea, 4; Beijing: China Shehui Science Press, 1–39. 27 The Gansu Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (1975), “The Qinweijia and Qijia cemeteries in Yongjing, Gansu”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2. 28 The Gansu Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (1974), “Excavation report on the Dahezhuang, Site in Yongjing, Gansu”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2.

390

J. HAN

of remains probably belongs to the late Qijia period, contemporaneous to the Erlitou culture. In the central and western Ganqing region (i.e. Gansu and Qinghai provinces) and the upper and middle reaches of the Wei River, red and brown potteries, long and thin in shape but not made with the help of slow-speed wheels, were commonly seen in the Qijia culture of the time. Whereas this type of jars can be called “the Qinweijia Type” 秦魏家类型, those commonly seen in the lower reaches of the Wei River to the east can be called “the Laoniupo Type” 老牛坡类型, which were mostly grey and had a round belly and decorative patterns, and some of which were made with the use of wheels.29 Other similar jars include those seen in the early East Longshan Site 东龙山遗址 in Shangzhou of the Danjiang River 丹江valley.30 As is pointed out by Zhang Zhongpei and Sun Zuchu, “the disappearance of the Keshezhuang culture in the Baoji region 宝鸡地区 of Shaanxi was just the result of the eastward expansion of the Qijia culture”.31 In fact, not only was the drastic change in cultural landscape during the post-Longshan period in the Baoji region and even the entire Guanzhong region associated with the large-scale eastward advance of the late Qijia culture, but the early Zhukaigou culture was even strongly influenced by the late Qijia culture. As a result of its continuous eastward advance, the Qijia culture collided with the westward-moving Xinzhai type in the Luoyang Basin in Henan, thus adding to the Erlitou culture an important type of artefacts, i.e. a large number of shujing yuanfuguan, jars with a waisted neck and a round belly, which can be found in Phase I of the Erlitou culture, including the Erlitou Site in Yanshi and Xiyacun in Shanxian County32 (See Fig. 23.3, 10–12). In other words, although the possibility that such type of jars of the Erlitou culture were developed on the basis of similar wares that had earlier on infiltrated the Luoyang 29 Zhang, Tian’en (2000), “On the cultural remains of the Xia period in the eastern Guanzhong region”, Relics and Museolgy, 3. 30 YAng, Yachang (2000), “New developments in the Xia archaeology in Shaanxi— Excavation findings at the East Longshan Site in Shangzhou”, Ancient Civilizations Research Newsletter, 5: 34–36. 31 Zhang, Zhongpei & Sun, Zuchu (1998), “A genealogical study of the prehistoric culture of Shaanxi and the formation of the Zhou civilization”, A Collection of FarWindedness—Collection of Essays in Celebration of the 40th Anniversary of the Founding of the Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology, Xi’an: Shaanxi Remin Meishu Press, 155. 32 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Heritage (1989), “Excavation of the Xiyacun Site in Shaanxi County”, Huaxia Archaeology, 1.

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

391

Fig. 23.3 Laced-rim jars with a constricted neck and round belly 束颈圆腹花 边罐 from the Longshan and Erlitou cultures (1. the Caiyuan culture [Linziliang LF11➄:11]; 2. the Keshezhuang II culture [Qiao Village H4:24]; 3–5 & 7–9. the Qijia culture [Shizhao Village T317➁:6, Yehezi H148:12, Liuwan M968:1, Laoniuspo 88XL I 2H24:14, Qinweijia, Hengzhen M9:5]; 6. the Wangwan III culture [Cuoli H22:31]; 10–12. the Erlitou culture [Erlitou II-V·T104➅:21, Xiya Village H4:40, Xiya Village H4:4])

392

J. HAN

Basin cannot be ruled out, they should mainly have come from the Ganqing (Gansu and Qinghai provinces) and the Guanzhong regions in central Shaanxi at the dawn of the Erlitou culture. Previously, it has been assumed that the huanbian guan, jars with decorative patterns seen in the Guanzhong region, had arrived as a result of the influence by the Erlitou culture. Unfortunately, the opposite of the cause-effect relationship has been true. The strong penetration of the late Qijia culture of the Central Plains should not have brought only one element, that is, the pottery shujing yuanfuguang, jars with a waisted neck and a round belly. Lin Yun has long noticed that “bronze wares of the north lineage had already been present in the late Erlitou culture and exerted an impact on the bronze wares of the Erlitou culture”.33 Based on the prosperity of bronze wares in the Qijia culture, An Zhimin has inferred that the bronze wares of the Central Plains “probably had entered China through ‘the Silk Road’ in the prehistoric period”.34 The American scholar Fitzgerald-Huber has further pointed out that the origin of the Erlitou bronze civilization might have been closely linked to the eastward spread of Bactrian metallurgy from Central Asia, and that the specific transmission route from the west to the east was from Central Asia and Siberia to Xinjiang, then to the Ganqing region, and finally to the Central Plains, in the process of which the Qijia culture in the Ganqing region played a direct role. He also deduced possible links between the bronze jue tripod spouted wine vessel and gu of the Qijia culture, and the dailiuguan, jars with a sprout 带流罐, and the bronze cups from the Shahr-i Sokhta 沙赫德遗址 remains in Iran.35 In addition, Wang Xun also mentioned the possibility that the presence of the element of horses in the Erlitou culture might be attributed to influence from the northwest.36

33 Lin, Yun (1987), “A study of the relationship between the bronzes in the Shang culture and those in the northern region”, Collected Essays on Archaeological Culture (I), Beijing: Wenwu Press, 129–155. 34 An, Zhimin (1993), “A preliminary discussion on the e Chinese bronzes”, Archaeology, 12. 35 Fitsgerald-Huber, Lousia, G. (1995), “Qijia and Erlitou: The question of contacts with distant cultures”, Early China, 20: 17–67. 36 Wang, Xun (1997), “The Erlitou culture and the ancient Chinese civilization”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 3.

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

393

Indeed, there existed few identifiable bronze wares (excluding those so-called bronze wares which had bronze traits but were produced by smelting syngenetic ores) in the Central Plains (including the areas to its east) during the Longshan period, and only individual bronze wares in bell-, cone- and flake-shapes were found. In contrast, the bronze metallurgy of the Erlitou culture had been relatively mature, producing a wide variety of tools, weapons and vessels, which naturally evokes the association between the sudden rise of bronze wares in the Erlitou culture with the eastern spread of the long-established metallurgy from the west. In the following cultures, including the Sintashta-Petrovka, Andronovo, Seyma-Tubino and Okunev cultures, located from Siberia to Central Asia and to the western Xinjiang; the Kermuzi type remains and the Tianshanbeilu culture, located from Altai to eastern Xinjiang; the Siba culture in the Hexi Corridor; and the Late Qijia culture in the Ganqing region, bronze wares, such as knives, axes, spears, mirrors and bubble ornaments, were not only commonly popular, but also can all have their absolute age traced back to the early 2000 BCE. This evidence also forms a solid chain of the eastward spread of metallurgy from the west and reflects its successive localization process.37 In respect to the route of the strong eastward movement of the late Qijia culture towards the Guanzhong and then the Central Plains regions, as reflected by the shujing yuanfuguan, jars with a waisted neck and round belly become increasingly apparent, and the indirect influence of western metallurgy on the bronze civilization of Erlitou has actually been confirmed. As pointed out by Lin Yun,38 one bronze huanshoudao, a knife with ringed head 环首刀 from Phase III of the Erlitou Site is clearly of the northern origin,39 and another bronze qi, a small axe flanked

37 Li, Shuicheng (2005), “The regional characteristics and interaction of the early bronze cultivation in the Northwest and Central Plains”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3; Han, Jianye (2007), The Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Cultures of Xinjiang, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 38 Lin, Yun (1994), “Several chronological issues of the early northern system of bronzes”, Collection of Papers of Inner Mongolia Cultural Relics and Archaeology, (Series 1), Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press, 291–295. 39 The Erlitou Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1983), “Excavation brief of the Erlitou Site in Yanshi, Henan Province, in Autumn 1980”, Archaeology, 3.

394

J. HAN

by teeth-like decoration, is in fact a variant of the northern war axe.40 Similar items of these two wares can be found in the late Qijia culture.41 FitzGerald-Huber also suggested that the cross-hollowed round plaques from the Erlitou Phase III can be linked to similar element in Central Asia. The analysis by Jin Zhengyao reveals that a zhui cone 锥 from Phase II of the Erlitou culture was made of an arsenical-copper alloy,42 suggesting some possible association with the arsenical-copper alloy of the Siba Site 四坝遗址 in Jiuquan, Gansu and the Tianshanbeilu (i.e. North Branch of the Tianshan Mountain) Site in Hami 哈密天山北路, Xinjiang. Arsenical-copper had been used in western Asia as early as 4000 BCE43 In addition, there are similarities between the ge, dagger axes 戈 of the Erlitou culture and the guanshongfu, axes with shaft-holes 管銎斧 of the Tianshanbeilu Site in the Hami culture,44 implying that the former might have been inspired by the latter (see Fig. 23.4). Reversely, the inlaid turquoise 嵌饰绿松石 animal-masked plaques 兽面纹牌饰 of the Erlitou culture, as well as the pottery he spouted pot 陶盉, could have spread backwards to the late Qijia culture in Gansu.45 Apart from bronze wares, traces of wheeled carts found in the Erlitou culture could also be attributable to the influence from the west.46 In 40 The Erlitou Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (1976), “New bronze and jade finds from the Erlitou Site in Yanshi”, Archaeology, 4. 41 For example, the ring-headed knife from the Qijiaping Site, Guanghe, Gansu, and the double-eared axe from the Shangguandi (i.e. the Shang pot site) at Kangle. See Li Shuicheng (2005), “The regional characteristics and interaction of the early bronze cultivation in the Northwest and Central Plains”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3 (18 & 21 in Figure II, 18 & 21). 42 Jin, Zhengyao (2000), “A natural science research on Erlitou bronzes and the exploration of Xia civilization”, Cultural Relics, 1. 43 Muhly, J.D. (1988), “The beginning of metallurgy in the Old World”, In R. Maddin, ed., The Beginning of the Use of Metals and Alloys, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2–20. 44 Lv Enguo, Chang Xien & Wang Binghua. (2001), “A brief discussion of the bronze age archaeological culture in Xinjiang”, in Su Bingqi and Contemporary Chinese Archaeology, Beijing: Science Press, 184–187. 45 Zhang, Tianen (2001), “The bronze plaque decorations with animal faces excavated in Tianshui and the related issues”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 1. 46 Before the discovery of the ruts in the Erlitou culture, the idea that Chinese Shang Dynasty carriages had originated in the West was prevalent. Wang, Haicheng (2004), “The origin of Chinese carriages”, International Journal of Eurasian Studies, Series 3, Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1–75.

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

395

Fig. 23.4 Comparison of bronzes of the Tianshanbeilu in Hami, the Late Qijia and the Erlitou cultures (1, 3 & 4. axe [Qijiaping, Nanwan, Erlitou K3:1]; 2 & 5. ring-headed knife [Shangguandi, Erlitou III M2:4]; 6. ge [Erlitou III Cai:60]; (1 & 2. The Late Qijia culture; 3. The Tianshanbeilu in Hami; 4–6. The Erlitou culture)

general, the earliest two-wheeled, horse-drawn vehicle is widely acknowledged to be the one excavated from the Sintashta burial site dating back to the early 2000s BCE in the southern Urals. In this case, the distance between the ruts is 1.25–1.3 metres.47 Similarly, the distance between the ruts found at Phase III of the Erlitou Site in recent years is also approximately 1.2 metres.48 Moreover, although the decline of pottery-making techniques on the wheel had already begun to show itself in the late Longshan period, such

47 Gening, V.F., Zdanovich, G.B., & Gening, V.V. (1992), Sintashta, Cheliyabinsk (in Russian). 48 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2003), “Chinese Archaeology: Xia and Shang Volumes”, Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press, 122–123.

396

J. HAN

a trend became immediately apparent in the Erlitou culture. This decline may be related to the intervention of the hand-made pottery tradition represented by the Qijia culture, as well as the shift of emphasis in handicraft technology following the arrival of advanced western metallurgy. However, Western culture could only have indirectly influenced the rise of the Erlitou bronze civilization. The bronze ritual vessels, such as the jue tripod vessel with spout, the gu trumpet-shaped ritual cup and ding tripods 鼎 which were symbols of the Erlitou bronze civilization, all had pottery prototypes and a long history in both the east and the Central Plains regions, and had utterly nothing to do with the wares from Central Asia. Furthermore, the composite clay casting technique used in casting bronze vessels had already been in use since the early Longshan period, and was clearly different from the hard stone casting technique popular then in Central and Western Asia. This suggests that the Erlitou bronze civilization had primarily evolved from the Central Plains (including the eastern regions of China). As pointed out by Li Shuicheng in respect tor the Central Plains region, while in fact metallurgy from Central Asia “as a foreign influence was constantly weakened during its successive transmission, screening and transformation from one place to another, the real rise of metallurgy in the Central Plains region and the formation of an independent Chinese style was not achieved until the late Erlitou culture”.49

23.3

The Environmental Background

The rise of the Erlitou bronze civilization is inherently linked to climatic fluctuations in Eurasia around the 2000 BCE. Wu Wenxiang and Liu Dongsheng concluded that the temperature resulting from the drop around 4000 BP “is likely to be the coldest one since the Younger Dryas event, and the most influential Little Ice Age since the historic period, and an important climatic shift for many parts of the world in the Holocene climate evolution, marking the end of the local climatic optimum and the beginning of the late Holocene”. They further pointed out that the consequence of this climatic event

49 Li, Shuicheng (2005), “The regional characteristics and interaction of the early bronze cultivation in the Northwest and Central Plains”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3.

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

397

was widespread, affecting most parts of Eurasia, including Europe, North Africa and China.50 In the case of China, this dry and cold event took off around 2300– 2200 BCE, resulting in the overall southward shift of the vegetation belt and frequent flooding in the Yellow River valley.51 Such dry and cold weather reached its peak around 2000 BCE, when glacier advances occurred in the Tianshan Mountains,52 the temperature in the Daihai region almost dropped to around 0 °C with its precipitation of the region decreasing significantly,53 and the climate in the Guanzhong region deteriorated.54 From 1800 to 1700 BCE, when the climate became slightly warmer and more humid, the temperature and precipitation in the Daihai Basin rebounded,55 and there appeared a clear downward erosion in the valleys of southeastern Henan,56 Then, the weather again turned dry and cold, reaching the bottom at around 1000 BCE.

50 Wu, Wenxiang & Liu, Dongsheng (2001), “The 4000aBP event and its implications for the origin of ancient Chinese civilization”, Quaternary Research, 21(5). 51 Cui, Jianxin & Liu, Shangzhe (2003), “Exploration of the floods and culture in China 4000aBP”, Journal of Lanzhou University, 39(3). 52 Chen, Jiyang (1988), “A preliminary study on several issues of the Lichen chronology of new-type glacier changes in the Urumqi River headwaters of the Tianshan Mountains”, Science China (Series B), 2. 53 Liu, Qingsi, Wang, Jiaxing & Li, Huazhang (1991), “Characteristics of Holocene Lake evolution in the Northern Agro-pastoral Zone”, Regional, Environmental and Natural Disaster Geographical Research, Beijing: Science Press, 1–7; Liu, Qingsi & Li, Huazhang (1992), “Holocene environmental evolution and prediction of the agro-pastoral interlaced belt in Northern China”, Beijing: Dizhi Press, 16–54; Xu, Qinghai & Xiao, Jule, et al. (2003), “A quantitative reconstruction of the Paleo-climate of the Daihai Basin since the Holocene from Sporopollen Data”, Marine Geology and Quaternary Geology, 23(4). 54 Jia, Yaofeng & Pang, Jiangli (2003), “A high-resolution Holocene climatic study of the Liwan Section in the Eastern Guanzhong Basin”, Journal of Arid Land Resources and Environment, 17(3); Huang, Chunchang, Pang, Jiangli & Huang, Ping (2002), “Research on the Holocene climatic events in the Loess Plateau in the western Guanzhong Basin”, Arid Land Geography, 25(1). 55 Xu, Qinghai & Xiao, Jule, et al. (2003), “A quantitative reconstruction of the Paleoclimate of the Daihai Basin since the Holocene from Sporopollen Data”, Marine Geology and Quaternary Geology, 23(4). 56 Department of Archaeology of Peking University, & the Relics Protection and Administration of Zhumadian City (1998), The Yangzhuang Site in Zhumadian: Cultural Relics and Environmental Information in the Upper Huaihe River in the Middle Holocene, Beijing: Science Press.

398

J. HAN

The climate deterioration from 2300 to 2200 BCE had had a farreaching impact on ancient civilizations throughout Eurasia.57 With the southward movement of the vegetation belt, people in the northern steppes, who had been put under great pressure to survive, in most cases had to choose to migrate southward and at the same time adjust their mode of production correspondingly. When these south-moving migrants met with the indigenous people in the south who were mainly engaged in agriculture, conflicts would inevitably arise, resulting in largescale chained adjustments in cultural patterns and social and economic structures. As far as China is concerned, it may have been due to the southward migration of the hunting tribes from the north and the increasingly worsening conditions for agricultural production in areas along the Great Wall that the late Laohushan culture in central and southern Inner Mongolia and central Shanxi was forced to migrate southward. And it is this migration that had not only led to the decline of the once prosperous Taosi culture in the Linfen Basin,58 but driven the late Phase II of the Miaodigou culture in southern Linfen to the central and western Henan, where it amalgamated with the early Phase III of the Wangwan culture in central Henan and resulted in the appearance of a powerful late Phase III of the Wangwan culture.59 Later on, when Phase III of the Wangwan culture continued to advance southward on a large scale, it caused the extinction of the Shijiahe culture and laid the foundation for the heartland region of the Central Plains to become a cultural core.60 In addition, the threat of flooding may be another reason for the decline of the Shijiahe culture in the Yangtze River valley. The Central Plains culture, which was less subjected to flooding, did not collapse in the face of the floods. On

57 Wu, Wenxiang & Liu, Dongsheng (2001), “The 4000aBP event and its implications for the origin of ancient Chinese civilization”, Quaternary Research, 21(5). 58 Han, Jianye (2001), “The Tangtao Clan’s conquering of the West Xia and Houji the Ancestor of Zhou Tribes exiling Danzhu the son of Emperor Yao”, Journal of Peking University (Philosophy and Social Sciences), 3; Han, Jianye (2007), “The expansion and external influence of the Laohushan Culture”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 1. 59 Han, Jianye (2006), “Phase II of the Miaodigou culture in southwest Shanxi and west Henan: Periodization and genealogy of the Longshan Culture”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2. 60 Yang, Xingai & Han, Jianye (1995), “Yu the Great quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2.

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

399

the contrary, it strengthened its organization and management capabilities and accelerated the civilization process of the society.61 As for Siberia and Central Asia, an agro-pastoral culture, the SintashtaPetrovka 辛塔什塔-彼德罗夫斯卡文化, characterized by horse-drawn chariots, arose in the Siberian steppe, accustoming to the climatic transformation to a dry and cold weather. Later, it developed into the Andronovo culture 安德罗诺沃文化 and expanded southward in a large scale, with one branch reaching western Xinjiang and as an aftereffect indirectly influencing the Central Plains. The slightly warmer and more humid climate around 1800 BCE afforded a good opportunity for the development of the Central Plains Culture. Against this background, the Xinzhai type of Phase III of the Wangwan Phase III culture commenced to advance westward, and collided in the Luoyang Basin with the eastward-moving agro-pastoral culture from the west, resulting in an integrated all-new Erlitou culture and its subsequent rise as a bronze civilization. Whereas this major climate event provided a great opportunity for cultural transformation in different regions, the outcome of the transformation varied. In the end, the Central Plains culture came out on top, overshadowing the surrounding cultures. Su Bingqi and Yin Weizhang explored the regional divisions of archaeological cultures, and categorized the early Chinese culture into two large regions, one being the inland-oriented and the other ocean-oriented.62 The former concerns the northwestern region which was centred on the upper and middle reaches of the Yellow River and had many connections with the central and western Eurasian continent. The latter includes the southeastern region which was mainly situated in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River and the lower reaches of Yellow River and had many connections with Southeast Asia and the Pacific Islands. The Erlitou culture that emerged in the Central Plains has been the crystallization of the fusion of the two major cultural traditions from the East and the West. It is the superior geographical position of the Central Plains, which means “the centre under heaven” 天下之中, that constituted the prerequisite of the rise of the eclectic Erlitou culture. Additionally, the hinterland of the Central Plains is also approximately located in the centre 61 Wang, Wei (2004), “Discussion on the causes of the large-scale cultural changes around 2000 BCE in China”, Archaeology, 1. 62 Su, Bingqi & Yin, Weizhang (1981), “About the floristic types of archaeological cultures”, Cultural Relics, 5.

400

J. HAN

of the monsoon region of east China, with a moderate average annual temperature, a precipitation and a sensitivity conformant to the change. And this might explain why this culture could undergo continuous development without sudden ups and downs, and why it could have been forging ahead courageously without resting on its achievements.

23.4

The Relevant Historical Texts

The relationship between the Erlitou culture and the Xia and Shang cultures has been heatedly discussed for more than half a century. After the discovery of the remains of the Luodamiao Site 洛达庙 遗址 in Zhengzhou in 1956, Li Xueqin immediately proposed that it most probably belonged to the Xia Dynasty.63 After Xu Xusheng and other researchers discovered the Erlitou Site including the remains of the Luodamiao in 1959, they consulted the records of the Shang capital of Xi’bo 西亳 and concluded that this site “was in fact a metropolis at that time, and should most probably have been the capital of the King Tang 汤, a ruler of the Shang Dynasty”.64 After the excavation of the Erlitou Site, the academic opinion still mostly followed Xu Xusheng’s view, maintaining that at least the late period of the Erlitou cultures should have entered the Shang Dynasty. Xu Shunzhan, on the other hand, contended that its early and middle periods should probably have pertained to the Xia culture.65 The discussion on this issue became increasingly heated since the late 1970s. Among the various views, the two most representative ones include: (1) the theory of Tangdu Zhengbo “汤都郑亳”, i.e. “the Shang Site of Zhengzhou was Bo, the capital of King Tang of the Shang Dynasty”, as proposed by Zou Heng, who also concluded that Phase I-IV of the Erlitou culture all belonged to the Xia Dynasty; and (2) the theory of Yudu yangcheng “禹都阳城”, i.e. “Yangcheng as the capital of King Yu the Great”, as proposed by An Jinhuai, who, in turn, believed while

63 Li, Xueqin (1958), “Archaeological discoveries in recent years and the early Chinese slave society”, New Construction, 8. 64 Xu, Xusheng (1959), “Preliminary report on the investigation of the Xia Dynasty in western Henan in the summer of 1959”, Archaeology, 11. 65 Xu, Shunzhan (1964), “Exploring the culture of the Xia Dynasty”, Journal of Historical Science, 7.

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

401

Phases I and II of the Erlitou culture belonged to the Xia Dynasty, Phases III and IV belonged to the early Shang.66 After the 1980s, Sun Hua and Tian Changwu proposed that Phases I-III of the Erlitou culture were the Xia culture and Phase IV was the Shang culture.67 Li Boqian, on the other hand, believed that the late Longshan culture in Henan and the entire Erlitou culture both belonged to the Xia culture.68 Even Zhao Zhichuan, who once argued that the Erlitou Site belonged to Tangdu Xibo 汤都西亳, but later revised his view to include the late Longshan culture, the Xinzhai period and the Erlitou Phases I-III culture as Xia culture on the basis of the new discoveries at the Xinzhai Site and the Shang City in Yanshi, Henan Province.69 Therefore we see that, until the 1990s, the view that the Erlitou culture was mainly the Xia culture was gaining increasing consensus among the academic community. As far as I am concerned, I once referred to the large-scale replacement of the Shijiahe culture by Phase III of the Wangwan culture, which was triggered by the event “Yu the Great quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes”, to demonstrate that the beginning of the late Wangwan Phase III culture had already entered the Xia Dynasty; and by referring to the decline of the cultural influence of Phase IV of the Erlitou culture, which used to have a great influence in Phase III, I argued that the junction of Xia and Shang dynasties should have happened between Phase II and Phase IV of the Erlitou culture.70 Later, Gao Wei et al. demonstrated that the boundary between Xia and Shang cultures should have been between the early and late periods of Phase IV

66 An, Jinhuai (1978), “A preliminary survey of the culture of the Xia Dynasty in western Henan”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 67 Sun, Hua (1980), “About the Erlitou culture”, Archaeology, 6; Tian, Changwu (1981), “A survey of the of Xia culture”, Cultural Relics, 5. 68 Li, Boqian (1986), “The cultural type and genealogy of the Erlitou Type”, Cultural

Relics, 6. 69 Zhao, Zhichuan (1985), “A brief discussion on the Xinzhai period of the Erlitou culture”, Proceedings of the Fourth Annual Conference of the Chinese Archaeological Society (1983), Beijing: Wenwu Press, 13–17. 70 Han, Jianye (1997), “The origin and development stages of the Xia culture”, Journal of Peking University (Philosophy Social Sciences Ed.), 4.

402

J. HAN

of the Erlitou culture, which provides further support to my view that the Erlitou culture basically belonged to the Xia culture.71 If we accept that all the cultures of the late Wangwan III, the Xinzhai period and the Erlitou period primarily pertained to the culture of the Xia Dynasty, when exactly did the Erlitou culture start as the Xia culture? Tian Changwu once pointed out that “the Erlitou culture should have developed after the (legendary) event of ‘the restoration of the Xia state by Prince Shaokang (about 1972–1912 BCE) as the king of Xia’” 少康 复国.72 Li Boqian held that, the Erlitou type “is likely to be the culture after the (legendary) events of ‘King Taikang’s (about 1978–1974 BCE) loss of the Xia throne’ 太康失国 and ‘the seizure of the Xia sovereignty by Houyi (about 1998–1940 BCE), the Archer’ 后羿代夏 and the Xia culture developed afterwards”.73 In contrast, I notice a more direct link between the Erlitou culture and the Zaolvtai type 造律台类型 from the potteries such as quchixing loukongbing dou, i.e. the curved-ruler-shaped and hollow-stemmed pedestal plates 曲尺形镂孔柄豆 and guaner hu, jars with tubular handles 贯耳壶. Moreover, I also note that the remains of the Youyu clan 有虞, who supported the resurgence of Prince Shaokang, may correspond to the remains of the Zaolvtai type. Thus, I maintain that “the birth of the Erlitou culture can be most likely dated back to the time of Prince Shaokang’s reign, and that it was developed on the basis of the Wangwan Phase III culture, together with the elements of the Longshan culture, which had been brought to the Xia territory by the westward migration from the oriental clan inhabitants such as You Reng 有仍, You Li 有鬲 and You Yu. In this manner, the decline of the late Wangwan Phase III culture can also be explained by the legend of “King Taikang’s loss of the Xia throne”.74 71 Gao, Wei, Yang, Xizhang, Wang, Wei, & Du, Jinpeng (1998), “The Shang city in Yanshi County and the cultural demarcation between Xia and Shang dynasties ”, Archaeology, 10. 72 Tian, Changwu (1981), “Exploration of the Xia culture”, Cultural Relics, 5. 73 Li, Boqian (1986), “The cultural type and genealogy of the Erlitou Type”, Cultural

Relics, 6. 74 Han, Jianye (1997), “The origin and development stages of the Xia culture”, Journal of Peking University (Philosophy Social Sciences Ed.), 4. Both the curved-rulershaped and hollow-stemmed pedestal plates (ancient vessels for meat) 曲尺形镂孔柄豆 (seen in the Donggangou Site M1:1), and the jars with tubular handles 贯耳壶 (seen in the Erlitou Site IV M26:3), which were found in Phase I of the Erlitou culture, look

23

ON THE DAWN OF THE ERLITOU BRONZE CIVILIZATION

403

It is only after the large-scale excavation of the Xinzhai Site in recent years that we knew that the decline of the late Wangwan III culture had been limited in the central areas of the early Xia culture, such as the counties of Dengfeng and Yuzhou of Henan, while the Xinzhai type was not only emerging unexpectedly in Zhengzhou and Xinmi—both to the east of the Songshan Mountain in Henan—but also getting the better of the former. In other words, what the Central Plains were experiencing at that time was just an adjustment and shift of the cultural landscape and centre rather than a general cultural decline. While the Xinzhai type itself contained a large number of eastern elements from as the Zaolvtai type, the Zaolvtai elements in the Erlitou culture came from the Xinzhai type. Logically, this provides a new possibility: it might have been the Xinzhai type of culture that had become the remains formed on the basis of integrating a large number of the Zaolvtai elements from eastern Henan after Shao Kang’s resurgence; in contrast, the Erlitou culture could have only evolved when a certain Xia ruler had moved westward to the Luoyang Basin after several generations of Prince Shaokang’s reign. Perhaps we can encapsulate the whole Xia culture like this: whereas the Xinzhai type pertained to the middle Xia culture and the Erlitou culture to the late Xia culture, the main part of the late Wangwan III culture which was earlier than the Xinzhai type fell naturally into the early Xia culture.

very much similar to the same type of pottery excavated in the Wangyoufang Site in Yongcheng of Henan (H5:42, M3:9) of the Longshan culture in eastern Henan Province.

CHAPTER 24

A Brief Overview of “the Bronze Age Revolution” in China

The Bronze Age refers to “a developmental stage of material culture in human society amid which bronze was employed as essential raw material for the production of tools, implements and weapons”.1 Although most societies in Eurasia witnessed a transformation of varying degrees from the Chalcolithic Age to the Bronze Age, and many entered the stage of early civilization, the extent of changes varied from region to region. For example, the Circumpontic metallurgical province, the first to enter the Bronze Age in as early as 3500 BCE,2 experienced a relatively moderate overall change, with a consistent evolution of bronze casting techniques and cultural patterns and social formations that were not significantly different from their predecessors. Thus, some scholars have classified the Bronze Age from a Eurasian perspective as the “Bronze Age culture systems in the late Prehistoric Age”.3 Unlike many other regions, China entered the Bronze Age around 2000 BCE. Afterwards, remarkable transformations took place in the fields of techno-economy, 1 The Editorial Committee of Archaeology of the General Editorial Board of the Encyclopedia of China (1986), China Encyclopedia ·Archaeology, Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press, 399. 2 Chernykh, E.N. (1992), Ancient Metallurgy in the USSR, London: Cambridge University Press, 1–4. 3 Yang, Jianhua (2009), A preliminary exploration of the division of bronze culture systems in Eurasia, Xin Guo Ji—Essays in Celebration of Mr. Lin Yu’s Seventieth Birthday, Beijing: Science Press, 274–280.

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_24

405

406

J. HAN

cultural landscape and social formations in most regions in China, which can be characterized as a “Bronze Age revolution”. This chapter provides a brief overview of this historical period.

24.1 The Rapid Spread of the Bronze Techniques and the Decline of the Pottery Techniques Around 2000 BCE, a craze for bronze first arose in northwestern China, then spread to the north, northeast and the Central Plains regions, and finally reached the eastern coastal areas. This surge of bronze casting techniques from west to east marked a revolutionary boost in productivity, ushering these regions into the Bronze Age successively. The region that first entered the Bronze Age would be the Xinjiang region, and the date could have been as early as around 2000 BCE. The specific remains of the bronze culture include the Tianshabeilu North Branch Tianshan Mountain culture of Hami 哈密天山北路文化 in eastern Xinjiang, the Gumu gou culture (i.e. Ancient Ditch Cemetery) 古墓沟文 化 (also known as the Xiaohe or Riverside culture 小河文化) of the Lop Nur area 罗布泊, the Qiemu’erqieke Site 克尔木齐遗址 in Altai 阿尔泰 and its south, as well as the Andronovo 安德罗诺沃 culture in western Xinjiang. While these cultures can be divided into two “systems”, i.e. the “system characterized by jars with handles” 带耳罐文化系统 in the east versus the “system characterized by bucket-shaped jars” 筒形罐文化 系统 in the west,4 both systems had made small tools popular everywhere, for instance weapons and decorations made of bronze, including knives, swords, spears, axes, adzes, chisel, awls, sickles, arrowheads, mirrors, earrings, rings, bracelets, bells, tablets, ornamental balls, buckles, beads, tubes and pins. The raw material primarily consisted of tin and arsenic. Next, it is the Gansu, Qinghai and Shaanxi regions that entered the Bronze Age in around 1900 BCE. Their cultural remains mainly include the cultures in the following sites and regions: the Siba Site 四坝遗址 in the central and western parts of the Hexi Corridor, the late Qijia culture in central and southern Gansu, eastern Qinghai, as well as the Guanzhong region in Shaanxi. The bronze wares of these regions were similar to those of the Xinjiang region, especially those of North Branch

4 Han, Jianye (2007), The Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Cultures of Xinjiang, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 98–121.

24

A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF “THE BRONZE AGE REVOLUTION” …

407

Tianshan Mountain in Hami, with knives, axes, adzes, awls, arrowheads, mirrors, earrings, rings, bracelets, ornamental balls, buckles, mace heads, armbands, crescent-shaped ornaments, etc. being very popular. Of these cultures, arsenic was commonly used in the Siba Site. What deserves special attention is that the late Qijia culture at this time expanded significantly from Gansu to the Guanzhong region, clearly outlining the main west-to-east route of transmission of the early bronze culture.5 Then, at around 1800 BCE, the Zhukaigou culture 朱开沟文化 and the Lower Xiajiadian culture 夏家店下层文化 emerged, respectively, in the northern and northeastern China in its narrow sense. Their early bronze wares, mainly made of tin bronze, included knives, arrowheads, bracelets, armbands, earrings and rings, as well as relatively unusual artefacts such as hammers and axes with handles. These bronze wares are analogous to those from northwestern China mentioned above. In particular, the distinctive and characteristic flared earrings 喇叭口耳环, found in the Zhukaigou culture and the early stage of the Lower Xijiadian culture, were once popular in the Siba culture and late Qijia culture, and even in the Andronovo culture of Xinjiang. Their provenance is probably the Andronovo culture in southern Siberia.6 In addition, elements from the Qijia culture, such as pottery jars with two large ear-shaped handles 双 大耳罐 and adult male–female joint burials, had spread to the Zhukaigou culture; while elements from the Zhukaigou culture, such as the li tripod vessel with snake motif 蛇纹鬲, were also found in the Lower Xiajiadian culture. These facts indicate that there had indeed been a trend of cultural influence from the west to the east. Admittedly, there is no denying that certain bronze cultural elements might have been introduced directly into the Zhukaigou culture and the Lower Xiajiadian culture from the northern grassland instead of through the Hexi corridor. At roughly the same time or later, the Erlitou culture, another Bronze Age culture, was born in the Central Plains. Certain bronze wares of this culture, such as the singled-edged bronze sword with a ring pommel 环首刀 and the qi axe flanked by teeth-like decoration 戚 (斧), might be closely related to the above-mentioned bronze cultural traditions in

5 Han, Jianye (2008), The Natural Environment and Cultural Development of the PreQin Period in Northwest China, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 196–200. 6 Lin, Yun (2002), “Bronzes vessels of Xia Dynasty found in North China”, Research of China’s Frontier Archaeology (Vol. 1), Beijing: Science Press, 1–12.

408

J. HAN

its west.7 The emerge of bronze dagger axes 青铜戈 might have also been influenced by the socketed axes 銎斧 of the North Branch Tianshan Mountain culture in Hami.8 However, a large number of bronze ritual objects, such as ding tripod cauldrons 鼎, jue tripod spouted wine vessels 爵, jia, cauldron-shaped vessels for wine-warming 斝, and he spouted pitchers 盉, had their pottery prototypes in the east and Central Plains with a long-standing and far-reaching origin. Not only had their multi-mould casting techniques already appeared as early as the Longshan period, but were even conspicuously distinguished from the stone mould casting techniques prevalent in the northwestern region. What might be seen as a result of an indirect influence from the west might lie in the bronze alloying techniques. In fact, as Li Shuicheng pointed out, since the Central Asian metallurgy was “constantly transited, sifted, adapted during its dissemination from one place to another, its influence as an out-comer on the Central Plains was weakened, while the real rise of metallurgy in the Central Plains and the formation of an independent Huaxia (Chinese) style had not appeared until the late Erlitou culture”.9 Through the Erlitou culture, bronze casting techniques were also spread to the Yueshi culture 岳石文化 in the lower Yellow River. It was exactly during this period when pottery-making techniques, which had undergone continuous development of more than 10,000 years, started to decline, and the most representative wheel-based pottery-making techniques reached its lowest point. Although this trend had already begun to show itself in the late Longshan period, it suddenly became apparent in the Erlitou and Yueshi cultures. This decline might be related to the intervention of the hand-made pottery tradition represented by the Qijia culture and the shift of handicraft techniques following the introduction of the advanced metallurgy from the western regions.

7 Lin, Yun (1994), “A few chronological issues of the early northern bronze system”,

Collection of Papers of Inner Mongolia Cultural Relics and Archaeology (Vol. 1), Beijing: China Encyclopedia Press, 291–295. 8 Han, Jianye (2009), “On the rise of the Erlitou bronze civilization”, Journal of National Museum of China, 1. 9 Li, Shuicheng (2005), “The regional characteristics and interaction of the Early bronze smelting industry in the northwest and the Central Plains”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3.

24

A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF “THE BRONZE AGE REVOLUTION” …

409

24.2 The Dramatic Social Complication and the Emergence of the Kingdom Civilization The Erlitou culture, i.e. the late Xia culture, formed around 2000 BCE, boasted the Erlitou super-central settlement. The foundations of its palace buildings were magnificent in size, well-designed in structure, multitudinous in quantity and hierarchical in status, suggesting that a rigorous palatial residence system had already been established by then. Apparently, the Erlitou capital settlement had direct control over the culture of the heartland of the Central Plains, while the influence of the Erlitou culture spread throughout most areas of China, indicating both the emergence of a sovereign supremacy over tianxia, “under the heaven”, i.e. “the world” 天下 and the entry into a mature wangguo “kingdom” 王国 civilization from a guguo “ancient state” 古国.10 Accordingly, the surrounding Yueshi culture, the Lower Xiajiadian culture and the Zhukaigou Culture all exhibited clear trends of social complexity, with burials differentiated and more cities established. This fact also provides evidence for the observation that the kingdom being surrounded by multiple fanguo “vassal states” 方国, whose degrees of social complexity, compared with the kingdom, were at a lower level. Although the social complexity of the Bronze Age society was due to the early civilizations of the Longshan period or the “ancient states”, its intensity was unprecedented. There are three possible reasons for this. Firstly, the emergence of bronze tools led to the rapid development of related handicraft industries and the intensive division of labour in society, so that the state could strengthen its control over copper resources to increase its power.11 The second reason is the eastwards and southwards expansion of the above-mentioned cultures with varying degrees of animal husbandry from the broadly-defined “northern regions” (e.g. the Andronovo, the North Branch Tianshan Mountain in Hami, the Qijia, 10 Su, Bingqi (1994), “Welcoming the new century of Chinese archaeology”, The Hua People, the Decedents of the Dragon and the Chinese: In Search of the Roots by Archaeology, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press, 236–251. 11 Shi, Zhangru (1995), “The craft of casting bronze in the Yin Dynasty”, Collected

Works of the Institute of Historical Studies, 26: 102–103; Zhang, Guangzhi (1984), “The capital system of the Xia, Shang and Zhou dynasties and their cultural similarities and differences”, Collected Works of the Institute of Historical Studies, 55: 51–71; Liu, Li & Chen, Xingchan (2002), “The city: An issue of control over natural resources in the Xia and Shang dynasties”, Southeast Culture, 3.

410

J. HAN

the Zhukaigou, the Lower Xiajiadian cultures, etc.), which had exerted unprecedented pressure on the Central Plains and the Haidai regions. The subsequent frequent wars and population migration thus led to the upheaval and adjustment of the cultural landscape in eastern and central China. Thirdly, the emergence of the bronze weapons, such as ge dagger axe 戈, yue battle-axe 钺 and zu arrowhead 镞, in turn, resulted in the intensifying specialization and systematization of weapons, exacerbating the severity of warfare and expanding the scale of warfare. In a nutshell, the war accelerated the flow of wealth and resources to the most powerful social group, strengthened the rights of the military chiefs and led to significant divisions of social status.

24.3 The Rapid Development of Animal Husbandry Economy and Significant Adjustment of the Cultural Landscape Meanwhile, the emergence and rapid development of the animal husbandry economy led to a major reshaping of the cultural landscape. To date, no Neolithic remains have been confirmed for Xinjiang, and even if they did exist, they would remain at a relatively low level of development. However, by around 2000 BCE, however, a multitude of bronze cultures with varying levels of animal husbandry emerged quite suddenly, covering most areas of Xinjiang. This is specifically the case, in the Altai and other places of northern Xinjiang, for the Qiemu’erqieke site 克尔木 齐类遗存, an animal husbandry- and hunting-centred economy. Though its dwelling sites, crops and agricultural tools have not been identified, many tools or weapons such as stone arrowheads 石器镞, bone arrowheads 骨镞, copper arrowheads 铜镞 and copper knives 铜刀 have been found here. However, other cultures, located in the north and south of the Tianshan Mountains, were agro-pastoralist economies. On the one hand, sheep, cattle and horse bones, along with fur products were frequently found, animal figures such as deer and sheep were common in rock paintings of the same period, and tools for animal husbandry and hunting such as swords, bows and arrows, ring-drilling polishing stones, as well as ornaments such as bronze mirrors, and tongpao (kou) (little bronze balls) 铜泡 (扣) were also common. On the other hand, dry land grain crops such as wheat and millet, as well as grain processing tools such as stone sickles, stone grinders and stone grinding rods were found.

24

A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF “THE BRONZE AGE REVOLUTION” …

411

However, even among the agro-pastoralist economies, there were many differences in terms of the developmental level of agriculture and animal husbandry. Of these bronze cultures, the North Branch Tianshan Mountain in Hami was highly-developed in pottery, stable in settlements and relatively advanced in agricultural economy, while the Siba culture in the western part of the Hexi Corridor, which was similar to the former as an agro-pastoralist economy, was also relatively well-developed in agriculture. Though millet, domestic pigs, stone knife (chicken sickles), stone sickles, etc. had been common in the cultures in the eastern regions of the Hexin Corridor and beyond, such as the late Qijia culture, Zhukaigou culture and the Lower Xiajiadian culture, indicating that their economy would still be predominantly agricultural, the proportion of animal husbandry and hunting had increased significantly. Excavations from the relevant sites showed that the proportion of sheep remains was significantly higher indicated by the burial custom of placing sheep horns or the sacrificed sheep or domestic pigs, and by tools for animal husbandry hunting such as bone knives with flint blades 骨梗石刃刀, bronze knives with bone handles 骨柄铜刀, bronze knives, scrapers 刮削器, ring-drilling polishing stones 穿孔砺石 and short-toothed bone combs 短齿骨梳 were commonly used. It can be seen that sheep-centred animal husbandry occupied a prominent role in these cultures. In addition, at that time, dry land farming expanded southward, especially as the area designated for wheat cultivation growing significantly. Animal husbandry, agro-pastoralism and agricultural economy with a large portion of animal husbandry are highly adaptable economic modes in arid and semi-arid regions. This is especially the case for agropastoralism, which allows various forms to complement each other. This flexible adaptability further led to the emergence of a range of cultures in a short period in previously culturally disadvantaged areas, such as Xinjiang, central and western Qinghai, the Xilingol region 锡林郭勒 of Inner Mongolia and the West Liao River valley. The vast northwest inland arid area, the semi-arid grasslands area of Inner Mongolia and other places finally saw a first peak of human development (see Figs. 24.1 and 24.2), and the culture of the West Liao River valley flourished again. This is an unprecedented major change in the cultural landscape of China since the Neolithic revolution around 10,000 BP. Such a major change in the cultural landscape led to the first confrontation between the north and the south in China, with the agrarian economy and the animal husbandry as their respective primary economies.

412

J. HAN

Fig. 24.1 The cultural landscape of the northwestern region in the late Neolithic Age (the late Longshan culture, 2200–2000 BCE)

Fig. 24.2 The cultural landscape of the northwestern region in the early Bronze Age (2000–1500 BCE)

24

A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF “THE BRONZE AGE REVOLUTION” …

413

This situation subsequently resulted in a serrated farming-pastoral zone along the Great Wall. Thereafter, as the climate fluctuated, the agricultural and pastoral populations moved back and forth, creating a continuous and profound exchange of blood ties and culture. In the course of this exchange, which was embodied in both war and peace, the vast northern regions with their strong pastoral tradition and the central and southern agricultural regions became increasingly interconnected and interdependent and gradually grew into an inseparable unit. The scope of “the Early China” in a cultural sense subsequently further expanded,12 the cultural content grew richer, constantly increasing the ability and vitality to cope with challenges. This situation continued through the Shang, Zhou, Qin and Han dynasties and lasted till the Ming and Qing dynasties. The Bronze Age culture of China mostly developed from the local Chalcolithic Age culture. However, as China, located in eastern Eurasia, entered the Bronze Age more than 1000 years later than the West, its “Bronze Age revolution” must have been closely linked to the influence and stimulation of western Bronze culture. The fundamental reason for this delay lies in the environmental background of the transition into a dry and cold climate in those days.13 According to research, a global “Little Ice Age” event occurred around 2000 BCE, with a sudden drop in precipitation, which was particularly obvious in northwestern China.14 The “Little Ice Age” had a substantial impact on the southern Ural Mountains, giving birth not only to the local animal husbandry economy as represented by horses and horsedrawn chariots, but also the Sintashta-Petrovka culture 辛塔什塔-彼德罗

12 The term “the Early China” refers to the relative cultural unity formed by the intermingling of cultures in most parts of China between the Neolithic Age and Shang Dynasty, with the Central Plains as the core. It can also be called “the Early Chinese Cultural Sphere” or simply “the Early China”. See Han Jianye (2005), “On the cyclical ‘division’ and ‘integration’ of the early Chinese culture”, Historical Review. 13 The important influence of climatic events around 4000 BP on ancient civilizations in the Old World has been noted by many, see Wu Wenxiang & Liu Dongsheng (2001), “The 4000 a BP event and its implications for the origin of ancient Chinese civilization”, Quaternary Research, 21(5); Wang, Wei (2004), “An exploration of the causes of the widespread cultural change in China around 2000 BP, Archaeology, 1; Wang, Shaowu (2005), “The sudden climatic changes and the decline of ancient civilizations from 2200– 2000 BCE”, Progress in Natural Sciences, 15(9). 14 Han, Jianye (2008), The Natural Environment and Cultural Development of the Pre-Qin Period in Northwest China, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 18–39.

414

J. HAN

夫斯卡文化 of the Bronze Age. Under the same climate conditions, along with the push of the Sintashta-Petrovka culture, pastoralism became a widespread practice in Siberia and Central Asia. In pursuit of pasture and arable land, these agro-pastoral groups, which probably spoke an IndoIranian language, moved towards the south and southeast on a large scale,15 resulting in a strong impact that spread various western elements, such as bronze artefacts and chariots, to different areas along the route, thus contributing significantly to the emergence of the animal husbandry economic belt in northern Eurasia.16 Afterwards, for a long time, the movements and interactions of agricultural and animal husbandry people along the Great Wall were also closely associated with the fluctuation of climate.17

15 Kuzmina, E.E. (2001), “The first migration wave of Indo-Iranians to the south”, The Journal of Indo-European Studies, 29(1). 16 Demkin, V.A. & Demkian, T.S. (2002), “Paleoecological crises and optima in the Eurasian Steppes in ancient times and the middle ages”, In K. Jones-Bley & D.G. Zdanovich, eds., Complex Societies of Central Eurasia from the 3rd to the 1st Millennium BCE, Washington DC: Institute for the Study of Man, 389–399. 17 Han, Jianye (2008), The Natural Environment and Cultural Development of the Pre-Qin Period in Northwest China, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 458–468.

PART V

Culture Genes and Historical Memory

CHAPTER 25

8000 Years Old Cultural Genes of Early China Revealed from Archaeological Discoveries

Thanks to the painstaking efforts of several generations of archaeologists for nearly a century, Chinese archaeology has made outstanding achievements. One of its major contributions is that their research has over time accumulated the evidence to accept as certain that the origin of early China in a cultural context, consisting of multiple strands around one centre, dates back all the way to the prehistoric period. Such an Early China has laid the foundation of the Xia, Shang and Zhou dynasties, and even of the modern unified multi-ethnic nation today. Over the course of thousands of years from the budding of early China around 8000 years BP, to the formation of the early China approximately 6000 BP, to the formation of early Chinese civilization over 5000 BP and to the maturation of early Chinese civilization about 4000 years BP, the Early China underwent a continuous process of twists and turns, forging unique traits that distinguish it from other civilizations in the world and encapsulating “the cultural genes that enable the Chinese people to live, grow, prosper and invigorate without interruption”. The formation of early China and its cultural genes were closely associated with its geographical environment and climate. As the largest region suitable for agricultural production in the world, China had cultivated the world’s first rice-based and millet-based agrarian systems in its southern and northern regions respectively at around 10,000 BP. From around 8000 BP, the two major agrarian systems were taking shape, with rice farmed in the Yangzi River valley in southern China, and millet in the © China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_25

417

418

J. HAN

Yellow River valley in northern China. Consequently, the basic concept of “agriculture as the essence of life” 以农为本 emerged early in China, upon which China’s unique cultural genes were formed.

25.1

Holistic Thinking and Harmony Between the Heaven and Man

From its very beginning, the Chinese people has always been holding a holistic and continuous view of the universe. This concept may be attributable to the reverence for nature on account of an enormously huge agricultural society, or also to the particular importance attached to astronomy and the calendar due to farming needs. This view of the universe itself embodies the cultural genes of holistic thinking and the harmony between man and nature. At the Jiahu Site 贾湖遗址 in Wuyang, Henan, which pertained to the Peiligang culture, astronomical instruments which were found from around 8000 years BP in large adult male burials, including compassshaped bone tools 规形器 and bone pitch pipes (bone flutes) 骨律管 that were likely to have been used for astronomical observation and the determination of seasons, suggesting that Chinese astronomy could have already emerged by then. The burial items also include stones-filled tortoise shells with carved scripts, indicating possible links to divination or symbolism and numerology of bagua (the eight trigrams) 八卦象数; the round dorsal shells and the flat ventral shells might imply an embryonic cosmological view of a round heaven and a square earth 天圆地 方. At the Gaomiao Site 高庙遗址 in Hongjiang, Hunan, the earliest octagonal star pattern 八角星纹 was found on fine white pottery, which may have been associated with the spatial concepts such as “eight directions and nine palaces” 八方九宫 and “round heaven and square earth”. Other motifs such as the sun, the phoenix, the flying dragon with a tusked animal mask 獠牙兽面飞龙纹, and the heavenly ladder 天梯纹, along with the presence of frame-structured, terraced buildings 排架式梯 状建筑, demonstrate a profound if primitive religious atmosphere implicating a worship of heaven 通天敬天. At the Chahai Site 查海遗址 in Fuxin, Liaoning and other sites in its vicinity, stone piles in the shape of a dragon and motifs of a dragon with a tusked animal mask were also found. During roughly the same period, at the Qiaotou Site 桥头 遗址 in Yiwu and the Kuahuqiao Site 跨湖桥遗址 in Xiaoshan—both in Zhejiang Province—hexagrams consisting of yang or masculine lines

25

8000 YEARS OLD CULTURAL GENES OF EARLY CHINA …

419

(unbroken, solid lines), or yin feminine lines (broken, open lines) 阴阳爻 卦画, bearing great resemblance to symbols from Zhouyi (I-Ching or The Book of Changes ) 周易 and bagua (the Eight Trigrams) 八卦, were painted or carved on potteries or bone artefacts, suggesting potential association with the practice of tortoise divination witnessed at the Jiahu Site. From about 7000 BP onwards, motifs including the octagonal stars and tusked animal faces became popular in most regions of China, indicating that the cosmological view of “round heaven and square earth” and the concept of worshipping heaven should have been widely disseminated and accepted. For example, octagonal star patterns were found carved on the central position of the “jade diagram of Luoshu” 洛书玉版 and the “jade eagle with zoomorphic wings” 兽翅玉鹰 unearthed from the Linjiatan Site 凌家滩遗址 (5000 BP) in Hanshan, Anhui. In addition, the discovery of the grave containing mosaics formed from clamshells of a tiger and a dragon 蚌塑龙虎 at the Xishuipo Site 西水坡遗址 (6000 BP) in Puyang, Henan, pushed the inception of China’s twenty-eight lunar mansions back several thousand years. At the Niuheliang Site 牛河梁遗址 (5000 BP) near the junction of Lingyuan and Jianping in Liaoning Province, a ritual circular mound 圜丘 or “temple of heaven” 天坛 enclosed by three stone concentric circles 三重石圈 was found. The diameter of the outer circle is exactly twice that of the inner one. Their ratio is exactly the same as that of the diameters between paths of the sun across the sky at summer solstice and winter solstice documented in the Chart of the Seven Orbits《七衡图》from Arithmetical Classic of the Gnomon and the Circular Paths of Heaven《周髀算经》 . The ritual site thus is regarded as the most comprehensive diagrammatic representation of the theory of the Canopy Heaven 盖天宇宙论 from the prehistoric period ever seen. The cosmological view of “round heaven and square earth” along with its related concepts such as astronomical observation and time determination 观象授时, astronomy and calendar formalization 天文历 法, divination by symbols, numbers and tortoise shells 象数龟占, yinyang and bagua 阴阳八卦, in connection with the worship of heaven, is a holistic cosmological view that emphasizes the universal link between cosmos, heaven, earth, nature and human beings. It held a dynamic rather than static view about the universe and had been a way of thinking that combined primitive religion and numerical reasoning summarized by later generations as the philosophical belief in harmony between man and nature. With this cosmological view, our ancestors had always held a

420

J. HAN

reverence for nature, heaven and earth, which evolved into a worldview that respected and conformed to nature, and acted in accordance with the times represented by Zhouyi (I-Ching or The Book of Changes 《 ) 周易》and Classic of the Way and the Virtue《道德经》 . The dialectal thinking pattern, characterized by the complementarity of yin and yang elements, the unity of opposite sides and the concept of continuous movement without stop, had been deeply rooted in the blood of every Chinese, laid the cornerstone of Chinese classical philosophy, guided the development of Chinese civilization and left a far-reaching impact.

25.2 Ancestor Veneration and Companionship with Fellow Humans Agricultural production requires a group of people to cultivate a piece of land and live on it continuously. Such stability can easily lead to the rise of consanguinity or ties of a blood-based society bonded by common ancestors. It is thus reasonable for the cultural genes of ancestor veneration 祖先崇拜 and yi ren wei ben, literally “man-centredness”, i.e. a sense of human orientation, solidarity with fellow humans or companionship with fellow humans 以人为本, to take shape in Early China, the largest agricultural civilization in the world. Chinese prehistoric burials attached great importance to the belief that “entering the earth brings peace” 入土为安. The presence of communal cemeteries, deeply-buried bodies, carefully placed coffins and burial items showed the special veneration for the deceased, which also reflected emphasis on kindred and family affection in social life. The earliest evidence of this tradition can be seen at the Peiligang culture 裴李岗 文化. In many sites of the Peiligang culture in Henan Province, such as the Peiligang in Xinzheng, the Shuiquan in Jiaxian and Jiahu in Wuyang, there were cemeteries near the settlements. Such an arrangement should be the result of a group of people who had lived together and been buried together”, demonstrating the close blood kinship between the dead and the living from the same clan or of the same ancestors. This arrangement also points to the origin of the custom of zuzang “clan burial” 族葬 and zu fenmu “clan graves” 族坟墓 recorded in the Rites of the Zhou《周礼》 dating back to 8000 years BP. Meanwhile, division of the same cemetery into sections and carefully arranged groups, rows and columns of burials should be a reflection of the social organization on different levels such as jiating families or households 家庭, jiazu clans, 家族, shizu patriarchal

25

8000 YEARS OLD CULTURAL GENES OF EARLY CHINA …

421

clans 氏族, as an indication of the social status of adults, children, men and women in reality. The large graves with more burial items were mostly for male adults, suggesting that some heads of clan might have occupied a prominent position. The fact that the same cemetery could sustain for hundreds of years not only showed that people of the same clan had long lasting memories of the habitat of their ancestors, but also gave justification and “legitimacy” to the long-term cultivation of this land by their descendants. The customs of the Peiligang culture, whereby earth burial in the form of clan cemeteries was observed, were at the time unique in the world, forming a sharp contrast to those cultures of the same period in west Asia whereby intramural burial, celestial burial, cremation were practised for the sake of iconic worship of deities and pursuit of soul purification. The tradition of clan burial, ancestor veneration and historical memory which came into being in the Peiligang period continued till the late Neolithic period and spread across present-day China. The Dawenkou Cemetery 大汶口墓地 in Tai’an, Shandong, is a typical example. For a period as long as 2000 years (from 6000 to 4000 BP), the arrangement of burials within cemeteries remained unchanged. The customs of clan cemetery and ancestor worship were carried through the Xia, Shang, Zhou dynasties and even to the Qin and Han dynasties, became the fountainhead of the patriarchal system and funeral rules, and had laid the foundation of the clan society in Chinese history. Therefore, ancestral lineage has occupied a central position in the literature and historical legends. This ancestral veneration-based “root culture” 根文化 would endure regardless of subsequent social reorganizations and dynastic changes. The concept of kindred and family affection which germinated during the Peiligang period anticipated the subsequent concepts of “benevolence” 仁 and “filial piety” 孝 and the thought of “people as the basis of government” 民本 at the time of the Zhou Dynasty. In this vein, it is greatest benignity to start from loving one’s family and nation to loving mankind, just as it is greatest filial piety to start from respecting and supporting one’s parents, to passing on and spreading the ancestral foundation and moral tradition. The people of Zhou Dynasty had a strong belief in fate. The reason for the overthrowal of King Zhou of the Shang Dynasty by King Wu of the Zhou tribe at about 1046 BCE 武王伐纣 was attributed to the fact that King Zhou “brought destruction on himself” 自绝于天. In the mind of the people of the Zhou tribe, whether one

422

J. HAN

would be favoured by fate would depend on his “cultivated virtue” 修 德 and people’s will 民心 or on public judgement. As the saying goes, “things will happen according to people’s will” 民之所欲, 天必从之.

25.3 In Pursuit of Order and Steadfast Impartiality The super-large-scale agricultural production in early China was predicated on a long and settled life, which in turn required constant adjustment of the internal social order to maintain stability. During that process, the cultural gene of pursuing order and maintaining stability was gradually formed. The other manifestation of this cultural gene is that the scope of the Chinese people’s activities has not changed much during its thousands of years of development. There has been no large-scale external expansion. “This peaceful development is a matter of choice, instead of a lack of might” “不为也, 非不能也”. As the most stable and most continuous culture in the world, the early Chinese culture remained ceaseless for more than 10,000 years, with its ethnic unity being uninterruptedly inherited ever from the Neolithic Age. Examples of this stability and continuity abounded in the history of Chinese culture. As a simple, practical but fragile vessel, potteries were first invented in China about 20,000 BP, which later made China the world’s largest area where potteries were widely used. This fact should be attributed to the solid agricultural production and stable social life. The early cultural exchanges between China and the West around 5000 BP mainly brought livestock and crops such as sheep, cattle and wheat to China, but did not change the basic pattern of the rice-based or milletbased farming and pig-based husbandry in early China. The introduction of the animal husbandry culture, characterized by horse-drawn chariots from the Eurasian steppes at about 4000 BP, had a great impact on the civilizations of western Asia, Egypt and the Indus. While under this influence a cultural belt that featured animal husbandry gradually came into being along the Great Wall in northern China, the components of both the residents and the culture on this belt were mainly ethnic or native Chinese elements themselves and had never shaken the foundation of Chinese culture. The stability and continuity of the early Chinese culture continued until after the Qin and Han dynasties. While the earliest stone artefacts in China, such as fu axes 斧, ben adzes 锛 and zao chisels 凿, were mainly woodworking tools used to build

25

8000 YEARS OLD CULTURAL GENES OF EARLY CHINA …

423

houses, the clan-based settlement was the mainstream dwelling pattern in prehistoric China. In the Xinglongwa cultural 兴隆洼文化 sites (around 7000–8000 BP) in Inner Mongolia, scattered in Xinglongwa 兴隆洼 and Xinglonggou 兴隆沟 in Aohan Banner, and Baiyin Changhan 白音长汗 in Linxi County, there were villages surrounded by trenches outside, houses in straight rows inside and large houses in the centre of the villages. This settlement pattern was significantly different from the randomly laid out settlements of the same period witnessed in places such as western Asia. In the Yangshao sites in Shaanxin Province (around 6000 BP) such as the Banpo in Xi’an, the Jiangzhai in Lintong and Beishouling in Baoji, there were also villages circled by moats. For example, the village surrounded by the moat in the Jiangzhai settlement consisted of five blocks of houses, each of which contained large-, medium- and small-sized houses. While the large-sized houses were probably places for public events such as sacrifice rituals, almost all of the three types of houses had doorways facing the central square and were surrounded by public facilities such as potterymaking workshops and cemeteries, suggesting a centripetal and orderly society. The 5000-year-old Shuanghuaishu Site 双槐树遗址 in Gongyi of Henan featured a large prominent dwelling areas surrounded by triple encircling moats. While the earliest remains of a walled city known to date in China is the Chengtoushan Site located in Lixian County of Hunan Province, which dates back to more than 6000 BP, such cities became scattered all over the Yellow River basin and Yangtze River basin around 5000 BP. These ancient cities were built not only to protect the inhabitants from the attack of enemies or the threat of flooding, but also to separate people of “the inside” from those on “the outside”, to emphasize the “centre” and to maintain the internal order of society. For example, the large ancient cities of Liangzhu, Taosi and Shimao 良渚、陶寺、 石峁古城, which covered millions of square metres in size, were built around large-scale “palatial residences” in the centre, while the small but regular Pingliangtai Site 平粮台城址 located in Huaiyang, Henan, had a central avenue. Furthermore, the city sites from the Central Plains were mostly square and regular, which may be attributed to both the geographical characteristics of the plain area and the observance of social order. Besides, the fact that burials in early China since the Peiligang culture had been neatly arranged in general also bears a great resemblance to the arrangement of villages and city sites, suggesting the abidance of social order.

424

J. HAN

The houses of the Xinglongwa culture around 8000 BP were basically square or rectangular in shape with a fire pit in the centre. Behind some fire pits, stone statues of deities were placed, indicating the existence of the “centre” concept in the purist of regular and symmetrical architectural space. Such a concept spanned the whole course of both the Yangshao and the Longshan cultures. For instance, the palace-style house at the Xipo Site (around 5000 BP) of Lingbao City, Henan, which covered several hundreds of square metres, had a large sacred fire pit in its middle front and was supported by four large symmetrically-placed pillars. The largest building at the Dadiwan Site in Qin’an, Gansu, had embodied the basic features of Chinese classical ritual or palatial edifices, such as the dichotomy between the front hall and rear chamber 前堂后室, the distinction between the inner and outer space 内外有别, the symmetry between the east and west compartments 东西两厢左右对称, and the hierarchical arrangement of the three doors from the left to the centre and to the right 左中右三门主次分明. Similar layout patterns were also found from the buildings at the Nanzuo Ste in Qingyang, Gansu and the Lushanmao Site in Yan’an, Shaanxi. Later, the temples and palaces of the Xia, Shang and Zhou periods in Henan, including the Erlitou Site in Yanshi, the Shangcheng Site in Yanshi and the Yin Ruins Site in Anyang, etc., were even more neatly and orderly arranged. Among them, the siheyuan quadrangle courtyard 四合院 styled temple buildings of the Zhou Dynasty at the Fengchu Site in Qishan, Shaanxi, can be viewed as both a symbol for the maturity of Chinese classical ritual or palatial structures, and as an embodiment of the aspiration for order and stability by the rulers of the Western Zhou. The institutional manifestation of social order in early China was mainly accomplished through the self-regulatory “ritual system” rather than the enforced law. “The use of ritual vessels is to apply etiquette and manifest status” 器以藏礼. The ritual system was manifested in the rules for utensil usage, palatial dwelling and burials. The ritual system was characterized by a combination of flexible self-discipline, simple moderation, rigid rules and hierarchical distinctions, and is the way of the “maintenance of centrality” 执中 or “neutrality” 中庸. Archaeologically, at the Xipo Cemetery located in Lingbao, Henan, roughly 5000 BP, burials were neatly arranged by size and grade, and large burials here, albeit great in size, contained only a small number of paired funeral objects, indicating both the status of the grave owners and the emphasis on frugality. This

25

8000 YEARS OLD CULTURAL GENES OF EARLY CHINA …

425

evidence also reflects the inception of funeral or ritual systems then in the Central Plains. In cultural sites of the lower Yellow River area such as the Dawenkou, Longshan and so on, sets of coffins and conventionalized burial items were excavated, which is evidence of preliminary funeral or ritual systems. Apparently, these systems anticipated the mature system for the use of coffins and ding tripod cauldrons 鼎 in the Western Zhou period. Ding, as the most prominent ritual vessel in early China, was first seen in the Peiligang culture of the Central Plains. At approximately 5000 BP, the pottery ding-centred ritual vessel combination had taken shape across the middle east areas; roughly 4000 BP, at the Erlitou Site of the late Xia Dynasty, the bronze ding appeared. Later in the Zhou Dynasty, the number of burial objects such as ding tripods and gui ewers 簋 was a standard find in the graves of nobles at different levels.

25.4 Capacity for Coalescence and Peaceful Coexistence The early Chinese culture, which was based on agriculture, advocated order, kindness to others, love for peace and “selfless service” 为而不 争. However, given its large geographical space and varied natural environment, there existed not just two major agricultural systems in Early China, i.e. the rice-based versus the millet-based. For even within each system, there were a multitude of cultural variations. To maintain longterm stability on such a large geographical scale, it was necessary for the systems to intermingle and accommodate each other, which then naturally gave rise to the cultural genes upholding the capacity for coalescence and peaceful coexistence 有容乃大、和谐共存. In the early Neolithic period around 10,000 BP, Chinese culture could be divided into five major cultural zones according to the different shapes of pottery. Later, due to continuous interaction and intermingling, the total number of cultural zones was reduced to four in around 8000 BP. Centring around the Central Plains, these four zones shared many connections and commonalities with each other, leading to the germination of the Early China in culture. From roughly 6000 BP onward, most regions in China merged into a super-cultural sphere, pronouncing the formation of the culturally Early China or “the Earliest China”. Despite their respective distinctive features, the cultures within this super-cultural circle already displayed general and integrated properties. Situated in the

426

J. HAN

middle reaches of the Yellow River or the Central Plains, this cultural circle had grown into a flower with its pistil and multiple layers of petals that had been blooming from the Xia, Shang, Zhou dynasties to the Qin and Han dynasties. The formation and development process of the Early China was also a course of close interaction among people from different regions and of continuous mingling between cultures. Seeking common ground while reserving differences 求同存异, harmony in diversity 和而不 同 and harmonious coexistence 和谐共处 was one of the secrets to maintain the long-term, orderly, stable development in a multi-stranded yet unified 多支一体 China in the cultural sense. Of course, during the cultural development in different regions in early China, with increasing population and growing social complexity, there arose inevitable conflicts and wars. Amid the Neolithic period, traces of large-scale warfare were found in at least three phases, evident in the increased use of stone weapons such as zu arrowheads 镞, yue battle-axes 钺 and mao spears 矛, the improvement of defence facilities such as city walls, barbicans entrances 瓮城, protruding ramparts 马面 and trenches, and the increase of random mass graves. The wars around 5000 and 4000 BP were all associated with dry and cold weather events. Whereas extreme weather events had caused in the northern regions drastic declines in resources, difficulties in agricultural cultivation, and frequent disasters, people from the northern tribes would generally migrate south, triggering a chain reaction of wars. However, instead of causing the collapse of the early China, the wars rapidly reinforced the capability in social mobilization and organization of the country, pushing most regions of China into first primitive and then increasingly mature civilizations successively. This is especially the case in the context of wars around 4000 BP. During this period, the middle reaches of the Yellow River became home to large cities of millions of square metres such as Taosi, Shimao and Erlitou where jade artefacts, bronze vessels and potteries of different styles from different regions came together, coalesced, “sinicized” and then were disseminated back to the surrounding areas. For example, the ritual artefacts of the Erlitou culture in the late Shang Dynasty, such as the jade zhang tablet 璋, and the ceremonial bronzes of jue wine vessels 爵 and jia drinking vessels 斝 eventually reached north to the west Liao River, east and south to the coastal areas, and west to Gansu, Qinghai and Sichuan provinces. Moreover, in the late Xia Dynasty, bronze, mainly used to produce weapons and tools in the Eurasian steppe, was cast in the Central Plains as the bronze ding tripods symbolizing the country and its

25

8000 YEARS OLD CULTURAL GENES OF EARLY CHINA …

427

social order, and was widely seen in various regional centres during the Shang and Zhou dynasties. Up to 3000 BP, the animal husbandry culture was characterized by bronze weapons and tools and emerged along the Great Wall region, formed both an antagonistic and intertwined relationship with the farming culture of the Central Plains. This relationship further moderated the resilience of early China and allowed it to develop and mature. In fact, the Chinese people had always known that “a weapon is an inauspicious tool that must be used as a last resort”, and that the essence of the civil and military way lay in defending the homeland, working on the foundation of the country and passing on civilization.

25.5 Hard-Working and Unswerving Determination Farmers have been the most hard-working and persevering group of people in the world. They cultivate land, grow plants and look after the fields, harvest and thresh the crops, process grains, raise livestock and poultry, and make various handicrafts by hand, with little time to spare except for festivals, weddings and funerals. Early China was the largest agricultural area and had the largest number of farmers in the world, which contributed to the formation of the cultural genes that cherish hard-working and unswerving determination. Rice cultivation in China emerged more than 10,000 BP in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River, expanded to the Huaihe River basin and the lower reaches of the Yellow River roughly 9000 BP; spread to southern China, Taiwan, and from around 6000 BP moved in the direction of the Sichuan Basin, arriving there at around 4000 BP. By contrast, millet cultivation appeared in northern China more than 10,000 BP. About 8000 BP, it spread to the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River and most areas of the west Liao River basin. Around 5000 BP, it expanded westward into the arid Hexi Corridor and southwestward onto the towering Qinghai-Tibet Plateau. Around 4000 BP, it reached Xinjiang. During its development, this prehistoric agriculture had to adapt itself to different geographical, climatic and soil conditions and to overcome numerous difficulties and challenges. The Yangtze and Huai River basins were rich in water resources, but due to the low and flat terrain, both areas were subject to frequent flooding. The ancestors of the Liangzhu and Qujialing cultures thus

428

J. HAN

built large-scale dams in the middle and lower reaches of the Yangtze River to prevent flooding and control water, which was a labour-intensive process, not to mention the hard work and patience required for intensive rice farming. In contrast, despite the deep soil layer of the Loess Plateau, the weather was mostly dry across the year, with rainfall mainly clustered in the summer with frequent natural disasters, so farmers in the north had got accustomed to the hardships brought by drought, having to work hard to seize the opportunities to sow and harvest. The Yangshao culture, the direct root of the Chinese civilization, was a product of the Loess Plateau. Having spanned eight or nine modern-day provinces and lasted for more than 2000 years, the Yangshao culture embodied the spirit of perseverance and persistence of the prehistoric ancestors in northern China. The history of China’s agriculture has been the history of hard work, perseverance and self-improvement of the Chinese people. (This section was originally published in Guangming Daily on 4 November 2020)

CHAPTER 26

Violent Cultural Changes in the Longshan Period and Tribal Warfare in Chinese Legendary Era

At the end of the 2nd millennium BCE, when the Longshan culture was transiting from its early period to its late period, there occurred two largescale violent cultural changes, both of which related to tribal warfare. Based upon this presumption, it is possible to establish the correspondence between certain archaeological cultures and the local tribes of the time and take a key step forward in the exploration of China’s ancient history before the Xia Dynasty.

26.1

Introduction

Shiji, Records of the Grand Historian《史记》begins with the chapter Annals of the Five Emperors 五帝本纪》which is followed by Annals of Xia《夏本纪》and Annals of Yin《殷本纪》 . Although Sima Qian 司马迁 (145–90 BCE) lamented the remote antiquity of Wudi (the legendary Five Emperors) 五帝, he still believed that their legends were mostly trustworthy.1 This understanding was largely shared among researchers 1 According to “Annals of the Five Emperors” of Records of the Grand Historian, “Sima Qian, the Imperial Astronomer, said that scholars mostly praised the Five Emperors for a long time. However, the Shangshu i.e. The Book of History《尚书》 , which is the most credible book, only records the emperors since Yao 尧, but not the emperor, Zhuanxu 颛 顼, and Diku 帝喾. Although the hundred schools of thought would mention the Yellow Emperor, gods and monsters were often involved, which is implausible and not elegant, so it is difficult for scholars to tell the story …When I look at the Annals of Chunqiu

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_26

429

430

J. HAN

of later generations in general. However, at the early twentieth century, with the rise of “yigupai” (doubters of antiquity) 疑古派 represented by Gu Jiegang, the historical authenticity of the Wudi period was questioned in principle, and even Yu the Great, the founder of the Xia Dynasty, was regarded a mythical figure.2 Further, although the late Shang is deemed a credible “historical” period “历史” 时期 due to the discovery of oracle bone scripts and Yinxu (the Yin ruins) 殷墟, the Wudi period, for its lack of the hard evidence from written records, is still classified as the “legendary era” 传说时代3 or the so-called protohistoric period “ 原史” 时代.4 Even the early Shang and Xia periods are no exceptions. However, studies based on handed-down documents can only propose some hypotheses in need of verification5 ; whereas the studies based on the combination of excavated pieces of evidence such as oracle bone scripts, bronze inscriptions, and bamboo and silk manuscripts, can only show that there existed records regarding Wudi (the Five Emperors) from the late Shang and Western Zhou dynasties to the Spring and Autumn and

(literally “spring and autumn”)《春秋》and the Guo Yu (literally “language of different states”)《国语》 , their exposition of the Five Emperors ’ Virtues《五帝德》and the Imperial Surname《帝系姓》is very clear, only that the Confucian scholars did not examine it in depth, but the situation reflected in these two books is actually true. Shangshu has been incomplete for a long time, but its missing content can often be found in other works. If one has not learned and thought deeply and understood the meaning of the book from the heart, the contents of these books would have been difficult to understand for the uninitiated and uneducated”. 2 Gu, Jiegang (1982), Distinguishing Ancient History (Vol. 1), Shanghai: Shanghai Guji

Press. 3 The lower limit of Xu Xusheng’s “Legendary Era” reaches Yin Ruins period. See Xu Xusheng (1985), The Legendary Era of Ancient Chinese History (new ed.), 19–20. 4 “Protohistory” is a concept proposed by western scholars, which is between the prehistory and historical period, see Liu Wensuo (1998), “On the concept of ‘prehistory’, ‘protohistory’ and ‘historical period’”, Huaxia Archaeology, 3. 5 Meng Wentong and Xu Xusheng, respectively, put forward the theories of the “three

major nationalities” and “three major tribe groups” in ancient China, which have the same connotation and show that ancient history and legends have their own reasonable logic, see Meng Wentong (1999), Subtle Discrimination of Ancient History, Chengdu: Bashu Shushe Press; Xu, Xusheng (1985), The Legendary Era of Ancient Chinese History (new ed.), Beijing: Wenwu Press.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

431

the Warring States periods 春秋战国时期,6 which cannot directly verify the very existence of the Wudi period. As a matter of fact, in his book Distinguishing Ancient History (Vol. 1)《古史辨》 ,7 Li Xuanbo has clearly pointed out that the only way to solve problems related to ancient history is through archaeology. Gu Jiegang also holds that the truth of ancient culture revealed by the unearthed ancient artefacts can be used either to start a new tradition for studies on China’s ancient history or to eradicate the old one.8 In principle we can assume that if those legendary tribal groups had really existed, they would certainly have left material remains, and archaeology should indeed be the most fundamental means to unveil the mysterious ancient history of the legendary era. Since archaeological pieces of evidence have been buried underground for long periods, there is no possibility of artificial alteration, addition, or deletion. Therefore, these materials possess both objectivity and authenticity beyond any doubt and thus should constitute the most reliable frame of reference for historical studies of the legendary era.9 After nearly a century of arduous work, the internal logical order and main contents of this frame of reference have been gradually deciphered and interpreted; the genealogy of the pottery-centred archaeological culture of Chinese prehistory and protohistory has been established in principle; and the conditions for research based on cross-reference of ancient history and archaeology have been mostly up-to-date. Looking back on the archaeological exploration of the early Shang and Xia cultures, one can see that the approach adopted by scholars represented by Zou Heng is to derive the unknown from the known. Specifically, studies based on this approach would start from the known evidence of the late Shang culture to deduce knowledge about the 6 Li, Xueqin (1994), Stepping out of the Ancient Age of Doubt, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press; Li, Ling (2002), “On the Meaning of Public Discovery Yi, Journal of National Museum of China, 6; Wang, Hui (2007), “Unearthed written materials and new evidence of the Five Emperors”, Journal of Archaeology, 1. 7 Li, Xuanbo (1982), “The only solution to problems in ancient history”, Discussions on Ancient History, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press, 268–270. 8 Gu, Jiegang (1982), “Answer to Mr. Li Xuanbo”, Distinguishing Ancient History, Shanghai: Guji Press, 268–270. 9 “From the perspective of sorting out the legendary historical materials per se, prehistoric archaeological data have become the most reliable frame of reference that cannot be ignored”. Bai, Shouyi & Su, Bbingqi, eds (1994), “Preface”, General History of China, Shanghai: Remin Press, 17.

432

J. HAN

early Shang, Xia and pre-Shang cultures, especially the importance of the determination of their respective capital cities; and focusing on the overall comparison between the spatial patterns of archaeologically researched culture and the systematic findings of ancient history studies, remarkable results have been achieved.10 The archaeological exploration of the Wudi period approximately followed the same rationale. The premise of these studies is that archaeological culture can, to some extent, correspond to a specific ethnic group,11 or a tribal group or an early state established around a core ethnic group. For instance, based on the records from oracle bone scripts and handed-down documents, such a premise can be verified in principle with the approximate correspondence between the crown land, its four regions and neighbouring states of the capital of the late Shang Dynasty, and the central, subcultural, and influential zones of Yinxu (Yin Ruins). Given the clear archaeological evidence for feudalism in the Western Zhou,12 it can be derived that this premise is mostly valid and plausible. However, here arises another issue. Given the difficulty in precisely defining the spatial territory and temporal duration of a particular ethnic group of the legendary era, how can the group be aligned to a particular archaeological culture? Besides, archaeological culture itself has a variety of distinguishing schemes. Under this situation, divergent views would naturally arise in succession13 with regard to a particular research conclusion. One approach may help solve this tricky issue to a certain extent; that is, the cross-reference of archaeologically researched cultural changes and tribal warfare. Intense tribal warfare, which could cause dramatic

10 Zou, Heng (1980), Collected Archaeological Papers of the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 11 Li Boqian pointed out that “Archaeological culture is related to the community of ethnic groups, but it is not an equivalent concept. For reasons of marriage, interaction, conquest and migration, the inhabitants of a certain archaeological culture may belong to different ethnic groups, but there is always one of them which is dominant and leading”. See Li Boqian (1986), “Issues of the cultural nature and ethnic identity of the Erlitou type”, Cultural Relics, 6. 12 The Shang and Zhou Studies Group of the Archaeological Teaching and Research Section of the Department of History of Peking University (1979), Archaeology of the Shang and Zhou Dynasties, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 154–165; Xu, Zuoyun (1994), History of the Western Zhou Dynasty, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company. 13 For example, there are many different theories about the Xia culture. See Zheng Jiexiang (2002), Treatise on the Xia Culture, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

433

changes in both the landscape and features of cultures, is particularly noticeable and recognizable. “By using the radical changes in the archaeological culture to confirm the legendary wars or migrant events, and to establish several basic points from here for the exploration of other details, it is possible to get an overview of China’s ancient history in the Wudi period”.14 This chapter intends to conduct a cross-reference analysis of two violent cultural changes in the Longshan period and the two large-scale tribal wars during the Yao 尧, Shun 舜 and Yu 禹 periods. Subsequent discussions regarding other related issues are also made on this basis.

26.2 The Southward Expansion of the Wangwan Phase III Culture and Yu’s Conquest of the Miao Man Tribes During the Longshan period, which spanned the late third and early second millennium BCE, Phase III of the Wangwan culture, located in central Henan, started to rise and finally expanded to southern Henan and the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, resulting in the collapse of the powerful Shijiahe culture. This event may be related to the legendary account of “the Great Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes”.15 26.2.1

The Rapid Development and Expansion of the Wangwan Phase III Culture

Phase III of the Wangwan culture was mainly spread over central and western Henan, with its absolute dates falling into the period of around 2400–1750 BCE.16 This culture can be divided into two major periods,

14 Han, Jianye & Yang, Xingai (2006), “Preface”, in The Five Emperors Era: Archaeological Observations of the Ancient History System with Huaxia as the Core, Beijing: Xueyuan Press, 5. 15 Yang, Xingai & Han, Jianye (1995), “Exploration of ‘Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 16 “The chronological ceiling of the Wangwan Phase III culture, which was previously presumed to be around 2500 BCE”. See Han Jianye & Yang Xingai (1997), “Studies of the Wangwan Phase III culture”, Journal of Archaeology, 1. “The earliest data measured in the new survey is about 2400 BCE” See Fang Yanming (2015), “Discussion on some

434

J. HAN

corresponding respectively to the early and late Longshan periods that were roughly separated by the year of 2100 BCE.17 At the turn of the two periods, there had been major changes in its cultural scope and external relations. The early Phase III of the Wangwan culture was mainly confined to central Henan and the representative cultural relics of this period include the Haojiatai Site 郝家台 in Yancheng,18 the Shilipu Site 十里铺19 in Shangcai; the Zhanmatun Site 站马屯 in Zhengzhou,20 the Beiliu Site 北刘 in Ruzhou21 and so on. In addition, rammed-earth city walls of more than 30,000 square metres22 were found at the Haojiatai Site. At that time, the area of northwest Henan (i.e. the north of present-day Zhengzhou-Ruzhou line) still pertained to the territory of influence of Phase II of the late Miaodigou cultural type; the area of eastern Henan and northern Anhui (i.e. the east of present-day Xuchang-Luohe line) was

issues of the carbon fourteenth dating of the Henan Longshan and Erlitou cultures”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. “As for the lower limit of the Wangwan III culture, it should be bounded by the emergence of the Erlitou culture with regard to the Luoyang Basin was, and the latest fitting data of the Erlitou Phase I was in about 1750 BCE”. See Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2014), The Erlitou Site (1999–2006), Beijing: Wenwu Press, 1231. 17 “The chronology of the turn of the Wangwan III culture from the early phase to the late one, was previously presumed it to be about 2200 BCE”. See Han Jianye & Yang, Xingai (1997), “A study of the Wangwan III culture”, Journal of Archaeology, 1. Based on new dating data, it is proposed to be about 2100 BCE. 18 Refers to the remains of the first and second phases. See Henan Provincial Institute

of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2012), The Haojiatai Site in Haocheng, Zhengzhou: Daxiang Press. 19 Refers to the remains of the second and third phases. See The Zhumadian District

Cultural Management Committee of Henan Province (1983), “The Neolithic relics of the Shilipu Site in Shangcai, Henan Province”, Archaeological Collectanea, 3: 69–80. 20 Refers to the remains of the first period. See Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics, et al. (1987), “Excavation report of the Zhuanmatun Site in Zhengzhou”, Huaxia Archaeology, 2. 21 Refers to the third period of the remains. See Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics (1990), “Excavation report of the Beiliuzhuang Site in Linru, Henan”, Huaxia Archaeology, 2. 22 School of Archaeology of Peking University, Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology & Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Luohe City (2017), “The main harvest of field archaeology in the Haojiatai Site of Luohe, Henan from 2015 to 2016”, Huaxia Archaeology, 3.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

435

under the control of the early Zaolvtai culture23 ; and to southern Henan and the Jianghan (Yangtze-Hanjiang rivers) along the line of present-day Xiping-Shangcai was distributed the powerful Shijiahe culture. Phase III of the early Wangwan culture covered an area of about 20,000 square kilometres, which is about the size of a prefecture-level city in present-day Henan Province. The earliest Wangwan Phase III culture should have originated from the Gushuihe type of the Yangshao culture. Some potteries excavated here, such as straight-necked weng urns 直领瓮, deep-bellied guan jars 深腹罐, basin-shaped leibo bowls with flat bottom 盆形擂钵, pingdiwan bowls with flat bottom 平底碗, jar-shaped ding tripods 乳足/高足罐形鼎 and so on, bore great resemblance to those from the Gushuihe type. However, other potteries newly excavated here, such as gui ewers 鬶, bird-head shaped ding tripods 鸟兽形足鼎, zhepan dou bronze vessels for meat or other food 折盘豆, quanzu pan circular-legged plates 圈足盘, guxing bei tall wine beakers 觚形杯, zhefu hu carinated bellied kettles 折腹壶 and so on, exhibited the elements from the Longshan culture in the Haidai region. In addition, funnel-shaped leibo bowls with flat bottom 漏斗形擂 钵, wide flat ding tripods 宽扁式足鼎 and red pottery xiefu bei obliquebellied goblets 红陶斜腹杯, all characteristic of the Shijiahe culture in the Jianghan region, were also found here. It is thus obvious that while the Wangwan Phase III culture had been under the heavy influence from both the Longshan and Shijiahe cultures, and it had kept contact with the Longshan, Zaolvtai and Shijiahe cultures.24 The late Wangwan Phase III culture had spread to most parts of Henan except its eastern part and further extended to western Henan, southwestern Shanxi, northern Hubei and western Hubei. Even the late Shijiahe culture 25 or the Xiaojia Wuji (the Xiao Family’s Residence

23 It is represented by the remains of the Yuhui Site in Bengbu, Anhui. See Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Bengbu City Museum of Anhui Province (2013), The Yuhui Village Site in Bengbu, Beijing: Science Press. 24 We once divided the remains of the early Wangwan III culture into three groups, A, B and C, of which A exhibited the factor of the Shijiahe culture and B that of the Longshan culture. See Yang Xingai & Han Jianye (1995), “Exploration of ‘Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 25 Meng, Huaping (1997), The Structure of the Prehistoric Cultures in the Middle Reaches of the Yangtze River, Wuchang: Changjiang Wenyi Press.

436

J. HAN

Ridge) culture26 from the Jianghan Plains, due to their close similarities to the Wangwan Phase III culture, can as well be regarded as its local variants. Given this inclusion, the distribution area of the late Wangwan Phase III culture (the Xiaojia Wuji culture included) in a broad sense was about 200,000 square kilometres, which is ten times larger than that of the earlier or previous period, and even larger than the area of the present-day province of Henan or Hubei. Since the late Wangwan Phase III culture was mainly developed on its early period, its typical utensils almost completely inherited its early tradition, with some changes in the shape and ornamentation of the instruments.27 Together with these changes, its utensils developed and manifested obvious local variations, which can be classified as the Meishan type 煤山类型 located in the Ruying District of the southern Songshan Mountain, the Wangwan type 王湾类型 in Zhengluo District of the northern Songshan Mountain, the Sanliqiao type 三里桥 along the Yellow River in southern Henan and southwestern Shanxi Provinces, the Yangzhuang type 杨庄类型 in southeastern Henan,the Lower Wanggang type 下王刚类型 in southwestern Henan and northwestern Hubei Provinces, the Shiban Xiangzi (literally the slabstone lane) type 石板巷子类型 in the Xiajiang area of western Hubei and so on.28 Among these local variations, the Meishan type, which had occupied the central position in this cultural type, not only was the most powerful, but also boasted the two largest and most prestigious sites of this culture: namely the Wangchenggang Ancient City 王城岗古城 in Dengfeng29 and

26 He, Nu (2006), “On the Xiaojia Wuji culture and its related issues”, Archaeology of the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties (II), Beijing: Science Press, 98–145. 27 Han, Jianye & Yang, Xingai (1997), “A study of the Wangwan Phase III culture”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 1. 28 Han, Jianye (2015), The Early China: Formation and Development of the Chinese Cultural Sphere, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press, 166–168. 29 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics, & Department of Archaeology of the Chinese History Museum (1992), The Wangchenggang and Yangcheng Sites in Dengfeng, Beijing: Wenwu Press; School of Archaeology of Peking University, & Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2007), Archaeological Discoveries and Research of the Wangchenggang Site in Dengfeng (2002–2007), Zhengzhou: Daxiang Press.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

437

the Wadian Settlement 瓦店聚落 in Yuzhou,30 both in Henan Province. The former was comprised of two small cities and a large one built with rammed earth. The large city covered an area of 350,000 square metres and had in its foundational sacrificial pits containing human and animal remains, and also remains of wild animals respectively, with fragments of cast bronze containers excavated as well.31 The Wadian Settlement covered an area of 400,000 square metres, from which a great number of black potteries, such as exquisite gaobing bei tall-stemmed goblets 高 柄杯 and jade artefacts such as bi (flat and round jade vessels with small holes in the middle) 璧, yue battle-axes 钺 and niao bird-shaped jade objects 鸟 were unearthed. Obviously, there are signs of manual division of labour and of social stratification in both settlements, which show that they were not only remarkably different from other small- and mediumsized settlements around them, but laos that they have entered the early stage of civilization by that time. Moreover, in the large-sized burials of the Wangwan Phase III culture, despite the small number of burial objects, there appeared erceng tai second-tier platforms 二层台, wooden coffins and exquisite jade yue battle-axes. This burial practice reflected not only a funerary tradition of “emphasis on status over wealth”, but also a weak religious commitment. This evolutionary pattern of civilization symbolized an overall pursuit of simplicity and moderation and constituted what we once called “the Zhongyuan (Central Plains) Pattern”.32 It should be pointed out that the cultures of the late Longshan period located in southern Henan, northern Hubei, western Hubei and the 30 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2004), The Wadian Site in Yuzhou, Beijing: Shijie Tushu Chuban Gongsi. 31 In most parts of the Yellow River and Yangtze River basins, bronze artefacts of the Longshan period were commonly found, which entered the late Chalcolithic period. Copper crucible pieces were found in the sites of the Wangchenggang Phase III culture, including the Meishan, Guchengzhai and Niuzhai; fragments of copper containers were excavated from the sites of Wangchenggang and Xinzhai; and red copper bells, arsenic copper container fragments, copper gear shapers, and copper rings were found in the late Taosi culture. The discovery of these copper containers in the Central Plains shows that the clay compound mould casting techniques had been possessed, which was different from the stone mould casting techniques that had been popular in the West for a long time. It can be seen that bronze casting techniques with Chinese characteristics had basically taken shape in the Longshan era. 32 Han, Jianye (2003), “A preliminary discussion of the general trends and different patterns of social development in Chalcolithic age in China”, The Journal of Ancient Civilizations, 2: 84–96.

438

J. HAN

Jianghan regions were more similar to the Meishan type of the Wangwan Phase III culture33 and might as well be seen as the consequence of the southward expansion of the Meishan type. 26.2.2

The Rise and Fall of the Shijiahe Culture

The Shijiahe culture was mainly distributed around the middle reaches of the Yangtze River, and its absolute dates fall into the period of about 2500–2100 BCE,34 corresponding to the early Longshan period. At its peak, the Shijiahe culture reached southern Henan in its north, Lake Poyang in its east, Lake Dongting in its south and the Three Gorges in its west, covering an area of about 200,000 square kilometres, which was approximately equivalent to that of the late Wangwan Phase III culture. As a successor of the Qujialing culture, the Shijiahe culture not only covered similar distribution areas as the former, but also inherited and developed most of its pottery utensils, such as zhefu ding carinated bellied tripods 折腹鼎, zaoxingzu ding chisel-shaped tripods 凿形足鼎, gaoling guan long-necked jars 高领罐, yaoguxing guan waist drum-shaped jars 腰 鼓形罐, dakong zeng microporous steamers 大孔甑, quanzu wan circularlegged bowls 圈足碗, quanzu pan circular-legged plates, changjing hu long-necked pots 长颈壶, red pottery xiefubei oblique-bellied goblets 斜腹杯, gaobing bei tall-stemmed goblets and painted pottery spinning wheel. However, the utensils of the Shijiahe culture were not as light, thin and exquisite as those of the Qujialing culture; instead, they looked outdated, lacking a youthful vigour. Of course, there were some traces of elements coming from surrounding cultures. For instance, its gui ewers and carved pottery zun vase-like wine vessels 刻符陶尊 might have come from the Yuchisi type 尉迟寺类型 of the Dawenkou culture in northern Anhui35 ; the small amount of axe-shaped jia bronze drinking vessels 斧 33 Jin, Songan (2010), “The southward migration of the Wangwan Phase III culture and its related issues” Cultural Relics of Central China, 1. 34 Based on the 14C dating data before the mid-1990s, combined with the age of the Wangwan Phase III culture, I inferred that the absolute age of the Shijiahe culture was about 2500–2200 BCE. According to the latest dating study, the lower limit of this culture should better be adjusted to 2100 BCE. See Yang Xingai & Han Jianye (1995), “Exploration of ‘Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 35 Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (2001), The Yuchisi Site in Mengcheng: Excavation and Research of the Neolithic Sttlement in Northern

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

439

形斝 found in southwestern Henan and northwestern Hubei might have come from the late Miaodigou Phase II culture in southwestern Shanxi and western Henan.36 In addition, in the newly-unearthed large number of pottery animal- and human-shaped figurines, made of kneaded red clay and bearing strong local characteristics, the animal-shaped potteries portrayed various domestic animals, wild animals, birds, turtles, fish, etc., and the human-shaped ones exhibited people with different postures, some holding fish or dogs while others carrying things on their back. For the Shijiahe culture, there appeared nearly 20 ancient city sites, including the Shijiahe and Longzuicheng 龙嘴城 Sites in Tianmen, Hubei; the Taojiahu 陶家湖 and Jimingcheng 鸡鸣城 Sites in Gong’an, Hubei; the Yejiamiao 叶家庙 Site in Xiaogan, Hubei; the Chenghe 城河 Site in Shayang, Hubei; the Majiayuan 马家垸 Site in Jingmen, Hubei; the Yinxiangcheng 阴湘城 Site in Jiangling, Hubei; the Menbanwan 门板 湾 Site in Yingcheng, Hubei; the Zoumaling 走马岭 Site in Shishou, Hubei; and the Jijiaocheng 鸡叫城 Site and the Chengtoushan 城头山 Site in Lixian, Hunan. These sites had mostly begun to establish themselves during the Qujialing period. The results of a systematic survey of the Shjiahe-centred region in the southern foothills of the Dahong Mountain suggested that 63 sites of the Shijiahe culture were distributed in clusters within an area of about 150 square kilometres.37 Among them, the largest Shijiahe City covered an area of 1.2 million square metres2 . Together with its outer ring moats and external artificial mounds, the whole city would have spread over more than 2 million square metres. The inner city was designated into different sections in terms of their functions, such as the palatial section, the burial section and the sacrifice section.38 There might also be bronze smelting and casting workshops, suggesting the special status this handicraft had Anhui Province. Beijing: Science Press; Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, et al. (2007), The Yuchisi Site in Mengcheng (II), Beijing: Science Press. 36 Represented by the middle and late remains of the “Miaodigou Phase II cultural relics” of the Dongguan Site of the ancient city of Yuanqu. See the Chinese History Museum, & Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology, etc. (2001), The Dongguan Ancient City in Yuanqu, Beijing: Science Press. 37 Hubei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2009), “Survey of the prehistoric settlements in the southern foothills of the Dahong Mountain: With focus on the Shijia River”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1. 38 Department of Archaeology of Peking University, Hubei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, & Shijiahe Archaeological Team of Jingzhou Museum

440

J. HAN

enjoyed then. While the area of the surrounding sites ranged from as large as 600,000 square metres to as small as tens of thousands square metres, these city sites, together with other ordinary settlements, formed a multi-layered settlement system,39 whose social development should be at a stage similar to that of the Wangwan Phase III culture. Both inside and outside the Shijiahe City40 there were places where multiple ritual relics containing nested zun ritual wine pots 套尊, upsidedown zun ritual wine potst 倒立尊 and facedown wan bowls 扣碗 were found, such as the Yinxintai 印信台, Dengjiawan 邓家湾 and Xiaojia Wuji (the Xiao Family’s Residence Ridge) 肖家屋脊 sites. In the Sanfangwan 三房湾 site, tens of thousands of red pottery cups and sculptures full of religious connotations were unearthed. However, even the larger burials here were not exquisite, nor did they contain precious burial items. But in them there were many practical storage-oriented gaoling guan high-necked jars neatly placed. It is obvious that whereas these jars highlighted the purpose for storage or “to boast one’s wealth”, and it reflected the funerary tradition of “emphasis of wealth over status”, which symbolized the overall evolution pattern of civilization in this culture, i.e., the “sub-Jianghan pattern” 江汉亚模式 of “the Eastern Pattern”.41 The Longshan culture entered its late period around 2100 BCE. Due to the influence of the forceful southward expansion of the Wangwan Phase III culture, regions including southeastern Henan, southwestern Henan, western Hubei and northern Hubei had been dominated by the Wangwan Phase III culture. Even the cultural appearance of the Jianghan Plains and its surrounding areas became similar to that of the

of Hubei Province (1992), “Investigation report on the Shijiahe site group”, Southern Ethnology and Archaeology (Vol. V), Chengdu: Sichuan Science Jishu Press, 213–294. 39 Zhang, Chi (2003), Research on the Prehistoric Settlements in the Middle and Lower Reaches of the Yangtze River, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 40 Jingzhou Museum of Hubei Province, Hubei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, & Department of Archaeology of Peking University (1999), The Xiaojia Wuji or Xiao Family’s Residence Ridge, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Hubei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Department of Archaeology of Peking University, & Jingzhou Museum of Hubei Province (2003), The Dengjiawan Site, Beijing: Wenwu Press; Hubei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2016), “Main harvests of excavations at the Shijiahe Site in 2015”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1. 41 Han, Jianye (2016), “Comparison of the civilization processes in the Central Plains and Jianghan regions”, Jianghan Archaeology, 6.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

441

Wangwan Phase III culture,42 so much so that some scholars name it the post-Shijiahe culture or the Xiaojia Wuji (the Xiao Family’s Residence Ridge) culture. At that time, most of the typical artefacts of the Shijiahe culture disappeared and most of the utensils here—such as shortnecked weng urns 矮领翁, slender and high dou pedestal plates 细高柄 豆 and side-mounted ding tripods 侧装足鼎—were similar to those from the Meishan type of the Wangwan Phase III culture; meanwhile gui ewers and he spouted pitchers 盉, similar to the Longshan culture or the Zaolvtai culture, were also found. It is worth noting that the jade artefacts from the Xiaojia Wuji culture exhibited advanced and exquisite craftsmanship. The different types of jade artefacts found here include cicadas 蝉, human heads 人首, tiger heads 虎首, flying eagles 飞鹰, coiled dragons 盘龙, deer or sheep heads 鹿/羊首, ji hairpins for hair bunches 笄, long jade strips 柄形饰, huang semi-annular jades, 璜 guan tubular jade 管and so on.43 These jade objects originated from the Longshan culture or the Wangwan Phase III culture.44 A final word in passing, the ancient cities that had lasted for nearly a thousand years from the Qujialing culture to the Shijiahe culture were mostly destroyed or deserted; the number of ruins in the southern foothills of the Dahong Mountain 大洪山 dropped from 63 to a dozen in the Shijiahe culture period45 ; the once ever-prevalent ritual facilities such as nested gang vats 套缸 and thousands of red pottery cups and sculptures also disappeared.

42 Yang, Xingai & Han, Jianye (1995), “Exploration of ‘Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 43 Hubei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2016), “The main harvests of the 2015 excavations at the Shijiahe site”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1. 44 The eagle-headed ji excavated from the Xiaojia Wuji Site was also found in the Wadian Site in Yuzhou, Henan, and the crown-shaped carved jade ornaments 冠状透雕玉 饰 excavated from the Liuhe Site in Zhongxiang, Hubei and other sites were also found in the Zhufeng Large Tomb in Linqu, Shandong, and the M22 of the Taosi Site in Xiangfen, Shanxi. 45 Hubei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2009), “A survey of the prehistoric settlements in the southern foothills of the Dahong Mountain: With focus on the Shijiahe Site”, Jianghan Archaeology, 1.

442

J. HAN

26.2.3

Yu’s Conquest of the Miao Man Tribes and the Early Xia Culture

As mentioned above, around 2100 BCE, there were dramatic and huge changes between the Wangwan Phase III culture and the Shijiahe culture.46 The rapid, large-scale southward expansion of the Wangwan Phase III culture in a short time resulted in the downfall of the Shijiahe culture, the demolishment of the city walls and the obliteration of special religious sacrifice items. Such violent changes can never be accounted for by the exchanges of culture or trade, and there might only be one plausible explanation: large-scale fierce wars between Zhongyuan (the Central Plains) and the Jianghan regions. Most possibly, these violent changes may correspond to the historical event of “Yu zheng sanmiao”, i.e., “Yu’s Conquest of the Miao Man Tribes” “禹征三苗” documented in the pre-Qin literature.47 The most detailed record of the event, “Yu’s Conquest of San Miao”, can be found in the Mozi: Feigong (literally “against military aggression”)《墨子·非攻》 . “In former times, the Miao Man tribes were in great disorder and Heaven decreed their destruction. The sun was strange and came forth at night. For three days it rained blood; dragons appeared in the temples, and dogs cried in the market places; there was ice during summer and the earth cracked so that springs welled up. The five grains underwent change and the people were greatly alarmed. Heaven issued its decree to Yu the Great, ruler of the State of Xia, at the Xuan Palace and Yu himself took hold of Heaven’s imperial tablet in order to attack the You Miao tribes 有苗. Thunder and lightning suddenly crashed and there was a spirit with the face of a man and the body of a bird which, with great deliberation, took hold of an arrow and shot the Miao general. The Miao army was thrown into great confusion, and not long after the Miao tribes were in decline. Having subdued the Miao people, Yu separated the mountains and rivers, dividing them into high and low, offering sacrifices 46 Astronomers believe that the phenomenon of “the sun demon was out in the night” 日妖宵出 in Mozi · Non-attack (Part 2) was caused by “Re-day of Sky” and “Re-dusk of Sky” “天再旦” “天再昏” brought by a total solar eclipse. They also calculated that in 2104 BCE in Hubei, southeastern Shaanxi, and the westernmost region of southern Henan, there was a “Re-dusk of Sky” phenomenon. See Jiang Linchang, (2001), New Explorations of the Xia and Shang Civilization, Hangzhou: Zhejiang Renmin Press, 196–197. 47 Yang, Xingai & Han, Jianye (1995) “Exploration of ‘Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

443

to regulate the four regions, and creating harmony between spirits and people. The world was then at peace. This explained why Yu reduced the You Miao”. It seems that Yu took advantage of the natural calamity and civil unrest of the Miao Man tribes to invade suddenly, causing them to suffer a crushing defeat. Similar records can also be found in other pre-Qin literature. For example, as was mentioned in Bamboo Annals (Ancient Text ) 《古本竹书纪年》 , “When the Miao tribes were about to perish, the sky began to rain blood, ice appeared in the summer, the earth cracked deep into the underground springs, and the black dragons hid in the temple during the day, and came out at night”.48 The authenticity of the Xia ruler Yu was once doubted by the “yigupai” (doubters of antiquity). However, documents excavated in recent years prove that at least in the middle or late Western Zhou Dynasty, Yu’s taming of the floods and mapping of jiuzhou (the territory of ancient China) 九州 remained applauded by the Zhou people.49 Xu Xusheng holds that the Xia people, including Yu himself, should primarily live in southern Shanxi and central and western Henan.50 According to the records from the Strategies of Warring States: Strategies of Wei《战国策·魏 策》 , “In the past, where the Miao Man tribes lived, there was Lake Pengli 彭蠡湖 on the left, Dongting Lake on the right, Qishan 祁山 to the north, and Hengshan 衡山 to the south. Although there were natural fortifications, the government affairs were not well governed, and as a result, Yu drove them away”. As is verified by prior research, the Miao Man tribes occupied a territory spreading in between the west of Lake Poyang 鄱 阳湖, the east of Lake Dongting and the south of Mount Tongbai 桐柏 山, which covered most of Hubei with the Jianghan region as its core.51 Given this information, Yu’s conquest of the Miao Man tribes should have occurred in an area ranging from southern Shanxi, to central and western Henan and to the Jianghan Plains regions. 48 A note of Tongjian Waiji《通鉴外纪》is with reference to the Suichaozi《隋巢子》and Jizhong Chronicle《汲冢纪年》 . 49 Zhu, Yuanqing (2006), “Treatise on Yu’s painting of the Nine States ”, The Journal of Ancient Civilizations, 5: 55–69. 50 Xu, Xusheng (1959), “Preliminary report of the investigation of the ‘Ruins of Xia’ in Western Henan in 1959”, Archaeology, 11. 51 Xu, Xusheng (1985), “The legendary era of ancient Chinese history” (new ed.), Beijing: Wenwu Press, 57–59.

444

J. HAN

According to the relevant literature, the most prominent warfare between the Zhongyuan (Central Plains) and the Jianghan regions before the Shang Dynasty is Yu’s conquest of the Miao Man tribes.52 Meanwhile, the greatest and most dramatic cultural change found in between Zhongyuan and Jianghan before the late Shang Dynasty was the replacement of the Shijiahe culture by the Wangwan Phase III culture. This can be plausibly deduced from their interactions. Previous researchers have also sought to explain Yu’s conquest of the Miao tribes53 in terms of the foray of the Erlitou culture into the Jianghan region. This view is not in line with the actual circumstance, because in the late Longshan period, the Jianghan region was already in decline and had gradually become assimilated by the Zhongyuan culture. As is discussed above, if the large-scale replacement of the Shijiahe culture by the Wangwan phase III culture corresponds to Yu’s conquest of the Miao tribes, there should also exist a correspondence between Yu the ruler and the Wangwan Phase III culture after the Longshan period, and between the Miao tribes and the Shijiahe culture. In legends, Yu was

52 The literature also records that Yao and Shun 尧舜, two great rulers prior to Yu, once carried out expeditions against the Miao tribes, such as Lv Shi Chun Qiu · The Summonings《吕氏春秋·召类》 : “Yao fought at Danshui Noura to conquer the southern barbarian Miao, and Shun repelled the Miao people and changed their customs”; Zhujian · Liutao (Bamboo Slips: Six Arts of War) 竹简 《六韬》 : “Shun launched crusade against the Miao tribes”. But it is likely that this is just a variation of the legend of Yu’s conquest of the Miao, such as The Present Bamboo Book Chronicle《今本竹书纪年》says, “Emperor Shun ordered Xiahou to go on a punitive expedition to the You Miao”. Even if there really was Yao and Shun’s crusades against the Miao Man, the consequences of their fighting could not be compared with Yu’s conquest; otherwise, the Miao Man people should have already become obedient, why should Yu still have to launch another large-scale conquest? See Xu Xusheng (1994), “Yao, Shun, and Yu” (Part 2), Literature and History (Vol. 40), Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 1–22; Shi, Xingbang, & Zhou, Xing (1988), “On the wars of Yao, Shun, and Yu on the Miao Man tribes: An investigation of the history of the formation process of the state in China”, Prehistory; Zhuang, Chunbo (1988), “An investigation of Shun’s crusade on the Miao Man tribes”, Journal of the Southcentral Minzu University (Humanities and Social Sciences ed.), 1; The Sorting Group of the Bamboo Slips of the Han Dynasty of Hebei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics (2001), “The Collation and Annotation of the Bamboo Slips Liu Tao (Six Arts of War) of Prince Huai of Zhongshan from the Dingzhou Western Han Tomb”, Cultural Relics, 5. 53 Yu, Weichao (1980), “Archaeological speculations on the pre-Chu and Miao cultures”, Cultural Relics, 10; Luo, Kun (1996), “An investigation of the southward spread of the Erlitou culture and the historical traces of the conquest of the Miao tribes”, Anthology of Xia Culture Studies, Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 197–204.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

445

the leader of the Xiahou clan and the actual founder of the Xia Dynasty.54 Thus, the Wangwan Phase III culture from the early stage of the late Longshan period probably was the origin of the Xia culture, and the early Wangwan Phase III culture could be the pre-Xia culture with Gun 鲧, father of Yu, included.55 The late Wangwan Phase III culture had spread in size, with obvious variations and differences between different regions, which can be divided into several local types. These variations and types constituted the commonalities of cultural relics left behind by the tribal groups with the Xia people as the main body in the early Xia Dynasty.56 Among these types, the Meishan type in central Henan was the main stream which had expanded southward and invaded the Shijiahe culture and might even have been the core of the early Xia culture; or to be more exact, the culture of the Xia people.57 It is likely that the Wangchenggang Ancient City was “Yu’s capital Yangcheng” 禹都阳城.58 Seen from this perspective, the origin of the Xia culture should date back to the beginning of the late Wangwan Phase III culture, instead of the Erlitou

54 Bamboo Book Chronicle《竹书纪年》(Collation of Anthology of Six Generations《文选· 六代论》 注引) writes: “In the Xia Dynasty, from Ruler Yu 禹 to Ruler Jie 桀, altogether there were seventeenth emperors”. Historical Records · Annals of the Xia Dynasty writes: “Yu then became the emperor, facing the world from the south, and the name of his reign was called Xia Hou, and his surname Si”. 55 Guoyu · Luyu (Part I)《国语·鲁语上》writes: “Yellow Emperor 黄帝 and Zhuanxu 颛 顼 were revered as the ancestors of the Xiahou 夏后 clan”; Da Dai’s (Dai Senior) Book of Rites · Imperial System《大戴礼·记帝系》 : “Zhuanxu gave birth to Gun 鲧”. 56 Guoyu · Zhouyu (Part II)《国语·鲁语下》writes: “Yu was praised by the emperor, and the world was his salary. He was also given the surname Si and his clan to be named Xia”. Sun Qingwei believes that this proves Xia “is a geopolitical entity” not a simple clan. See Sun Qingwei (2018), Traces of the House of Yu, Beijing: SDX Joint Publishing Company, 389. 57 Historical Records · Annals of Xia《史记·夏本纪》 : “Sima Qian said that Yu was surnamed Si, thereafter he was enfeoffed, and regarded the name of his country as his surname. Therefore, there were the Xia Hou clan, the Hu clan, the Nan clan, the Zhenxun clan, the Tongcheng clan, the Bao clan… etc.” These enfeoffed clans might all belong to the category of the “Xia” tribal group in the broad sense. 58 An Jinhuai first proposed the opinion that the ancient city Wangchenggang was the capital of the ruler Yu, i.e. Yangcheng. See An Jinhuai (1978), “A Preliminary study of the culture of the Xia Dynasty in western Henan”, Henan Bulletin of Cultural Relics and Museology, 2.

446

J. HAN

culture.59 This conclusion provides a solid basis to determine the origin of the Xia culture from the archaeological perspective. The Shijiahe culture, as part of the culture from the Miao tribes, also covered a large area, equivalent to the size of a present-day province and far greater than the scope described in the Strategies of Warring States: Strategies of Wei. Despite its internal regional variations, the Shijiahe culture was the culture of its tribal groups with shared cultural customs from this area. It is worth noting that the literature suggests that the Miao “became less and less significant ever after”. The archaeological evidence regarding the demise of the Shijiahe culture reflects the ferocity of Yu’s conquest of the Miao tribes. However, the Xiaojia Wuji (the Xiao Family’s Residence Ridge) culture that emerged afterwards in the Jianghan region still retained a certain amount of the features of the Shijiahe culture. It can thus be deduced that many indigenous people remained in the local area after the warfare. Obviously, the strong influence of the Zhongyuan (Central Plains) culture on the Jianghan culture was not a comprehensive replacement of the overall population, and it is likely that the vast majority of the hinterland of the Jianghan Plains was still inhabited by indigenous people. The discovery of the exquisite jade artefacts from the Xiaojia Wuji culture shows that the Jianghan culture still demonstrated considerable strength and vitality. However, these jade artefacts had no predecessors from the Jianghan culture, but

59 Zou Heng puts forward the idea that the Erlitou culture was the same as the Xia culture; An Jinhuai and others advocates that “the late Longshan culture in Henan” (that is, the third phase of Wangwan Culture) had entered the Xia Dynasty; Li Boqian believes that the late Longshan culture in Henan and the entire Erlitou culture were all Xia culture, and the Erlitou type “is likely to be the Xia Dynasty culture after the ‘Taikang’s loss of the state’ and ‘Houyi’s replacement of of Xia’”. I once argued that the late Wangwan III culture had entered the Xia Dynasty at the beginning of the late period, and the Erlitou culture was the culture after the “Shaokang’s rejuvenation of the state”; I then adjusted to the idea that the Xinzhai type could be the Xia culture after “Shaokang’s rejuvenation of the state”. See Zou Heng (1978), “The theory of the Shang city of Zhengzhou as the capital of Tang Bo”, Cultural Relics, 2; Zou, Heng (1980), “On the Xia culture”, Collected Archaeological Papers of the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 95–182; An, Jinhuai (1978), “A preliminary study of the Xia culture in western Henan”, Henan Bulletin of Cultural Relics and Museology, 2; Li Boqian (1986), “The cultural nature and genealogical issues of the Erlitou type”, Cultural Relics, 6; Han, Jianye (1997), “The origin and developmental stage of the Xia culture”, Journal of Peking University, 4; Han, Jianye (2009), “On the rise of the bronze civilization in Erlitou”, Journal of National Museum of China, 1.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

447

instead belonged to the Haidai-Zhongyuan tradition.60 From this it can be said that the Jianghan culture had been indeed weakened! The period around 2100 BCE happened to be a time of dry and cold climate. For reasons of their survival, people from northern China and Zhongyuan (the Central Plains) were forced to move southward to seek more suitable living environments, which might have constituted the fundamental motivation behind Yu’s conquest of the Miao tribes. There existed slightly different evolutionary patterns of civilization in the Zhongyuan and Jianghan regions, i.e., the Zhongyuan Pattern and the sub-Jianghan model under the Eastern Pattern. In the Zhongyuan region, people’s livelihood had been relatively harsh, and the cultural development had experienced frequent twists and turns. Therefore, the residents there had become industrious and mindful of life’s potential dangers. In contrast, life in the Jianghan region had been relatively affluent, and its culture had been developing in a steady and stable manner. As a result, people there had tended to indulge in comfort rather than endeavouring themselves. It is here that the reason may lie for the rise of the Zhongyuan region and the decline of the Jianghan region; just as the proverb goes, “Where suffering leads to survival, comfort leads to death”.61

60 “The small pieces of jade from the late Longshan period found in the graves of the Shijiahe Site in Tianmen, the Liuhe Site in Zhongxiang, the Sunjiagang Site in Lixian, and the Zaolingang Site in Jingzhou and other sites lacked connection with both the Shijiahe culture and the earlier Qujialing culture, but displayed similarities with the Longshan culture in the Central Plains and the Longshan jade. For example, the more consistent eagle-shaped hairpins 鹰形笄 were found not only in the sites of Xiaojia Wuji, Sunjiagang and Zaolingang, but also in the Wadian Site in Yuzhou, Henan, and even northern Shaanxi. Similar artefacts like the animal-shaped crown ornaments were found both in the Xiaojia Wuji and Liuhe sites, and in the large burials in Zhufeng, Linqu, Shandong Province, and Taosi in Linfen, Shaxi Province. It can be seen that before and after Yu’s conquest of the Maio tribes, there was not only occurred the southward move of the Central Plains Huaxia (Chinese) culture, but also the infiltration of the Dongyi (the eastern barbarian) culture”. See Han Jianye & Yang Xingai (2006), The Time of the Five Emperors: Archaeological Observations of the Huaxia-Centred System of the Ancient History, Beijing: Xueyuan Press, 16. 61 Han, Jianye (2016), “Comparison of the civilization processes in the Central Plains and Jianghan regions”, Jianghan Archaeology, 6.

448

26.3

J. HAN

The Southward Expansion of the Laohushan Culture and Ji’s Banishment of Danzhu

Another violent cultural change amid the Longshan period occurred in the north. The forceful expansion of the Laohushan culture led to the demise of the Taosi culture in southern Shanxi, which might be associated with the legendary account of “Ji fang Danzhu”, i.e., “Ji’s banishment of Danzhu” 稷放丹朱. 26.3.1

The Growth and Rise of the Laohushan Culture

The Laohushan culture was mainly distributed in an area which can be narrowly defined as the “northern region”, including central and southern Inner Mongolia, northern Shaanxi, central and northern Shanxi and northwestern Hebei. Its absolute dates spanned from about 2500 to 1800 BCE and can also be subdivided into two major phases with the year of 2100 BCE62 as the line of demarcation. Since the Laohushan culture did not experience a drastic expansion such as the Wangwan Phase III culture had, remnants of both its early and late phases can be found in most parts of the northern region, with only a few exceptions. For example, for the early Longshan period, in the northern Daihai region in Liangcheng County, Ulanqab, Inner Mongolia, there existed more than a dozen settlements centred around such sites as the Laohushan and the Yuanzigou.63 Similar remnants even existed in the further northern area, the east of Xilinguol.64 However, not only did these regions in which sites of the early phase of the Longshan Culture were scattered seem to have been obliterated in the late phase, but even the scope of the remaining cultural relics moved southward for more than 300 kilometres. Thus, the sudden emergence of the

62 Han, Jianye (2003), Research on the Neolithic Culture in Northern China, Beijing:

Wenwu Press. 63 Inner Mongolia Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology (2000), Daihai Archaeology, 1: Collection of Excavation Reports at the Laohushan Cultural Site, Beijing: Science Press. 64 Han, Jianye (2008), The Natural Environment and Cultural Development in Pre-Qin Northwest China, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 336–338.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

449

stone city Shimao65 in Shenmu, Shaanxi Province, at the turn of the Longshan culture from its early phase to the late phase, should be related to the Laohushan culture and the southward migration of its residents. The architecture of the Shimao stone city exhibited no difference from that of the previous Laohushan city: the cave-styled buildings with white- and grey-coloured walls in Shimao were similar to those in the Laohushan city. So were the potteries unearthed here, such as li tripod cooking vessels 鬲, jia bronze drinking vessels 斝, yan bronze steamer vessels 甗, he spouted pitchers, shenfu guan deep-bellied jars and gaoling guan high-necked jars. However, apart from its huge size of more than four million square metres, both its magnificent urban building architecture and its exquisite jade and bronze artefacts made the Shimao city stand head and shoulders above others: the city walls were three folded, the imperial city terraces were imposing, the city gates were grand and impressive and the walls were laid with particular attention and craftsmanship. This superiority shows that the Shimao settlement should not only have been the centre of the Shimao cultural type in northern Shaanxi,66 but also held some sway on other subtypes of the Laohushan culture.67 Since the society of the northern region had exhibited a rather complexity, it should have already turned into the primary stage of a civilized society at that time. The fact that few burial objects were excavated from the tombs of the Laohushan culture indicates that there have been limited social stratification but a 65 Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology (2013), “The Shimao Site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archeology, 7; Shaanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology (2017), “The location of the imperial terrace at the Shimao City site in Shenmu County, Shaanxi Province”, Archeology, 7. 66 While the centrality of the Shimao settlement had been long established, it was unexpected that the site should have covered such a huge area. As I once said, “The Shimao settlement, covering an area of 900,000 square metres, with complete defense facilities and precious jade artefacts, was most likely to have been the centre of the northern Shaanxi super settlement groups”. Han, Jianye (2003), Research on the Neolithic Culture in Northern China, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 254. 67 The stone city settlement in Bicun Village, Xing County, Shanxi Province, which was about 60 kilometres east of the Shimao Site, covered an area of 750,000 square metres, and had both central buildings and jade objects unearthed, but neither its size nor scale can be compared with that of the Shimao City. Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology (2016), “A brief report on the 2015 excavation of the Bicun Village Site in Xing County, Shanxi Province”, Archaeology and Cultural Relics, 4; Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology, & Department of Archaeology of the College of History and Culture of Shanxi University (2017), “A brief report on the 2016 excavation of the Bicun Village Site in Xing County, Shanxi Province”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 6.

450

J. HAN

simple and pragmatic life style instead. However, in quite a lot of sites of the Shimao culture type, there existed burial pits containing the head skulls of young women which revealed the brutal aspect of the society then. We once characterized this evolutionary pattern of civilization as the “northern pattern”, since it was compatible with the harsher climates and poor natural resources it was situated in.68 The rise of the stone city of Shimao might also be attributed to the inspiration of and pressure from the ancient city of Taosi in southwestern Shanxi. The huge size of the Shimao stone city and the advanced jade manufacturing techniques had no predecessor or origin in the northern region and should have appeared as result of the influence of the Taosi city. Also, the possibility that some of jade artefacts found in Shimao were obtained directly from Taosi could not be ruled out either. In addition, the northern region in which Shimao was located also had to face the pressure from the Eurasian steppe, which should supply a major explanation for the large number of cities standing side by side on the mountains during the Laohushan period.69 As for the bronze wares and humanfaced stone sculptures found in the Shimao city, they might have been produced against the background of its exchange with the bronze culture from the Eurasian Steppe, since on its northwest were distributed the early Bronze Age cultures such as the Okunieff culture 奥库涅夫文化 and the Qiemuerqieke (a township located in the southwest of Altay City, Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region) culture 切木尔切克文化.70

68 Han, Jianye (2003), Research on the Neolithic Culture in Northern China, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 262–266; Han, Jianye (2003), “A brief discussion on the general trend and different modes of social development in the Chalcolithic age in China”, Ancient Civilization (Vol. 2), Beijing: Wenwu Press, 84–96. 69 Han, Jianye (2008), “On the early northern stone city belt as the “prototype” of the Great Wall ”, Huaxia Aracheology, 1. 70 Guo, W (2013), “The exchange between northern China and the Eurasian Steppe in the Longshan Period seen from the Stone People at the Shimao Site”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 6.

26

26.3.2

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

451

The Rise and Fall of the Taosi Culture

The Taosi culture was mainly scattered in the Linfen Basin, and its absolute dates fell into the time period of about 2500–2100 BCE,71 corresponding to the early Longshan period. The Taosi culture is a “weird example” in the Zhongyuan or Central Plain region. Though it had been developed on the basis of Phase II of the Miaodigou type of the ethnic Yangshao culture, which inherited the virtue of simplicity, it specifically comprised many “luxurious” eastern elements in this culture. Covered an area of nearly three million square metres, the ancient city of Taosi probably was the centre of the Taosi culture, as well as the largest central settlement in the northern Zhongyuan region during the Longshan period just before the appearance of the Shimao stone city.72 And prior to the Shimao city, it was only the Liangzhu culture that had once created large cities of a similar size. Not only did the jade artefacts, the tuogu alligator drums (made from the skin of the Yangtze crocodiles) 鼍鼓 and the painted pottery discovered from Taosi exhibit the characteristics of the Dawenkou and the Liangzhu cultures, but even the “V-shaped shichudao” stone kitchen knives 石厨刀 were almost identical to those of the Liangzhu culture. Thus, it can be deduced that the late Dawenkou culture and the late Liangzhu period both have contributed to the formation of the Taosi culture and the ancient city Taosi.73 Even the possibility of a westward migration of some Liangzhu people could not be ruled out.74 While there existed apparent social differentiation in the Taosi culture, its funeral practice of “emphasis on both status and wealth” was obviously incompatible with “the Zhongyuan Pattern”, but instead pertained to “the Eastern Pattern” of civilization 71 Han, Jianye (2006), “Phase II of the Miaodigou Culture in southwestern Shanxi

and western Henan—Periodization and genealogy of the culture in the Longshan Period”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2; He, Nu (2004), “A review of the genealogy of the Taosi Culture”, Ancient Civilizations, 3: 54–86. 72 He, Nu & Yan, Zhibin (2002), “Further exploration of the largest prehistoric city site in the Yellow River Basin”, China Cultural Relics Daily, 8 February, 1st page; Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Linfen Municipal Bureau of Cultural Relics of Shanxi Province (2015), The Taosi Site in Xiangfen—Excavation Report from 1978 to 1985, Beijing: Wenwu Press. 73 Han, Jianye (2001), “Tang’s attack against Xixia and Danzhu’s banishment by Ji”, Journal of Peking University (Humanities and Social Sciences ed.), 3. 74 Han, Jianye (2010), “The evolution of early Chinese civilization in the Liangzhu, Taosi and Erlitou sites”, Archaeology, 11.

452

J. HAN

evolution. It is also noteworthy that despite its small geographical scope, and the Taosi culture had a far-reaching influence. For example, the jade artefacts of the Taosi culture, such as cong octagonal jade with a round hole in the middle 琮, bi flat round jade vessels with a small hole in the middle, yue battle-axe, dao knife-shaped jade 刀, spread westward to regions in Shaanxi, Gansu, Qinghai and Ningxia Provinces, becoming the primary predecessors of the jade artefacts of the Laohushan culture, the Qijia culture, the Caiyuan culture and so on.75 Nonetheless, in the late Longshan period, the once prosperous Taosi culture came to an abrupt end when the rarely-seen double-handled ceramic li tripod cooking vessels appeared in the Linfen Basin, where only jia bronze drinking vessels had been popular. To account for the turn of the Taosi culture to the late Taosi period, I once attributed this change to the forceful southward expansion of the Laohushan culture, believing that conflicts and wars might have broken out between tribes from the northern region and those from the southwestern Shanxi.76 The archaeological evidence unearthed later, including that of violent massacres, torture of women and the frenzied destruction of graves,77 also showed that the previous pottery-based observations were in line with the reality. The two ancient cities, Shimao and Taosi, were both super large-sized settlements with an area of three or four million square metres each and had coexisted for a short period of time. Given the basic tendency and contrast between them, i.e., Shimao’s prosperity versus Taosi’s collapse, the former in the south versus the latter in the north, it is only reasonable to assume that there might have been a certain logical relationship behind this tendency or contrast. In fact, the expansion of the Laohushan culture did not stop at the region of southwestern Shanxi Province, as can be 75 Han, Jianye (2008), The Natural Environment and Cultural Development in the Pre-Qin Northwest China, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 336–338. 76 I have previously called the pre- and late-stage of the Longshan culture in the Linfen Basin “the Taosi type” and “the late Taosi type” respectively, which I later changed to “the Taosi culture” and “the late Taosi culture”. See Han Jianye (2001), “Tang ’s attack against Xixia and Danzhu’s banishment by Ji”, Journal of Peking University (Humanities and Social Sciences Ed.), 3. 77 The Shanxi Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, & Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology, et al. (2002), “The 2002 excavation report of the Taosi Site in Xiangfen, Shanxin”, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 3; Gao, Jiangtao (2017), “Analysis of the phenomenon of ‘tomb destruction’ at the Taosi Site”, Archaeology of the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties, 7: 345–354.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

453

seen in the penetration of its cultural elements, such as li tripod cooking vessels, microlithic zu arrowheads 镞 and bugu bone blocks for divination 卜骨, into Phase II of the Hougang culture and Phase III of the Wangwan culture,78 which brought some pressure on these areas; the later violent expansion of Phase III of the Wangwan culture into southern Henan and the Jianghan (the Yangtze-Han Rivers) regions might be regarded as an aftermath of the pressure from the north. 26.3.3

Ji’s Banishment of Danzhu and the Origin of the Pre-Zhou Culture

The great misfortune which had caused the collapse of the Taosi culture by the southward advancement of the Laohushan culture might most possibly be related to the legendary account of “Ji fang Danzhu”, Ji’s banishment of Danzhu”. As is documented in the “Ancient Text” in Bamboo Annals, “Houji banished Zhu in Danshui”.79 Houji 后稷, the legendary ancestor of the Zhou tribe 周人, was clearly described in The Book of Songs《诗经》 .80 Some scholars hold that Houji and his mother, Jiang Yuan 姜嫄 of the Youtai clan 有邰氏, lived in the area around the Jing River 泾水 and Wei River 渭水, but Qian Mu maintains that they should have resided in southern Shanxi.81 In fact, if the Dayuan 大原 inhabited by the Youtai

78 Han, Jianye (2007), “The expansion and external influence of the Laohushan culture”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 1. 79 This is a quotation from Hainei Nan Jing (literally “the Southern Classics within the Seas”) in Shanhai Jing (or “Classics of the Mountains and Seas”)《山海经·海内南 经》 . More quotations include Annals of Gao Zu in Historical Records《史记·高祖本纪》 “Danzhu was banished in Danshui by Houji”, and Annals of Five Emperors in Historical Records《史记·五帝本纪》“Danzhu was banished by Houji”. 80 The poem Sheng Min (literally “the Shifting of the People”) in Daya (or “Major Odes of the Kingdom”) in The Book of Songs《诗经·大雅·生民之什》says: “When the first person came down, it was because Jiang Yuan could give birth to a child. How did the first person come into being? We prayed to the gods and worshipped the emperor, praying for a son to be born as an heir. The gods’ blessing was always auspicious when you stepped on God’s thumbprint. Once the fetus was born, the child was nurtured diligently, and he was to become the heir of the Zhou Dynasty Houji”. 81 Qian, Mu (1931), “An examination of the geography of the early Zhou Dynasty”, Yanjing Journal, 10.

454

J. HAN

clan (Tai Dai 台骀) refers to the present Taiyuan basin 太原盆地,82 the residence of the Zhou ancestors should also include the central Shanxi region. Or perhaps the ancestors of the Zhou tribe had undergone a process whereby the tribe expanded from central Shanxi to southern Shanxi. In the legends, Danzhu was the son of Emperor Yao, whose original residence should have been in the capital with Emperor Yao. As for Danzhu’s legendary residence in Danshui,83 southwestern Henan, this account may be the consequence of his banishment, or the result of the close communication between the Taotang clan and clans from southwest Henan.84 Regarding the residence of Emperor Yao or the Taotang clan, there are different views, such as places in Shandong, Hebei and Shanxi Provinces. Among these, Shanxi attracts considerable support as it is recorded in pre-Qin historical documents such as The Commentary of Zuo《左传》 . However, discrepancies also exist within this widely supported view itself: some saying that the residence should be Pingyang (Linfen in southern Shanxi) 平阳, and others saying that it is Jinyang (Taiyuan in central Shanxi) 晋阳.85 Moreover, records of the Genealogical Annals of

82 In the poem “The Sixth Month” in Xiaya (literally “Minor Odes of the Kingom”) of The Book of Poems《诗·小雅·六月》 , there is this line, “Our army launched a punitive expedition against the invading tribe to as far as the northwestern city Dayuan (contemporary Guyuan City in the Ningxia Autonomous Region)”, the city Dayuan was (mis-) taken as present day Taiyuan, the provincial capital of Shanxi by Zhu Xi in his Biography of a Collection of Poems《诗集传》 . 83 By quoting from Fan Wang’s Record of Jingzhou《荆州记》 , The Records of the Five Emperors in Historical Records《史记·五帝本纪》says, “The Danshui County was in Danchuan, and it was where Yao’s son, Zhu, was installed”. 84 Among the remains of the Shijiahe culture in southwest Henan and northwest Hubei Provinces, kettle-shaped jia wine cups with a round mouth and three legs 釜形斝 of the southwest Shanxi origin were sometimes found. See The Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1991), The Qinglongquan and Dasi Sites in Yunxian, Hubei, Beijing: Science Press, 135. In contrast, while cinnabar tombs 朱砂 葬 were common in the Taosi and Qingliangji cemeteries in southwestern Shanxi, the raw material of cinnabar was most likely to come from the northwestern Hubei and southwestern Henan. See Fang Hui (2015), “A study of cinnabar burials of prehistory and the Xia period: With discussion of the legends of Sage Emperor Yao and Danzhu”, Literature, History, and Philosophy, 2. 85 Xu, Xusheng (1994), “Yao, Shun and Yu” (I), Literature and History, 39: 1–26.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

455

the Emperors and Kings《帝王本纪》even suggest that there might be a change of capital from Jinyang to Pingyang.86 Some scholars also try to associate the legendary events of the imprisonment of Emperor Yao and the banishment of Danzhu with Emperor Shun. For example, as is recorded in the Bamboo Annals《竹书纪年》 , “Shun imprisoned Yao, and then prevented Danzhu from meeting his father Yao”.87 Such legendary accounts seemed to contradict totally what Confucius had commended the deed of “Yao’s abdication of the throne to the worthiest Shun”. However, in essence, these views have one thing in common; that is, a significant misfortune must have occurred between Yao and Shun, and it was highly likely that this misfortune had corresponded to the legendary event of “Houji’s banishment of Danzhu”. Though it was Houji who banished Danzhu, the blame of the event was nevertheless shifted on to Emperor Shun in some historical records. After all, as is recorded in the Canon of Yao of The Book of Documents《尚书· 尧典》 , Shun was the ruler reigning the Central Plains then. The so-called event of the “banishment” of Danzhu might be resolved through fierce wars. According to the Canon of Yao of The Book of Documents, Ji and Yu were approximately contemporaries. This being the case, the time of the events of Ji’s banishment of Danzhu and Yu’s conquest of the Man Miao tribes would also pertain to the same period with a slight difference, that is, around the transition from the early Longshan period to the late one, which in turn happened to correspond to the time of the southward expansion of the Laohushan culture and its destruction of the Taosi culture. Based on the remnants of the destroyed cities and graves, the violent slaughters, and the tortured women, all by people from the north, “the banishment of Danzhu” should by no means be banishment, but literally massacre!

86 The Century of the Emperors《帝王世纪》writes: “The emperor Yao was first installed in Tang (nowadays Tang County of Hebei Province), and then moved to Jinyang (present day Taiyuan of Shanxi Province). Then he became the son of Heaven, and made his capital Pingyang (i.e., Taiyuan)”. 87 The Annals of Five Emperors in the Historical Records《史记·五帝本纪》was quoted in the main text of the Geographical Records《括地志》as saying, “The Bamboo Book《竹书 》said: ‘Shun imprisoned Yao, and then prevented Dan Zhu, so that he could not meet with his father.’”.

456

J. HAN

The above discussion further proves that the Taosi culture in the Linfen Basin should have been the culture of the late Taotang clan period,88 and that the Taosi ancient city might most likely have been the capital of the Taotang clan or Emperor Yao. From the far-reaching influence of the Taosi culture on its surrounding areas, it can be assumed that the relationships between Yao and other tribal leaders recorded in the Canon of Yao of The Book of Documents might have come from an authentic historical background. In addition, the late Taosi culture, located in the Linfen basin and Yuncheng basin of southern Shanxi, might have pertained to Houji, the founder of the Zhou Dynasty. Its earlier origin should have been from the Laohushan culture, and the Shimao ancient city might have close links to the distant Zhou ancestors or the earliest pre-Zhou culture. After the massacre at Taosi and the banishment of Danzhu by Ji, the tribe of the Taotang clan might have become extremely weak in southern Shanxi, but not have perished, since some of the features of the Taosi culture had been retained in the late Taosi culture, as is reflected in the excavated potteries (e.g., jia bronze drinking vessels, bianhu pottery pots with a flattened and round belly 扁壶) and jade artefacts. It might as well be said that the late Taosi culture had been a fusion of the newlyarrived the Zhou of Houji culture and the Tao-Tang clan culture, and that the dry and cold climate around 2100 BCE should have contributed the historical background behind the destruction of the Taosi culture by the southward-advanced Laohushan culture.89

88 Li, M. (1985), “The Yao-Shun Period and the Taosi Site”, Prehistory, 4; Zou, H. (1987), “On the conditions for the exploration of the Xia culture”, Huaxia Civilization, Beijing: Peking University Press, 1: 162–179; Wang, W. (1987), “The Taosi remains may be the remains of the Tao-Tang clan culture”, Huaxia Civilization, Beijing: Peking University Press, 1: 106–123. 89 Han, Jianye (2006), “The influence of the climatic events of 5000–4000 years BP on the culture of northern China”, Research in Environmental Archaeology, 3: 159–163.

26

26.4

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

457

The Longshan Period and the Times of Yao, Shun and Yu Emperors

The term “the Longshan Period” refers to approximately the period of time during which cultures in most parts of the Yellow River and Yangtze River regions coexisted with the Longshan culture.90 The exact dates when different regions stepped into the Longshan period varied from region to region, but in general, they ranged from the second half of the 3rd millennium BCE to the beginning of the 2nd millennium BCE. The various sub-cultures of the Longshan period as represented by tripods— e.g. the ding tripod cauldrons 鼎, jia bronze drinking vessels (or li tripod cooking vessels) and gui ewers—and black and grey potteries actually constituted the mainstream cultural elements of the early China in a cultural sense.91 Although the Longshan culture had experienced an increasing social stratification and fostered several regional centres and civilizations, it was the Zhongyuan (Central Plains) region that had ultimately come out as the one with the greatest strength. In fact, this happened to be the period which witnessed the gradual restoration of the Zhongyuan culture after a thousand years of decline, and it might as well correspond to the time of the emperors of Yao, Shun and Yu and the early Xia Dynasty successively. As discussed above, through the cross-reference of the two violent cultural changes and tribal warfare, we know that the Taotang Clan, the Xiahou Clan, the Pre-Zhou Dynasty and the Miao Man tribes have interacted with each other; while the legendary emperors or heroes of Yao, Yu, Houji and Danzhu might approximately have pertained to the same period, with their main stage of action located near the Yellow River and Yangtze River basins during the Longshan Period. However, in The Book of Documents: Canon of Yao, the legendary names of Shun and Qi 契 were also mentioned along with the above-mentioned figures, suggesting that 90 Yan, Wenming (1981), “The Longshan culture and the Longshan era”, Cultural Relics, 6. 91 The “Early China” in the cultural sense, also called the “Cultural Early China”, or the “Early Chinese Cultural Sphere”, refers to “the relative cultural community formed by the integration and connection of cultures in most parts of China before the Qin and Han dynasties”, which I believe was completed in the 4th millennium BCE during the Miaodigou Period. See Han Jianye (2012), “The Miaodigou Period and the ‘Early China’”, Archaeology, 3; Han, Jianye (2015), “The Early China—The formation and development of the Chinese Cultural Sphere”, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press.

458

J. HAN

they may also have correlated with some of the archaeological cultures of the Longshan Period. 26.4.1

The Zaolvtai Culture, the Late Miaodigou Phase II Type and Shun of the Youyu Clan

According to Discourses of Lu (I) in Discourses of the States《国语·鲁语 上》 , “So the Youyu clan 有虞氏 made sacrifice to the Yellow Emperor 黄帝 and the ancestor to Zhuan Xu 颛顼, and offered suburban sacrifices to Emperor Yao and the ancestor Shun”. Shun had been the head of the Youyu clan. Though there are different views concerning the residence of the Youyu clan and Shun, the disagreement largely hinges on two areas: (1) eastern Henan and western Shandong and (2) southern Shanxi.92 From the archaeological perspective, the Youyu clan may have had connections both with the Yuchisi type of the Dawenkou culture and the Zaolvtai culture 造律台文化—both of which were located in eastern Henan and northwestern Anhui—and with the late Miaodigou Phase II type which was located along the Yellow River in southwestern Shanxi. The Zaolvtai culture was developed upon the Yuchisi type of the Dawenkou culture and it was also heavily influenced by the Longshan and Phase III of the Wangwan cultures.93 Li Boqian holds that the Zaolvtai type (i.e., the Zaolvtai culture) may have been the remnants of the Youyu clan (i.e. Emperor Shun),94 and that its predecessor, the Yuchisi type, may have been the earlier Youyu culture. The Zaolvtai culture can be seen 92 The book of Lilu (II) of Mencius《孟子·离娄下》writes: “Shun was born in Zhufeng, moved to Fuxia, and died in Mingtiao, a remote or barbarian area in the east”. Annals of the Five Emperors of Historical Records· 《史记·五帝本纪》writes: “Shun was a native of Jizhou. Shun ploughed fields in Lishan, fished in Leizhe, made pottery on the bank of the Yellow River, produced all kinds of domestic wares in Shouqiu, and ran a trade in Fuxia”. From these two records it is clear that there had been a disagreement between the eastern barbarian region and Jizhou as to the birth place of Emperor Shun as far back as in the Warring States Period (476–221 BCE) and the Western Han Dynasty (202 BCE–8 AD). See Li Boqian (1983), “On the type of the Zaolvtai culture,” Cultural Relics, 4; Xu, Xusheng (1994), “The Emperors of Yao, Shun, and Yu (I)”, Culture and History, 39: 1–26; Wang, Kelin (2002), “The Longshan culture and the Youyu clan in southwest Shanxi Province—An exploration of the origin of the Yu Shun clan”, Journal of Chinese Antiquity, 1. 93 Han, Jianye (2015), The Early China: The Formation and Development of the Chinese Cultural Sphere, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press, 169–170. 94 Li, Boqian (1983), “On the type of Zaolvtai culture”, Cultural Relics, 4.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

459

either as part of the Longshan culture of the Central Plains or as part of the Longshan culture of the Haidai region, reflecting its transitional status between the two cultures. In Huaiyang 淮阳 of Anhui Province, where the descendants of Shun had lived in legends, the site of Pingliangtai City 平粮台 had been found. Its advanced architecture, regular shape and rigorous layout suggest a rather high level of social development. Phase II of the Miaodigou type, located along the Yellow River in southwestern Shanxi, had already entered the pre-Longshan period in its late stage. Interestingly, at this site, a multitude of artefacts were excavated, including jar-shaped ding tripods with a round base 圜底罐形 鼎, and deep-bellied zun vase-like wine vessels 深腹尊, high-necked hu pots 高颈壶 and gu-shaped bei wine beakers, which all bear great resemblance to those from the Yuchisi type of the Dawenkou culture located in northern Anhui.95 Therefore the sudden burst of eastern cultural elements in the late Miaodigou Phase II type in large quantity was most likely the result of the partial migration of people from northern Anhui and eastern Henan. This conclusion provides an archaeological feasibility to deduce that part of the Youyu clan, including Emperor Shun, had migrated from eastern Henan and western Shandong to southern Shanxi. As can be seen from the Qingliangsi Cemetery 清凉寺 in Rucheng of Shanxi Province, which belonged to Phase II of the late Miaodigou type, there existed wide differences between the large and small graves in that a large number of eastern-style jade artefacts were found in the large burials.96 While this finding can be obviously associated with the possibility of an intermingling of the Qingliangsi culture with the Eastern Pattern, it indicated a stage of social development similar to that of the Taosi culture, a stage which was also in line with the status of the Shun in legends. According to the Canon of Yao in the Book of Documents, Emperor Shun was once ordered by Emperor Yao to exile Gong Gong 共工 (an ancient legendary figure) to Youzhou 幽州, send Huan Dou 驩兜 (the name of a man who was a close friend of Gong Gong) to Chongshan 崇山 (the name of a place in the southern part of Chongyang County, Hubei Province), drive the Miao Man clan to Sanwei 三危 95 Han, Jianye (2006), “The periodization and genealogy of the Miaodigou Phase IILongshan culture in southwest Shanxi and west Henan, Acta Archaeologica Sinica, 2. 96 Shanxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology, et al. (2016), The Prehistorical Site of the Qingliangsi Cemetery, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

460

J. HAN

(the name of a place in the southeastern part of Dunhuang County, Gansu Province) and kill his Father Gun (the name of Xia Yu’s father) on Mount Yu 羽山. When these four sins were committed, the world was convinced. Similar stories can also be found in Annals of the Five Emperors of the Records of the Grand History. Archaeologically, the Zaolvtai culture displayed a tendency of a large-scale outward expansion after the late Dawenkou period. What is worth mentioning is its most obvious outspread in the south direction, which had left a profound influence upon the formation of the Guangfulin culture 广富林文化 in Songjiang District of Shanghai and the Doujitai culture 斗鸡台文化 in Shouxian County, Anhui Province, with its earthenware vessels such as the yan tripod steamer, which reached as far as the Tanshishan culture in northwestern Fujian Province. At one point, its influence even reached the Jianghan (Yangtz and Han Rivers) region in the southwest.97 This may have been the historical background for the legend regarding Shun’s burial in the wilderness of Mount Cangwu 苍梧 in Yongzhou County of southern Hunan during his southern tour.98 26.4.2

Phase II of the Hougang Culture, Phase II of the Xueshan Culture and the earliest Pre-Shang Culture

The pre-Shang culture refers to the culture of the people in the state of Shang before the establishment of the Shang Dynasty. Pre-Shang culture started from Xie’s time to the destruction of the Xia Dynasty by Tang 汤, a duration which corresponded to the whole Xia Dynasty. According to The Book of Documents《尚书》and other historical records, the Shang founder Qi and the Xia founder Yu were contemporaries. According to the Bamboo Annals (Current Text )《今本竹书纪年》 , important activities

97 Han, Jianye (2015), The Early China: The Formation and Development of the Chinese Cultural Sphere, Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press, 186. 98 In Tan Gong of The Book of Rites (I)《礼记·檀弓上》 , it says that “Emperor Shun

was buried in the wilderness of Cangwu.” Annals of the Five Emperors of the Records of the Grand History《史记·五帝本纪》says: “(Emperor Shun) went on a hunting tour in the south, died in the wilderness of Cangwu, and was buried in Mount Jiuning 九疑, on the southern side of the Yangtze River, which was thus renamed Lingling 零陵, meaning Tomb Zero”.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

461

or events had occurred to the Shang ancestors99 at the time of the successive Xia rulers, such as Xiang 相, Shaokang 少康, Zhu 杼, Mang 芒, Xie 泄, Buxiang 不降, Kongjia 孔甲 and Lvgui 履癸. The poem Changfa of the Odes of the Shang Dynasty in The Book of Poetry《诗·商颂·长发 》(one of the Songs of Chu) says: “When the Yousong tribe 有娀 was rising in power, Emperor Yu married the Yousong princess who gave birth to a baby son Xie”. The Verses of Chu: Heavenly Questions《楚辞· 天问》says: “How could Emperor Ku 喾 be fond of her when the beautiful Jian Di 简狄 lived on the Yao Terrace, the fairyland 瑶台?” From these legendary records it is clear that the earliest ancestor of the Shang Dynasty was Emperor Ku, who married Jian Di of the Yousong tribe. The Records of the Grand History: Annals of Yin《史记·殷本纪》synthesized these legends as “Prince Xie of the Yin tribe 殷契 was born to the mother Jian Di, who was daughter of the Yousong tribe and second concubine of Emperor Ku”. Tang Lan, who believes that the tribe Yousong was the tribe of Rong 戎,100 combines the latter (i.e. Rong) with the beautiful Jian Di, thus obtaining the blended term “Rong Di” 戎狄. In fact,

99 In The Bamboo Annals《今本竹书记年》(Emended by Wang Guowei): “In the fifteenth year of the emperor’s reign, Xiangtu, Duke of the Shang tribe (which was located in present-day Shangqiu, Henan) made a horse carriage”. “In the eleventh year of Emperor Shaokang’s reign, he made Ming, Duke of the Shang tribe to harness the Yellow River”. “In the thirteenth year of Emperor Zhu’s reign, the Shang duke died on the post of river-harnessing”. “In the thirty-third year of Emperor Mang’s reign, the Shang duke moved to Yin (i.e. present-day Anyang, Henan)” (As Wang Guowei commented in his emendation of The Bamboo Annals: “This is due to the fact that the Chronicle of the Mountains and Seas《山海经》contains, by quoting The Bamboo Annals, the phrase “Prince Hai of the Yin Dynasty (i.e., after it moved its capital to Yin and renamed Shang as Yin), which is why the event of the capital relocation to Yin was made”). “In the twelfth year of the Emperor Xie’s reign, Prince Hai of Yin went to visit the Youyi clan and was killed; in the sixteenth year, the Duke of Yin, Wei, with the assistance of the army of the River God, attacked Youyi and killed its head Mianchen”. “In the ninth year of Emperor Kongjia’s reign, the emperor ascended, and the Duke of Yin returned to Shangqiu”. “In the thirty-first year of Emperor Gui’s reign, a great thunderstorm struck, and the State of Shang launched an attack on the State of Xia, with the battle fought at Mingtiao”. 100 Tang, Lan (1976), “A study of the history of the Western Zhou period by means of bronze inscriptions—An overview of the significant historical value of a group of bronze artefacts found in Baoji in recent years”, Cultural Relics, 6.

462

J. HAN

the founding emperor of Shang was Xie. The Book of Origins: The Residences of the Rulers《世本·居篇》reports that “Xie lived in Fan 蕃.101 Ding Shan suspects that the place name Fan was an apocryphal reference to the place Bo 亳 which was located between the Yongding River 永定河 and Kou River 滱河.102 Zhao Tiehan maintains that Xie first lived in Qi 契阝, namely, Ji 蓟 in present-day Beijing.103 These two theories are similar. Ancestors of the Shang Dynasty from Xie to Ming 冥 should have spanned a period which was equivalent to the late Longshan period, when the Jiangou Type 涧沟型 of Phase II of the Hougang culture 后岗文 化 and Phase II of the Xueshan culture 雪山文化 were distributed in the region from southern and central Hebei Province to Beijing. The most representative potteries found in this region include the rolled-rim olive-shaped guan jars 卷沿橄榄形罐 and the rolled-rim waist earthenware yan vessels 卷沿有腰隔甗, which might have represented artefacts of the earliest Shang culture.104 Around Phase II of the Erlitou period, these two types of potteries, together with the rolled-rimmed, conefooted li tripod vessels 卷沿锥足跟鬲 from central Shanxi, constituted the main utensils used in the late pre-Shang culture, including the Xiaqiyuan culture 下七垣文化105 or the Zhanghe type 漳河类型 of the pre-Shang culture.106 As for the Jiangou Type of Phase II of the Hougang culture and Phase II of the Xueshan culture, under the heavy influence of the Longshan or Zaolvtai cultures, they also manifested cultural elements of the northern culture as represented by the shuangpan li tripod vessels with two handles and stout legs double-raised, fat-footed lizards 双鋬 肥袋足鬲, which is consistent with the relevant legendary records with regard to their predecessors, Emperor Ku and Emperor Jan Di.

101 A quotation made in The Wei River Annotations in The Book of Rivers《水经·渭水 注》 , as cited in The Geographical Annotation of The History as a Mirror《通鉴地理通释》 . 102 Ding, Shan (1988), Textual Research of Historical Texts of the Shang and Zhou Periods, Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju. 103 Zhao, Tiehan (1963), “A new textual research of the eight capital movements before Emperor Tang’s reign in the Shang Dynasty”, Dalu Zazhi, 27(6). 104 Han, Jianye (1998), “An investigation of the origin of the pre-Shang culture”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2. 105 Li, Boqian (1989), “An investigation of the culture of the pre-Shang period”; Essays in Honour of Su Bingqi’s Fifty-five Years of Archaeological Research, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 280–293; Wang, Lixin & Zhu, Yonggang (1995), “An investigation of the origin of the Xiaqiyuan culture”, Huaxia Archaeology, 4. 106 Zou, Heng (1980), “A preliminary discussion of the culture of the Xia Dynasty”, Collection of Archaeological Papers on the Xia, Shang and Zhou Dynasties, Beijing: Wenwu Press, 95–182.

26

VIOLENT CULTURAL CHANGES IN THE LONGSHAN …

26.5

463

Conclusion

While both the large-scale replacement of the Shijiahe culture by Phase III of the Wangwan culture, and that of Taosi culture by the Laohushan culture, can only have occurred as the consequence of fierce wars, these two historical events corresponded to the legendary accounts of “Yu’s conquest of the Miao Man tribes” and “Ji’s banishment of Danzhu”, respectively. Viewed and starting from this point, it can also be found that there also exists good correspondence between other archaeological cultures and other tribal figures of the Longshan period, such as Shun of the Youyu clan and the Zaolvtai culture, Ancestor Xie of the Pre-Shang period and Phase II of the Xueshan culture. In this vein, a framework of correspondences can be established between the archaeological cultures of the Longshan period and some of the tribes during the time of the legendary figures such as Yao, Shun and Yu. This framework might help to justify, to a large extent, that the legendary records in the Canon of Yao of The Book of Documents, whereby Emperors Yao and Shun once were gathered together with their respective talented peers under one roof to perform their official agenda were a true portrayal of their tribal alliance for important business, instead of pure imagination. Although the figures of Yao, Shun, Yu, Ji and Xie had come from different tribes and belonged to different archaeological cultures, they had mainly resided in the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River which had been centred on the southern Shanxi region, or Zhongyuan Central Plains in its broader sense, while the Miao Man tribes near the Yangtze River reaches had only existed as their opponent to be conquered. As for the shanrang succession system 禅让, it might have in essence been a euphemism for the rotation of the heads of the tribal alliance, as the strength of the tribes waxed and waned. Furthermore, the event of the “Yu’s conquest of the Miao Man tribes” could also provide solid archaeological evidence for the determination of the upper limit of the Xia culture. Li Min and Shao Wangping once argued that the scope of jiuzhou, i.e., the nine major regions of the country and its division, as stated in the chapter Tribute of (Emperor) Yu in The Book of Documents《尚书·禹贡 》 , roughly corresponded to the geographical scope of the country during the Longshan period and its various archaeological cultures,107 and this 107 Li, M. (1981), “A study of the Tribute of (Emperor) Yu and the history of the Xia dynasty”; The Book of Documents and Ancient History Studies (revised and enlarged ed.)”,

464

J. HAN

proposal should not be far from the truth. However, although the might of Phase III of the later Wangwan culture, to which the reign of Emperor Yu of the early Xia Dynasty had corresponded, was much greater than that of the previous period, it was still roughly equal to that of the other sub-Longshan cultures in the Haidai and the northern regions. Therefore, it would have been unimaginable for the Xia power of Emperor Yu’s time to accomplish the magnificent feat of assuming sovereignty over the country and mapping out the jiuzhou. Even at the late Longshan period, the country remained largely a state of “many states”. It was not until the rise of the Erlitou culture in the Zhongyuan, i.e., the Central Plains region, about the eighteenth-century BCE, that the region gained final unification and became universally influential in the whole country.108 By then, it would have entered the late Xia period.109 In addition, although fragments of bronze vessels were found from Phase III of the late Wangwan culture, which pertained to the early Xia culture, they might just imply the possibility of casting jiuding, i.e., the nine tripod set 九鼎, rather than the capacity of actually casting them, a formidable artistry which could only have been envisaged at the time. In fact, the real bronze ding tripods had only been found in the Erlitou culture.110 It might be most likely that Emperor Yu had indeed established the Xia Dynasty, but did not yet enjoy kingship over the surrounding tribes; and hence what the legendary account of “Yu as king of China” and “his mapping of jiuzhou” had entailed are at least “layer-by-layer” amalgamations from the later Xia emperors onwards. (This section originally appeared in No. 1 of Journal of Social Sciences in 2020.)

Zhengzhou: Zhongzhou Shuhua Press, 52–53; Shao, W. (1989), “An archaeological study of the jiuzhou nine regions (II)”, Beijing: Cultural Heritage Press, 11–30. 108 Xu, Hong (2009), The Earliest China, Beijing: Science Press; Han, Jianye (2010), “The Liangzhu, Taosi and Erlitou sites—The evolutionary path of the early Chinese civilization”, Archaeology, 11. 109 Han, Jianye (2009), “On the rise of the Erlitou bronze civilization”, Journal of National Museum of China, 1. 110 The Erlitou Team of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences (1991), “New bronze artefacts found at the Erlitou Site of Yanshi County, Henan Province”, Archaeology, 12.

CHAPTER 27

Ancient Historical Legends: To be Considered in Studies of the Origin of Chinese Civilization

The study of the origin and early development of the Chinese civilization is of significant historical value. Thus researchers should adopt an archaeology-based, multidisciplinary and comprehensive approach which especially requires cross-referencing between documentary records and the legendary accounts of the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors 三 皇五帝.

27.1

The Rationale Underlying the Approach

The ancient civilizations located in the west of Eurasia, such as the ancient Egyptian, the Sumerian, the ancient Greek civilizations, all have their own distinctive cultural genes and rich historical memories. Although modern and contemporary scholars’ research on these ancient civilizations is definitely based on the physical remains found by archaeologists, their research is in separate from the interpretation of relevant written materials. Without the characters or written documents, the exact belief system of the gods, the concept of soul regeneration, the legal system and various scientific knowledges would not have been directly analysed from the physical remains, not to mention the dynastic lineage and their historical evolution. In China, though written characters as early as at least 5000 BP have been found, no systematic characters or documents that date back to the late Shang Dynasty (i.e. before 1046 BCE) have been uncovered. This may be attributed to the fact that people then mainly © China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_27

465

466

J. HAN

wrote on organic materials such as silk, bamboo and wood. And the lack of systematic findings of written documents prior to that time has largely limited the understanding of early Chinese civilization. Fortunately, in addition to the oracle bone inscriptions of the late Shang Dynasty, China boasts a large amount of historical documents since the Western Zhou Dynasty, which were either handed down or excavated, as well as historical materials preserved through inheritance. These historical documents and materials contain extremely rich legendary accounts about the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors, which deserve being viewed as a treasure trove of information for the study of the origin and early development of the Chinese civilization. There exists a wide temporal gap between the Shang-Zhou dynasties (1600–256 BCE) and the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors Era (about 9684–2015 BCE). Thus, the accounts of the Three Sovereigns and Five Sovereigns, i.e. the semi-mythical sage-kings and moral exemplars, in documentary records of the Shang and Zhou dynasties and of later generations, would surely not be immune from mistakes, omissions and exaggerations in the long process of the inheritance and dissemination. While it is imperative that researchers make meticulous differentiation so as to discard the false from the true, it is also imperative that researchers hold these historical materials in veneration and compassion and caution themselves against indiscriminate negation or elimination. In 1921, Hu Shi 胡适 claimed in his speech, “With regard to the history prior to the Eastern Zhou Dynasty (770–256 BCE), not a single word can be trusted”. Such a view once encouraged a group of scholars to fiercely doubt the ancient history, giving rise to the far-reaching Doubt Antiquity movement 疑古运动. Although the “yigupai” (the Doubting Antiquity school) 疑古派 did contribute to the eradication of the obsolete trend of superstition recorded in ancient history, the doubting of the antiquity was too aggressive and “went too far”, so it must be critically checked. If we simply and brutally discard the legendary historical materials that contain the precious historical memories of our Chinese forefathers in the name of “science” and “rigorousness”, and hope to activate the archaeological materials by the analogy of ethnography or the “paradigm” from other ancient civilizations, I am afraid that we will only derive some specious and dogmatic inferences. In addition, we should not expect to clarify the characteristics of early Chinese civilization and confirm the early Chinese historical lineage in this way. In fact, the

27

ANCIENT HISTORICAL LEGENDS: TO BE CONSIDERED …

467

very Chinese character Hua 华 in the word Zhonghua 中华 (China) was derived from the legends of the Huaxu clan 华胥氏. Thus, without the legends about ancient history, the discussion under the name of Zhonghua (China) would not have been possible.

27.2

Findings based on the Approach

The archaeological excavations of Yinxu (Yin ruins) 殷墟 in Anyang, Henan, in 1928 provide solid evidence to support that Yinxu (Ruins of Yin) is the site for the capital of the late Shang Dynasty and confirms that the history about the late Shang Dynasty in the Historical Records《史记 》and some other documents is trustworthy. Thus, the above-mentioned claim that “there existed no trustworthy history before the Eastern Zhou Dynasty” is refuted. Next, the excavation of the Erligang Site 二里岗遗址 in Zhengzhou, Henan in 1952 unveils the archaeological exploration of the ancient history before the late Shang Dynasty. Since then, An Jinhuai proposed that Zhengzhou should be the capital Ao of the mid-Shang Dynasty (in the mid-Shang Dynasty, Emperor Zhong Ding 仲丁 moved the capital to Zhengzhou and named it as Ao 隞都), while Zou Heng held that Zhengzhou should be the capital of King Tang 汤, i.e. “Bodu” 亳都. Although written documents unearthed from Zhengzhou are limited, its status as one of the capitals of the early Shang Dynasty has already been confirmed. In 1959, while investigating the ruins of Xia 夏 in western Henan, Xu Xusheng found the Erlitou remains in Yanshi, Henan. At the initial stage of the investigation, it was presumed to be the capital city “Xibo” (literally “Western Capital Bo”) 西亳 of Emperor Tang of the Shang Dynasty. In 1977, after in-depth analysis of the archaeological excavations, Zou Heng proposed that Erlitou should have been the capital city of the Xia Dynasty. During the period from 1959 to 1977, archaeological evidence-based methods have made great progress through debate. To date, it has been widely accepted that the Erlitou culture can be traced back to the late Xia Dynasty, that the Erlitou Site is site of the capital city of the late Xia Dynasty, and that the late Xia Dynasty history is mostly trustworthy. As a result, it is logical for An Jinhuai and Li Boqian to regard Phase III of the late Wangwan culture, the predecessor of the Erlitou culture, as one that most likely corresponded to the early Xia culture.

468

J. HAN

The exploration of the Five Emperors Era 五帝时代 also yielded significant results. In the 1930s, on the basis of contemporaneous archaeological findings and comprehensive literature review, Xu Zhongshu inferred that “Yangshao 仰韶 is likely to be the remains of the Yuxia tribe” 虞夏. In the 1950s, Fan Wenlan surmised that “the Yangshao culture should correspond to the culture of Huangdi tribe” 黄帝. Since the 1970s and the 1980s, a growing number of scholars have joined in the archaeological explorations of the Five Emperors Era. There are not only micro-level contrastive studies on the cultures of the Miao Man tribes, the Tangyao tribe 唐尧, the Dongyi tribes (i.e. eastern barbarians) 东夷, the Yanhuang tribe 炎黄 by scholars such as Yu Weichao, Zou Heng, Yan Wenming, Xu Shunzhan, but also macro-level research such as the General History of China《中国通史》edited by Bai Shouyi. In the second volume of the General History of China, Su Bingqi and others argued that the late Yangshao culture should correspond to the Yanhuang period and the Longshan period to the Yao, Shun and Yu 尧舜禹 periods. And this conclusion is an important contribution made by archaeologists to the verification of ancient history after the establishment of the Neolithic cultural genealogy in China. Since the mid-1990s, the possibility that the early Yangshao culture belonged to the Yanhuang culture was further investigated, and clear archaeological evidence for historical events such as Yu’s conquest of the Miao Man tribes and Ji’s banishment of Danzhu was clearly identified, which provides a solid archaeological basis for determining the upper limit of the Xia culture. The Historical Records begins with the Annals of the Five Emperors 《五帝本纪》 , which does not cover the Three Sovereigns 三皇. Thus, the legend of the Three Sovereigns is not only regarded as groundless by the Doubt Antiquity School, but also rarely discussed among scholars who believed in ancient history. Consequently, there exists a lack of cross-reference in archaeological studies. However, if we align the turtle divination and the images of numbers 龟卜象数, symbols resembling writing, compass-shaped bone tools 规矩形骨器, neatly arranged “clan burial” 族葬 cemeteries and the like found at sites that date back to more than 8000 BP, such as the Qiaotou Site 桥头 in Yiwu, the Jiahu site 贾湖 in Wuyang and the Dadiwan Site 大地湾 in Qin’an, with the legends of bagua (the eight trigrams) 八卦 created by Fuxi 伏羲 and Nvwa 女娲, astronomical observation and calendar formalization 观象制 历, the establishment of rules of marriage 别婚立制, the establishment of rules of human relations 鼎定人伦, we will find many matches between

27

ANCIENT HISTORICAL LEGENDS: TO BE CONSIDERED …

469

them. Similarly, the legends of the Three Emperors should also have real historical background which needs unravelling through archaeological research. In addition, according to legends, some ancient tribes or ancient regimes in China’s frontier areas, such as Qiang 羌, Rong 戎, Ba 巴, Shu 蜀, Xiongnu 匈奴, Da Yuezhi (the Greater Yuezhi) 大月氏, Xianbei 鲜卑, Wu 吴 and Yue 越, are related to the tribes in the middle reaches of the Yellow River such as Hua, Xia and Zhou 周. These legendary accounts may be attributed to the fact that these ethnic groups, or at least their ruling class, could have their roots traced to China. This inference needs to be carefully explored in conjunction with archaeology and should not be easily negated under the name of “imagination”, “reconstruction” and “played-up connections” of historical nihilism.

27.3

The Approach as a Research Method

Looking back on the archaeological exploration of the early Shang and Xia cultures, we can see that the method used by scholars is mainly to derive the unknown from the known. Specifically, it starts from the known evidence of the late Shang culture to deduce knowledge about the early Shang culture, the Xia culture and the pre-Shang culture, attaching importance to the identification of the capital city and paying attention to the overall comparison between the spatial pattern of archaeological cultures and the system of ancient history. Here we propose two interrelated research methods for consideration: the first is the “genealogical method” 谱系法 that combines cultural, genetic and genus genealogy; and the second is the “change method” 变迁法 that associate cultural changes and settlement changes with war and migration. The communal life and close contact of people who live in a specific natural environment for some time will lead to the emergence of common customs or even language. And the blood relationship should be the natural bond for ancient human beings living together as a society. Therefore, in theory, the archaeological culture and the “clan” 族 which emphasizes blood identity are likely to echo each other. As documented in the oracle bone inscriptions and handed-down documents, the Wangji (the royal central domains around the seat of the king) 王畿, Situ (the four cardinal areas beyond the royal central domains of the Shang Dynasty) 四土, and Fangguo (the neighbouring states at the borders of the late Shang) 方国 corresponded to the cultural core area 文化中心区,

470

J. HAN

subcultural area 亚文化区, and influenced marginal regions 文化影响区 of Yinxu (Ruins of Yin). Also, according to the Jin bronze inscriptions 金文 and handed-down documents, the Zhuhou guo feudal vassal states 诸侯国, frontier areas and the record about the Western Zhou corresponded to the Western Zhou cultural centre area, feudal cultural area and cultural influence area. This proves that the contrastive research method on archaeological cultures and clan ethnicity is reliable and feasible to a certain extent. Of course, it is difficult to precisely define the spatial and temporal scopes of their specific ethnic groups with regard to the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors Era. Archaeologists have proposed different cultural division schemes, so an exact point-to-point correspondence is prone to problems. However, if we can establish a relatively sound and perfect genealogy of the archaeological cultures since the Neolithic Age, it means that we have succeeded in establishing the genealogy of various tribes and clans before the late Shang. In other words, matching one genealogy to another would be similar to determining the correspondence of two nets: once the two “nets” match, the certainty of the research findings will become much higher. In recent years, molecular biology has been increasingly employed in archaeology, which makes the genetic genealogy of the pre-late Shang period a reality rather than a mere fancy. Combining this “net” with the cultural genealogy and family genealogy, turning the three “nets” into one, we will surely achieve a major breakthrough in research on ancient legends. However, genetic genealogy can only determine human blood ties, but not cultural relationships; and ancestral or clan relationship is based on consanguinity, it is thus more an indication of cultural identity. Therefore, genetic genealogy cannot be simply equated with clan genealogy, just as cultural genealogy cannot be simply equated with clan genealogy. The drastic changes in culture and central settlements are relatively easier to observe. The reasons for these radical changes are mostly largescale migration and wars, which would leave the deepest impressions upon ancient people and become the most frequently recorded events in ancient legendary histories. It is an effective method for the contrastive research method of archaeology and ancient historical legends to compare both the changes in culture and central settlements with events of warfare and migration events recorded in ancient history so as to confirm some key points of query. The most prominent example of cultural change is the sudden and large-scale mutation that occurred at the turn of the

27

ANCIENT HISTORICAL LEGENDS: TO BE CONSIDERED …

471

Longshan period in southern Henan and the Jianghan (the Yangtze and Hanjiang rivers) region. The previously distinctive and flourishing Shijiahe culture 石家河文化 was replaced within a short period by Phase III of the Wangwan culture 王湾三期文化, which was represented by potteries such as short-collared weng urns 矮领瓮, slender and high pedestal dou plates 细高柄豆, and side-mounted ding tripods 侧装足鼎. And the twenty ancient cities in the Jianghan area, which had existed for nearly a thousand years, were basically destroyed. As for the reason behind this sudden and large-scale mutation, there would be no other plausible explanations apart from massive wars! As a preliminary study, we once proposed that this change would have been the consequence of the legendary event “Yu zheng sanmiao” (Yu the Great quelling the Miao Man tribes: under the leadership of Emperor Yu, the Huaxia tribal alliance in the north fought a large-scale war with the Sanmiao or Miao Man tribal alliance in the south to compete for slaves and living space) 禹征三苗. Once the identification of the key point “Yu zheng Sanmiao” is established, the existence of the tribes of Yu 禹, Xia and Sanmiao (Miao Man) 三苗 can be further established as a historical fact, which can further verify the facts of the event of Yu zheng Sanmiao and the founding of the Xia Dynasty at around 2100 BCE. In terms of the most prominent example of the radical changes in settlements, it occurred around 2100 BCE when the Laohushan culture in the northern region moved south on a large scale and replaced the Taosi culture, whereby a large number of li caldrons with two handles 双鋬陶鬲 appeared in the Linfen Basin where there had used to be merely jia tripod vessels 斝. Violent scenes such as massacres, slaughters of women, and destruction of burials, etc., which had occurred near the ancient city of Taosi, could only have resulted from wars. We have resorted to the legendary event of “Ji fang danzhu” (Houji’s banishment of Emperor Zhu to Danshui)” 稷放丹朱 to cross-reference the abovementioned radical change. Once this key point of reference is determined, it can directly prove the historical authenticity and time of Houji 后稷, Danzhu 丹朱 and even Yao 尧. The archaeological cross-reference research on the Three Emperors and Five Emperors is indeed a challenging task. Based on archaeology, this research requires proficiency in research methods for archaeological typology and archaeological culture, meticulous analysis of archaeological cultural genealogy, and in-depth understanding of the legends concerning the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors. Therefore, it is essential

472

J. HAN

for archaeologists and historians to work together, and for universities to cultivate professional talents with both archaeological and historical attainments. Under no circumstance should we ignore the legends of the Three Sovereigns and Five Emperors, or remain indifferent to the relevant archaeological explorations. The combination of ancient history and legends constitutes an inevitable path for the study of the origins and early development of the Chinese civilization, and marks an unshakable common mission incumbent on us contemporary archaeologists and historians.

CHAPTER 28

Ancient History of the Legendary Era: Not Unverifiable

The legendary era refers to a prehistoric period that has no written contemporaneous records but is mentioned in later literature or legends. In his book The Legendary Era in Ancient Chinese History《中国古史 的传说时代》 , published in the 1940s, Xu Xusheng holds that China’s legendary era should have concluded before the late Shang period. Such a conclusion is made upon the fact that large numbers of oracle bone inscriptions were unearthed at Yinxu (the Yin Ruins) 殷墟, indicating the transition into the historical period. In this vein, the Early Shang 早 商, Xia 夏 and the earlier Five Emperors 五帝 periods should all fall under the category of the legendary era. It is unlikely that the oracle bone inscriptions would have been the earliest writing system in China. Nor would the late Shang period have been the start of written account of Chinese history. The Zhushu scripts, i.e. the red ink-written Chinese characters 朱书文字 found on early Shang pottery at the Taosi Site in Xiangfen and the Xiaoshuangqiao Site 小双桥 遗址 in Zhengzhou, are much the same as the oracle bone inscriptions, and those on the late Longshan pottery from the Taosi Site in Xiangfen also bear great resemblance to the oracle bone inscriptions. These both suggest that there should have been more mature writing systems before the arrival of the oracle bone inscriptions. The events from the legendary era may have been handed down by word of mouth from times of antiquity and got recorded gradually since the Western Zhou. However, it cannot be ruled out that these events © China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_28

473

474

J. HAN

might have also been translated from ancient texts, which had been inevitably exaggerated, misrepresented or mythologized in the translating process. Thus, while it is natural for us as researchers to eliminate the false and retain the true, we should hold ancient documents in awe and veneration. That is, we should not speak of falsifications easily without full assurance, and avoid classifying legends hastily as myths simply because of their mythological overtones. Regarding the verifiability of the legendary era, given the mixed and complex nature of legends, it is, in effect, difficult to authenticate them on the basis of documented history by later generations alone. In fact, in the first volume of his Discussions in Ancient Chinese History《古史辨》 , Li Xuanbo clearly points out, “The only way to approach ancient history is via archaeology”. Gu Jiegang also holds that the truth about ancient cultures as revealed by underground excavations cannot only be used to build a new ancient history but also to destroy the old one as well. Then, can archaeology really confirm, to a certain extent, the ancient history of the legendary era? If so, what is the research method? Archaeology, as it should be noted here, is the most fundamental means to approach the ancient history from the legendary era. If the tribal groups of the legendary era had indeed existed, material remains of this existence must have been left behind. Buried under the ground from time immemorial, archaeological data would be impossible to be tampered with. Thus, it is beyond doubt that these data are authentic and objective and should constitute the most reliable frame of reference for legendary narratives. After a century of painstaking exploration, the inner logical order of this frame of reference has been deciphered and interpreted gradually, and the pottery-centred cultural genealogy of Chinese prehistory and aboriginal history has been established in principle. Therefore, the conditions for the contrastive research on ancient history and archaeology are basically mature. Looking back on the exploration of the early Shang and Xia cultures, we can see that prior researchers, represented by Zou Heng, have mainly relied on the approach of extrapolating from the known to the unknown, specifically from the known late Shang culture to the early Shang, Xia and pre-Shang cultures. The premise of these discussions is that archaeological culture can, to some extent, correspond to a certain ethnic clan, a tribal group, or an early state established with a core ethnic group. Such a premise can be verified by the approximate correspondence between, on the one hand, the royal central domains around the seat of the king 王

28

ANCIENT HISTORY OF THE LEGENDARY …

475

畿,the four cardinal areas beyond the royal central domains of the Shang Dynasty 四土, and the regional states (Fangguo) at the border regions 边 疆方国 as documented in the oracle bone inscriptions, and on the other hand, the central, subcultural and influenced marginal zones of Yinxu (the Yin Ruins). While previous studies have helped to show the validity of the above premise, another problem arises though: given that it is difficult to define precisely the spatial and temporal boundary of a particular ethnic clan or group in the legendary era, how can a legendary era be aligned to a particular archaeological culture? One approach may help partially resolve this difficult question; that is, by means of a comparison and contrast between an archaeological cultural change and a tribal warfare. Intense inter-tribal warfare, which has the potential to cause dramatic changes in the cultural landscape, is particularly noticeable and recognizable. Hence, it is plausible to employ major archaeological cultural changes to verify important wars or migratory events in the legends, whereby several start points can then be identified, other details of interest can be explored, and an overview of the ancient Chinese history with regard to the Five Emperors period can be obtained. Let us take for instance the archaeological evidence of two events for a brief illustration, i.e. Yu zheng sanmiao, i.e. Yu’s conquest of Miao Man tribes 禹征三苗 and Ji fang danzhu, i.e. Ji’s banishment of Danzhu 稷放 丹朱. The story of Yu’s conquest of the Miao Man tribes can be found in Mozi: Condemnation of Offensive War (III)《墨子·非攻下》 , the Bamboo Annals《古本竹书纪年》and other historical accounts. As the actual founder of the Xia Dynasty, Emperor Yu should have lived around central and western Henan Province, while the Miao Man tribes were generally believed to have lived in most parts of Hubei, with the Jianghan (the Yangtze-Han rivers) Plains as its centre. Prior to the early Longshan period (about 2100 BCE), Phase III of the Wangwan culture 王湾文化 in central and western Henan was rather small in size, while the Shijiahe culture 石家河文化, with the Jianghan Plains at its centre, was almost ten times larger in scope. However, around 2100 BCE, the Wangwan III culture expanded southward on a large scale in a short period of time, resulting in the demise of the Shijiahe culture in an area of around a couple of thousand miles. Such a drastic change could never be explained by conventional cultural exchanges, trade and other similar reasons. In my opinion, there might have been only one possibility and this is the result of a large-scale and fierce war between the Central Plains and Jianghan

476

J. HAN

Plains, which would also correspond to the event of “Yu’s conquest of the Miao Man tribes”. The event of “Ji’s banishment of Danzhu” is documented in the Bamboo Annals. Houji 后稷 was the legendary ancestor of the ancient Zhou clan. Some researchers hold that Houji and his mother Jiang Yuan 姜嫄 should have resided around the Jing and Wei Rivers 泾水、渭水, but Qian Mu argues that their residence should be in the southwest of Shanxi Province. According to legends, Danzhu was a son of Emperor Yao 尧, and thus his residence should have been in the capital of Emperor Yao. There are multiple views as to the exact location of Emperor Yao’s capital, and the most well-known one is Pingyang 平阳, which probably corresponds to Linfen 临汾 in southern Shanxi Province. Before 2100 BCE, the Linfen Basin had been dotted with the Taosi culture, and the ancient city of Taosi 陶寺, which covered an area of nearly three million metres2 and remained the largest central settlement of the Longshan period in the northern part of the Central Plains before the emergence of Shimao Stone City 石峁石 城. But in the late Longshan period, after 2100 BCE, the prosperity of the Taosi culture came to an abrupt end, and large quantities of li tripods with two handles 双鋬陶鬲 appeared in the Linfen Basin, where there had only been jia tripod vessels 斝 but no li. I once posited that this might have been related to the forceful southward movement of the Laohushan culture 老虎山文化, indicating possible conflicts and even wars between the northern tribes and those in the southwestern Shanxi, which may also corroborate the event of “Ji’s banishment of Danzhu”. Both the massive replacement of the Shijiahe culture by Phase III of the Wangwan culture and that of the Taosi culture by the Laohushan culture could only be attributed to the intense acts of warfare, which correspond to the legendary events of “Yu’s conquest of the Miao Man tribes” and “Ji’s banishment of Danzhu”, respectively. While these two illustrations helped to establish a solid basis for the comparison and contrast of ancient history and archaeological evidence, the “verification” of the ancient history of the legendary era remains a “relative” one, given the lack of written texts from the legendary era. In fact, even though there was a convincing match between the documentary and archaeological evidence, the “conclusion” thus derived still pertains to “an inference”. This is true of the exploration of legends of the Five Emperors, and it is also true of the exploration of the landscape of the Xia culture.

28

ANCIENT HISTORY OF THE LEGENDARY …

477

The ancient historical period of the legendary era happened to be the initial stage of civilization. Where the ancient legends contain the precious memories of our ancestors, the archaeological remains have solidified the wisdom and sweat of our forefathers. It is the pursuit and responsibility of academia to attach importance to and explore the ancient Chinese history of the legend era. (This section was originally carried in the People’s Daily on 14 November 2018).

CHAPTER 29

An Archaeological Approach to Studies of Ancient History of Legendary Era

In recent years, there has arisen a craze on “ancient history” in the society. Within this frenzy, experts are keen on “competing on the stage with each other”, the laymen are enthusiastic about seeking their roots and looking for their ancestors, and the governments at various levels are fond of holding various ceremonies to worship ancestors such as emperors Yan and Huang 炎黄. While this tendency has become increasingly abustle and astir, it may be related to the background of China’s rise, symbolizing a manifestation of “cultural self-confidence”. Nevertheless, lively as the scene might be, the understandings of “ancient history” remain disparate, and a consensus is hard to reach: some repudiating it utterly, other swallowing it uncritically, and still some nosy parkers even overgeneralizing this knowledge with the history of West Asia, Egypt and the world in a flamboyant manner. The ultimate reason behind the frenzy may be attributed to the fact that most people either lack the proper understanding of the ancient history of the legendary era, or do not study or master the correct research methods. While they are incompetent and unable to conduct thorough investigation, they will choose to comfort themselves with the label of adherents of the “purity” and “rigor” of historiography and archaeology. Otherwise, they will reach a hasty conclusion based on the

© China Social Sciences Press 2023 J. Han, The Making of the Chinese Civilization, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-99-4213-8_29

479

480

J. HAN

knowledge of just a few ancient books, blog posts and scenic spots. In view of this problematic situation, I would like to share my humble opinion on the research methods for studies on the ancient history in the legendary era for our readers’ reference and criticism.

29.1 Archaeology: The Key to Ancient History Problems The legendary era 传说时代 refers to the period that lacked the documents recorded of the time but is mentioned in later documents or legends. According to Xu Xusheng, the legendary era of ancient Chinese history should have concluded before the late Shang, since large quantities of oracle bone inscriptions of that period have been unearthed.1 Therefore, eras including the early Shang, Xia and Five Emperors should all fall into the category of the legendary era. Ancient China boasted a long tradition of “belief in antiquity” 信古, but after the late Qing Dynasty, there emerged a trend of “doubting antiquity” 疑古. The concept of “legendary era” is, in effect, the product of the idea of “believing and doubting”, where “believing” indicates that the legends about ancient history generally have a real historical background; and “doubting” means that the ancient history before the late Shang can only be found in the literature of later generations, most of which is based on copying, translation or even words of mouth. As such, there would inevitably be mistakes and omissions in the interpretation, and it is, therefore, necessary to remove the false and preserve the truth. Is the legendary era really trustworthy? How authentic is it? Should we uphold “doubting antiquity” or banish it2 ? From the early twentieth century up to the present, there has been a heated debate on these questions. However, for the research based on the handed-down documents, only a few hypotheses to be tested can be formulated. Wang Guowei once combined the newly discovered oracle bone inscriptions with handeddown documents, and verified that the history of the Shang Dynasty

1 Xu, Xusheng (1985), The Legendary Era of Ancient Chinese History, new ed., Beijing: Wenwu Press, 19–20. 2 Li, Xueqin (1994), Out of the Age of Doubt, Shenyang: Liaoning University Press.

29

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL APPROACH TO STUDIES …

481

as documented in Historical Records《史记》is true,3 demonstrating the power of the “dual-evidence method” 二重证据法. Nonetheless, his approach still relied on the documents of that time to study the history of the time, thus making it illogical to affirm that the history of the Xia and Five Emperors contained in the Historical Records must be historical facts. The discovery of and research on the unearthed documents such as oracle bone inscriptions, jinwen or bronze inscriptions 金文, bamboo strips 简牍, silk books 帛书 and so on prove that there were indeed a multitude of records about the Five Emperors from the late Shang and the Western Zhou, to the Spring and Autumn period and the Warring States period. While these records could not have been the forgeries after the Han, there still lacks direct evidence to support the real existence of the Five Emperors. It thus seems that the key to the problems of ancient history should lie in archaeology. Li Xuanbo has long pointed out in his book Discussions on Ancient History (Vol. 1)《古史辨》that the only way to solve ancient history problems is archaeology.4 Gu Jiegang also holds that the truth of ancient culture revealed by the ancient artefacts unearthed from underground can build or destroy ancient history.5 In the Preface to The General History of China (Vol. 2)《中国通史 》edited by Bai Shouyi and Su Bingqi, there is such a sentence that reads, “From the perspective of sorting out the legendary historical materials, prehistoric archaeological materials have become the most reliable frame of reference that cannot be ignored”.6 Presumably, if those tribal groups in the legendary era had existed in reality, they would have definitely left material remains; and archaeology should indeed be the fundamental means to the study of the ancient history of the legendary era. Since archaeological materials are long buried underground, and there is no possibility of artificial alteration, addition or deletion, their objectivity and authenticity are beyond doubt, thus constituting the

3 Wang, Guowei (1959), “An examination of the First Princes and First Kings seen in the divination of the Yin”, in Guantang Jilin (Vol. 9), Beijing: Zhonghua Shuju, 409–436. 4 Li, Xuanbo (1982), “The only solution to problems in ancient history”, in Ancient History Discrimination (Vol. 1), Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press, 268–270. 5 Gu, Jiegang (1982), “Response to Mr. Li Xuanbo”, in Su Bingqi, ed., Discussions on Ancient History (Vol. 1), Shanghai: Shanghai Guji Press, 268–270. 6 Bai, Shouyi & Su, Bingqi, eds. (1994), The General History of China (Vol. 2), Shanghai: Shanghai Remin Press, 17.

482

J. HAN

most reliable frame of reference for legendary historical materials. After nearly a century of arduous archaeological work, the internal logical order and main contents of this frame of reference have been gradually deciphered and interpreted, and the conditions for cross-reference research between ancient history and archaeology have been mostly mature. Looking back on the archaeological exploration of the early Shang and Xia cultures, prior researchers, as represented by Zou Heng, have mainly relied on the approach of extrapolating from the known to the unknown, specifically from the known late Shang culture to the early Shang, Xia and pre-Shang cultures.7 This approach attaches importance to the identification of the capital city, and pays attention to the overall comparison between the spatial pattern of an archaeological culture and the system of ancient history. With this method, fruitful results have been achieved, and a consensus on the early Shang culture has been reached. However, the mainstream understanding of the cultures of the Xia, pre-Shang and pre-Zhou periods is largely hypothetical. Further, the archaeological exploration of the Five Emperors Era remains confusing, with many disparate views being raised. Meanwhile, most professional archaeological and historical scholars are filled with doubts about the archaeological exploration of the legendary era, and their understandings also vary widely. This is undoubtedly mainly due to the lack of literature about the pre-late Shang period (except for few individual characters). However, in ancient China, it was probably popular to write on organic materials such as bamboo and silk, and therefore difficult for the documents that had once existed to be preserved and discovered today. As a matter of fact, even if the documents before the late Shang Dynasty cannot be unearthed for the time being, it is still possible to gradually advance the archaeological research of the legendary era based on the cross-reference of the existing documents and archaeological materials of later generations. Given the importance of this approach, here I would propose two interrelated research methods for your reference: the first is the “genealogical method” 谱系法 that combines cultural, genetic and clan or genus genealogy; and the second is the “change method” 变迁法 that combines cultural changes, settlement changes, and war and migration. 7 Zou, Heng (1980), Archaeological Essays on the Xia, Shang and Zhou Periods, Beijing: Wenwu Press.

29

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL APPROACH TO STUDIES …

483

29.2 Genealogy: The Combination of Cultural, Genetic and Genus Genealogy Cultural genealogy is the study of cultural typology and its evolution from an archaeological perceptive. Why would an archaeological culture with certain characteristics be formed in some specific region during a specific time period? Yan Wenming attributes the reasons to natural environment, cultural environment and common cultural traditions.8 That is to say, the communal life and close contact of people who live in a specific natural environment for some time will lead to the emergence of common customs or even language, and the blood relationship or consanguinity should have constituted the natural bond for ancient human beings living together as a society. Therefore, in theory, the archaeological culture and the clan that emphasized blood identity are likely to echo or correspond to each other. Undoubtedly, it is also possible for a certain clan or an ethnic group to communicate with other clans or groups from adjacent areas and generate a similar culture, thus creating a situation in which a certain archaeological culture corresponds to a tribal group established with a certain main ethnic group as the core. Just as Li Boqian points out, “Archaeological culture is related to the ethnic community, but they are not the same concepts. Due to various reasons such as marriage, communication, conquest and migration, etc., residents belonging to a certain archaeological culture may come from different clans, but there is always one clan or ethnic group that dominates and leads”.9 Obviously, with the increase of social complexity and the emergence of societies classified in terms of countries or nations, it will be increasingly common to determine nationality by region. Consanguinity or clan identity will naturally become weakened in general but will not disappear; instead, it may even be strengthened during the collision and interaction with other ethnic groups. This may be especially true of the ruling clans or groups, since they are likely to extend the range of their cultural and ethnicity identification to a wider area through multiple means, such as expansion, immigration, feudalism and so on. Such an extension will serve to render the central and main regions of the early state or country into a 8 Yan, Wenming (1997), Some theories on an archaeological culture”, in Archaeology towards the 21st Century, Xi’an: Sanqin Press, 78–93. 9 Li, Boqian (1986), “The cultural properties and genetic identity of the Erlitou cultural type”, Cultural Relics, 6.

484

J. HAN

distribution area of the ruling tribes and their advantageous archaeological culture, with the surrounding regions becoming subordinate tribes and disadvantaged archaeological cultures. Up to now, two approximate correspondences have been established. One is the correspondence between, on the one hand, wangji the royal central domains around the seat of the king 王畿, situ the four cardinal areas beyond the royal central domains of the Shang Dynasty 四土, and fangguo the regional states at the border regions 边疆方国 as documented in the oracle bone inscriptions; and, on the other hand, the central, subcultural and influenced marginal zones of Yinxu (the Yin Ruins) 殷 墟.10 The other correspondence is between the royal central domains around the seat of the king, the feudal vassal states 封建诸侯国 and the frontier areas 边疆地区 of the Western Zhou Dynasty as recorded in the jinwen or bronze inscriptions and handed-down documents, on the one hand; and the Western Zhou cultural central area, feudal cultural area and cultural influence area, on the other. These two correspondences have helped to demonstrate, on a satisfactory extent, that the cross-reference research method on archaeological culture and clan ethnicity is reliable and feasible to a certain degree. There are researchers, though, who, based on modern ethnographic data, infer that the appearance of certain pottery in an ethnic region is not necessarily related to ethnicity, thus denying the possibility of conducting cross-reference research on archaeological culture and ethnicity. In my opinion, they might miss one fundamental point that we should use the entire archaeological culture and ethnicity as the basis for cross-reference research, and that a couple of pottery types cannot represent the entire archaeological culture. In fact, it requires a group of pottery types and other cultural relics and sites to construct an entire archaeological culture. But the essence of the problem for studies of the history of the legendary era boils down to one issue, and that is: given the difficulty in the determination of the temporal and spatial scope of a specific clan or ethnic group, how can a definite correspondence be established between a clan or ethnicity and a specific archaeological culture? Let alone the fact that archaeological cultures themselves have various division schemes. It goes without saying that the point-to-point correspondence approach, if based on insufficient evidence, can easily lead to disparate views. However, 10 Song, Xinchao (1991), Research on the Yin and Shang Cultures and Their Regions, Xi’an: Shaanxi People’s Press.

29

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL APPROACH TO STUDIES …

485

once an archaeological and cultural genealogy since the Neolithic Age is established, the genealogy of various periods before the late Shang Dynasty can be set up. When these two genealogies get matched, just as two networks tally with each other, the certainty or validity of the relevant studies will be greatly enhanced. As mentioned above, while both the basic framework and contents of Chinese archaeological cultural genealogy of the Neolithic Age have been established, there is still a long way to go before the details of this genealogy can be fully substantiated and deliberated. This is one of the reasons why we cannot easily give up archaeological typology. Relatively speaking, the framework of the genealogy of the clans and ethnic groups before the late Shang Dynasty has been roughly built on available legendary data, and focuses primarily on zhongyuan the Central Plains 中原 and the surrounding areas where the Huaxia ethnic group 华夏 集团 was located. There are probably no legends recorded for most of the surrounding areas, which renders this archaeological network a much smaller web than a cultural genealogy in the true sense of the word. If we study the rich genealogical information contained in the oracle bone inscriptions and the jinwen bronze inscriptions, we can roughly determine the ethnicity genealogy of the late Shang period. If we can backtrack from here and set up the ethnicity genealogy of the time prior to the late Shang Dynasty in a more detailed manner, we can better fit this ethnicity genealogy with the cultural genealogy. In this case, we shall be one step closer to discovering the truth of the ancient history of the legendary era. In recent years, molecular biology has been increasingly employed in archaeology. Through the analysis of human DNA sequence, Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA, the DNA type of human ancestors can be inferred, and the relationship between individuals and the genetic distance between different clans can be determined. From this perspective, it can be seen that it will no longer be an illusion to establish the genetic genealogy of the pre-late Shang period. It follows that a “three-in-one” combination of this genetic genealogy with the cultural genealogy and clan genealogy, will surely achieve a major breakthrough in research on the ancient history of the legendary era. But note that genetic genealogy can only determine human blood ties, but not strict cultural relationships; whereas ethnicity lineage is built upon ancestral lineage, it is determined more in terms of cultural identity. Therefore, genetic genealogy cannot be simply equated with clan or ethnicity genealogy, just as cultural genealogy cannot be simply equated with it.

486

J. HAN

Of course, it is challenging to fit the cultural genealogy, genetic genealogy and ethnicity genealogy together; neither is it possible to do it overnight. The only way feasible is to commence with partial fitting. Given the high uncertainty of partial fitting, it is sensible to take precaution against setting up a correspondence between an archaeological discovery in some place with a legend—which is an easy job—disregarding the specific archaeological age and similar legends in other regions. Caution should also be exercised when aligning the results of a gene trace with a certain “ancestor” in the legendary era regardless of the time, space, personality and cultural attributes. All of these cannot be advocated as standard way of practice for archaeological exploration of the legendary era.

29.3 Radical Change: The Combination of Cultural, Settlement and War Migration To reduce the uncertainty of research findings due to partial fitting of archaeology and legends about history, it is essential to identify the key points of changes in both culture and central settlements. These points of change are relatively easier to observe and determine by archaeological means. The reasons for radical changes are mostly large-scale migration and wars. Even if the ultimate reason may be attributed to climate events such as dry or cold weather, the impact on human society had always been manifested in the form of migration and war, which would have left the deepest impressions upon people and would have been most frequently recorded in ancient history and legends. As I pointed out in the preface of my monologue The Era of Five Emperors: Archaeological Observations of the Ancient Historic System with Huaxia as the Core《五帝时代—— 以华夏为核心的古史体系的考古学观察》 , “by using the radical changes in the archaeological culture to confirm the legendary wars or migrant events, establishing several basic points and then exploring other details, it is possible to roughly unveil the basic frame of the ancient Chinese history in the era of the Five Emperors”.11 A cultural radical change can be a genuine “radical change” by meeting the following two conditions. First, the cultural landscape undergoes a

11 Han, Jianye (2006), The Era of Five Emperors: Archaeological Observations of the Ancient Historic System with Huaxia as the Core, Beijing: Xueyuan Press, 5.

29

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL APPROACH TO STUDIES …

487

sudden change. Next, the change spans an unusually enormous area. For example, a large-scale cultural change had occurred at the turn of the Longshan period in the regions of southern Henan and the Jianghan (the Yangtze and Han rivers) Plains. In an area larger than the entire presentday Hubei Province, the once unique and prosperous Shijiahe culture suddenly turned into Phase III of the Wangwan culture or the remains of the alike. Even the core area of the Jianghan Plains and the region further south of the Dongting Lake were no exception. For such a drastic change, there would be no other explanations apart from large-scale wars! Therefore, we propose that this would be the possible result of the legendary event of Yu zheng sanmiao, that is, under the leadership of Emperor Yu, the Huaxia tribal alliance in the north fought a large-scale war with the Miao Man tribal alliance in the south to compete for slaves and living space 禹征三苗.12 In Mozi《墨 子》 , the description of this event was portrayed as earth-shattering, and the result was “Miao’s army erupted in great chaos and was ordered to be executed”. Although there is no DNA evidence available at present, nor do we know the true proportion of the Xia and Miao population who stayed in the Jianghan Plains after this upheaval, the cultural manifestations were already very obvious. As such, if a consensus on the identification of the key point of Yu zheng Sanmiao can be reached, the existence of Yu, Xia and the Miao Man tribes as historical facts can then be determined; so can the year of both the event of Yu zheng sanmiao and the founding of the Xia Dynasty be verified at around 2100 BCE. Radical settlement changes can be reflected most clearly in large-size central settlements or capital cities, which get primarily manifested in the forms of sudden destruction of city walls, palaces and graves. For example, about a couple of dozens of ancient cities of the Shijiahe culture were almost completely ruined at the same time when the above-mentioned Phase III of the Wangwan culture swept southward. For another instance, it was also around 2100 BCE when the Laohushan culture from the northern region advanced southward on a large scale, the Taosi culture in the Linfen Basin and its surrounding areas also underwent radical changes. Violent scenes such as massacres, ravage of women and destruction of burials occurred near the ancient city of Taosi. This phenomenon could only have resulted from a war. I have resorted to the legendary 12 Yang, Xingai & Han, Jianye (1995), “Exploration of ‘Yu’s quelling the unrest of the three Miao Man tribes’”, Cultural Relics of Central China, 2.

488

J. HAN

event of Ji fang Danzhu, i.e. Houji’s banishment of Emperor Zhu to Danshui 稷放丹朱, to cross-reference this event of radical change.13 The identification of such a key point directly proves the authenticity of Houji 后稷 and Danzhu 丹朱, and also lends support to the authenticity of Emperor Yao and the theory that the Jizhou 稷周 clan had originated from Shanxi.

29.4

Conclusion

Up to this point, the question still remains hanging: given that the ancient history of the legendary era is illusive to capture and difficult to substantiate, then why do we have to waste our time on it? Does it suffice to have a “pure” archaeology and a prehistory? I think there are at least two reasons which underlie our persistence in this study. First, the ancient history of China’s centenary era is mostly the history of the ancestors of the Chinese people. Worshiping and acknowledging ancestors has become not only a custom for the Chinese nation from times of antiquity, but one of the secrets to the continuous development of the Chinese civilization for the past few thousands of years. It is only a legitimate pursuit of the Chinese people to find out who their ancestors have been, a pursuit which should neither be reproached; nor should it pinned the label of “nationalism”. Next, although the archaeological remains are rich in connotations, they are “dead”. The best way to make them rejuvenated and explained is to find reliable documents to cross-reference them and then to compare them with folkloristic and ethnological documents. These documents directly link to the ancient world whereas folklore and ethnology can only provide indirect inspirations. Although legendary stories about ancient history are records made by later generations, they may contain historical reality, which, once confirmed, will offer invaluable archaeological interpretation to the history of the legendary era. However, it is extremely difficult to conduct archaeological study on the legendary era. Built on the basis of archaeology, this vein of

13 Han, Jianye (2001), “Tang’s attack against Xixia and Danzhu’s banishment by Ji”, Journal of Peking University (Humanities and Social Sciences Ed.), 3.

29

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL APPROACH TO STUDIES …

489

research entails proficiency in the research methods for both archaeological typology and archaeological culture, careful analysis of the archaeological cultural genealogy, and a comprehensive understanding of ancient history and legends. It is by no means an easy task to reach this goal. Current university education seems to be promoting quality education; but in effect, disciplinary differentiation is becoming more and more meticulous. As a result, quite a lot of students majoring in archaeology are getting more and more unfamiliar with typology. Those who do know something about typology do not read ancient history, while those who major in ancient history know little about archaeology. How can archaeological research on ancient history in the legendary era be conducted under such circumstances? Therefore, as a good place to start, change and reform has to be done with education, in terms of training talents who are versatile at both archaeology and ancient history. Otherwise, faced with the growing enthusiasm from the general public for the ancient history, if professionals in history and archaeology fail to lead or direct, but keep silence on questions about the ancient history, they are turning the right to speak to the “lovers” of ancient history who may be “innovative” on a groundless manner. (This section was originally published in Yichan (Vol. 1) by Nanjing University Press, 2019).