symbolic jades of the erlitou period: a xia royal … · symbolic jades of the erlitou period: ......
Post on 30-Aug-2018
224 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
Symbolic Jades of the Erlitou Period: A Xia Royal TraditionAuthor(s): Elizabeth Childs-JohnsonSource: Archives of Asian Art, Vol. 48 (1995), pp. 64-92Published by: University of Hawai'i Press for the Asia SocietyStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20111255Accessed: 12/07/2010 13:22
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available athttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unlessyou have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and youmay use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.
Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained athttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=uhp.
Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printedpage of such transmission.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
University of Hawai'i Press and Asia Society are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extendaccess to Archives of Asian Art.
http://www.jstor.org
Symbolic Jades of the Erlitou Period:
A Xia Royal Tradition
Elizabeth Childs-Johnson Hamilton College
1. here has been lively discussion recently about the cul
tural identity of the Xia, allegedly China's earliest historical
period, dating to ca. 2100?1700 bce. Due to the lack of any extant written documents from this period historians have
been hesitant to confirm the period's historicity.1 None
theless, due to C14 dates and the geographical distribution
of cultural remains throughout Henan, Shaanxi, and
Shanxi provinces, archaeologists and art historians favor a
Xia rather than Early Shang identification for the Erlitou
culture.2 Excavated finds reveal plans of major religio-ad ministrative centers and pubescent ritual bronzes such as
jue and jia, and now ding and he, that mark the beginning of bronze casting for ritual purposes.3 Far more prominent, nonetheless, in the excavated material, and overlooked by
modern scholarship are the specialized, large in scale blades
worked out of nephrite jade. Although these nephrite blades when published may be labeled ritual implements, there has been no discussion of why they are ritual or what
they signify artistically in terms of early Chinese cultural
history. In order to illustrate that these Erlitou jades iden
tify a major tradition artistically and historically, I shall be
gin by identifying stylistically representative types amidst
archaeological remains and amidst collections in and out
side China. Then I shall compare these representative jade works of art with excavated examples of earlier and over
lapping Longshan period sites, and of later provincial and
Bronze period sites to further define what appears to be a
major jade-working tradition unique to the Erlitou cultural
period and theoretically Xia dynasty. Due to recent excavations of the last ten years it has be
come evident that during the Late Neolithic, ca.
3500?2100 bce, ancient China witnessed a long period of
jade-working. Various cultures aligning coastal China from
northern Shandong to southern Zhejiang, such as the
Hongshan of northernmost China, Dawenkou and Shan
dong Longshan of northeastern China, and Liangzhu of
southeastern China, are individually representative of jade
working on a major scale.4 Each culture is characterized by
idiosyncratic types of well-developed jade forms. Hong shan jades, for example, comprise primarily amuletic
dragon and cloud forms. Liangzhu jades, on the other
hand, are distinguished by specialized conga and bib shapes.
64
Dawenkou jades are marked by ornamental and refined
tool types. Longshan period jades of Shandong include for
mally designed blades, some of which are directly related to Erlitou period jade-working. The exploitation of jade and the popularization of symbolic jade forms during the
Erlitou period can be viewed generally as a climax to a
longstanding pre- and proto-historic tradition concen
trated originally not in central but in coastal China.
ERLITOU PERIOD JADE TYPES AND THE
ERLITOU PERIOD STYLE
Jades excavated from Erlitou period sites derive primarily from the site of Erlitou of Erlitou period III, although a
few works date to periods II and IV.5 Almost all of the ex
cavated jades come from burials or pits found near or in the
vicinity of the nos. i and 2 "Palace" remains. The earliest
jades were discovered at Erlitou in 19676 and the latest thus
far reported in 1987.7 Most of these jades are artistically so
phisticated works of art modeled on utilitarian tools and
weapons. They show no evidence of use and since the ma
jority were found in moderately well-to-do burials, these
jades may be generically described as symbols of wealth, and perhaps
as proto-insignia.
Major types of these symbolic jades of the Erlitou cul ture include the zhangc-blade, daod-knife, faceted yuee-ax, and gef-dagger (Fig. ia). Other, less conspicuous forms are
the guis-blade, zuh-arrowhead, handle attachments, and
various ornaments (Fig. ib). The names for certain of these
jades are in some cases
self-explanatory since they are func
tionally descriptive of the original weapon or tool from
which they derive. Representative of this category are the
ge-dagger, yue-ax, and dao-knife. Other names for Erlitou
period jades, such as zhang and gui, are drawn from
Eastern Zhou and later Han ritual texts like the Zhouli1
(Rites of Zhou) and Lij? (Records of Rites).
Prototypes of Erlitou period jades are in all cases trace
able to Neolithic utilitarian implements originally fabri
cated in stone (Fig. 2). The jade weapon type yue, for ex
ample, is derived from the utilitarian stone ax, fuk (Fig.
2d). Stone fu, which were used to chop, split, and hew
wood, are ubiquitous amidst archaeological finds of
Neolithic date.8 Early Neolithic examples from Hemudu
1
? ?
I\l
pa O O O
??\
Fig. i. A. Major types of jade works of art from Erlitou, Yenshi, Henan: i. Zhang (Kaogu 1983.3, fig. 10:5-6, p. 204); 2. Yue (1. KG 1984.1, fig. 5:2, p. 38; 2. KG 1976.4, fig- 6:4, p. 262; 3. KG 1983.3, fig. 70:1, p. 204; 4. KG 1978.4, fig. 1:1, p. 270); 3. Dao (1. KG 1985.12, fig. 8:1, p. 1092; 2. KG
1975.5, fig- 4-10, p. 305; 3. KG 1978.4, fig. 1:3, p. 270); 4. Ge (1. KG 1976.4, fig. 6:6, p. 262; 2. KG 1975.5, fig- 4-7> P- 305).
a
Q. .
M fh
B. Secondary types of jade works of art from Erlitou: 1. Handle (1, 2. KG 1976.4, fig. 6: 1 and 5, p. 262; 3. KG 1975.5, % 4-*4, P- 305); 2. Gui (1. KG 1975-5, % 4:6, p. 305; 2. KG 1983.3, % 10:7, P- 204; 3. KG 1976.4, % 6:2, p. 262); 3. Arrowhead (KG 1983.3, fig. 7:4, p. 215); 4. Bead (1. KG 1983.3, % 104, p. 204; 2. KG 1984.1, fig- 5H-5, P- 38).
65
I
m o o o
Fig. 2. Five Erlitou period jade types and their utilitarian prototypes: A. From chan-spade to zhang-blade (Zhongguo kaoguxuehui nianhui lunwenji
1980.1:99); B. From lian-sickle to ge-dagger (Wen Wu 1984.2, fig. 3:9); c. From ben-adze to gui-blade (Kaogu 1975.5, fig- 4^6, p. 305; WW 1984.2);
D. From fu-ax to yue-ax (KG 1978.4, fig. 1:1, p. 270; KG 1981.3, fig. 6:1, p. 196); e. From dao-knife to dao-blade (KG 1975.5, fig- 4:10, P- 395)
in Zhejiang province,9 for example, show a standard design of a broad and thick blade with stepped shoulder that was
fastened to a wooden or bone handle at a 90-degree angle.
Examples from the earliest to the latest phase at Hemudu
evolve from crude to more refined shapes, from rough to
polished, and from small to very large examples.10 The fu-ax is a tool whereas the yue-ax is a weapon used
to kill and slaughter theoretically humans and animals.
Although the yue weapon evolved from the utilitarian fu
tool, and although the tool may have been used as a
weapon and the initial weapon as a tool, their differences
appear to be practical and chronological. Hunting gear in
cluding spears, bows, and arrows are known to have been
used throughout the Neolithic. Specialized weapons used
for defense, on the other hand, begin to appear in archae
ological assemblages at the time city walls and other forms
of defense appear, which is late in the Neolithic, during the
Longshan era of ca. 3000?2000 bce in Shandiong and
Henan provinces,11 but also earlier with the yue-ax that
emerges during the Late Hemudu and Liangzhu periods. In
common yue and fu ax types share a handle set at a right
angle and a rectangular blade with an outwardly bowed
edge of which one and sometimes two sides are beveled.
Differences are marked primarily by a refinement of form.
66
For example, the yue that appears during the latest phase of
Hemudu, ca. 3200?2700, is characterized by a slightly rounded blade shape and by the use of a perforated hole in
stead of a stepped shoulder for attachment of handle to
blade.12 Although the author of the site report does not ex
plain his use of the term yue as opposed to fu, the more
refined shape, new perforated hole for attachment, and
slender proportions are outstanding characteristics that
define later functional and symbolic bronze and jade yue.13 It is apparent that by about 3500 bce stone and jade tools
begin to be consciously and consistently polished, and by ca. 3300 bce tools and weapons begin to appear commonly as specialized objects. Our means of distinguishing utilitar
ian and defensive axes are therefore stylistic and formal.14 A
thinner fabric, refinement through polish, and perforated hole for hafting qualify the ax as a yue weapon.
The distinction in function between fu and yue is
clarified in Shang script. In the article "The Classification,
Nomenclature, and Usage of Shang Jades," Xia Nai at
tempted to revise traditional nomenclature for jades, in
cluding the yue, by initially drawing on archaeological ev
idence.15 His discussion of weapons in the section "Weapons and Implements" is, however, clouded by a lack of distinc
tion between tool and weapon forms, between utilitarian
fu and weapon yue. At one point yue are described as flat
fu and a weapon form of chan-spade, and at another point as large fu, as suggested by the Han Shuowen definition. Xia
does not rely on archaeological data or written records
from Shang times to amplify his discussion of axes but
rather still depends on the traditional nomenclature of the
Qing archivist, Wu Dacheng, when using qi1 (ch'i), for ex
ample to refer to a yue ritual tool with flanking side dentil
decor.
In the Eastern Han Shuowen, yue is defined as a big fu ax or simply fu and is written both withe and without111 the
metal radical.16 Earlier in Shang oracle bone inscriptions the yue graph is used as the verb "to hack or behead a
sacrificial victim with the ritual ax."17 This verb of
sacrifice11 in inscriptions frequently takes sacrificial animals or prisoners of war as its object. Although no bronze ver
sions of yue have yet been discovered at Erlitou, later ex
amples from Early and Late Shang sites of Zhengzhou and
Anyang date mimick the shape of pre- and proto-historic versions from jade-working sites of Longshan and Liang zhu date. From a functional point of view the yue then was
an ax used on ritual occasions during Shang times. Since
the shape and form of Shang yue are stylistically based on
Erlitou prototypes18 it is apparent that we are dealing with
the specialized yue rather than with the utilitarian fu in elite
burials of the Erlitou period. At Erlitou six yue have been excavated. The trapezoidal
version with one or two hafting holes (Fig. IA2) was stan
dardized earlier at Liangzhu and Longshan sites.19 One
variation carries decorative serrations along the upper two
sides of the blade and a blunt cutting edge with two-sided
beveling. The latter, excavated in 1975, like another exca
vated in 1982, is small, measuring 11.2 cm tall, 5.8-6.8 cm
wide, and 0.6 cm thick.20 A fourth example of this jade type of yue, from burial no. 3 at Erlitou, has no serrations but
does have a turquoise stud that fills a small hole in the lower
part of the blade.21 The second type of yue, so far singular to Erlitou sites, is the round and square shape with large, central hole and blade that is faceted into four beveled
edges (Fig. IA2 left and upper right). This round, almost
disk-shaped version22 is known through two examples from K3 in area III at Erlitou (Fig. 3).23 The slightly larger
example measures 9.6 cm wide and 0.6 cm thick with a
central hole that is 5.2 cm in diameter. The square and third
variation of yue is from burial no. 6; it is the largest known
example from Erlitou, measuring 21.0 cm tall by 23.0 cm
wide, with a central hole that is 4.6 cm in diameter (Fig. IA2 left).24 Serrated tooth decor, as on the trapezoidal ver
sion, symmetrically aligns the two sides. The use of a char
acteristically thin but tensile slice of jade material and ap
plication of decor through faceting or indentation clearly
identify these yue as Erlitou in style and date.
The ge-dagger ax (Fig. 4) is another form of weapon new to this early historic period, when defense assumed an
all-important role.25 As a weapon the ge appears later than
Fig- 3- Jade yue, 9.6 cm wide, 0.6 cm thick, Erlitou. Kaogu 1976.4, pi. 10:2.
Fig. 4. Jade ge, 30.2 cm long, 6.6-6.9 cm wide, 0.5-0.7 cm thick,
Erlitou. Kaogu 1978.4, pl-7:i xia.t
the yue. Ge is well known in oracle-bone26 and bronze
scripts, where it refers to the weapon used to attack and stab
to death an enemy.27 The ge graph is used as the signifie in a variety of other Shang words that are similar in meaning, such as "to cut down"0 or "to attack,"P or it is used in the
composition of the character for shields28 As demonstrated
long ago by James Menzies, the ge in design and function
originated in the agricultural tool, the lianr-sickle (Fig.
2b).29 As with certain other Erlitou jades, the ge are large,
impressive, and sometimes decorated with abstract linear
motifs in the area of the haft (Figs. IA4; 4). The ge exca
vated from K3 measures 30.2 cm long, 6.6-6.9 cm wide, and 0.5-0.7 cm thick; and the ge-blade from burial no. 37
measures 43.0 cm long, 8.0 cm wide, and 0.5 cm thick.30
The undecorated example unearthed from a pit within
foundation F3 measures 21.9 cm long and 3.8-4.7 cm
wide.31 The Erlitou type of ge is distinguished from early
Shang examples at Zhengzhou in jade and bronze by its
symmetrical shape and centered blade point.32 The tip of most later Shang examples begins to point downward and
67
Fig. 5. A.Jade dao, 60.4-65.0 cm long, 9.5 cm wide, 0.1-0.4 cm thick,
Erlitou; b. Detail of geometric decor. Kaogu 1978.4, pi. 11:3; Wen
Fong (ed.), The Great Bronze Age of China (New York, 1981), pl. 3.
a strong median line runs longitudinally along the length of
the blade. Typical of the Erlitou style is the emphasis on
symmetry but also decoration that is either geometric and
linear or in the form of faceted edges, such as decorate the two long sides of the ge from K3. Proportionally, the blade is long and elegant and the handle short. The middle is
thicker than the sides and the edges are evenly beveled.
The Erlitou jade ge is identical in type to excavated bronze
versions, such as those published in 1976.33 The blades of
the bronze examples are sharp, suggesting that they were
designed for use. The workmanship of the excavated ge from Erlitou, and also yue, is very high in quality of jade
working; and, as pointed out by the archaeological team
working at Erlitou, the exquisitely refined technique of
grinding and of polishing match the best work produced
today in jade workshops of Beijing.34 Clearly, Erlitou jades are masterpieces of artistic design and in this respect repre sent a major artistic center for setting stylistic standards.
The daod and zhang,c the third and fourth major forms
of symbolic jades at Erlitou, are also noteworthy for their
exquisite quality and elegant style, with emphatic symme
try and strength of design. The dao-knife is self-explana tory in name and function, for it is ubiquitous as a tool in
excavations throughout the Neolithic (Fig. 2e).35 By the
Erlitou period this utilitarian saw has lost all functional ties
with its predecessor in favoring a strictly formal design
symbolic of power. The four dao excavated at Erlitou are
68
extremely thin isosceles trapezoids with usually three but also seven equidistant holes for hafting, respectively. The
larger ones measure 65.0 (bottom)-6o.4 (top) cm long, 9.5 cm wide, and 0.4-0.1 cm thick; and 53.5 cm long and 8.8 cm wide (Fig. 5);36 a slightly smaller one measures
46.5-52.3 cm long and 9.8-10.3 cm wide; and the shortest
one, 25.9 cm long and 11.5 cm wide.37 Two of the exca
vated dao?the largest and that measuring 52.3 cm from
M57?are decorated with the type of geometric design found on both ge and zhang. As on the ge, these geomet ric motifs include sets of incised slanting lines here crossed like X's to form a diamond pattern that is framed by pairs of vertical lines and by an outer framing line mimicking the
shape of the isosceles trapezoid blade (Fig. 5B). As on the
yue, small-scale serrations decorate flanking sides; here they are systematized as evenly spaced nodules. The dao have one front face; the backs usually are left undecorated, al
though polished. Holes are drilled from the front side only. The zhang-blades are the most surprising and exquisitely
worked jades of the Erlitou period. As argued by Dai
Yingxin,38 these eccentrically formed blades with con
cavely bowed end originate in the tool type of similar shape called chans-spade, well known at the early southern Neo lithic site of Hemudu in Zhejiang (Fig. 2A) but also evi
dently at Miaodigou period II in Henan. The peculiar shape of this spade is determined by the origin of this tool in the shoulderblade of water buffalo or water deer.39 The shape of this bone turned tool is mostly flat and narrow with a
stepped shoulder used for hafting and a softly flaring broad blade theoretically used for digging. As a tool type it is
known throughout the Taihu region of Ma Jiabang and
Liangzhu cultures.40 Although the lashing technique may have differed slightly between tool and later Erlitou jade symbol, the design is similar. As Dai suggested, artistic li cense was exercised in determining the arrangement of
handle and length of the blade.41 In frontal outline both share the indented rectangular haft and long trapezoidally
flaring biconcave blade with crescent-shaped edge. Al
though the secondary hafting holes perforated on the util
itarian bone spade are deleted on the symbolic jade blade, one perforation remains on the haft like the utilitarian
spade. Since there are few documented bone chan of sim
ilar shape to those from the Taihu area at northern sites in
Henan, Shanxi, or Shandong, the inspiration for this pop ular Erlitou jade, on the basis of present evidence, seems to
be primarily southern and Neolithic in origin. To date no
zhang have yet been discovered in Liangzhu tombs or site
finds, although, according to very recent reports, zhang have been "uncovered" amidst Shandong Longshan and Yueshi period remains.42
The name zhangc derives from later ritual texts, primar
ily the Zhouli. There zhang and numerous variations based on descriptive prefatory qualifiers are cited. These varia
tions, such as yazhang,* dazhang,u and bianzhang,v are in most cases simply descriptive of outstanding properties
Jade cm ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H Kaogu Fong ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^MiCj??JUkflH^Hi^^^^^^l^^^^^^^^^^^^lV^^^H 7//C Bronze ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^Bfol^^^^^l^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^HI^^^I
Fig. 7. Jade handle, 17.1 cm long, 0.8
cm wide, burial no. 3, Erlitou. Kaogu
1983.3, pl. 1:4, fig. 7, p. 202.
characterizing the zhang.43 Yaw of yazhang, for example, refers to ya-teeth of yachi and to the dentils frequently found decorating the haft of zhang, as pointed out by the
Han commentator Zheng Xuan.44 The zhang type, which
is illustrated as one of six auspicious jades on several Han
stele,45 can be traced back to the early historic blade of the
Erlitou period. In the Han Shuowen zhang are described as
"half of a gui."46 This explanation is in part correct because
it refers to the degenerate form of zhang of Shang through Han date. This degeneration of the zhang blade is illus
trated by the example from The Minneapolis Museum of
Arts (see Fig. 16). The blade is stripped of its usual haft and
crescent-shaped mouth. By Shang times this form is merely a shapeless long blade without handle and an end cut at a
sharp diagonal?this is the type represented in Han ritual
texts under the label zhang and defined "half a gui."47 This
"half a gui" form of the zhang is also very close to the shape assumed by long dao blades that have been re?ut by slicing the blade in half (see the attempt to re?ut the upper edges of the dao in Fig. 12) and by trimming the ends into edges that are oblique.48 Although the name zhang does not ap
pear in a Xia or Shang literary context, that it describes the
form represented at Erlitou is clear from the evolution of
this jade as a type. Three zhang have been excavated at Erlitou. The exam
ple discovered in 1975 is bone white in color, measuring 46.0-48.0 cm
long, 4.0 cm wide, and 0.4?0.5 cm thick
(Fig. 6).49 It is celebratory in design, elegantly long and flat
with slightly forked head. In complement to this blade of
classic proportions, small-scale, paper-thin thread ridges decorate the front side of the haft and leave a dentated sil
houette of paired and more deeply cut dentils at the edges. This relievo design with staccato rhythm is comparable to
those decorating the yue and dao blades but is by far the
most complex and sophisticated version known amidst
Erlitou cultural remains. A small perforated hole relieves
the inner end of the handle. The other two zhang from
Erlitou were found together in burial no. 3 from area V.50
Although like the bone-white zhang they are similarly thin
and long, measuring 48.1 cm and 54.0 cm long, respec
tively, they are also considerably wider at 11.4 cm and 14.8 cm. All three have in common an emphasis upon a front
face where perforations and serrations are oriented. The 54.0
cm-long zhang, like one of the Erlitou yue, has a turquoise stud inserted, in this case, into the small hole at the edge of
the blade. The blade heads are methodically worked to a
very thin edge that forms a delicate half-moon in shape. The haft decoration of the burial zhang does not carry the
refined, raised relief of the 1975 excavated example, but it still
bears the elegant silhouette that is outlined with pairs of al
ternately deep and more lightly worked projections. Another type of jade, long, thin and rectangular, that is
prominent amidst Erlitou remains is the so-called "handle"
(Figs. iBi; 7). Not one has been found attached to any other material that may signify its use.51 Small, perforated holes frequently appear at the handle's tip and sometimes
top edge (see Fig. 7). They vary in length from 10.0 to 17.0 cm and in width from 1.6 to 2.2 cm, and can be very thin,
69
averaging 1.0?2.0 cm thick.52 Their shape is distinctive
with an indented grip at one end and a blunt or broken
edge at the other. The longest example, at 17.0 cm, dis
covered in 1975, is decorated with a series of stacked semi
human and tiger heads that alternate with plumelike motifs
once imitative of a bird-feathered headdress (Fig. 7).53 Some fragmented examples show that this plume motif
may degenerate into an independently repeated motif ver
tically aligning the handle (Fig. ibi). Another symbolic type of jade form from Erlitou is the
guis-blade. The name^m is derived from the name for one
of the six auspicious jades of Han times that were made
popular by reference in the Zhouli and its commentaries.54
Like the zhang, which because of certain attributes took on
other names, the gui too became various in label by Han
times. The gui-blade as a generic type nonetheless has a
long history beginning during the Late Neolithic and last
ing well into the Han and later dynastic periods. For this
reason it, like the zhang, may be called by its generic name
gui, first cited in ritual texts of Han date. Gui in the
Shuowen is defined "as round at the top and square at the
bottom."55 This description fits the jade of that shape known from Neolithic through Han times. As with the
zhang, gui too appear to have originated in an agricultural tool form, in this case, the benx-adze of Late Neolithic
times (Fig. 2c). Early versions of the gui from Shandong show that the blade was heavily stepped on one edge, as is
the adze tool (see Fig. 20).56 The gui, then, like the dao and
zhang blades, appears to be agricultural in origin. The three gui excavated at Erlitou57 seem insignificant
by comparison to their related but earlier counterparts from
Shandong. Gui are also small by comparison to zhang and
dao from Erlitou. The undecorated example measures 21.1
cm long and 6.4 cm wide, and the other with a band fea
turing a diamond motif at the haft measures 17.4 cm long and 7.4 cm wide (Fig. 1B2).58 The two have a double set of
perforated holes for hafting. Their tips are blunt and forms
simple, showing little connection with their utilitarian pro
totype. A third, cruder example found at Erlitou, measur
ing over 10 cm in length (Fig. IB2 right), may also be re
lated to the gui as a type. Ornamental forms, such as tubular beads and awl-shaped
spear points, are known but are not numerous amidst ex
cavated finds (Fig. 1B4). Only six examples have been
found in excavations.59 Leaf-shaped arrowheads in jade are
also represented (Fig. 1B3).
CORROBORATION OF THE ERLITOU STYLE:
OTHER ERLITOU PERIOD JADES FROM COLLECTIONS
IN AND OUTSIDE CHINA
A variety of comparable jades from Western and Chinese
collections corroborate the evidence that the group of sym bolic jades excavated at Erlitou served as markers of an elite
power that thrived during the Erlitou period and theoreti
cally its preceding phase, tentatively labeled early Xia and
coeval with the Longshan.60 On the basis of the excavated
jades from Erlitou, it is evident that certain forms, such as
zhang, dao, ge, and yue were favored as symbolic markers
and, in this respect, appear as a precedent for the Chinese
aesthetic favoring "politicized" art forms in jade. Stylis
tically, Erlitou jade works of art are classical in expression;
they are often characterized by a large scale, emphatic sym
metry, elegant design, geometrically precise decorative de
tail in the form of a delicate relievo or incised bands, an ex
tremely refined quality of workmanship, a frontal
orientation, and usually a flat, two-dimensional surface.
Comparative zhang-blades are numerous in collections
outside China. Representative examples of Erlitou period date belong, for example, to The Minneapolis Institute of
Arts (see Fig. 16), The Field Museum in Chicago (Fig. 8), the Indianapolis Museum of Art (Fig. 9), and the Norton
Gallery in Florida.61 The zhang from the Field Museum ap
proximates in size the larger zhang with turquoise stud ex
cavated from burial no. 3 at Erlitou in measuring 52.0 cm
long and 10.0?11.8 cm wide. Standard features include the
robust shape with crescentic tip worked to a thin beveled
edge, and a tang which is strong and rectangular. The tang has a hole for hafting and a jagged silhouette referring to
the complex decor of miniature, multiplied thread-thin
ridges that decorate the haft of the bone-white zhang
picked up at Erlitou (Fig. 6). Certain motifs on The Field
Musuem zhang underscore Erlitou aesthetics. Small-scale
ridges align the front of the haft (Fig. 8 a) but similarly play ful pairs of small-scale serrations decorate the inward turn
ing arc of the mouth (Fig. 8b)?as if to emphasize the
strictly aesthetic and symbolic function of this heraldic
blade type. The zhang from the other three collections are
robust with widely bowed, flaring mouths. The example from the Indianapolis Museum measures 31.2 cm long by 12.4 cm wide (Fig. 9), the Minneapolis example 40.6 cm
long by 8.4 cm wide, and the Norton example 39.37 cm
long by 12.7 cm wide. Each is typically biconcave in shape, very thin and flat, averaging 0.4?0.8 cm thick. The three
share with the two from M3 of Erlitou the geometric de
sign of the haft. Two sets of extended dentils frame exactly two pairs of shorter ones, and all continue across the haft in
delicately raised ridges. The strength of design and the clas
sic balance in the proportions of these four zhang fit the
phase represented by examples from Erlitou, a phase that
evidently witnessed a climax in the perfection of this type of symbolic jade.
Two ge-blades from the collections of Dr. Paul Singer
(Fig. 10) and the Buffalo Museum of Science62 also reflect
a style and form comparable to the classic expression repre sented by works at Erlitou. The ge from the Buffalo
Museum measures 43.8 cm long, which is over 10 cm
longer than that from Erlitou. What is Erlitou in taste is the
interest in symmetry and balance of the geometrically rec
tangular handle and central blade point. By the Zhengzhou
period of early Shang times the point of the jade and
70
VIHHHHMjMgMMMMM|^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^g^L^^^^^MC a. Jade zhang, cm. long,
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^B face of blade
a.
bronze ge bends downward and the middle is strongly marked by a median Une.63 Small-scale dentils, as found on
zhang, yue, dao, and now ge, align the end edge of the
tang. In contradistinction to the Buffalo ge, the jade ge from the Singer Collection is hard in outline and design,
suggesting a date later rather than contemporary with the
Erlitou jades. Although the hafting hole is located at a dis tance from the haft, like the bronze ge from Erlitou,64 the
blade point is centered and the tang fluted. The geometric decor of a diamond pattern framed by pairs of vertical lines
also reflects a favored motif of Erlitou style.
Comparable dao from Western collections, in particular the Arthur M. Sackler Collection (Fig. n) and The Art
Institute of Chicago (Fig. 12), also document Erlitou pe riod styles. Both Sackler and Chicago dao are extremely
long, extending beyond the longest Erlitou piece at 65.0 cm, in measuring 101.9 cm and 73.6 cm, respectively. They are 11.2 cm wide by 0.3 cm thick and 10.5 cm wide by 1.4 cm thick. The Art Institute example has been worked on
both upper edges, indicating that there was an attempt to
re?ut the blade (Fig. I2b), as was often done in post-Xia,
Shang through Han times, when refashioning dao as
zhang.65 Typical geometric designs of Erlitou inspiration are the diamond motif flanked by pairs of vertical lines at
opposite corners of this long blade. The blade also appears to have been reworked on all four edges in forming a long slender piece of jade rather than a wider long trapezoid,
which would explain why there are no symmetrically dis
posed hafting holes. The Sackler blade, on the other hand,
represents an artistic climax in the expression of the dao as
a classical work of art: the blade is perfectly symmetrical,
formally balanced, an isosceles trapezoid with five equidis tant hafting holes bored from the front, thus with all the
subtleties of Erlitou taste. Interest is paid to setting off the
shape of the blade by creating the same shape in smaller size
either through incised outline, as on the excavated dao, or
through relief outline, as on the Sackler piece. Like the ex
cavated dao from Erlitou, the raised panel is in turn deco
rated with the symmetrical, geometric motif of diamonds
and pairs of slanting and vertical lines. The serrated motif, in other cases so carefully varied between sets of deep and
shallow troughs, is here varied as negative and positive ver
sions of what is now a repeated bracket-shape on flanking short sides of the dao.
The version of yue with faceted blade is more difficult to
locate in collections in and outside China. One example, almost identical in form to the rounded yue with blades
faceted into four edges from Erlitou, is published as a rub
bing in the Qing catalogue Guyu tulu by Huang Jun (Fig. 13). The side serrations, which include two sets of three
dentils divided by a deeper cut, follow closely the Erlitou
interpretation. On other examples of this round-like ax, in
the Ashmolean Museum66 and the Bahr Collection in
Chicago,67 for example, the serrations are hardened and the
round blade is left unfaceted, suggesting that the two blades
date either late in the Erlitou period or to the Shang, as rep resented by Zhengzhou period remains.68 The Ashmolean
piece is quite small, measuring only 9.3 cm in diameter.
Shapes unknown through excavations at Erlitou but of
Erlitou style also exist in collected works outside China.
One type is the eccentrically long, gui-shaped blade, known through examples published by C. T. Loo69 and in
the Indianapolis Museum of Art (Fig. 14).70 The former
71
Fig. 9. Jade zhang, 31.2 cm long, 0.7 cm
thick, Erlitou culture. Indianapolis Museum of Art, Eli Lilly Collection.
Fig. 10. Jade ge, 47.0 cm long, Erlitou
culture. Paul Singer Collection.
Fig. 11. Jade dao, 73.5 cm long, 10.5 cm wide, 1.4 cm thick, Erlitou culture. Courtesy of the Arthur M. Sackler Collection, Smithsonian Institution,
Washington, D.C. S1987.450.
measures 63.4 cm long and the latter, 57.15 cm. Erlitou pe riod features stand out in the affected length and handle
decor with serrations and paper-thin raised ridges, and an
end with further dentils. The heads of these long blades are
spatula in shape, which suggests affinity with the strongly beveled edge of the gui and their tool prototype, the ben.
Stylized length and small-scale decor through silhouette
typify Erlitou style that is here used lyrically in creating an
unorthodox shape of a symbolic jade. Another type of symbolic jade, not found in excavations
but of Erlitou style and date, are the short dao with double
perforations for hafting. Examples from the I. Wyman Drummond Collection in the American Museum of
Natural History,71 the Paul Singer Collection (Fig. 15), and
the A. W. Bahr Collection now in The Field Museum72 are
representative. All examples are characterized by Erlitou
72
period aesthetics, such as perfect symmetry of trapezoidal
design, equidistant hafting holes, and a flat shape that thins
towards the once-functional cutting edge. Typically the
backs are flat and the fronts highly polished. These and the
long dao, zhang, yue, ge, and certain eccentric forms that
exploit elegant length and flatness or finely worked deco
rative detail in silhouette stylistically identify Erlitou period
jade-working.
THE RELATIONSIP BETWEEN ERLITOU AND
LONGSHAN PERIOD JADES FROM HENAN, SHANXI,
SHAANXI, ANHUI, AND SHANDONG
It may be observed that as a major art form jades repre
senting the Erlitou style gradually disappear during the
Shang era, although the style survives in outlying, regional cultures so far represented by sites as far flung as Fujian and
A
Fig. 12. A. Jade dao, ioi.o cm long, 11.2 cm wide, 0.3 cm thick, Erlitou culture; B. Detail of short end of blade. The Art Institute of Chicago, Kate
S. Buckingham Endowment. 1954.1197.
ri ;fv~
Fig. 13. Rubbing of jade yue, n.d., Erlitou culture. Huang Jun, Guyutulu
(Beijing, 1939), I:i.
Sichuan provinces and now Hong Kong and Vietnam.73
The climax of jade-working, as witnessed in the refined,
large-scale symbolic blades from Erlitou, in turn seems to
be anticipated at several sites during the Longshan period. Dates calibrated from the northern Longshan and southern
Liangzhu cultures are ca. 3300-2100 bce, with the
Shandong Longshan covering ca. 2400-2000 bce, and the
Erlitou ca. 2100-1800/1700 bce.74 Archaeological data il
lustrating the interrelationshp of Erlitou and Longshan
jade-working traditions come from several stray finds and
excavations in Anhui, Shaanxi, Shanxi, and Henan
provinces.
During the Longshan period, beginning at some time
during the mid-third millennium bce, a major cultural
change is manifest in the appearance of nonutilitarian, sym bolic jade forms. In southern and coastal Liangzhu period tombs, refined jade yue appear in large numbers alongside "ritual" cong and bi.75 Dao also occasionally appear in
Liangzhu period remains, such as at Changxun in Zhejiang
province and Fuquanshan in Shanghai,76 where standard
Liangzhu jades, like bi, cong, and yue, are otherwise
prominent. Thus, gradually, during the Liangzhu and also
Longshan periods symbolic jade forms and concomitantly weapons increase in production, whereas "ritual" jades,
73
Fig. 15. Short jade dao, 11.9 cm long, 5.5 cm wide, under 1 cm thick, Erlitou culture. Paul Singer Collection.
such as the cong and bi, well known in the south and coastal China, decrease.
The most dramatic find corroborating the new emphasis to be played by the symbolic jade is represented by the nu
merous stone dao and yue (called fu in the site report) ex
cavated at Xuejiagang in Qianshan county, Anhui pro vince.77 Remains from Xuejiagang site derive mostly from
cemetery burials with periods II?III representing Liangzhu and two final short periods of occupation representing
probably Shandong Longshan (PIV) and Shang (PV). Period II is rich but period III still richer in number of bur ial artifacts. During period III ceramics are made mostly by
hand, although rims of vessels are turned on the wheel.
They are gray to black in color with a percentage showing a black skin on an otherwise gray vessel, a treatment that
typifies later classical Longshan and Liangzhu period ce
ramics. Amidst period IV remains there is a large percent age of eggshell-thin, highly polished blackware dingy tripods, guiz-pitchers, and bei^-cups which point to an
occupation level of classical Shandong Longshan date.78
Although during period III few jades appear, refined stone
versions of dao and yue, both of which become popular as
formal jade types during the Shandong Longshan and
Erlitou periods, abound. Forty-nine yue and 36 dao were
excavated from 80 tombs of PHI.79
The latter dao and yue from Xuejiagang are flat and thin, and are described by the excavators as showing evidence of use (Fig. 17).80 Certain of the dao apparently were re?ut
and reused,81 possibly for the purpose of amassing in a tomb
symbols of agricultural wealth and military might. There is no mention about use or lack of use with regard to what
appears to be yue rather than fu axes at this site. The spe cial position of these two types of implements, the yue
Fig. 14. Long jade blade, 63.4 cm
long, 8.8 cm wide, 0.4 cm thick.
Indianapolis Museum of Art, Eli
Lilly Collection.
74
Fig. 16. Jade zhang, 38.64 cm long,
10.79 cm wide, 0.8 cm thick, Late
Erlitou/Early Shang period. The
Minneapolis Insitute of Arts, bequest of
Alfred Pillsbury.
. OO OOOOO
Fig. 17. A. Drawing of stone vue, Songze/Liangzhu culture, Xuejiagang, Anhui. Kaogu Xuebao 1982.3, fig. 24, p. 309); B. Drawing of stone dao, Songze/Liangzhu culture,
Xuejiagang, Anhui. KGXB 1982.3, fig. 25, p. 310.
weapon and dao-agricultural tool, is not only illustrated by their large numbers but by the artistic interest taken in
painting certain of their upper surfaces with an abstract
bracket motif that approximates the bird-feathered head
dress decorating Liangzhu and also later Shandong Long shan jades (see Fig. 20).82 By comparison to other tool and
weapon types, yue and dao are greatest in number. The dao
range in size from 15.0 to 51.6 cm long (Fig. 17B) and haft
ing holes range in number from two to thirteen. All dao are
trapezoidal in shape, and, according to the report, in most
cases both sides of the blade are characterized as sharp and
beveled, thus, they appear designed for use. The hafting holes vary between being drilled from one or two sides.
The sandstone material varies in color from granitic to
amethyst purple. Since the stone tools from period III at
Xuejiagang are dated by C14 to around 3000 bce,83 well
before the height of the Shandong Longshan and Erlitou
periods, they are significant as stone precursors of jade ver
sions that become the hallmark of classic Erlitou period
styles. They are also significant geographically as one chan
nel through which southern, Late Neolithic influences may have reached the north.
It becomes apparent that the creation of tools and
weapons as symbolic forms occurred during the Liangzhu and Longshan periods (ca. 3300?2100 bce) and climaxed
during the classic Shandong Longshan (2400?2000 bce) and
Erlitou (2100-1700 bce) periods. Although the archaeolog ical data is still piecemeal, certain symbolic jade types and
related stones from Longshan sites in Shaanxi and Shanxi
can be used to document this trend of symbolic jade-mak
ing during the Longshan and subsequent Erlitou periods. Collected jades from Cangshanmao in Yenanshi,
75
Shaanxi, include bi-disks, degenerate cong, stray imple ments, plus a yellow-green dao that is 54.6 cm long.84 The
latter blade is beveled on both sides, is slightly bowTed in
shape, and according to the excavators shows use along its
middle edge. Four small holes for hafting pierce the upper half of the blade. Three additional holes aligning the upper
edge indicate earlier use of the jade. Decor in the form of
symmetrically positioned dentils appears along the two
short ends of this blade. This feature is typical of Erlitou
dao and thus can aid in dating these pieces to a coterminous
Longshan or Erlitou cultural period of expression. The
cong from Cangshanmao show a total loss of vigor in form
and decor by comparison with their predecessors amidst
Liangzhu cultural finds, which is another tendency point
ing to a date in Longshan or the Erlitou period, when these
ritual cong become obsolete as major works of art. Figurai
imagery is reduced to linear motifs of circles and lines as on
similar cong from Taipingchang in Sichuan85 and Taosi in
Shanxi,86 also dateable to this Longshan/ Erlitou cultural
phase. Gray and blackware ceramics picked up at Cang shanmao further confirm dating these site finds and jades to
the late Longshan/Erlitou cultural phase. Finds from Taosi in Xiangfen, Shanxi province are only
partially published and promise to be rewarding in the fu
ture. Over 230 burials have been discovered and 109 re
ported.87 The site is identified as a new type-site for the
Longshan phase in the Middle Yellow River Valley. Finds
are generally comparable to those from the Sanliqiao cul
ture, a type-site of the Henan Longshan. As at Cangshan mao, jade cong and bi are found in burials. Cong are ex
tremely small (1.3 and 2.6 cm tall) and show formal
degeneration and lack of decor: the usual four vertical
channels separating prisms are described as forming an
eight-pointed star and the decor is limited to three hori
zontal ducts. Certain of the cutting edges of the yue (de scribed as chan?) are said to be blunt and thin, indicating that yue here are symbolic and not used objects. The one
published dao is comparable to those from Cangshamao in
Shaanxi. It measures 25.0 cm long, is asymmetrical with
two perforated holes for hafting, and the blade is beveled
on both edges.
Jade and stone implements from Shimao in Shenmuxian, Shaanxi are the most rewarding in documenting the cul
tural interp?n?tration of Erlitou and earlier Longshan tradi
tions in the Yellow River Valley. Ceramics from Shimao
are characteristic of period II at Kexingzhuang, which is
equivalent to the Longshan Neolithic in Shaanxi but could
overlap into the subsequent Erlitou phase.88 A variety of
tombs have been cleared but only a selection of the finds,
including jades, have been published. It is reported that
finely worked jades rather than ceramic vessels are promi nent in tombs of this date; this phenomenon reflects elite
burial interests typical of both Shandong Longshan and
Erlitou. According to the 1988 report of Dai Yingxin,89 the
majority of the jades from Shimao were not excavated but
were collected and out of 400 or 500 only a part have been
recovered. There is no accounting
as to which jades were
found in tombs and which were simply collected. The re
covered part of the jades associated with this site are repre sented by a description of 28 zhang, 9 gui, one fu, 5 yue, one qi, 3 ge, and close to 40 dao.90 Outside of one fu and
qi, representative specimens selected for description in
clude those that are familiar in Erlitou period tombs and for
this reason are particularly useful in corroborating the
Erlitou tradition of jade-working. According to the au
thor's present and more convincing argument,91
none of
these tool and weapon jades show evidence of use. Outside
of the few ornamental huang and bi shapes, dao, yue, and
zhang have blunt cutting edges, indicating that "they were
not used implements but rather were ritual implements."92 Short and long dao, oblique and arc-shaped zhang
blades, yue, and now ge from Shimao are illustrated.93 It is
stated that most of the nephrite jades from this site are black or dark green in color, are finely worked, and are very thin.
The four longest dao are extremely thin, in one case mea
suring 0.115 cm thick, thinner than comparative versions
from Erlitou. The dao are in general long, varying 14?26 and 49?55 cm and are trapezoidal in shape with a slightly bowed blade. Shorter, thicker dao vary 13-16 and 19-28 cm in length. The two published zhang were in the first re
port called chan-spades for reason that they originated in
the spade type of tool.94 As discussed earlier, like the dao, the zhang are very thin and long with sharp blades and are
mostly black in color of jade. According to the more recent
publication of finds at Shimao, the longest zhang measures
49.0 cm long and 7.8 cm wide at the tip of the blade, and
the majority of others average above 30 cm long. As illus
trated in a drawing, the haft of one of the zhang is charac
terized by a serrated silhouette as is popular on Erlitou
zhang (see Fig. 25A).95 Other zhang are simplified to an
oblique instead of half moon-shaped blade edge and are
without a dentate silhouette; this shape is generally similar
to the bronze version of zhang from Erlitou96 and the de
generate jade version represented by the blade from The
Minneapolis Museum of Arts (Fig. 16). The three ge de
scribed in the second report are typologically and stylisti
cally comparable to the Erlitou jade ge. Their dimensions, which range from 36.5, 29.4, and 21.0 cm in length and 0.6
to 1.0 cm in thickness,97 are comparable to Erlitou ge. The
black ge measuring 29.4 cm long from Shimao is compara ble to Erlitou versions in favoring a symmetrical blade with
a central point that is sharp on the upper and lower edges and with facets extending along the length of upper and
lower parts of the blade. Neither has a central median line
but both have hafts differentiated from the blade and a per forated hole for attachment of a handle. Only one of the
jade yue is illustrated with the exception of another labeled
qi. All yue are characteristic of Erlitou period types. The
yue labeled qi has a rectangular shape decorated with den
tils on flanking sides at the haft, as typifies one version of
76
HIP
the Erlitou yue. All cutting edges of yue are half-moon in
shape, and blunt. Their backs are flat and their bodies thin.
The yue have either one or two perforations for binding a
handle. Although the quality of jade-working at Shimao
does not match the high standards of Erlitou examples, ty
pologically and stylistically the two jade-working centers, Shimao and Erlitou, are comparable. If Shimao is dated to
the Longshan then the site finds are suggestive that the
Longshan Neolithic and Erlitou periods are overlapping and related in cultural interest. The evidence from Shimao, and also Cangshanmao in Shaanxi and Taosi in Shanxi, is
particularly rewarding in indicating that Erlitou period pre decessors and contemporaries produced specialized sym bolic jade forms concentrating on zhang, yue, dao, and ge,
just like Erlitou. Ge are not represented in lesser finds from
Cangshanmao or yet from Taosi. Earlier, mostly stone but
also jade prototypes, particularly dao and yue from
Xuejiagang in Anhui and earlier Liangzhu period tombs, show early southern precedent for specialized tool and
weapon jades. Although the archaeological evidence is still
piecemeal, on the basis of the above-mentioned data, the
transformation from utilitarian to pure symbolic forms?as
they appear in select burials at Erlitou?exists during the
Longshan, and, as will be discussed below, was a fait ac
compli by the Shandong Longshan period that begins ca.
2400 BCE.
B
Fig. 18. a. Drawing of a stone/jade gui, 18.0 cm long, 4.5 cm wide,
0.85 cm thick, Shandong Longshan, Liangchengzhen, Rizhao,
Shandong. Kaogu 1972.4, fig. 2, p. 57; B. Revised drawing of a
stone/jade dao, 48.7 cm long, 12.0-15.0 cm wide, 1.5 cm. thick,
Shandong Longshan culture, Liangchengzhen, Rizhao, Shandong. KG 1972.4, % 3,P- 57
THE SYMBIOTIC RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JADES
WORKED IN SHANDONG DURING THE CLASSICAL
LONGSHAN PERIOD AND THOSE WORKED IN
CENTRAL CHINA DURING THE ERLITOU PERIOD
The evidence thus far suggests that symbolic jades of
Erlitou period date witnessed an earlier phase of develop ment presently identifiable with the Liangzhu and
Longshan phases at Xuejiagang in Anhui province and later
Longshan/Erlitou phases in the north at Taosi in Shanxi, and Cangshanmao and Shimao in Shaanxi. Other evidence
corroborating that there existed a thriving jade-working tradition of Longshan/Erlitou period date are the exquisite
examples of jade gui and dao, and now possibly zhang (see
below) that can be associated with the culture of the
Shandong Longshan. Ceramic finds from the Dawenkou
through Shandong Longshan cultural phases indicate that
Shandong underwent a long period of development com
parable to the Songze and Liangzhu cultural phases of south
coastal China.98 The Dawenkou culture is estimated as ex
tending from ca. 4500 to 2300 bce and the succeeding
phase of the Shandong Longshan from ca. 2400 to 2000
bce." The latter phase synchronizes and overlaps chrono
logically with the Erlitou culture. Although unlike Erlitou no early style bronzes have been found at Shandong
Longshan sites, this northeastern culture was thoroughly fa
miliar with the sophisticated art of working jades of formal
design. Two site finds are pivotal for identifying the interrela
tionship of northeast and north inland cultures, of
Shandong Longshan and Erlitou. One is the well-known
discovery of symbolic jades at Liangchengzhen, Rizhao in
1963100 and the other is the more recent discovery at Linqu,
Zhufeng, also in Shandong.101 Two symbolic jades, imita
tive of the tool shapes of ben and dao, reportedly made of
stone but possibly black jade (Fig. 18), were found along with black pottery fragments at Liangchengzhen.102 The
ben, properly called gui in its transformation as symbolic
77
Fig. 19. Openwork upper part of a jade pin, 23.0 cm long, burial no. 202, Shandong Longshan culture,
Linqu, Zhufeng, Shandong. Kaogu 1990.7, pi. 1:1.
blade, measures 18.0 cm long, 4.5-4.9 cm wide, and
0.85-0.6 cm thick. The cutting edge is heavily beveled on
one side and is only slightly so on the reverse side. This
form of blade is the predecessor for the generalized jade gui from Erlitou (Fig. IB2). The Liangchengzhen blade is in
cised with semi-human masks on both ends of the handle.
The dao from Liangchengzhen, mislabeled chan in the
report, is much longer than the gui, measuring 48.7 cm
long, 12.0-15.0 cm wide, and 0.5 cm thick (Fig. i8b). Three equidistant holes bored from the front side align the
upper edge, where a wooden handle may originally have
been hafted to the blade. An extra, smaller hole is out of
alignment with the others, suggesting that this blade had an
earlier phase of use or additional means of support. The
piece was broken in several parts. In size and trapezoidal
shape the type is close to the undecorated versions exca
vated at Erlitou, although it is not as rigorously symmetri cal in its proportions, which would indicate an earlier date.
According to Liu Dunyuan, the black pottery fragments found with the gui, some of which are now in the Shanghai
Museum, once belonged to the edge of a pan.ab 103 The
decorative motifs are similar in style to the incised lines of
hooks and brackets framing the two semi-human masks on
the jade gui. This stylistic comparability justifies dating the
jades to the classic phase of the Longshan period in
Shandong, ca. 2400-2000 bce.
Jade remains from Linqu, Zhufeng in Shandong also
date to the Shandong Longshan period. Ceramic types and
style indicate that the burial finds date to the classical phase when highly polished eggshell-thin, black vessels were per fected in form and design.104 The several jades that were
excavated from burial no. 202 approximate those from
Liangchengzhen and also Erlitou. The jades include two
yue, an elaborate openwork jade ornament (Fig. 19), a jade
stickpin decorated with miniscule images of the human
face, and a three-holed dao. The Linqu dao has not been
published in photograph but is described as measuring 21.7-23.7 cm
long, 6.0 cm wide, and 0.7-0.8 cm thick, as
black-green in color, and as trapezoidal in shape. From the
drawing of its form in the tomb plan, the dao, like the
Liangchengzhen blade, has three equidistant perforated
hafting holes and another hole along one short side. The
yue are generally comparable to others excavated in
Shandong, for example, from Dantucun, Wulianxian,105 and to the plain rectangular type known at Erlitou (Fig. 1A2). The Longshan period yue from Dantucun curiously
has serrated decor along its upper edges, as is familiar on
Erlitou and related Shimao jades. The dao, yue, and gui from Liangchengzhen and Linqu
succeed an already well-developed tradition of jade-work
ing represented in Dawenkou period finds.106 As symbolic
jades, they represent a peak of sophistication and refine ment in both style and form that is comparable in most re
spects to the slightly later, or overlapping in date, jades
78
Fig. 20. Jade gui, obverse and reverse faces, n.d., Shandong Longshan cul
ture. Palace Museum, Beijing.
Fig. 2i. A. Jade gui, 21.0 cm tall, Shandong Longshan cul
ture; B. Detail of decoration at the base. Hotung Collection.
79
Fig. 22. A.Jade dao, 41.0 cm long, 11.7 cm wide, Shandong
Longshan culture; b. Sketch of the remaining mask with extended
limb on obverse and reverse ends of the blade. Paul Singer Collection.
from the Erlitou period. The Shandong dao and gui are
clearly symbolic, not tools and not utilitarian in function.
Their thinness alone renders use impractical. The sophisti cation of jade-working during the Shandong Longshan is
marked not only by the taste for formal jade blade shapes but by complex imagery calligraphically worked into the
jade's surface. This sophisticated art of working jade, as
noted, is matched by the quality of ceramics well known
through the highly burnished blackware vessels of classic
shape that were designed for ritual use.107 What is the rela
tionship between the two cultures of Erlitou and Shandong Longshan and their sophisticated jade-working traditions?
80
Preference for certain details of decor and varied type of
symbolic jades suggest that the two cultures, Erlitou and
Shandong Longshan, were close and in regular contact.
Both cultures, for example, favored the dao blade as a sign of wealth. The Liangchengzhen and Linqu types retain the
trapezoidal shape with ends of uneven height that is typical of the earlier functional dao, as represented at Xuejiagang and of dao from other Longshan and Erlitou cultural contexts
in Shaanxi and Shanxi provinces. The dao blades of Erlitou cultural date, on the other hand, are more advanced stylis tically in favoring a formal shape that is strictly symmetrical.
The gui from Erlitou also show a formal evolution be
yond Shandong Longshan styles. On the basis of current ar
chaeological data, gui do not appear to be a primary type of symbolic jade favored at Erlitou cultural sites. The few
gui from Erlitou finds seem secondary and subordinate, sterile versions of a type already well established within the cultural tradition of Shandong Longshan. The gui from
Liangchengzhen, on the contrary, show their origin in the adze and therefore a date stylistically earlier than that of the Erlitou examples.
Recently reported but only partially documented by ar
chaeological data are three zhang said to be from
Shandong, illustrated and briefly discussed in recent articles
by Liu Dunyuan, Wang Yongbo, and Yang Boda.108 The three zhang are said to come (i) from a stone tomb in
Shangwanjia in Wulian county, Shandong; (2) from Long shan remains at Dafanzhuang, Linyi county, Shandong; and
(3) from Yueshi remains at Simatai, Haiyang county,
Shandong. None of these finds was excavated. The zhang from Dafanzhuang and Simatai are said to derive from
Longshan and Yueshi period remains. Presuming that these will eventually be published with proper provenance, their
presence amidst theoretically Shandong Longshan and Yueshi contexts, nonetheless, would reinforce the symbi otic relationship between Shandong Longshan and Erlitou cultural periods and the evidence that the sophisticated zhang of Erlitou provenance and date grew out of a north ern Longshan period tradition of jade-working and still earlier agricultural tool of southern Hemudu and Liangzhu affiliation. A large gap in our knowledge about the trans
mission and interaction of mid- through late third millen nium bce Liangzhu and Longshan traditions still remains.
Several extant jade blades of the gui, dao, and yue type from collections in and outside China further solidify the
interaction between the Shandong Longshan culture and
jade-working traditions at Erlitou. Representative gui blades of Shandong Longshan style are in the Palace
Museum in Beijing (Fig. 20) and in the Hotung Collection
(Fig. 21). Two representative dao belong to the Paul Singer Collection in New York (Fig. 22) and the Arthur M. Sackler Collection in Washington, D.C. (Fig. 23).109 The
gui blades are characterized by a long rectangular shape that is usually pierced by two hafting holes, unlike the un
earthed example from Liangchengzhen, and by two
^^^^^^^^HHMf^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^HBS^-'^^^^H cm Shandong Longshan ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^HK& l^^^l decor on one ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H^HfcJ^^^H of the Courtesy of the Arthur ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^H^^^H Sackler Gallery,
A
B
beveled edges, one heavily and one slightly in imitation of
the adze tool. The imagery on the Hotung Collection gui
(Fig. 21) can be read as a worn version of the more repre sentational motif depicted on the Liangchengzhen blade.
The incised semi-human is reduced to a central set of eyes surrounded by hook-and-curl motifs once related to the
extensions surrounding the semi-human mask on the un
earthed blade. Further geometric display of the type found on the Liangchengzhen sherds is typified in the symmetri cal display of hooks and curls above the mask motif.
Significant to this interpretation is the pattern of framing vertical Unes and horizontal bands filled with a linked dia
mond or brioche pattern. The layout of these geometric motifs interestingly correspond with those on the gui blades from the Beijing Palace Museum (Fig. 20) and
Erlitou (Fig. IB2). The framing patterns of verticals and
horizontals on the Beijing Palace Museum blade is matched on the reverse by an incised image of a geometric version
of the semi-human mask as found on the Liangchengzhen
gui (Fig. 1 8a). Here the eyes are framed by what has the ap pearance of openwork cloudscroll motifs, the same type that figure on the Linqu stickpin (Fig. 19), suggesting by its
comparability that this gui is a classic jade of Shandong
Longshan cultural expression. The significance of this im
age, although worn and barely decipherable, is underscored
by the crowning motif of bird with outstretched wings above the semi-human mask, a motif that recalls the
painted images on Xuejiagang yue and dao. This combina
tion of images, semi-human mask and bird, decorating gui is at the basis of a series of related, openwork jades and gui
blades in collections mostly outside China.110
Like the imagery on the gui blades, that on the two dao
from the Singer and Sackler collections further illustrates
that the Shandong Longshan culture had a rich religious tradition of symbolic imagery. The Sackler dao is 47.8 cm
long, 17.0 cm tall, and 0.9 cm thick (Fig. 23). The Singer dao is comparable in thickness but is otherwise completely
symmetrical, measuring 48.0 cm long (Fig. 22). If exam
ined closely, the incised image located midway on the short
sides of the Sackler dao can be read as a semi-human mask
in profile (Fig. 23B). Figurally, this semi-human image is
envisioned frontally, split into profile images overlapping the two short sides. If opened up, it would represent a
frontal image comparable to that represented on the Erlitou
jade handle (see Fig. 7) and Beijing Palace Museum gui. Brackets framing the eye are composed of the same hooks
and curls as frame the gui blade masks. An added attribute
is the limb ending in a claw that can be pursued below the
81
head of this motif. The image of semi-human mask with
limbs ending in claws on earlier Liangzhu jades immedi
ately comes to mind.111 This image of the semi-human
mask with limb extension is repeated on the Singer dao
(Fig. 22B) but with a total loss in meaning since the once
representational content has dissipated into an abstract,
geometric pattern of extended hooks and curls. The shape of the dao has also lost all vibrancy in its completely, rigidly
symmetrical, rectangular shape. The question arises, does
the rigid symmetry of this piece qualify it as an Erlitou
piece with Longshan style imagery? Given the comparabil
ity of the semi-human mask and limb pattern with images on other jades of attributed Shandong Longshan date, this
rectangular blade belongs within the northeastern,
Shandong Longshan tradition.
The Singer and Sackler dao blades and related Beijing Palace Museum gui, however, can be brought to bear in
explaining the figurai imagery on the jade handle and also
semi-human mask decorating the recently published bronze plaque from burial no. 57 at Erlitou.112 As discussed
earlier, a facial image of the tiger alternates with semi-hu man facial masks on the Erlitou jade handle (see Figs, ibi;
7). Although neither the tiger motif, the totemic-like rep etition of motifs, nor handle type has been discovered asso
ciated with jade works of art at Shandong Longshan sites, the image of the semi-human at Erlitou directly reflects the
subject portrayed in the jade art of the Shandong Longshan culture. The splayed nostril, almond-shaped eye, and grin
ning mouth are all features generically similar to subjects of
Shandong Longshan style. The same semi-human image,
highly abstracted, appears on the recently excavated bronze
plaque with turquoise inlay uncovered from burial no. 57. Circular eyes are framed by an upper display of geometrically abstract bird feathers and by a lower extension representing
abstractly simplified limbs with flanking claws. Since jade
working during the Shandong Longshan period was the
predominant art, with developed forms of imagery and
standardized types of symbolic jades, there were evidently various ways that Shandong Longshan influences could
affect Erlitou cultural expression. The impact of Shandong
Longshan upon Erlitou is documented by the presence of
gui but also dao at Erlitou. Although these gui are not a
major jade of Erlitou cultural production, the dao is shared
and perfected by both cultures. Religious imagery in the
form of the semi-human mask with feathered headdress
and limb with claw extension also now appears to be trans
mitted from earlier Liangzhu art and is a preferred form of
representation in both Shandong Longshan and Erlitou art.
The suggested symbiotic relationship between the two
cultures in Shandong and Henan appears in other ways. The independent yet shared interest in symbolic jade blades, such as dao and yue, and probably zhang, as a form
of art is one. As illustrated by Li Boqian, plentiful ceramic
data also demonstrate that the direction of influence was of
earlier Shandong Longshan styles on Erlitou.113 Certain
82
vessel shapes of Shandong origin, such as the so-called gui, can be compared
to similar and later versions at Erlitou. Li
also makes the suggestion that Erlitou may represent the
occupation of the usurper from the east, Yi, of the Eastern
Yi who conquered the Xia king, Tai Kang, and then ruled as king of Xia. Other historical data for the interchange be
tween the Xia and Eastern Yi of Shandong solidifies this
possibility. Fu Sinian with keen insight postulated long ago that in early historic and proto-historic China two major cultural groups, called Xia and Yi, existed in northeast and
central north China.114 In the Bamboo Annals there is fre
quent reference to Yi tribes who come from the east to
make their submission to Xia kings, who are enfiefed by Xia kings, or who revolt against Xia kings; and of Xia ex
peditions to the Yi in the east.115 The documentation of
historic records for the frequent social and political contact
between Xia and Eastern Yi complements and corroborates
the interdependent relationship of Erlitou and Longshan cultural and jade-working traditions.
PROVINCIAL ERLITOU CULTURAL JADES IN
FUJIAN AND SICHUAN
The appearance of numerous and large-scale ritual jades amidst certain regional finds from outside the Yellow River
Valley in southwestern and southeastern China is tantaliz
ing evidence for an extensive Erlitou cultural influence.
The richest finds derive from excavations and reports made
since 1931 in Guanghanxian in Sichuan province. Other
finds come from the far southern provinces of Fujian, and
just recently reported, from Yuenan, modern-day Viet
nam,116 and Dawan, Hong Kong.117
The stone and jade types from Tanshishan in Fujian be
long to two phases of the Tanshishan culture.118 The first
phase levels (xia and zhong) is stated to be prehistoric in
date and comparable to the Liangzhu culture, and the sec
ond or latest phase (level shang) is defined as Bronze Age in
date. All tools and weapons were fabricated out of stone
and are comparable to southern cultural types from Jiangxi,
Guangdong, and the Taihu Valley of Bronze Age date. The
exception cited amidst these tools and weapons, however, is the blade with sharp edge called ge from Meili in
Zhangpu. The shape of this blade is generically comparable to the bronze version of zhang with rounded blade head
from Erlitou. The diagnostic trait identifying this shape as
a zhang and not ge of Erlitou cultural type is the jagged sil
houette of the haft and the flared outline of the blade.
Neither dimensions nor a detailed description of this find is
provided. Other tool and weapon finds, including a large number of ge, are also generically comparable to northern
types of Bronze Age date. The appearance of well-estab
lished symbolic jades of Erlitou stylistic inspiration in the far
south?possibly an import from the north?may not be sur
prising given the longstanding interaction that is suggested elsewhere in the south, such as at Guanghanxian in central, north Sichuan.
Fig. 24. Jade fu, zhang, and collared disk, . VS jHSw^ ^^Hl*? %? - f Taipingchang culture/Late ^A|^'| mE$ti^?S^lt ̂K??tlh?' ?L &
' ^ *
Neolithic/Early Bronze Age, Hanzhou, ^P>^L' "
?J^B^^?l^^? ̂BQKv^^f '
????k Sichuan. D. S. Dye, "Some Ancient m??/r * JMBSM^S^k.-!* ^^^9 *&7?hHL? ^KwK
Circles, Squares, Angles and Curves in Mt <^t\ W* '**
^EtU^^K?*^ ^Bnl"4 Earth and in Stone in Szechwan, China," Mr I -^ Uf*\ %& '
f ^Bfta^^l^?B^*^B^J?: <? Research Society IV, figs, opposite p. 104. ^J Y J^Bw&Sf?L'^ ^V B wVv^0 -^BpP
' la
The earliest reports of jade finds from Sichuan appear in
English in 1931 and 1933 in the Journal of the West China
Border Region Research Society (Xieda xuebao), published by the West China Union University in Chengdu, Sichuan. In
1931 D. S. Dye, Professor of Geology, gave a brief descrip tion of six different types of Neolithic stone and jade im
plements recovered from the bottom of an irrigation ditch
of a "progressive farmer."119 In 1934 David C. Graham up dated Dye's report by describing in more detail the prove nance of the find.120 He provided a map and illustrated the
rectangular pit out of which the finds were allegedly taken on the farm of a Mr. Yen. He also carried out informal ex
cavations at this site, known as Taipingchang, near Han
zhou and carefully documented his excavations in a pre
liminary report, adding illustrations and notes about
stratigraphy and numerous pottery shards. In 1949 Cheng Te-k'un (Zheng Dekun) carefully reviewed Graham's
work and distinguished artifacts found in the pit from those
recovered from the cultural strata. In updating this earlier
research at Taipingchang, Cheng was able to conclude that, on the basis of polished stone tools and gray-slipped pot
tery, the ceremonial pit and dwelling site date to the last
phase of prehistoric Sichuan, which is equivalent to the
"Black Pottery Culture in North and East China,"121 or
Shandong Longshan. This pit find on the property of Mr. Yen has been chal
lenged recently by extremely rich finds from two other
large pits opened in 1982 at Sanxingdui, Guanghanxian.122 The latter two pits are dated by the excavators to PHI at
Sanxingdui on the basis of internal evidence and to the pre or beginning Late Shang phase or Yinxu period I on the
basis of external comparisons of ritual bronzes.123 The dat
ing of these three pits, the earlier one from Taipingchang and later two from Sanxingdui, covering the eras of
Longshan to Erlitou and Yinxu period I, is reflected stylis tically in the excavated stone and jade implements.
According to Cheng's assessments, the "ceremonial" im
plements found in the pit included 3 cong, several yuanac
rings with collar, over 20 bi-disks, more than 2 zhang, sev
eral long fu/yue, plus ornaments in the form of turquoise flakes, presumably for inlay, and 15 jade beads.124 The
mixed cultural character of these finds points to a date at
the end of Liangzhu/Longshan on the one hand and to the dominance of Erlitou period influences on the other. The
bi, mostly made out of local gray sandstone but with some
made out of jade, are extraordinary for their unprecedented size, compared to standard Liangzhu period bi.125 The
largest one has a diameter of 70.0 cm, a hole diameter of 18.0 cm, and a thickness of 7.0 cm.126 The three cong are,
on the other hand, very small: one is 5.5 cm tall and 7.5 cm
wide with a hole 6.5 cm in diameter; and the another is even smaller, measuring 3.0 cm tall and 5.7 cm wide. The third cong, recently published,127 measures 11.0 cm tall and
9.0 cm in diameter. The latter two are plain and the former has widely spaced grooves and a simplified circle on each
prism face. These motifs are feeble simplifications of the standardized mask that was masterfully worked in intricate
detail and levels of carving on cong of the classic Liangzhu period.128 The degenerate decor and small size of these
cong testify to the end of the classic Liangzhu, probably ca.
2400 BCE, when symbolic jades begin to dominate as the
preferred burial implement.
83
The mixed cultural character of the Taipingchang finds
is also marked by the presence of long fu/yue129 represent
ing late Liangzhu period influences130 and zhang represent
ing classic Erlitou period influences (see Fig. 24). One
zhang measures 39.4 cm long and 15.5 cm wide, and the
other 36.5 cm long and 12.4 cm wide. They are extremely thin, varying from 0.46 to 0.49 cm thick. As with Erlitou
excavated zhang, these examples have an exquisite silhou
ette comparable to a trumpet and a haft carefully outlined
in notches and paired protrusions also worked into a rhyth
mically, jagged outline. Three other zhang-blades, presum
ably from the same or a related find at Taipingchang, are
generically similar in style. One is striking in length, one of
the longest so far documented, at 56.1 cm. Another mea
sures 41.4 cm long; and still one other, broken at the haft, is estimated to measure 45 cm long.131 All three are simi
larly thin, averaging 0.4 to 0.5 cm thick. Artistically speak
ing, the sophisticated working of these jades is evident in
the care for form and small-scale geometric detail. The
geometric decor of parallel lines and jagged silhouette with
pairs of protruding paper-thin crossbars on the haft of the
longest example is somewhat hardened, suggesting that
these jades come at the end rather than the beginning of
Erlitou period influences.
Other artifacts showing influence of Erlitou period jade
working found in Taipingchang excavations include a re
cut dao-blade with geometric designs. Although the frag ment is described as a "borer,"132 its decor of lozenges and
groups of parallel lines characterizes it as a cut-down dao of
Erlitou inspiration. The medium exploited is identified as
hard sandstone,133 which indicates it was locally worked.
Another curious and so far unpublished dao from San
xingdui is characterized by the typical Erlitou style geo metric decor and design. What marks the latter jade as typ
ical of southwestern taste, however, is the preference for
radically large size, double or triple that of classical Erlitou
styles.134 Other evidence for the influence of Erlitou style are the remains of numerous turquoise flakes that were de
signed for inlay.135 The taste for turquoise inlay at Erlitou is
represented by several finds, and in the case of jades, by the
popular stud inlay on zhang and yue. The jades from the pits at Sanxingdui, in contrast to
those represented in finds at Taipingchang, show stylistic tendencies that have more to do with local manufacture
than with current dynastic or cultural styles of central north
China. They go far beyond stylistic tendencies of Erlitou in
reflecting idiosyncracies typifying local taste and manufac
ture, with pit 1 jades representing an earlier and pit 2 a later
phase of production. Amidst the extant jades from pit 1 at
Sanxingdui, zhang and ge blades stand out.136 It is not
specified how many zhang were excavated from pit 1, al
though the excavators distinguish four types based on the
form of the blade head. The first two types are ge in shape and need not be classified as zhang despite their syncretic use of the zhang-style haft. The third and fourth are zhang
84
type blades and measure 24.8 and 26.4 cm, respectively. The third type continues to reflect Erlitou styles in its pa
per-thinness, trumpet-shaped blade point, and haft heavily decorated with raised lines and profile serrations with two
pairs of notched crossbars (Fig. 25 a). The latter form, how
ever, has lost considerable balance in design and decor. The
fourth type is distinguished by a half-moon-shaped blade
point and unemphatic haft protrusions so that in shape it is
long and slightly bowed without a prominent hilt (Fig.
25B). Degeneration of form and aesthetics of classic Erlitou
style is marked in the taste for disruption of standardized
form and design. Manneristic tendencies are especially marked on zhang
blades from pit 2 at Sanxingdui. Fifteen examples, some of
which are jade and some stone, were excavated and sepa rated into two groups called yazhang and bianzhang by the excavators. Their differences derive from the shape of the
blade point: the former is forked and the latter is drawn at
an oblique angle;137 both can be defined as zhang. The lat ter is a simplification of the Erlitou zhang that became stan
dard during later Shang and Zhou eras (see Fig. 16). The
fifteen examples from pit 2 show eccentric diversion from
classic Erlitou period style in a variety of other ways. Variations include the taste for dramatic length without
balance, eccentric forking of the blade point, disinterest in
serrated handle designs and, most importantly, the interest
in portraying figurai motifs. The three green-to-gray jade blades (called bianzhang in the report) are surprising for
their incised imagery and emblematic signs.138 Four bands
of imagery decorate the upper and lower parts of the sim
plified obliquely shaped blade. The rows of human figures who are dressed in local costume alternate with bands fea
turing what the excavators describe as mountain and sun
motifs. Small-scale, profile motifs of zhang with forked
blades are positioned to the left and right sides of the em
blematic mountain motif. Clearly the zhang-blade was re
ligiously significant to users of these blades, who have been
identified as those of the early Shu culture.139 No such im
agery is known at Erlitou or in any early Shang context.
The ge-blades from pit 2 at Sanxingdui show the same
local stylistic tendencies that characterize the zhang. They are eccentrically thin, flat, and long, with the longest mea
suring 59.4 cm and the thinnest, 0.3 cm,140 as if in mockery of the Erlitou prototype that was large in scale and power ful in silhouette. The original Erlitou period interest in
faceting the two long edges of the blade and decorating the
handle with geometric decor survive but are manneristi
cally transformed. The ultimate transformation of proto
typical Erlitou period ideals can be read in the two pub lished ge described as zhang. The two ge have a handle
decor including pairs of raised lines and a notched silhou ette that mimick those of the zhang. Decor and shape are
manipulated for the purpose of creating a uniquely local
expression. These regional eccentricities are made promi nent by the small-scale image of a zhang-blade with eccen
Di?, M '
1 H
A " Il bad LJ B LiN f l?E3ET
Fig. 25. A. Drawing of two jade zhang, 38.0 and 24.8 cm long, Sanxingdui culture/Early Bronze Age, pit no. 1,
Sanxingdui. Wen Wu 1987.10, fig. 12:3-4, P- 8; b. Drawing of two stone zhang, 50.0 and 68.2 cm long, Sanxingdui
culture/Early Bronze Age, pit no. 2, Sanxingdui. WW 1989.5, fig. 34:8-9, p. 16.
trie notching at regular intervals rendered on the face of the
ge-blade. The latter ge, furthermore, has a blade tip perfo rated with the design of a profile bird. The other blade tip has been compared to the gaping mouth of a fish.141
The diversion from classic forms and decor of the north ern Erlitou style at Sanxingdui in Sichuan emphasizes the
independence of this southern tradition during an era
which, although extending beyond Xia into Early Shang, is clearly indebted to once mainstream Xia cultural stim
uli.142 What appears to be a widespread influence of the
Erlitou culture is now well documented not only in
Sichuan, where remains have been adequately published, but by piecemeal finds throughout the south, in Fujian,
Hong Kong, and now Vietnam. What this evidence sug
gests is that Erlitou influence was clearly more than a loose
tribal expression. Rather, Erlitou, like the later Shang, was
more likely a strong administrative center with centralized
control as is measured through the high standard in artistic
production both locally and provincially throughout an
cient China.
THE DISAPPEARANCE OF ERLITOU STYLE JADES
DURING THE SHANG
The Erlitou period was the era par excellence for creating
large-scale, classically designed symbolic jades. Typical
types, such as the zhang, long and short dao, and faceted
yue gradually wane as major art forms in favor of primarily bronze vessels during the successive Shang dynasty. If
Erlitou type jades appear in later Shang contexts they show a loss of creativity and a significant diminution in size. The
latter are key attributes in distinguishing Erlitou from later
Shang-style jade blades.
An extremely long zhang-blade was published in 1966 as
a work from Yangzhuangcun, Nanxiao, Zhengzhou.143 In
1958 a farmer while cultivating the ground uncovered the
blade about 1.5 meter below the surface. The blade mea
sures 66.0 cm long, 13.0 cm wide, and 0.4 cm thick, a stan
dard large scale for Erlitou period zhang. The shape of the
blade also appears to be completely Erlitou in style. The
head is crescentic and the haft is characterized by sets of
longer ridges that frame shorter sets and theoretically con
tinue as raised ridges across the width of the haft. Despite
85
the location of the find in Zhengzhou municipality the
zhang is completely Erlitou in style and form. Since
Zhengzhou is not outside the realm of Erlitou cultural
influences during the Erlitou period, this zhang likely dates
to a time within the Erlitou cultural phase.
Large-scale jades of Erlitou period design, like the zhang and dao, are rarely represented amidst burial goods or resi
dential remains at Erligang and later Shang period sites. The
jade ge is the exception. Several large-scale, long ge have
been excavated at Zhengzhou sites. One example, dark
green in color, measuring 57.0 cm long and 8.0 cm wide, comes from burial no. 7 at Baijiazhuang.144 Another exam
ple from burial no. 3 at Panlongcheng in Huangpi county,
Hubei, measures a record 93.0 cm long.145 In terms of
length Erligang period jade ge are longer than those exca
vated from Erlitou. Their prototype nonetheless is clearly Erlitou. Stylistically Erligang ge differ in favoring either a
strong median line down the longitudinal axis of the blade, a blade head that points slightly downward, or four blade
facets (rather than the two of Erlitou design) along their
length.146 Since the ge appeared later than the yue in Late
Neolithic jade assemblages (e.g., Shimao), the continued
production of ge in large scale and as a major jade art form
in early Shang times is understandable.
Yue-ax types simulating those of Erlitou design also con
tinue to be produced during the Shang period,147 but none
possesses the classical balance and sophistication of design that characterize their predecessor. The so-called handle
shaped jade, initially seen at Erlitou, on the other hand, is
very common in Shang and Western Zhou burials,148 al
though it too is invariably undecorated except for the rigid
repetition of the plume motif that was standardized during the Erlitou period.
Large-scale zhang and dao drop off markedly as elite art
works during the Shang. The only type of zhang that ap
pears in excavated Shang remains, in jade or stone, are de
generate examples of their prototype. Apparently 183 stone
zhang were unearthed from 41 of 900 small burials in the
Western Sector cemetery of Yinxu. The only examples
published there and from Xiao tun burials are very crude, all less than 15 cm long, and all with blades that have one
blunt and one oblique end.149 They look as if they had been
cut down the middle of an original long dao blade.
Zhang reported from Western and Eastern Zhou sites, such as Shangkangcun in Fufeng, Shaanxi; Dasikongcun in
Anyang; and Dongjiao in Luoyang, Henan, are similarly crude and shapeless150 and bear no comparison to their
original creative and classic form of Erlitou date. The nu
merous zhang from collections, as represented by Figure 16, probably date to Late Xia or Early Shang times, when
classic standards were relinquished. The latter type, repre sented by the example in the Hotung Collection (Fig. 21) exhibits degeneration of Erlitou style attributes in its lack of
proportion and balance of design. The handle and blade
head lose clarity of shape and ultimately dissipate into
86
straight, rectangular shapes with diagonal blade and no han
dle, as is commonly represented in stone or pottery in
Shang and Western Zhou tombs. Dao blades in the Erlitou
tradition, on the other hand, seem to disappear altogether unless certain of the crude form of zhang are identified as
reworked dao.151
Gui-blades, although not common amidst Erlitou finds, are popular, although uninteresting and at small scale after
the Erlitou period. By Shang times their points take a vari
ety of shapes, sometimes round and sometimes in the form
of an equilateral triangle. Numbers of jade gui with round
blades were excavated from Shang burial M5 at Anyang.152 The latter type is represented in burials from the Western
Sector cemetery at Xiaotun and the former in later Western
and Eastern Zhou burials, such as at Fengxixiang, Changan in Shaanxi, and Tongshan in Gansu.153 By Eastern Zhou
times the gui blade with symmetrical point is standardized, as illustrated by additional examples from the Chunqiu site
in Wuxian, Jiangsu.154 It is also significant that earlier
Liangzhu-type cong and bi occasionally appear in Shang and Western Zhou burials,155 but, as with certain of the
Erlitou symbolic jades, they are very small and crude, with
out decor, polish, or any of their former classic expression.
CONCLUSIONS
Zhang, dao, yue, and ge?specialized jade types and signi fies of elitist control?stand out amidst Erlitou-associated
Longshan remains and collections in and outside China.
These symbols of formalized tool and weapon shapes are
distributed in the immediate area of Erlitou cultural finds in
Shaanxi, Shanxi, and Henan, but as well in distant
Guanghanxian in Sichuan and elsewhere in south China
and outside China in today's Vietnam. The Erlitou culture
evidently was a
major power whose influence was perva
sive and culturally dominant. As suggested by shared jade
(and ceramic) works of art and cross-cultural influences of
Shandong Longshan upon Erlitou, which if as argued
chronologically fits a Xia identification, it is evident that this
Xia settlement could be culturally challenged by an equally
sophisticated center of power, the Eastern Yi. Given the evi
dence for the symbiotic relationship between jade-working centers of Erlitou and Shandong Longshan, for the wide
spread influence of Erlitou on certain southern sites, and
for the classic forms of developed jade symbols of wealth, the Erlitou culture produced a major artistic tradition that
strongly suggests a power different from the Shang yet con
tiguous with the Longshan. If we are to accept the finds at
Erlitou and related sites as Xia in date, which as noted is
corroborated by stratigraphical and chronological data, then the tradition of working large-scale jade blades as sym bolic art forms can be recognized as uniquely and charac
teristically Xia.
Notes
This article was first presented at the International Symposium on Xia
Culture, University of California, Los Angeles, May 23-25, 1990. 1. See for example the article by David Nivison on the "Astronomical
Evidence for the Bamboo Annals' Chronicle of Early Xia," and re
sponses to it assembled in Early China 15 (1990) 187?196. Recent publica tions collating past articles concerning the Xia include Xu Zhongxu
(ed.), Xia wenhua lunwen xuanji (Zhongzhou Guji Publishers, 1985); Tian
Changwu (ed.), Xua Xia wenming (Beijing University Publishers, 1987); Li Min, Xia Shangshi tansuo (Henan Renmin Publishers, 1985); and
Chou Hung-hsiang, Xiashi Xia wenhua yanjiu shumu (Hong Kong, 1990). 2. For a review of the evidence favoring a Xia identification rather
than Early Shang for Erlitou cultural remains see K.-C. Chang, The
Archaeology of Ancient China, 4th ed. (Yale Uniersity Press, 1986), pp.
307-316; and Louisa Huber, "The Bo Capital and Questions Concer
ning Xia and Early Shang," Early China 13(1988)146?77. In identifying Erlitou as Xia, Huber comprehensively considers data from archaeolog
ical, cultural, and historical viewpoints. In addition to relevant data from
stratigraphy and available C14 dates, she assembles historical source ma
terial alongside archaeological data to demonstrate that Xia and early
Shang were not only compatible but interconnected culturally, what she
describes as "comparatively homogeneous" (p. 55, also see pp. 55-62). Du Zhengsheng brings together the same sort of convincing interdisci
plinary data with the forceful conclusion that Erlitou is the Late Xia dy nastic capital of Jie at Zhenxun, and Yanshi Shangcheng is the Early
Shang dynastic capital of Tang at Bo ("Xiadai kaogu ji qi guojia fazhan
de tansuo," Kaogu (hereafter cited KG) 1991.1:43-56). At present this
historical-cultural continuity and the evidence from stratigraphie and
C14 dating strongly argue that Erlitou is a Late Xia culture and that
Yanshi Shangcheng is Early Shang. For C14 dates from Erlitou see Qiu Shihua et al., "You guan suowei 'Xia wenhua' de tan shisi(Ci4)-niandai
ceding de chubu gaogao," KG 1983.10:923-928.
3. See for example KG 1976.4, fig. 4 (PHI bronze jue), p. 260; Wen
Fong (ed.), The Great Bronze Age of China (New York: Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980), color pi. 1 (jue). The chance recovery of a
bronze ding-tripod and jia from area V at Erlitou indicates that the ding as a cast bronze vessel type was also known during the Erlitou period
(KG 1991.12, fig. 1 left, p. 1138).
4. For a discussion in English on jades from these Late Neolithic
(Hongshan, Liangzhu, Shandong-Longshan) and Erlitou cultures see the
exhibition brochure by E. Childs-Johnson, Ritual and Power: Jades of Ancient China (New York: China Institute in America, 1988) and also
"Dragons, Masks, Axes, and Blades from Four Newly Documented
Jade-Working Cultures of Ancient China," Orientations (April
I988):30-4I. 5. For jades excavated from Erlitou see Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan
kaogu yanjiusuo Erlitou gongzuodui, "Yenshi Erlitou yizhi sanbachu fa
jue jianbao," KG 1975.5:302-309, 294 (where jades date to PHI); "Yenshi Erlitou yizhi xin faxian de tongqi he yuqi," KG 1976.4:259?263
(PHI); "Erlitou yizhi chutu de tongqi he yuqi," KG 1978.4:270 (no
date); "1980-nian qiu Henan Yenzhi Erlitou yizhi fajue jianbao," KG
1983.3:199-205, 219 (PHI); "1981-nian Henan Yanshi Erlitou mucang
fajuejianbao," KG 1984.1:37-40 (PII, PIV); "Henan Erlitou erhao
gongdian yizhi," KG 1983.3:206-216 (PHI); "1982-nian qiu Yanshi
Erlitou yizhi jiuchu fajue jian-bao," KG 1985.12:1085-1094, 1108
(PPII?III); "1987-nian Yanshi Erlitou yizhi mucang fajuejianbao," KG
1992.4:294-303 (PHI). 6. KG 1975.5. From the earliest reports on discoveries and excava
tions at Erlitou there is reference to piecemeal fragments of jade (e.g.,
CASS, Luoyang Excavation Team, "1959-nian Henan Yanshi Erlitou
shijie jianbao," KG 1961.2, fig. 3:26, p. 84, a white jade piece). Due to
the scarcity of jade amidst the earliest excavated finds of 1957 at Erlitou
("Henan Yanshi Erlitou yizhi fajuejianbao," KG 1965.5:215-224, pi. 5:15 [ornament], 10 [fragment of a cong-tube],) author Fang Yousheng
suggests that jade, like the cowrie and turquoise, was an import or ob
ject acquired through trade (p. 223).
7. Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo Erlitou gongzuodui,
"1987-nian Yanshi Erlitou yizhi mucang fajue jianbao," KG
1992.4:194-303. Fragmented jade(s?) were said to have been collected
along with a bronze ding and jia from area V at Erlitou in 1987 (KG
1991.12:1138). 8. For utilitarian stone fu see Yuan Te-hsin (ed.), Zhongguo lishi wenwu
(Taipei, 1977), pi. 38: Cheng Te-k'un, Archaeology in China, I: Prehistoric
China (Cambridge, 1966), pis. X:i, 3; XL3; XIL2-3; Chang, Archaeology in Ancient China, fig. 174, p. 212; fig. 141, p. 178; fig. 132, p. 167. For
examples from Liangzhu tombs see Nanjing bowuyuan, "Jiangsu
Wujing Sidun yizhi de shijue," KG 1981.3, fig. 6:1?2, p. 196; Jingzhou dichu bowuguan, "Zhongxiang Liuhe yizhi," Jianghan kaogu 1987.2,
figs. 12:1-8, p. 13; 17:1-3, p. 20. For utilitarian stone fu from Dawenkou
see Shandong Provincial Cultural Bureau and Jinan Municipal Museum
(eds.), Dawenkou (Beijing, 1974), fig. 28, p. 37.
9. Lin Huadong, Hemudu wenhua chutan (Hangzhou: Zhejiang renmin
chubanshe, 1992), pp. 119-126. 10. Lin, Hemudu wenhua, fig. 5-6; Chang, Archaeology of Ancient China,
fig. 176, p. 213. 11. See note 25. 12. Lin, Hemudu wenhua, fig. 5-6:3-4, p. 123; fig. 2-6:2-3, P- 47; P- 17
13. For refined examples of what appear to be yue-axes made out of
jade or stone, however labeled fu, from Liangzhu tombs see Shanghaishi wenwu baoguan weiyuanhui, "Shanghai Qingpu Fuquanshan Liangzhu wenhua mudi," Wen Wu (hereafter WW) 1986.10, figs. 5-12, p. 8;
31:1-4, p. 10; 50:1?3, p. 16. All these yue are distinguished from utili
tarian prototypes by their thinner fabric and refined, polished surface.
For other refined, similar implements called chan-spades of stone and
jade from another Late Neolithic culture, see Dawenkou, fig. 27, p. 36,
pis. 23-24. The confusion as to whether an ax should be labeled yue or
fu is evident in the tendency to use both when describing the same im
plement from Liangzhu tombs. The axes that are described in note 7, for
example, are labeled fu. On the other hand, in the report of finds from
Fanshan, Yuhang, Zhejiang all axes are labeled yue (WW 1988.1, pp.
14-16, pi. 1:2).
14. K.-C. Chang used similar criteria in describing the yue in his
Archaeology of Ancient China, pp. 165?167. Here Late Neolithic axes,
called yue, are defined as "ritualized," due to their specialized qualities identifiable either through their refined matrix and design or through the use of an inscription or incised clan symbol.
15. See Xia Nai, "Shanghai yuqi de fenlei, dingming he yongtu," KG
1983.5:455-467 and later English version, "The Classificiation, Nomenclature and Usage of Shang Dynasty Jades," in K.-C. Chang
(ed.), Studies of Shang Archaeology (New Haven: Yale University Press,
1986), pp. 185?207 and esp. pp. 223?229. Xia stated that his examina
tion is based on an archaeological methodology, "to treat the excavated
artifacts as the basis of research and then seek to relate this material to
written records" (p. 207). There is, however, no analysis of archaeolog ical data nor of how one blade type is distinguished from another in
terms of name or function of the object in a Shang context. Xia still re
lies on the traditional "old approach" by seeking explanation in later lit
erary ritual names, as in his erratic treatment of various forms of the yue ax. For example, on p. 213 he calls the ax with large perforated hole and
faceted cutting edge from Erlitou a biqi instead of a yue as used in the
site report (p. 213). Xia Nai states: "The preliminary report terms them
'yueh' [Xia fig. 40:2]. They should be called 'pi-chi' [biqiac*] instead" (p.
213). There is no explanation for this statement. Xia is following Wu
Dacheng, the Qing author of Guyutukao (An Illustrated Study of Ancient
Jades, p. 59), who in 1889 distinguished yue as a perforated flat fu and the
flat ax with side serrations as qi, as we learn later on p. 226. Qi is not
known in Shang oracle bone inscriptions and is known in only one
Zhou bronze inscriptional example, where if the graph indeed does re
fer to qi then it is a reference not to a weapon but to a name (see e.g. Zhou Fugao, Jinwengulin, Hong Kong, 1974, no. 1616). Xia classifies the
87
ax weapon according to its blade type, in the category he labels "tao
shaped end-edge implements, frequently occurring in large sizes" (p.
224). 16. Ting Fu-pao, Shuo-wen chieh-tzu ku-lin (Taipei: Shang-wu yin-shu
kuan reprint, 1959), chin-pu (jinbuae) pp. 6332?6334; kepu (gebua*), pp.
5698-5699; Paul L.-M. Serruys, "On the System of the Pu Shou
[bushoua?] in the Shou-wen chieh-tzu, "
Chong-yang yen-chiu yuan li-shih
yu-yen yen-chiu-so chi-kan 56 (1985), no. 452, p. 734. In the Shuowen yue is also written with the metal radical6 (see pp. 719.3). In his commentary
on the latter graph Zheng Xuan notes that yue is also written without
the metal radical,"1 which helps clarify that the identification of yue here
is the ax as used in oracle bone inscriptions, where it refers to "to ax with
the yue11" in ritual slaughters.
17. In oracle bone incriptions yue is used verbally11 and refers to use of
the yue for sacrifices; see Sun Yirang in Qiwen zhulie, xia vol., p. 19 and
Li Xiaoding, Jiagu wenzijishi (Taipei, 1965), pp. 0459, 0479 for examples of the graph. Sun refers to the Shuowen definition in identifying the or
acle bone term of sacrifice and the graph of the bronze ritual implement illustrated in Zhou, Jinwengulin, pp. 214-215, 545. Also see Chang
Tsung-tung, Der Kult der Shang Dynastie in Spiegel der Orakelin-Schriften
(Wiesbaden: Otto Harrassowitz, 1970), p. 135.
18. Comparative and representative bronze versions of the yue of
Shang date include those from M5 at Anyang (Yinxu Fuhao mu, 1980, pi.
13) and the royal burial at Sufutun, Yiduxian, Shandong (WW 1972.8,
fig. 28, p. 29).
19. Representative axes from the Liangzhu and Longshan cultures are
illustrated in Childs-Johnson, Ritual and Power: Jades of Ancient China,
figs. 25-26, 53, pp. 18, 20; "Four Jade-Working Cultures," figs. 32-34,
p. 40. Also see Mou Yongkang et al., Liangzhu wenhua yuqi (Beijing,
1989), pis. 232-239. 20. KG 1978.4:270. For the jade yue with blade 7.7 cm long and 7.6
cm tall, excavated in 1982, see KG 1985.12, fig. 8:4, p. 1092. 21. KG 1983.3:203. The yue measures 9.2 cm tall, 8.0-9.24 cm wide.
22. Xia Nai calls this weapon a biqi, a bi-shaped qi ("Shang Dynasty
Jades," p. 227). He uses qi instead of yue in following the Qing cata
loguer of jades, Wu Dacheng (see note 15). In the excavation report yue is correctly used (KG 1976.4:262; fig. 6:3-4).
23. KG 1976.4, fig. 6:3-4, p. 262.
24. KG 1984.1, fig. 5:2, p. 38.
25. One of the major characteristics of Shandong Longshan (e.g.
Chengziyai) and Xia sites (e.g. Wangchengang and Dong Xiafeng) is the
construction of a city wall, presumbably for defensive purposes; KG
1980.2:97?107; Chang, Archaeology of Ancient China, p. 250; Anne
Underhill, "Variation in Settlements during the Longshan Period of
Northern China," Asian Perspectives 33:2 (Fall 1994): 197?228, esp. table
1, p. 203. It is in connection with this desire to defend that weapons such
as the ge originated. 26. Shima Kunio, Inkyo bokuji kenkyu (Hirosaki, 1958), p. 327.1-2.
27. Li Hsiao-ting, Chia-ku-wen-tz'u chi-shih Chung-yang yen-chiu
yuan lishi-yu-yen yen-chiu-so chuan-k'an chih wu-shih (Nankang,
J965), p. 3753- For the Han definition see Serruys, "On the System of
the Pu Shou," no. 451, pp. 733-734.
28. Li, Chia-ku-wen, pp. 3777, 3771, 3765. For other bone cognates and related terms see pp. 3753-3804.
29. James M. Menzies, The Shang Ko (Toronto, 1965), pp. 1-9.
30. KG 1975.5:305-306 (K3); KG 1992.4, fig. 3:3, p. 296, pi. 1:4
(M57). 31. KG 1976.4:261-262.
32. Ibid., p. 260.
33. Ibid., p. 263.
34. See for comparison, the ge from the Erligang period site of
Wangjinglou in Xinzheng county, Henan; KG 1981.6, fig. 1, p. 556.
35. For utlitiarian stone dao of Neolithic date see Cheng, Prehistoric
China, pi. XIV: 1-4.
36. KG 1975.5:306 (K3); KG 1992.4:296 (M57).
37. KG 1978.4:270.
38. Dai Yingxin, "Shaanxi Shenmuxian shimao Longshan wenhua
yizhi diaocha," KG 1977.3:155, 154-712; "Shenmu Shimao Longshan wenhua yuqi," Kaogu yu wenwu (hereafter KGWW) 1988.6:244-249;
Hayashi Minao, "Chug?k? kodai ch?kei gyokkotsu hakukei gyokki,"
Tohogakuho 54 (March, 1982)17?9, 1-45.
39. Lin, Hemudu wenhua, p. 155.
40. Ibid., p. 159. Lin states that this chan-spade was probably used to
sow crops.
41. Dai, "Shenmu Shimao," p. 245.
42. See Wang Hongming, "Shandong sheng Haiyangxian shiqian
yizhi diaocha," KG 1985.12 fig. 6:3, p. 1062 for a zhang found amidst
Yueshi period remains at Simatai, Haiyangxian, Shandong. Another
zhang is reported by Wang Yongbo to be on exhibit at the Linyi
Municipal Museum ("Shilun Guanghan Sanxingdui faxian de yurui,"
Jinian Sanxingdui kaogu faxian liushi zhounian, Ji BaShu wenhua guoji xueshu taolun hui lunwen, Guanghan, Sichuan, PRC, April 1?6, 1992,
manuscriptp. 121, fig. 4:6-7; "Yazhangxinjie," KGWW1988.1, fig. 1:6,
p. 38). Liu Dunyuan points out that the above two were picked up amidst Longshan and Yueshi remains ("Yazhang yu Shangdai tongge,"
Wenwu Tiandi 1994.3:11?12, inside cover for illustrations). Color pho
tographs of the latter two zhang picked up amidst Longshan and Yueshi
period remains, plus a third from Shandong are illustrated without cita
tion by Yang Boda in "Jade Zhang in the Collection of the Palace
Museum, Beijing," Orientations (February 1995):53?60.
43. Zhouli, "Dianrui," "Kaogongji" chapters, Sibu Congkan ed.
(Shanghai: Shangwu publishers, 1989), 5/37a, 35b, 36a, and i2/4b, 3b, where yazhang, zhang, dazhang, zhongzhang are cited. For an analysis of the Zhouli and other Warring States and Han literary references to
zhang see Zhou Nanquan, "Zhongguo gudai yu, shi zhang yanjiu," KGWW 1993.5:58-65; Feng Hanyi and Tong Enzheng, "Ji Guanghan chutu de yushiqi," KG 1979.2:32-33; Xia Nai, "Shang Dynasty Jades,"
pp. 217-220; Dai, "Shenmu Shimao," pp. 244-246; Wang, "Shilun
Guanghan Sanxingdui," pp. 3-14; Zheng Guang, "Cong Erlitou yizhi de yazhang tanqi," Wenwu Tiandi 1994.3:15.
44. See Zhou's discussion of this point in "Gudai yushi zhang," p. 60;
Feng and Tong, "Ji Guanghan," pp. 32-33; and Zheng, "Cong Erlitou,"
P- 15
45. Xia Nai relates that, as early as the Han, ritual jades included the
so-called "Six Auspicious Jades" ("Shang Dynasty Jades," figs. 36-37,
pp. 208-209). These so-called auspicious jades are incised on a Han stele
that is, for example, recorded in the Qing compendium by Hong Shi,
Li Xu, Hongshi Huimuchai Congshu ed. (1972), vol. 5, pp. 3-6. Wang
Yongbo also illustrates drawings of the so-called auspicous jades that are
illustrated as engravings on three Han stele (see his "Shilun Guanghan
Sanxingdui," fig. 5:4, 8?9).
46. Shuowen, yu-pu,?l pp. 141?142.
47. In Zhou Nanquan's article this type of degenerate zhang from ex
cavated sites is illustrated in fig. 5, p. 61. Figure 5:10 (a jade from the
Liangzhu site of Zhanglingshan in Wuxian, Zhejiang) should be deleted
from his chart since it is formally unrelated to the evolution of this jade
type. At the end of his article Zhou seems to misunderstand the stylistic evolution of the zhang from Neolithic through Han times by deciding to identify all oblique-edged zhang as zhang and those from the Erlitou
and Longshan periods with dentiled haft as qi (p. 63). For the post Erlitou type of zhang with rectangular haft and obliquely cut blade that
is Late Shang in date, see Zhongguo kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo
Anyang fajuedui, "1975-nian Anyang Yinxu de xinfaxian," KG 1976.4,
fig. 12 far right, p. 271.
48. If Longshan and Erlitou period dao are re?ut, the recutting is usu
ally executed by halving the blade so that it takes the shape of "half of a
gui" as is described in the Eastern Han Shuowen (see notes 47, 65). This
type of recutting is illustrated amidst the jade remains in Sichuan (see the
drawn example in Feng and Tong, "Ji Guanghan," pp. 32-33). Also see
Xia, "Shang Dynasty Jades," p. 220.
49. KG 1978.4:270.
50. KG 1983.3, fig- 7, PP. 202-203.
88
51. In Carved Jades of Ancient China (Berkeley, 1938), pi. IX: 1, Alfred
Salmony publishes a Shang bronze ge which is inserted into a jade han
dle of Erlitou inspiration.
52. See examples in KG 1978.4, fig. 2:2, p. 270; KG 1976.4, fig. 6:5,
p. 262, pi. 6:2 right; KG 1984.1, fig. 5:3; KG 1975.5, fig. 4:4-5, 12-24,
p. 305; KG 1985.12:1092-1033; KG 1994.3:296.
53. KG 1975.5, fig. 44, P- 305
54. Zhouli 5/35b, 36a, 37a; 12/ib, 3a, "Dianrui" and "Kaogongji"
chapters. Representative of the nineteenth and twentieth century com
mentators on the function and typology of the jade gui are the Qing scholar Nie Chongyi, Xinding Sanlitu, reprinted by Guji Chubanshe
(Shanghai,. 1984), vol. 10, p. 3; the Qing scholar Wu Dacheng,
Guyutukao, 1898, p. 21; the early twentieth century scholar Ling
Shunsheng, "Zhongguo gudai ruigui de yanjiu," Min-tsu-hsueh yen-chiu so chi-kan (Bulletin of the Institute of Ethnology):ij5-203; and Berthold
Laufer, Jade: A Study in Chinese Archaeology and Religion (Chicago, 1912,
republished by Dover, 1974), chap. 2, pp. 80-103.
55. Shuowen, tu-pu,^ pp. 6167-6169; quoted in Xia Nai, "Shang
Dynasty Jades," pp. 216-219.
56. It is also possible, but unlikely due to length, that the gui origi nated in the chan-spade, such as found at Dawenkou period sites (see note 13).
57. KG 1983.3, fig- 10:7, PP- 202-203; KG 1975-5, fig- 4:6, p. 305.
One of the gui has remains of hemp wrapping and three lines in ver
milion on its haft mimicking where the blade would have been bound
to a handle.
58. KG 1983.3, fig. 10:2-4, p. 204; KG 1984.1, fig. 5:4-5, p. 38.
59. KG 1983.3, fig- 7-4, P- 215; KG 1985.12, fig. 8:3, pp. 1092-1093. 60. For the evidence that the Erlitou culture derived in part from the
local Longshan culture of Henan see reports on Meishan and Dong-xi
afeng sites in KG 1975.5:282-294, Kaogu Xuebao (hereafter KGXB)
1982.4:427-475 (Dongxiafeng); KG 1980.2:97-107, KGXB 1983.
1:55?91 (Meishan); Yin Weizhang, "Erlitou wenhua tantao," KG
1978.1:1-4; Huber, "The Bo Capital," pp. 56-60. A predecessor of
Erlitou may be Wangchenggang, a site with a stamped earthen wall that
has been identified with the Xia founder's, Yu's, capital Yangcheng; Henan wenbo tongxun 1978.1:30?31; Chang, Archaeology of Ancient China,
pp. 315-316; Zou Heng, "Shilun Xia wenhua," Xia Shang Zhou
kaoguxue lunwenji (Beijing, 1980), pp. 95-182; An Jinhuai, "Jinnianlai Henan Xia Shang wenhua kaogu de xinshouhuo," WW 1983.3:1?7; Li
Boqian, "Erlitou leixing de wenhua xingzhi yu zushu wenti," WW
1986.6:41-47. 61. Four Erlitou period zhang belong to the Minneapolis Institute of
Art. One (no. 50.46.312) is illustrated in color in Childs-Johnson, "Four
Jade-Working Cultures," fig. 36, p. 41; and three are published in Na
Chih-liang, Chinese Jades from The Minneapolis Institute of Fine Arts
(Rutland, Vt.), 1977, pis. 9-11, p. 49. See also Horace F. Jayne, The
Chinese Collections in the Norton Gallery and School of Art (West Palm
Beach, Fla., 1972), cat. no. 46; C. T. Loo, Inc., An Exhibition of Chinese
Archaic Jades (New York, 1950), pi. IV3. 62. Joan Hartman, Ancient Chinese Jades from the Buffalo Museum of
Science, exhibition catalog (New York, 1975), pi. 55 (mislabeled Shang or Western Zhou).
63. One of the bronze versions of ge from Erlitou also has a strong median line but is balanced in proportions and without a tip that bends
(see KG 1976.4, fig. 3:1, p. 260).
64. KG 1976.4, fig- 3:3, P- 260.
65. Re?ut dao are common in collections; see Huang Jun, Guyutulu
(Beijing, 1939), 1:11-12 and appear to be re?ut as early as Shang times.
A re?ut dao-blade, for example, is known from the Late Xia/Early
Shang site of Taipingchang, Sichuan; see drawn figure 76 in David C.
Graham, "A Preliminary Report of the Hanchow Excavation," Journal
of the West China Border Research Society VI (1933-1934). 66. John Ayers and Jessica Rawson, Chinese Jade throughout the Ages,
Victoria and Albert Museum (London, 1975), fig. 5, p. 24.
67. Berthold Laufer, Archaic Chinese Jades Collected in China by A. W.
Bahr Now in the Field Museum of Natural History, Chicago (New York,
1927), pi. XIII:i.
68. Similarly hardened examples are known from the Fu Hao tomb at
Anyang (Yinxu Fuhao mu, pi. 115:2) and from tomb no. 18 at Xiaotun,
Anyang (KG 1981.4, pi. XVIL5).
69. C. T. Loo, Inc., An Exhibition of Chinese Jades, pi. VI: 5.
70. This piece has been published in Yutaka Mino and James
Robinson, Beauty and Tranquility: The Eli Lilly Collection of Chinese Art
(Indianapolis, 1983), pi. 8, pp. 64-65.
71. The short dao in the American Museum of Natural History in
New York, ace. no. 70.3.3022, is published here for the first time; it
measures 17.0 cm long by 7.7 cm wide.
72. For the dao from The Field Museum in Chicago see Laufer,
Archaic Chinese Jades, pi. Ill: 1.
73. See notes 116, 117.
74. Erlitou C14 dates are cited in KG 1977.4, PP- 217?232 and in
Chang, Ancient Civilization of China, pp. 315, 318. For Longshan C14 dates also see Chang, fig. 203, p. 247.
75. In most elite burials of Liangzhu cultural date, yue-axes are the
only weapons found in addition to ritual bi-disks and cong-tubes. The
axes are in all cases extremely refined, thin, and highly polished, de
signed as artistic works of art and not apparently for use (see Liangzhu burials cited in notes 8, 13).
76. WW 1984.2, fig. 3:8, p. 14; fig. 5, pp. 15-16 (Changxun); WW
1986.10, figs. 29-30, p. 10; fig. 31:8-9, p. 10 (Fuquanshan). 77. Anhuisheng wenwu gongzuodui, "Qianshan Xuejiagang Xinshiqi
shidai de yizhi," KGXB 1982.3:283-324.
78. Ibid., p. 322.
79. In the report certain axes are described as chan and others as yue. There is no explanation for the differentiation (ibid., pp. 308?311). In in
troducing the stone tools from these burials the yue, chan, and fu are cited,
but no fu are described in the catalogue of finds. This lack of distinction
and consistency of nomenclature characterizes the difficulty in distin
guishing weapon and tool types at this time when quality and refinement
are all-important as a means of signifying wealth. See notes 7-8. 80. KGXB 1982.3:297. 81. Ibid., figs. 24:3-4, 25, p. 310. 82. See ibid., fig. 25:3, 20, p. 310.
83. The excavators compare ceramics of PHI at Xuejiagang to those
from the Songze culture near Shanghai (KGXB 1980.1) and to those
from Beiyinyangying near Nanjing (KGXB 1958.1). This stage precedes the classic Shandong Longshan of ca. 2400-2000 bce.
84. Ji Naijun, "Yenanshi faxian de gudai yuqi," WW 1984.2:84-87.
85. Cheng, "The T'ai-p'ing-ch'ang Culture," pi. 1:3. 86. Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo Shanxi gongzuo
dui, "Shanxi Xiangfen Taosi mudi fajue jianbao," KG 1980:18-31;
"1978-1980-nian Shanxi Xiangfen Taosi mudi fajue jianbao," KG
1983.1:30-42.
87. KG 1980.1:30. Yue here are described as chan-spades. 88. Dai, "Shaanxi Shenmuxian," pp. 157, 154?172.
89. Dai, "Shenmu Shimao," p. 239.
90. See chart illustrated in ibid., pp. 246?247.
91. Ibid., pp. 244, 239. In his earlier analyses Dai Yingxin argued that
the jades were functional. For example, he separated the dao into vari
ous categories, including shan-dao, lian-dao, and dao. Shan means to cut
down and lian refers to sickle; thus, the function of the two longest forms
of dao seem similar rather than dissimilar. That described as lian-dao was
differentiated, seemingly, by the use of rectangular rather than round
holes for hafting the blade to a wooden handle and by its smaller size
("Shaanxi Shenmuxian," pp. 154-172).
92. Bushi shiyongqi ershi ligi, Dai, "Shenmu Shimao," p. 244.
93. Ibid., fig. 1, p. 240; color pis. 1, 4.
94. Shima, Inkyo bokuji kenkyu, p. 327.1?2.
95. KG 1977.3, fig- 2:2, p. 155.
96. The bronze zhang from Erlitou is published in KG 1976.4, pi. 5:4,
fig. 3, p. 260.
89
97-Dai, "Shenmu Shimao," chart p. 248, fig. 1:7, p. 240 (no.
SSY118).
98. See Chang's review, Archaeology of Ancient China, pp. 244-247.
99. Other Shandong Longshan cultural dates of ca. 2035 +/- 115 to
2405 +/- 170 are cited in Yan Wenming, "Longshan wenhua he
Longshan shidai," W/W 1981.6:41-48, 46 (Sanlihe); Li Boqian, "Erlitou
leixing de wenhua xingzhi yu zushu wenti," KG 1986.1, notes 17?18,
p. 47; KG 1977.4:225. 100. Liu Dunyuan, "Ji Liangchengzhen yizhi faxian de liangjian
shiqi," KG 1972.4:56-57. 101. The Shandong Archaeological Team iA, CASS, "Shandong
Linqu Zhufeng Longshan wenhua mucang," KG 1990.7:587-594. 102. Liu Dunyuan, "Lun (Shandong) Longshan wenhua taoqi de jishu
he yishu," Shandong daxue xuebao 1959.3.
103. Liu Dunyuan, "Shandong Rizhao Liangchengzhen kancha
jiyao," KG 1960.9.
104. The Shandong Archaeological Team iA, "Shandong Linqu
Zhufeng," KG 1990.7:594.
105. Shandong wenwu xuanji (Beijing, 1977), figs. 5,8, n.m.
106. See the jade axes published as chan-spades from Dawenkou, pi.
24; Childs-Johnson, "The Four Jade-Working Cultures," pis. 11-12, p.
33
107. See Du Zaizhong, "Shilun Longshan wenhu de 'danketao,'" KG
1982.2:181, pis. 11-12.
108. See note 42; Yang, "Jade Zhang," pp. 53-54.
109. Another representative jade from the Fogg Museum in
Cambridge is a yue with an incised mask on both faces; Max Loehr,
Ancient Chinese Jades from the Grenville L. Winthrop Collection in the Fogg Art Museum, Harvard University (1975), fig. 192, p. 151.
no. See the examples illustrated in Childs-Johnson, "Four Jade
Working Cultures," figs. 23-24, which include an openwork jade orna
ment with eagle and cloud motifs from the Mus?e Cernuschi and a jade
huang with similar theme from the Art Institute of Chicago. Gui blades
with comparable bird motifs and a semi-human mask are in part illus
trated in Doris Dohrenwend, "Demonic Images from Early China," Ars
Orientalise (1975); Na Chih-liang, Yu-chi tung-shih (Taipei, 1964), pi. 3;
Huang Jun, Guyutulu, ce I, 7. On one of these related works in the Freer
Gallery of Art (Dohrenwend, "Demonic Images," fig. 37a-b), is a con
siderably hardened and simplified representation of this semi-human
mask and winged bird. On other gui of Shandong Longshan style the
bird is eliminated and two facial images, one more animal-like and the
other more human, alternate on front and reverse sides.
in. See Mou Yongkang, Liangzhu wenhua yuqi, cover. A gui blade
from the Art Institute of Chicago, published originally by Alfred
Salmony in Archaic Chinese Jades from the Edward and Louise B.
Sonnenschein Collection (Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago, 1952), pi.
LIV:2; Carved Jade of Ancient China, pi. XXVII: 1?2 is a transitional piece
documenting the influence of Liangzhu styles on the Shandong
Longshan tradition. The image of the semi-human mask on the gui reflects Liangzhu style, although the subject and type of jade blade doc
ument Shandong Longshan taste.
112. KG 1992.4, color pi. 1.
113. Li, "Erlitou leixing," p. 45 illustration. In discussing Shandong
Longshan cultural influences on the Xia, Li expands upon earlier ideas
of Zou Heng ("Shilun Xia wenhua," Xia Shang Zhou) and Zhen
Zhengxiang ("Erlitou wenhua shangjue," Henan wenbo tongxun 1978.4).
114. Fu Sinian, "Yi Xia Dong Yi shuo," in Papers Presented to Ts'ai
Yuan P'ei on His Sixty-fifth Birthday (Nankang: Institute of History and
Philology, Academia Sinica, 1935), pp. 1093-1134.
115. James Legge, "The Annals of the Bamboo Books," chap. IV in
The Chinese Classics, vol. Ill: The Shoo King or The Book of Historical
Documents (Hong Kong, 1865), p. 119 (Di Xiang), p. 125 (Di Fa, Di
Gui), p. 122 (Di Shi). 116. Diep Dinh Hoa, "New Findings on Zhang in the Phung Nguyen
Culture," Archaeology Enters the Twenty-first Century Symposium Papers,
Beijing University, May 23-25, 1993. This culture precedes the
Dongson culture of Iron Age date. Four zhang were discovered, two at
the type-site Phung Nguyen and two in the Xom Ren remains, both in
Vinh Phu province.
117. One very small zhang was discovered, broken, in a tomb at
Dawan on Lamma Island; see Li Xueqin, "Xianggang Dawan chutu
yazhang yu wenti," Nanfang wenwu 1992.1:25?29; Yang, "Jade Zhang,"
p. 53; Shang Zhixiang, "Xianggang Dawan yizhi chutu yazhang zhuiji," Wenwu tiandi 1994.3:14-15.
118. Zeng Fan, "Guanyu Fujian shiqian wenhua yicun de tantao," KGXB 1980.3:264-284, pi. 1:8; "Fujian Zhangpu Xinshiqi shidai yizhi
diaocha," KG 1959.6:273-275.
119. D. S. Dye, "Some Ancient Circles, Squares, Angles and Curves
in Earth and in Stone in Szechwan, China," Journal of the West Chna
Border Region Research Society (Xieda xuebao) ^(1930-1931), Chengdu,
Sichuan, pp. 102-105. 120. David C. Graham, "A Preliminary Repeort of the Hanchow
Excavation," The Journal of the West China Border Research Society
VI(i933-i934):ii4-i3i 121. Cheng Te-k'un, "The T'ai-p'ing-ch'ang Culture," Xieda xuebao
i(i949):i-i5, 67-81. 122. Sichuansheng wenwu guanli weiyuanhui et al., "Guanghan
Sanxingdui yizhi yihao jisikang fajue jianbao," WW 1987.10:1-15;
"Guanghan Sanxingdui yizhi erhao jisikang fajue jianbao," WW
1989.5:1-20; "Guanghan Sanxingdui yizhi," KGXB 1987.2:227-254; "Lun Guanghan Sanxingdui yizhi de xingzhi," Sichuan wenwu
1988.4:9-12; "Sichuan Guanghan chutu Shangdai yuqi," WW
1980.9:76-77; Robert W. Bagley, "Sacrificial Pits of the Shang Period at
Sanxingdui in Guanghan County, Sichuan Province," Arts Asiatiques
XLIII(i988):78-86; Noel Barnard, "Some Preliminary Thoughts on the
Significance of the Kuang-han Pit-Burial Bronzes and Other Artifacts,"
paper presented at the Conference of Ancient Chinese and Southeast
Asian Bronze Culture, Kioloa, Feb. 8-12, 1988.
123. Pit I is dated Late Neolithic through Late Shang (WW
1987.10:14) and pit II to Late Shang (WW 1989.5:19).
124. The pit at Taipingchang was said to be 7 feet long, 3 feet wide,
and about 3 feet deep and a burial pit (Cheng, "The T'ai-p'ing-ch'ang
Culture," pp. 1-2, 68-69). According to Graham, the top of the pit was
originally covered with about 20 stone disks lying on their flat sides with
others set up vertically aligning the sides ("Hanchow Excavation," pp.
115, 116-118). Dye argues that the original configuration of these large to small sandstone disks formed a cone shape with the larger disks lying at the bottom ("Some Ancient Circles," p. 102).
125. Stone and jade bi excavated from burials at Fuquanshan were
small by comparison to the stone examples from Sichuan. They vary be
tween 13.0 and 23.0 cm in diameter (WW 1986.10:16). The largest bi
excavated from Sidun, Jiangsu was only 18.2 cm in diameter (KG
1981.3:197). Two of the largest bi known outside China, from The Field
Museum in Chicago, measure 39.0 and 41.0 cm in diameter (Childs
Johnson, Ritual and Power, fig. 12, p. 17; "The Four Jade-Working
Cultures," fig. 12, p. 36). 126. Over 100 fragments of bi were preserved (Cheng, "The T'ai
p'ing-ch'ang Culture," pp. 4?5, 70?71).
127. Feng and Tong, "Ji Guanghan chutu," fig. 1, p. 33; Zhongguo meishu quanji, gongyi meishu bian, 9 (yuqi) (Beijing, 1986), pi. 79, p. 29
text.
128. See a typical mask of the Liangzhu culture in Childs-Johnson, "Four Jade-Working Cultures," cover and figs. 18-19, P- 35
129. Cheng labels the zhang as zhengui and the long fu/yue as yangui
("The T'ai-p'ing-ch'ang Culture," pp. 2, 68). The jade labeled collared
disk from Taipingchang (Dye, "The T'ai-p'ing-ch'ang Culture," pi. 1:5) is well known in Shang and Western Zhou times (see Yinxu Fuhao mu,
pis. 91-94); the form's earlier history is not yet clear. Early examples in
ivory from the late Neolithic site of Dawenkou may relate to the
Neolithic or early historic prototype of this form (Dawenkou, fig. 87:4,
p. 102).
130. Long fu/yue axes more commonly appear in southern, Liangzhu
90
period burials than they do in northern, Dawenkou or Shandong
Longshan period burials; see WW 1984.2, fig. 112, p. 4 (Fuquanshan,
Shanghai); Wenwu ziliao congkan 1980.3, fig. 61, p. 23 (Caoxieshan,
Wuxian); and WW 1978.7, fig. 37, p. 15 (Shixia, Guangdong). 131. Feng and Tong, "Ji Guanghan yuqi," WW 1979.2, figs. 6?8, p.
32. The zhang measuring 56.1 cm long is illustrated in color in Zhongguo meishu quanji, 9 (yuqi), fig. 78.
132. Graham, "The Hanchow Excavations," fig. 76; Cheng, "The
T'ai-p'ing-ch'ang Culture," p. 77.
133. Cheng, "The T'ai-p'ing-ch'ang Culture," p. 76.
134. This unpublished dao-blade is presently stored in the Sichuan
Provincial Museum in Chengdu. It is at least three feet long, dark green to black in color, decorated on one side with the standard geometric de
sign of Erlitou style, and takes a perfect isoscelic trapezoid shape, also of
standard Erlitou style. 135. Turquoise inlay in the form of remains of flakes in burial finds
are common to Erlitou and Longshan period sites; see KG 1976.4, fig. 3:2, p. 260 (Erlitou) and KG 1977.3, fig. 2;i, p. 155 (Shimao, Shen
muxian) .
136. See WW 1987.10, fig. 12:1-9, pp. 5-6, 8.
137. Yazhang and bianzhang are terms drawn from the Zhouli and used
by Nie Chongyi of the Qing (Sanlitu), and by the excavators to describe
the zhang with differing shapes of head (WW 1987.10, fig. 12:3-4, P- 8;
fig. 13:7, p. 9). In the archaeological report bianzhang refers to the zhang whose blade-head takes the shape of an oblique angle.
138. Two of these examples are long, measuring 68.2 and 50.0 cm; and a third measures 27.3 cm long (WW 1987.10:8-9).
139. For a discussion of the significance of Shu see Dong Qixiang, "BaShu shehui xingzhi chutan," BaShu lishi (Chengdu, 1991), pp. 23-43; Tong Enzheng, Gudai de Ba Shu (Chengdu, 1979); and more re
cently, Li Shaoming, "Shu rende laiyuan yu zushu," Jinian Sanxingdui
kaogu faxian liushi zhounian ji (Ba Shu wenhua yu lishi guoji xueshu taolun
hu?), April 1-6, 1992, Guanghan, Sichuan.
140. WW 1989-5, fig- 34:3-5, PP- 16, 12-13.
141. WW 1989.10:5.
142. Zhen Zhengxiang makes the same point in her discussion of the
dates of jades from Sanxingdui (Zhongyuan wenwu 1993.1:9?11). 143. WW 1966.1:58. There is no reason to assume that because this
blade was found in Zhengzhou that it dates to the Erligang or Early
Shang period. There was no excavated context. Both Xia Nai ("Shang
Dynasty Jades," p. 219, note 20) and Yin Weizhang ("Erlitou wenhua
zai tantao," KG 1984.4:353) make this assumption. 144. KG 1957.1:72, pi. V:i2.
145. Zhongguo renmin gongheguo chutu wenwu xuan (Beijing: Cultural
Relics Press, 1976), no. 15.
146. See, for example, ge-blades from Minggonglu in Zhengzhou,
KG 1965.10:502; and elsewhere in Zhengzhou, KG 1957.1:72.
147. See, for example, Yinxu Fuhao mu, pis. 115-116; Yeung Kin
fong, Jade Carving in Chinese Archaeology, vol. I (Hong Kong: The
Chinese University Press, 1987), pi. XXXIV8-10; also see note 51.
148. These handles with "petal" or plain design are common in later
Shang and Zhou tombs and show little stylistic difference from their
Erlitou prototypes; see examples excavated from Zhengzhou, KG
1977.1, pi. 5:5; Dasikongcun, Anyang, S. H. Hansford, Chinese Carved
Jades (London, 1968), pi. 11:4-6; Fuhao tomb (M5), Anyang, Yinxu
Fuhao mu, pis. 156-160; Lingtai, Gansu of Western Zhou date, KG
1977.2, pi. XVL4-5; see also Yeung Kin-Fong, Jade Carving, pis. XLVL9-16, LXXVL9-16.
149. Zhongguo shehui kexueyuan kaogu yanjiusuo Anyang gong zuodui, "1969-1977-nian Yinxu Xichu mucang fajue baogao," KGXB
1979.1, fig. 79:1 left, described on p. 105. One similar example was
found in 1975 within the excavated foundations Fio at Anyang, KG
I976.4, fig. 12 right, p. 271. Broken examples, totaling 8, of similar type, 15.8 cm long, were found in Xiao tun burials; Yinxu fajue baogao
IQ58-1961 (Beijing, 1988 reprint), pi. 67:2-3, p. 255.
150. KG 1969.8:9; Ma Dezhi et al., "1953-nian Anyang Dasikongcun faxian baogao," KGXB 1955.9, pi- ? (M23, 32); Guo Baozhun and Lin
Shouchin, "1952-nian qiuqi Luoyang Dongjiao fajue baogao" KGXB
?955-9, pi- 5 lower right. Single examples are also known from Eastern
Zhou tombs of Springs and Autumns and Warring States dates; see
Zhongguo shehui kexue yuan kaogu yanjiu suo, Luoyang Zhongzhoulu
(Beijing, 1959), fig. 53:3, p. 115; Shangcunling Guoguo mudi (Beijing,
I959), pis. 10, 21; Guo Baozhun, Shanpiaozhen yu Liulige (Beijing, 1959),
pis. 35:6; 118:13.
151. It is difficult to account for this disappearance since the dao was
so monumental an artistic tradition during the Erlitou period. As sym bolic blades, dao do not appear in Shang or Western Zhou tombs. For
reworked dao in Shang times see note 65.
152. Yinxu Fuhao mu, pi. 84.
153. For eccentrically long examples in pottery and stone from
Tongshan, Gansu of Eastern Zhou date, see KG 1976.1, figs. 1-2, pp. 46?47; and in stone and shell from Fengxixiang, Fengxi, Shaanxi, see
Fengxifajue baogao (Beijing, 1962), pis. LXXXVIL6, XC:6). 154. WW 1988.11, fig. 8:105, p. 19. For additional examples see
Fengxi fajue baogao, pi. CII:n (Kexingzhuang); Luoyang Zhongzhoulu,
pis. 82:9, 48:3, 11; and WW 1985.2, fig. 6, p. 44 (Qishan, Licun,
Shaanxi).
155. See M5 at Anyang, Yinxu Fuhao mu, pis. 81-82; the Western
Sector Cemetery at Anyang, "Xichu mucang," KGXB 1979.1, fig. 79:3,
p. 104; Dasikongcun at Anyang, Hansford, Chinese Carved Jades, fig. 11:2; and Luoyang Zhongzhoulu, pi. 51:8 (Western Zhou).
91
top related