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

Chinese Characters

a. %

b. n

c. it

d. 77

e. ^

f. 31

k.

i.

m.

n.

*

A

o. ^(*) p. &

aa. #

ab. & ac.

ad.

ae.

af.

ag

ah.

ai.

aj

s.

t. ^4

u. *.#

V.

w. #

x. 5^r

y. ^ff

z.

92