The Chinese School of Archaeology

By Liangren, Zhang | Antiquity, September 2013 | Go to article overview

The Chinese School of Archaeology


Liangren, Zhang, Antiquity


Introduction

In 1959, at a meeting reviewing the 'archaeological achievements of the past 10 years' in celebration of the tenth anniversary of the 'New China (1949-)', the leading archaeologist Yin Da (1906-1983), then director of the Institute of Archaeology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), urged all the archaeologists in China "to cooperate fully, so that in the next three or five years, in the entire nation, we can build up a scientific and holistic system out of all cultural remains of all periods; that is to say, to build up a Marxist Chinese archaeological system" (Yin 1959: 123).

This call had two key words in it. One was 'Chinese'. Ever since the early twentieth century, growing nationalism had drum-beaten Chinese archaeologists to search for Chinese cultural origins (Liu & Chen 2001: 317). A particularly urgent matter for archaeologists of the 1950s was to dispel the notion of 'the western origin of Chinese culture' that was current among foreign and native archaeologists during the Nationalist Era (1911-1949). To achieve this goal, it was imperative to undertake archaeological investigation systematically so as to prove the autochthonous origins and undisrupted development of Chinese civilisations. The second word, 'Marxist', reflects a process of cutting the umbilical cord of the reborn archaeology of the 'New China' from the 'bourgeois archaeology' of the 'Old China' and swaddling the discipline with the mantle of Marxist theories and models.

Archaeology as a modern discipline came to China as a result of foreigners' exploration--partly research-oriented, partly treasure-oriented--in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries (Chen 1997: 42-49; Liu & Chen 2012: 5). As the Nationalist government curbed their activities from the late 1920s, native archaeologists, mostly western-trained, from a few isolated institutions (primarily the Cenozoic Research Laboratory of the Geological Survey of China, the Institute of History and Philology of Academic Sinica and the Society for Historical Studies of National Peking Academy), actively conducted research-oriented excavations at Anyang and other sites (Chen 1997: 185-204, 264-72). The political instability and economic feebleness of the time, however, restrained the discipline from desirable development. Although much progress was made in excavation techniques and typological analysis (Chen 1997: 227-50, 310-29), only a modest number of sites were excavated, and a small group of personnel trained (Xia 1954: 61-62; Chen 1997: 200, 274). Moreover, when the Communist Party took power in 1949, several major archaeologists followed the Nationalist regime to Taiwan, significantly curtailing the number of trained archaeologists left behind in mainland China.

The Marxist paradigm

The remaining archaeologists of the New China faced several challenges, not least how to adapt themselves to the changed political environment. Breaking ties with the West and creating bonds with the Soviet Union, the nascent Communist government modelled itself upon the latter to upgrade its science and education sectors (Pepper 1987: 197-203). Archaeologists, like other intellectuals mostly trained in Western universities and pro-West national universities, had little choice but to learn the 'advanced experiences (xianjin jingyan)' from their Soviet colleagues (Su 1984b [1950], 1984c [1953]; Xia 1952: 90; Zheng 1956: 15) through intense scholarly exchange and systematic translation of Soviet publications; as a result they revolutionised Chinese archaeological institutions, fieldwork methodology and interpretive paradigms (Zhang 2011).

A variety of publications, including textbooks, articles and course plans of Soviet archaeologists such as S.V. Kiselev (1905-1962), AV. Artsikhovskii (1902-1978) and AL. Mongait (1915-1974) inspired Chinese archaeologists to imbue the discipline with Marxist theories (Kiselev 1950: 5; Anonymous 1955; Artsikhovskh 1956; Avdushin 1956; Mongait 1963), and to provide the guidelines for the first Chinese archaeology textbooks in the 1950s. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • A full archive of books and articles related to this one
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

The Chinese School of Archaeology
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Help
Full screen

matching results for page

    Questia reader help

    How to highlight and cite specific passages

    1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
    2. Click or tap the last word you want to select, and you’ll see everything in between get selected.
    3. You’ll then get a menu of options like creating a highlight or a citation from that passage of text.

    OK, got it!

    Cited passage

    Style
    Citations are available only to our active members.
    Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

    "Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

    1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

    Cited passage

    Thanks for trying Questia!

    Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

    Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

    For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

    Already a member? Log in now.