Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-r5fsc Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T18:16:09.206Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Early Chinese History: The State of the Field

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 March 2011

Cho-yun Hsu
Get access

Extract

In this essay, I will survey recent scholarship on several major issues in the political, social, and economic history of ancient China, from the beginning of the Shang Dynasty to the end of the Han Dynasty. Archaeological aspects will be discussed only when their historical significance requires it, since the archaeological discoveries of recent decades have already been the subject of Professor Kwang-chih Chang's state-of-the-field article in The Journal of Asian Studies.

Type
Articles
Information
The Journal of Asian Studies , Volume 38 , Issue 3 , May 1979 , pp. 453 - 475
Copyright
Copyright © The Association for Asian Studies, Inc. 1979

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Chang, K. C., “Chinese Archaeology Since 1949.”.JAS. 36: 4 (1977). 623–47CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

2 Feuerwerker, Albert, ed., History in Communist China (Cambridge: M.I.T. Press, 1968)Google Scholar.

3 Japanese scholars underwent a soul-searching effort during the 1960s to determine their research directions. One of the common cries was the rejection of conventional “historical positivism.” The movement started in the field of studies of modern China; its impact, however, reached the field of early Chinese history as well. See Kamachi, Noriko, “Historical Consciousness and Identity: Debate of Japanese China Specialists over American Research Fund,”.JAS, 34: 4 (1975), 981–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

4 The problem of periodization is one of the most hotly debated topics. Articles dealing with this topic appeared in two anthologies edited by the Editorial Board of Li-shih yen-chiu: Chung-kuo ti nu-li-chih yü feng-chien-chih fen-ch'i wen-t'i lun-wen-chi (Peking: San-lien, 1956)Google Scholar; and Chung-kuo ku-tai-shih fen-ch'i wen-t'i t'ao-lun-chi (Peking: San-lien, 1957)Google Scholar.

5 Kuo Mo-jo, “Nu-li-chih shih-tai,” in Chungkuo ti nu-li-chih yü feng-chien-chih fen-ch'i wen-t'i lun-wen-chi; Wai-lu, Hou, Chung-kuo ku-tai she-hui shih (Peking: San-lien, 1949)Google Scholar.

6 For instance, Su Shih-tseng points out the heterogeneity of the Hsia-Shang slavery in “Hsiatai ho Shang-tai ti nu-li-chih.” Hsü Hsi-sheng and Chu Pen-yüan explained the heterogeneity by citing its oriental characteristics. Hsü, “Shang-Yin nu-li-chih t'e-cheng ti t'an-t'ao,” and Chu, “Lun Yin-tai sheng-ch'an tsu-liao ti so-yu-chih hsin-shih.” All are included in Chung-kuo ku-taishih fen-ch'i wen-t'i t'ao-lun-chi, pp. 57–82 and 83–125, respectively.

7 The most commonly cited archaeological finding is the evidence of human sacrifice, which the Chinese historians consider evidence of the prevalence of slavery. For instance, Hou-hsüan, Hu, “Chung-kuo nu-li she-hui ti jen-hsün ho jen-chi,” Wen-wu, No. 7 (1974), pp. 74–84Google Scholar; and Wen-wu, No. 8 (1974), pp. 56–67; and Chan-yüeh, Huang, “Wo-kuo ku-tai ti jen-hsün ho jensheng,” K'ao-ku, No. 3 (1974), pp. 153–63Google Scholar. K'ao-ku and K'ao-ku hsüeh-pao are rendered in the Wade-Giles rather than the Pinyin system of romanization.

8 Mo-jo, Kuo, Nu-li-chih shih-tai (Peking: Jen-min, 1954)Google Scholar. He recently reasserted the same position in an article published in Hung-ch'i: “Chung-kuo shang-ku-shih fen-ch'i wen-t'i,” (July 1972), pp. 56–62.

9 Ya-nung, Li, Chung-kuo ti nu-li-chih yü feng-chien-chih (Shanghai: Hua-tung jen-min, 1954)Google Scholar. See also his Hsi-Chou yü Tung-Chou (Shanghai: Jen-min, 1956)Google Scholar and Chou-chu ti shih-chu-chih yü To-pa-chu ti ch'ien-feng-chien-chih (Shanghai: Jen-min, 1954)Google Scholar. In the latter article, “patriarchy” precedes feudalism.

10 Wai-lu, Hou, “Lun Chung-kuo feng-chienchih ti hsin-ch'eng chi ch'i fa-tien-hua,” Li-shih yen-chiu, No. 8 (1956), pp. 23–45Google Scholar. See also his more fully developed Chung-kuo ku-tai she-hui-shih lun (Peking: Jen-min, 1963)Google Scholar.

11 Li-shih yen-chiu Editorial Board, ed., Chungkuo ti nu-li-chih yü feng-chien-chih fen-ch'i wen-t'i lun-wen hsüan-chi (Peking: San-lien, 1955)Google Scholar, and Chung-kuo ku-tai-shih fen-ch'i wen-t'i t'ao-lun-chi. For the 1978 conference, see Kuang-ming jih-pao 8 Nov. 1978, p. 2.

12 Chung-mien, Cheng, Hsi-Chou she-hui chih-tu wen-t'i (Shanghai: Hsin-chih-shih, 1956)Google Scholar; Lan, T'ang, “Ch'un-ch'iu Chan-kuo shih feng-chien kochu-shih-tai,” Chung-hua wen-shih lun-ts'ung, III (Shanghai: Chung-hua, 1963), 1–32Google Scholar.

13 Shizuka, Shirakawa, “In-dai junsosha to doreisei,” Ritsumeikan Bungaku Jinbunkagaku Kenkyujo, 2 (1952), 1–17Google Scholar.

14 Taketoshi, Sato, “Indai nōgyo keiei ni kansuru ichi mondai,” in Kurihara, Mikami, ed., Chūgoku Kodaishi no shomondai (Tokyo: Tōkyō Daigaku Shuppankai, 1954)Google Scholar; Chiaki, Ishida, “Shū kō,” Kōkotsu-gaku, No. 10 (1964), pp. 53–78Google Scholar.

15 Fu-kuan, Hsü, Chou-Ch'in-Han cheng-chih shehui chieh-kou chih yen-chiu (Hong Kong: New Asia Institute, 1972), pp. 2–13Google Scholar.

16 Eberhard, Wolfram, Conquerors and Rulers: Social Forces in Medieval China (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1965, 2nd and rev. ed.), especially pp. 27–30Google Scholar. For critics of Eberhard's insistence on the ethnic distinctiveness of the Chou people, see Bodde, Derk, “Feudalism in China,” in Coulborn, Rushton, ed., Feudalism in History (Hamden: Archon, 1965), pp. 81–82Google Scholar.

17 See Li's translation of N. D. Fustel de Coulanges's La Cité Antique into Chinese, , Hsi-la lo-ma ku-tai she-hui shih (Shanghai, 1944; rev. ed., Taipei: Chung-hua Wen-hua, 1955)Google Scholar. He applies the method to Chinese history in Chung-kuo ku-tai she-hui shih (Taipei: Chung-hua Wen-hua, 1953)Google Scholar. For a recent evaluation of Coulanges's contribution, see Wilson, Stephen, “Fustel de Coulanges and the action Françise,” Journal of the History of Ideas, 34 (Jan.-March 1973), 123–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Shigeshi, Kaizuka, “Chūgoku no kodai kokka,” in Kaizuka Shigeshi chōsaku-shū (Tokyo: Chūo Koronsha, 1976)Google Scholar, I, Part 2; Ichisada, Miyazaki, “Chūgoku kodaishi kairon,” in his Ajiashigaisetsu(Tokyo: Gakuseisha, 1973), I, 133–63Google Scholar, and II, 31–72. For the influence of the Naito theory on Miyazaki, see Hisayuki, Miyakawa, “An Outline of the Naito Hypothesis and its Effect on Japanese Studies of China,” Far Eastern Quarterly, 14: 4 (1955), 533–52Google Scholar.

19 Hsu, Cho-yun, Ancient China in Transition (Stanford: Stanford Univ. Press, 1965)Google Scholar.

20 Wheatley, Paul, The Pivot of the Four Quarters: A Preliminary Inquiry and Character of the Ancient Chinese City (Chicago: Aldine, 1971)Google Scholar.

21 Shigeki, Kaizuka, “Chūgoku kodai tōshikoku no seikaku,” in Sekai kōkogaku taikei (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1958)Google Scholar; Matsumaru Michio, “In-shū kokka no kōzō,” in Higashi Ajia sekai no keisei, Vol. IV of Iwanami kōza sekai rekishi (Tokyo, 1970, 1973)Google Scholar; Chang, Kwang-chih, Early Chinese Civilization: Anthropological Perspectives (Cambridge: Harvard Univ. Press, 1976), pp. 47–71Google Scholar).

22 Michiharu, Itō, “Sei-shū jidai no tōshi—sono kōkogakuteki ni mita tojō,” Kenkyu, No. 30 (1963), pp. 25–62Google Scholar; and “In-Shū jidai no tōshi,” Rekishi-Kyoiku, 14: 12 (1966), 22–28Google Scholar. See also his Chūgoku kodai ōchō no keisei (Tokyo: Shobunsha, 1975)Google Scholar.

23 Cho-yün, Hsü, “Chou-tai shang-yeh ho tushih ti fa-chan,” Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology (Academia Sinica), 48 (1977), Part 2 309–32Google Scholar.

24 Wright, Arthur F., ed., and Wright, H. M., trans., Balazs, Etienne, Chinese Civilization and Bureaucracy (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1964), pp. 3–33Google Scholar. 129–49, especially p. 31.

25 Creel, H. G., The Origins of Statecraft in China, Vol. I (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1970)Google Scholar; see also his “The Beginning of Bureaucracy in China: The Origin of the Hsien,” JAS, 23 (1964), 155–84CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “The Fa-chia: Legalists or Administrators,” Studies Presented to Tung Tso-pin on his Sixtyfifth Birthday, Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, Extra No. 4 (1961), pp. 607–36Google Scholar; “The Meaning of Hsing-ming,” Studia Serica, Bernhard Karlgren Dedicata (Copenhagen: Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities, 1959), pp. 199–211Google Scholar; “On the Origin of Wu-wei,” Symposium in Honor of Dr. Li Chi on his Seventieth Birthday (Taipei, Tsing-hua Journal Board, 1965), pp. 105–38; and Shen Puhai: A Chinese Philosopher of the Fourth Century B.C. (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 1974)Google Scholar.

26 Cho-yün, Hsü, “Chan-kuo ti t'ung-chih chikou yü chih-shu,” Bulletin of the College of Arts, National Taiwan University, No. 14 (1965), pp. 205–39Google Scholar.

27 Kan, Lao, “Han-tȧi chün-chih chi ch'i tui-yü chien-tu ti ts'an-cheng,” in University, Taiwan, ed., Fu ku-hsiao-chang Ssu-nien hsien-sheng chi nien lun-wen-chi (Taipei: National Taiwan University, 1952), pp. 29–61Google Scholar; also his “Han-tai ti t'ingchih,” Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology (Academia Sinica), 22 (1950), 29–138Google Scholar; and “Hanch'ao ti hsien-chih,” Annual of Academia Sinica, 1 (1954), 69–81Google Scholar. See the following items by Shu-fan, Yang in Ta-lu tsa-chih: “Liang-Han shang-shu chih-tu chih yen chiu,” 23: 3 (1963), 5–12Google Scholar; “Hantai chün-kuo shou-hsiang ti chüan-che,” 15: 1 (1956), 23–27Google Scholar; “Han-tai hsiang-t'ing chih-tu ti yen-chiu,” 11: 10(1955), 14–17Google Scholar. The works by Tao-chi, Chou, also in Ta-lu-tsa-chih, are: “Hsi-Han chün-ch'üan yü hsiang-ch'üan chih kuan-his,” 11: 12 (1955). 13–17Google Scholar; and “Han-tai tsai-hsiang chikuan,” 19: 11 (1959), 9–15Google Scholar. For Keng-wang, Yen, see Chung-kuo ti-fang hsing-cheng chih-tu shih: Ch'in-Han ti-fang hsing-cheng chih-tu, 2 vols. (Taipei: Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica, 1961)Google Scholar.

28 Houn, Franklin, “The Civil Service Recruitment Systems of the Han Dynasty,” Tsing-hua Journal of Chinese Studies, NS 1 (1956), 138–64Google Scholar. Crespigny, Rafe de, “The Recruitment System of the Imperial Bureaucracy of the Later Han,” Chung-chi Journal, 6 (1966), 67–78Google Scholar. Tien-yi Tao of the University of Hawaii is now carrying on a project on the same topic.

29 Hsu, Cho-yun, “The Changing Relationship between Local Society and the Central Power in Former Han,” Comparative Studies in Society and History, 7: 4 (1965), 358–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Also see the Chinese version, Cho-yün, Hsu, “Hsi-Han cheng-ch'üan yü she-hui shih-li ti chiao-hu tso-yung,” Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology (Academia Sinica), 35 (1964)Google Scholar. See also Kan, Lao, “Lun Han-tai ti yu-hsia,” Wen shih che hsüeh-pao, 1 (1950)Google Scholar; and “Han-tai ti hao-ch'iang chi ch'i cheng-chih shang ti kuan-hsi,” Symposium in Honor of Dr. Li Chi on his Seventieth Birthday, pp. 39–5 1. Ying-shih, Yü, “Tung-Han cheng-ch'üan chih chien-li yü shihchu ta-hsing chih kuan-hsi,” Hsing-ya hsüeh-pao, 1: 2 (1956), 209–80Google Scholar.

30 Fa-ken, Chin, “Tung-Han tang-ku jen-wu ti fen-hsi,” Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology (Academia Sinica), 34 (1963), 525–58Google Scholar; and “Wu-pao shou-yüan chi liang-Han ti wupao,” Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology (Academia Sinica), 37 (1965), 201–20Google Scholar.

31 Hsü Fu-kuan, Chou-Ch'in-Han cheng-chih shehui chieh-kou chih yen-chiu.

32 Ch'ü, Tung-tsu, Han Social Structure, ed.Dull, Jack (Seattle: Univ. of Washington Press, 1971)Google Scholar.

33 Yü, Ying-shih, Trade and Expansion in Han China (Berkeley: Univ. of California Press, 1967)Google Scholar.

34 Tung-kuei, Kuan, “Han-tai chu-li Ch'iangtsu wen-t'i ti chien-t'ao,” Shih-huo yüeh-k'an, NS 2: 3 (1972), 1–26Google Scholar; and “Han-tai ti t'un-t'ien yü k'ai-pien,” Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology (Academia Sinica), 45 (1973), Part 1, 27–88Google Scholar; Dobbs, Jack, History of the Discovery and Exploration of Turkestan (The Hague: Mouton, 1963)Google Scholar; Wiens, Herold, Han Expansion in South China (Hamden, Conn: Shoe String Press, 1954)Google Scholar.

35 Feuerwerker surveys four of these five topics and discusses one additional historiographical question, the role of imperialism in Chinese history, in Feuerwerker, , ed., History in Communist China (Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T. Press, 1968), pp. 15Google Scholar ff.

36 Yüeh, Shang, “Hsien-Ch'in sheng-ch'an hsing-t'ai chih t'an-t'ao,” Li-shih yen-chiu, 2 No. 7 (1955) pp. 1–28Google Scholar; and “Ju-ho lien-chieh li-shih jen-wu, shih-chien ho hsien-hsiang,” Chiao-hsüeh yü yen-chiu, No. 4 (1956), pp. 1–10Google Scholar; Chung-lo, Wang, “Kuan-yü Chung-kuo nu-li she-hui ti wa-chieh chi feng-chien kuan-shih ti hsing-ch'eng wen-t'i,” Wen shih che, No. 3 (1956), pp. 25–31Google Scholar; No. 4, pp. 48–59; No. 5, pp. 32–49; Ssu-chih, Wang et al. , “Kuan-yü liang-Han she-hui hsing-chih wen-t'i ti t'an-t'ao,” Li-shih yen-chiu, No. 1 (1955). pp. 19–46Google Scholar.

37 For instance, Po-tsan, Chien, “Kuan-yü liang-Han ti kuan-ssu nu-li wen-t'i,” Li-shih yenchiu, No. 4 (1954), pp. 1–24Google Scholar.

38 Wai-lu, Hou, “Chung-kuo feng-chien shehui t'u-ti so-yu-chih hsing-shih ti wen-t'i,” Lishih yen-chiu, No. 1 (1954), pp. 17–32Google Scholar.

39 Li-shih yen-chiu, ed., Chung-kuo li-tai t'u-ti chih-tu wen-t'i t'ao-lun-chi (Peking: San-lien, 1957)Google Scholar; Department of History, Nankai University, ed., Chung-kuo feng-chien she hut t'u-ti so-yu-chih hsing-shih wen-t'i t'ao-lun chi, 2 vols. (Peking: San-lien, 1962)Google Scholar.

40 Ya-nung, Li, “Chung-kuo ti feng-chien lingchu-chih ho ti-chu-chih,” in his Hsin-jan-tsai shihlun chi (Shanghai: Jen-min, 1962), pp. 873–1096Google Scholar.

41 Ch'ang-ch'un, Ho, Han-T'ang-chien feng-chien t'u-ti so-yu-chih hsing-shih yen-chiu (Shanghai: Jenmin, 1964)Google Scholar.

42 Wen-lan, Fan, “Shih-lun Chung-kuo tz'u Ch'in-Han ch'i Chung-kuo ch'eng-wei t'ung-i kuo-chia ti yüan-ying,” Li-shih yen-chiu, No. 3 (1954), pp. 15–26Google Scholar. Responses to Fan's work, as well as the Chinese translation of the essay by Efimov, are included in the collection Li-shih yenchiu, ed., Han min-chu hsing-ch'eng wen-t'i t'ao-lun chi (Peking: San-lien, 1957), pp. 1–16Google Scholar. Efimov's original paper is not available to the author of the present article.

43 These two types are represented in two anthologies. For the former, see Li-shih yen-chiu, ed., Chung-kuo nung-min ch'i-i lun-chi (Peking: San-lien, 1958)Google Scholar; for the latter, see Shao-ping, Shih, ed., Chung-kuo feng-chien she-hui nung-min chancheng wen-t'i t'ao-lun-chi (Peking: San-lien, 1957)Google Scholar.

44 Hsia, Ch'i, Ch'in-Han nung-min chan-chengshih (Peking: San-lien, 1962)Google Scholar; Ho Ch'ang-ch'un, Han-T'ang-chien feng-chien t'u-ti so-yu-chih hsingshih yen-chiu, pp. 6–130; K'ai-liang, Ma, “Kuanyü Kung-yüan i-shih-chi ch'u-ch'i nung-min ch'i-i ti chi-ko wen-t'i, Jen-wen k'o-hsüeh tsa-chih, No. 1 (1958), pp. 39–46; Li Kuang-pi, “Han-tai t'ai-p'ing-tao yü Huang-chün ch'i-i,” Li-shih chiao-hsüeh, No. 6 (1951), pp. 13–21Google Scholar.

45 Jung-kuo, Yang, “San Hung-yang ti chehsüeh ssu-hsiang,” Li-shih yen-chiu, No. 1 (1974), pp. 50–56Google Scholar; Yün-k'o, Ching, “Po Hsün-k'uang wei ju-chia shuo,” Li-shih yen-chiu, No. 1 (1975), pp. 29–88Google Scholar; Chung, Shih, “Hsi-Han wang-ch'ao t'ung Liu Pi teng fu-ni shih-li ti t'ou-tseng,” Li-shih yen-chiu, No. 2 (1975), pp. 68–75Google Scholar; Hsiao, Liang, “Lun Ch'en Sheng Wu Kuang nung-min ta ch'i-i ti li-shih kung-hsün,” Li-shih yen-chiu, No. 1 (1975). pp. 65–73Google Scholar.

46 The first attack on the Gang of Four's historiography in a historical journal was in Lishih yen-chiu, No. 6 (1976), which was entirely devoted to this purpose. More recent is an article by Kan-ch'uan, Lin re-evaluating Ch'in Shih-huang-ti, “Lun Ch'in-shih-huang,” Li-shih yen-chiu, No. 4 (1978), pp. 20–33Google Scholar. An article directly related to peasant uprisings in Chinese history, especially those in the Ch'in-Han period, is Chü-ko Chi, “Po Ssu-jen-pang tsai nung-min chan-cheng wen-t'i-shang ti fan-Ma-k'e-ssu chu-i niulun,” Li-shih yen-chiu, No. 1 (1977), pp. 46–59. For changes in anti-Confucian attitudes, see Ling, Yen, “Kuan-yü K'ung Ch'iu chu Shao-chengmao,” Li-shih yen-chiu, No. 1 (1978), pp. 63–65Google Scholar; and T'ien-yu, Hsieh and Chia-fan, Wang, “Po Fachia ch'ang-ch'i fan-fu-pi lun,” Li-shi yen-chiu, No. 3 (1978), pp. 35–43Google Scholar.

47 Naonori, Maeda, “Higashi-Ajia ni okeru kodai no Shūmatsu,” Rekishi, 1: 4 (1948), 19–31Google Scholar, also included in Shun, Suzuki and Sadao, Nishijima, Chūgokushi no jidai-kubun (Tokyo: Tōkyō Daigaku Shuppankai, 1957)Google Scholar. For Nishijima's statement, see pp. 191 ff of this same volume.

48 Tatsuo, Masubuchi, Chūgoku kodai no shakai to kokka (Tokyo: Kōbundō, 1960)Google Scholar.

49 Sadao, Nishijima, “Chūgoku kodai teikoku seiritsu no ichi kosatsu,” Rekishigaku kenkyū, 141 (1949), 1–15Google Scholar; and his “Kodai kokka no kenryoku kōzō,” Kokka kenryoku no shodankai (Tokyo, 1950)Google Scholar.

50 Sadao, Nishijima, Chūgoku kodai teikoku no keisei to kōzō (Tokyo: Tōkyō Daigaku Shuppankai, 1961)Google Scholar.

51 Masubuchi Tatsuo, Chūgoku kodai no shakai to kokka.

52 See the following articles by Mitsuo, Moriya: “Kan no kōso shūdan no sei ni tsuite,” Rekishigaku kenkyū, 158: 9 (1952)Google Scholar; “Furō,” Tōyōshi kenkyū, 14: 1–2 (1955)Google Scholar; and “Kandai kazoku no keitai ni kansuru sai kosatsu,” Chūgoku kodaishi kenkyū (Tokyo: Yoshikawa Kōbunkai, 1960), pp. 327–52Google Scholar.

53 Reiji, Hiranaka, Chūgoku kodai no densei to zeihō (Kyoto: Kyoto Univ. Tōyōshi Kenkyūkai, 1961)Google Scholar.

54 Masao, Kimura, Chūgoku kodai teikoku no keisei (Tokyo: Fumeido, 1965)Google Scholar. See also Wittfogel, Karl, Oriental Despotism: A Comparative Study of Total Power (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, 1957)Google Scholar. In his earlier work Wittfogel traced the origin of Chinese despotism to Ch'in: “Die Theorie der Orientaiischen Gesellschaft,” Zeitschrift für Sozialforschung, 7 (1938)Google Scholar.

55 Masao, Kimura, “Zen-go Kan kōtai-ki no nōmin hanran,” Tōkyō Kyōiku Daigaku bungakubu shigaku kenkyū, 61 (1967), 1–50Google Scholar; “Ryō-Kan kōtai ki no gōzoku hanran,” Risshō-Shigaku, 3 (1967) 12–41Google Scholar; and “Kōkin no hanran,” Shigaku Kenkyū, 91 (1972)Google Scholar.

56 Kiyōkichi, Utsunomiya, Kandai shakaikeizaishi kenkyū (Tokyo: Kōbundō, 1955)Google Scholar.

57 Mitsuo, Moriya, Chūgoku kodai no gōzoku to kokka (Kyoto: Kyoto Univ. Tōyōshi Kenkyūkai, 1966)Google Scholar.

58 Takashi, Yoshinami, Shin-Kan teikokushi kenkyū (Tokyo: Miraisha, 1978), especially pp. 23Google Scholar ff. and pp. 365 ff.

59 Higashi Ajia sekai no keisei.

60 K'uan, Yang, Chung-kuo ku-tai yeh-t'ieh chishu ti fa-ming ho fa-chan (Shanghai: Jen-min, 1956)Google Scholar; Chuang-yu, Fang, “Chan-kuo i-lai Chungkuo pu-li fa-chan wen-t'i shih-t'an,” K'ao-ku No. 7 (1953)Google Scholar; Ch'ang-shu, Chang, Lai-ssu ti chi-yüan chi ch'i fa-chan (Shanghai: Jen-min, 1964)Google Scholar; Hsienchou, Liu, Chung-kuo ku-tai nung-yeh chi-chieh fa-ming shih (Peking: K'o-hsüeh, 1963)Google Scholar.

61 Nung-shih yen-chiu chi-kan, No. 1 (1959), and No. 2 (1960), passim, especially Yu Yü, “Yu Hsi-chou tao Ch'ien-Han ti keng-tso chih-tu yenko,” Nung-shih yen-chiu chi-kan, 2 (1960), 1–17Google Scholar. Many of the opinions in these papers are incorporated into Kuo-ting's, WanChung-kuo nung-hsüeh shih (Peking: K'o-hsüeh, 1959)Google Scholar.

62 Motonosuke, Amano, Chūgoku nōgyōshi kenkyū (Tokyo: Ochanomizu shobo, 1962)Google Scholar. See also his “Sai-Shū no nōgyō to sono shakai kōzō,” Matsuyama shōdai ronshu, 7: 1 (1956)Google Scholar; and “Chūgoku kodai nōgyō no tenkai—Kahoku nōgyō no keisei katei,” Tōhō gakuhō (Kyoto), 30 (1959). 67–166Google Scholar.

63 Takeshi, Sekino, “Shin rai-shi kō,” Toyō Bunka Kenkyūjo kiyō, 19 (1959), 1–77Google Scholar.

64 Amano Motonosuke, “Seido-sei nōgu kō,” Chūgoku nōgyōshi kenkyū, pp. 687–96.

65 Motonosuke, Amano, “Shū no hohensei to seidensei,” Jinbun kenkyū, 7–8 (1957), 4–14Google Scholar; and Sato Taketoshi, , “In-Shū jidai no zei-sei,” Rekishi kyōiku, 186 (1969), 13–19Google Scholar.

66 Kimura Masao, Chōgoku kodai-teikoku no keisei.

67 Ho, Ping-ti, The Cradle of the East (Hong Kong and Chicago: Hong Kong Chinese Univ. Press and Univ. of Chicago Press, 1976), especially pp. 43–89Google Scholar. For some defects in Ho's presentation, see the reviews by Kwang-chih Chang in Journal of the American Oriental Society and in the Journal of Oriental Studies, Hong Kong, as well as the reviews by Richard Pearson in Science (July 30, 1976); by Hsu, Cho-yun in Geographical Review, 67: 1 (Jan. 1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; by Keightley, David in Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 37: 2 (1977), 392CrossRefGoogle Scholar, and in Early China, 3 (1977) 55–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and by Pulleyblank, E. G. in JAS, 35: 4 (August 1977), 715–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar. A paper which explicitly refers to Han agriculture is by a geographer: Ballas, Donald J., “Some Notes on Agriculture in Han China,” Professional Geography, 17: 4 (1965), 13–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

68 The manuscript is prepared as one volume of the Han History Project sponsored by the University of Washington, Seattle, and edited by Dull, Jack. A brief summary entitled “Agricultural Intensification and Marketing Agrarianism in the Han Dynasy” is included in Roy, David T. and Tsien, T. H., eds., Ancient China: Studies in Early Civilization (Hong Kong and Chicago: Hong Kong Chinese Univ. Press and Univ. of Chicago Press, 1979)Google Scholar.

69 It is impossible to cite every paper that contains such sections. By way of illustration, in the summary of archaeological discoveries since 1950, Hsia Nai stresses human sacrifice as one of the general features of Shang society. See yen-chiu-so, K'ao-ku, ed., Hsin Chung-kuo ti k'ao-ku shouhou (Peking: Wen-wu, 1961)Google Scholar, and “Wu-ch'an chieh-chi wen-hua ta ko-ming chung ti k'ao-ku hsin fa-hsien,” K'ao-Ku, 1 (1972), 29–42Google Scholar. For treatment of this topic using oracle bone inscription materials, see Hou-hsüan, Hu, “Chung-kuo nu-li she-hui ti jen-hsün ho jen-chi,” Wen-wu, No. 7 (1974), pp. 78–84Google Scholar, and No. 8 (1974), pp. 56–72.

70 These sites have been known to English readers. See, for instance, Chang, Kwang-chih, Archaeology of Ancient China (New Haven: Yale Univ. Press, rev. ed., 1968), pp. 194–209Google Scholar.

71 yen-chiu-so, K'ao-ku, “Ho-nan Yenr-shih Erh-li-tou tsao-shang kung-tien i-chih fa-chüeh chien-pao,” K'ao-ku, No. 4 (1974), pp. 234–48Google Scholar.

72 wen-hua-kuan, Shih-lou jen-min, “Shan-hsi Shih-lou I-tieh fa-hsien Shang-tai t'ung-ch'i,” K'ao-Ku, No. 4 (1972), pp. 29–30Google Scholar; po-wu-kuan, Ho-pei sheng et al. , “Ho-pei Kao-ch'eng hsien T'ai-hsi ts'un Shang-tai i-chih 1973-nien ti chung-yao fa-hsien,” Wen-wu, No. 8 (1974), pp. 42–49Google Scholar. Nai, Hsia, “Wu-ch'an chieh-chi wen-hua ta ko-ming chung ti k'ao-ku hsin fa-hsien,” K'aoku, No. 1 (1972), pp. 29–42Google Scholar.

73 “Ho-pei Kao-ch'eng hsien T'ai-hsi ts'un Shang-tai i-chih 1973-nien ti chung-yao fahsien”; and Yün-ming, T'ang, “Kao-ch'eng T'aihsi Shang-tai t'ieh-jen t'ung-yüeh wen-t'i ti t'ant'ao,” Wen-wu, No. 3 (1975), pp. 57–59Google Scholar; Chung, Li, “Kuan-yü Kao-ch'eng Shang-tai t'ungyüeh t'ieh-jen ti fen-hsi,” K'ao-ku hsüeh-pao, No. 2 (1976), pp. 17–21Google Scholar; Shih, Yeh, “Kao-ch'eng Shang-tai t'ieh-jen t'ung-yüeh chi ch'i i-i,” Wenwu, No. 11 (1976), pp. 56–59Google Scholar.

74 Lan, T'ang, “Ts'ung Ho-nan Cheng-chou ch'u-t'u ti Shang-tai ch'ien-ch'i ch'ing-t'ung-ch'i t'an-ch'i,” Wen-wu, No. 7 (1973), pp. 5–13Google Scholar.

75 yen-chiu-so, K'ao-ku, Feng-hsi fa-chüeh paokao (Peking: Wen-wu, 1962)Google Scholar.

76 Chiang-su sheng wen-wu kuan-li wei-yüan-hui, “Chiang-su Tan-t'u hsien Yen-tun-shanch'u-t'u ti ku-tai ch'ing-t'ung-ch'i,” Wen-wu ts'an-k'ao tzu-liao, No. 5 (1955), pp. 58–62Google Scholar; po-wu-kuan, Je-ho, “Je-ho Ling-yüan hsien hai-tao ying-tzu-ts'un fa-hsien ti ku-tai ch'ing-t'ung-ch'i,” Wen-wu ts'an-k'ao tzu-liao, No. 8 (1955), pp. 16–27Google Scholar; Lan, T'ang, “Hsi-Chou shih-tai tsui-tsao ti i-chien t'ung-ch'i Li-kuei ming-wen chieh-shih,” Wen-wu, No. 8 (1977), pp. 8–9Google Scholar; Sheng-wu, Yü, “Likuei ming-wen k'ao-shih,” Wen-wu, No. 8 (1977), pp. 10–12Google Scholar; Feng-nien, Chung et al. , “Kuan-yü Li-kuei ming-wen k'ao-shih ti t'aolun,” Wen-wu, No. 6 (1978), pp. 77–84Google Scholar; Chung-shu, Hsü, “Hsi-Chou ch'iang-pan ming-wen chien-shih,” K'ao-ku hsüeh-pao, No. 2 (1978), pp. 139–48Google Scholar; Hsüeh-ch'in, Li, “Lun ‘Shih-Ch'iang-pan chi ch'i i-i,'” K'ao-ku hsüeh-pao, No. 2 (1978), pp. 149–58Google Scholar.

77 po-wu-kuan, Shen-hsi sheng et al. , Ch'ing-t'ung-ch'i t'u-shih (Peking: Wen-wu, 1960)Google Scholar; Lan, T'ang, “Yang ch'ing-t'ung-ch'i ming-wen lei yenchiu hsi-Chou shih,” Wen-wu, No. 6 (1976), pp. 31–39Google Scholar; and Yüan, Chou, “Chü-po Chiu-wei liang-chia-chu ti hsiao-chang yü Chou-li ti penghuai,” Wen-wu, No. 6 (1976), pp. 45–50Google Scholar.

78 Mo-jo, Kuo, “Ch'u-t'u wen-wu erh-san shih,” Wen-wu, No. 3 (1972), pp. 2–10Google Scholar; Cheng-kang, T'ao and Ko-lin, Wang, “Hou-ma tung-Chou meng-shih i-chih,” Wen-wu, No. 4 (1972), pp. 27–37Google Scholar; Lan, T'ang, “Hou-ma ch'u-t'u Chankuo Chao-Chia-chih-meng tsai-shu hsin-shih,” Wen-wu, No. 8 (1972), pp. 31–35Google Scholar; Te-his, Chu and Hsi-kuei, Ch'iu, “Kuan-yü Hou-ma meng-shu ti chi-tien pu-shih,” Wen-wu, No. 8 (1972), pp. 36–38Google Scholar; Yu-ming, Li, “Wo tui Hou-ma meng-shu ti k'an-fa,” K'ao-ku, No. 3 (1973), pp. 185–91Google Scholar. The complete text is now published by Wen-wu (Peking, 1978).

79 Chün-li, , “Lin-tzu Ch'i-kuo ku-ch'eng k'an-t'an chi-yao,” Wen-wu, No. 5 (1972)Google Scholar; and Huo, Chu, “Ts'ung Shan-tung ch'u-t'u ti Ch'i-pi k'an Ch'i-kuo ti shang-yeh ho chiao-t'ung,” Wen-wu, No. 5 (1972), pp. 55–59Google Scholar.

80 Peng-hsing, Hao, “Hsin-cheng Cheng-Han ku-ch'eng fa-hsien i-p'i Chan-kuo t'ung-ping-ch'i,” Wen-wu, No. 10 (1972), pp. 32–40Google Scholar.

81 For metallurgical analysis of iron tools, see Chan-yüeh, Huang, “Chin-nien ch'u-t'u ti Chankuo liang-Han t'ieh-ch'i,” Kao-ku hsüeh-pao, No. 3 (1957), pp. 93–108Google Scholar; Chüeh-ming, Hua et al. , “Chan-kuo liang-Han t'ieh-ch'i ti chin-hsiang-hsüeh k'ao-cha,” Kao-ku hsüeh-pao, No. 1 (1960), pp. 73–89Google Scholar. For comparison of molds, Tzukao, Chang et al. , “Ts'ung Hou-ma t'ao-fan ho Hsin-lung t'ieh-fan k'an Chan-kuo shih-tai ti yeh-chu chishu,” Wen-wu, No. 6 (1973), pp. 62–65Google Scholar. On ancient mining sites, see k'ao-ku-tui, T'ung-lu-shan, “Hu-pei T'ung-lu-shan Ch'un-ch'iu Chan-kuo ku-k'uang-ching i-chih fa-chüeh chien-pao,” Wen-wu, No. 2 (1975), pp. 1–12Google Scholar; wen-hua-chü, Ho-nan, comp., Kung-hsien t'ieh-sheng-kou (Peking: Wen-wu, 1962)Google Scholar.

82 K'ao-ku yen-chiu-so, Hsin Chung-kuo ti k'aoku shou-hou, pp. 29–30. Chao-yüeh, Tseng and Huan-chang, Yin, “Shih-lun Hu-Shu wen-hua,” K'aoku hsüeh-pao, No. 4 (1959), pp. 47–58Google Scholar; Nai, Hsia, “Ch'ang-chiang liu-yü k'ao-ku wen-t'i,” K'ao-ku, No. 2 (1960), pp. 1–3Google Scholar; wen-kuan-hui, Che-chiang sheng, “Ho-mu-tu fa-hsien yüan-shih she-hui chung-yao i-chih,” Wen-wu, No. 8 (1976), and comments in the same issue, pp. 6–26Google Scholar; Nai, Hsia et al. , Ch'ang-sha fa-chüeh pao-kao (Peking: K'o-hsüeh, 1957)Google Scholar; po-wu-kuan, Hu-nan sheng et al. , Ch'ang-sha Ma-wang-tui i-hao Han-mu (Peking: Wen-wu, 1974)Google Scholar. See also Wen-wu, No. 9 (1972), passim; and po-wu-kuan, Hu-nan sheng et al. , “Ch'ang-sha Ma-wang-tui erh-san-hao Han-mu fa-chüeh chien-pao,” Wen-wu, No. 7 (1974), pp. 39–48Google Scholar.

83 For instance, I-yu, Li, “Nei-meng Chao-wuta-meng ch'u-t'u ti t'ung-ch'i tiao-ch'a,” K'ao-ku, No. 6 (1959), pp. 276–77Google Scholar, and “Nei-meng-ku hsi-pu ti-ch'ü ti Hsiung-nu ho Han-tai wen-wu,” Wen-wu ts'an-k'ao tzu-liao, No. 4 (1957), pp. 29–32Google Scholar; Uigur, Hsin-chiang tzu-chih-ch'ü po-wu-kuan k'ao-ku-tui, “Hsin-chiang Ming-feng hsien pei ta-sha-mo chung ti ku-tai i-chih,” K'ao-ku, No. 3 (1961), pp. 119–22Google Scholar; po-wu-kuan, Nei-meng-ku, “Ho-lin-ko-erh fa-hsien i-tso chung-yao ti tungHan pi-hua-mu,” Wen-wu, No. 1 (1974), pp. 8–23Google Scholar.

84 Ssu-ch'uan sheng po-wu-kuan, “Ssu-ch'uan Hsin-fan hsien Shui-kuan-yin i-chih shih-chüeh chien-pao,” K'ao-ku, No. 8 (1959), pp. 404–10Google Scholar; Ssu-ch'uan sheng wen-kuan hui, “Ch'eng-tu Yang-tzu-shan t'u-t'ai i-chih ch'ing-li pao-kao,” K'ao-ku hsüeh-pao, No. 4 (1957), pp. 17–31Google Scholar; po-wu-kuan, Ssu-ch'uan sheng, Ssu-ch'uan kuan-tsang fa-chüeh pao-kao (Peking: Wen-wu, 1960)Google Scholar.

85 po-wu-kuan, Yün-nan sheng, Yün-nan Chinning Shih-tsai-shan ku-mu-ch'ün fa-chüeh pao-kao (Peking: Wen-wu, 1959)Google Scholar; Han-chi, Feng, “Yünnan Chin-ning ch'u-t'u t'ung-ku yen-chiu,” Wenwu, No. 1 (1974), pp. 51–61Google Scholar.

86 K'ao-ku yen-chiu-so, Hsin Chung-kuo ti K'aoku shou-hou, p. 75. Also Yang Hsi-chang and Ching-han, Li, “Ts'ung k'ao-ku-hsüeh shang k'an Ch'in ho tung-fang ko-kuo ti she-hai ch'a-pieh,” K'ao-ku, No. 5 (1974), pp. 294–98Google Scholar.

87 For a summary of these discoveries, see Hsüeh, Shu, “Wo-kuo ku-tai chu-mu-chien fa-hsien ch'u-t'u ch'ing-k'uang,” Wen-wu, No. 1 (1978), p. 44Google Scholar.

88 po-wu-kuan, Shan-tung, “Shan-tung Lin-i hsi-mu fa-hsien Sun-tzu ping-fa ho Sun Pin pingfa teng chu-chien ti chien-pao,” Wen-wu, No. 2 (1974), pp. 15–26Google Scholar; Fu-i, Lo, “Lin-i Han-chien kai-shu,” Wen-wu, No. 2 (1974), pp. 32–35Google Scholar; Li-po, Chan, “Sun Pin ping-fa ch'an-chien chiehshao,” Wen-wu, No. 3 (1974), pp. 40–46Google Scholar; Han-mu, Yingchüeh-shan cheng-li hsiao-tsu, “Yingchüeh-shan Han-mu ch'u-t'u Sun-tzu ping-fa ch'an-chien shih-wen,” Wen-wu, No. 2 (1974), pp. 11–19Google Scholar; and, by the same author, “Lin-i Yinchüeh-shan Han-mu ch'u-t'u Sun Pin ping-fa shih-wen,” Wen-wu, No. 1 (1975), pp. 1–11Google Scholar.

89 Fu-i, Lo, “Lin-i Han-chien kai-shu”; Ch'en Chiu-chin and Ch'en Mei-tung, “Lin-i ch'u-t'u Han-ch'u ku-li ch'u-t'an,” Wen-wu, No. 3 (1974), pp. 59–68Google Scholar.

90 po-wu-kuan, Hu-nan et al. , “Ch'ang-sha Mawang-tui erh-san-hao Han-mu fa-chüeh chienpao,” Wen-wu, No. 7 (1974), pp. 39–48Google Scholar. Heng, Kao and Hsi-ch'ao, Ch'i, “Shih-t'an Ma-wangtui Han-mu-chung ti po-shu Lao-tzu,” Wen-wu, No. 11 (1974), pp. 1–7Google Scholar; Han-mu, Ma-wang-tui po-shu cheng-li hsiao-tsu, “Ma-wang-tui Hanmu ch'u-t'u Lao-tzu shih-wen,” Wen-wu, No. 11 (1974), pp. 8–20Google Scholar.

91 Han-m, Ma-wang-tui po-shu cheng-li hsiao-tsu, “Ch'ang-sha Ma-wang-tui Han-mu ch'u-t'u Lao-tzu i-pen ch'üan-ch'ien ku-i-shu shih-wen,” Wen-wu, No. 10 (1974), pp. 30–42Google Scholar; Lan, T'ang, “Huang-ti ssu-ching ch'u-t'an,” Wenwu, No. 10 (1974), pp. 48–52Google Scholar; Hsiang, Ling, “Shih-lun Ma-wang-tui Han-mu po-shu I-yin chiu-chu,” Wen-wu, No. 11 (1974), pp. 21–27Google Scholar; Lan, T'ang, “Ma-wang-tui ch'u-t'u Lao-tzu i-pen chüan-ch'ien ku-i-shu ti yen-chiu,” Kao-ku hsüehpao, No. 1 (1975), pp. 7–38Google Scholar.

92 K'uan, Yang, “Ma-wang-tui po-shu Chankuo-ts'e ti shih-liao chia-chih,” Wen-wu, No. 2 (1975), pp. 26–34Google Scholar; Han-mu, Ma-wang-tui po-shu cheng-li hsiao-tsu, “Ma-wang-tui Han-mu ch'u-t'u po-shu Chan-kuo-ts'e shih-wen,” Wen-wu, No. 4 (1975), pp. 14–26Google Scholar; Yung, Ma, “Po-shu pieh-pen Chan-kuo ts'e ko-pien ti nien-tai ho li-shih pei-ching,” Wen-wu, No. 4 (1975), pp. 27–40Google Scholar.

93 Hsiao-kan ti-ch'ü wen-wu k'ao-ku hsün-lien-pan, “Hu-pei Yün-meng Sui-hu ti shih-i-hao Ch'in-mu fa-chüeh chien-pao,” Wen-wu, No. 6 (1976), pp. 1–10Google Scholar; Ch'in-mu, Yün-meng chu-chien cheng-li hsiao-tsu, “Yün-meng Ch'in-chien shih-wen,” Wen-wu, No. 6, (1976), pp. 11–14Google Scholar, No. 7 (1976), pp. 1–11, and No. 8 (1976), pp. 27–37.

94 Ch'ang-chiang liu-yü ti-erh-ch'i wen-wu k'ao-ku kung-tso jen-yüan hsün-lien-pan, “Hupei Chiang-ling Feng-huang-shan hsi-Han-mu fachüeh chien-pao,” Wen-wu, No. 6 (1974), pp. 41–60Google Scholar; Sheng-chang, Huang, “Chiang-ling Fenghuang-shan Han-mu chien-tu chi-ch'i tsai li-shih ti-li yen-chiu shang ti chia-chih,” Wen-wu, No. 6 (1974), pp. 66–77Google Scholar; and I, Hung, “Chiang-ling Feng-huang-shan shih-hao Han-mu chien-tu ch'ut'an,” Wen-wu, No. 6 (1974), pp. 78–84Google Scholar.

95 K'ao-ku-tui, Kan-su Chü-yen, “Chü-yen Han-tai i-chih ti fa-chüeh ho hsin-ch'u-tu ti chien-ts'e wen-wu,” Wen-wu, No. 1 (1978), pp. 1–25Google Scholar; P'ing-fang, Hsü, “Chü-yen k'ao-ku fa chüeh ti hsin shou-huo,” Wen-wu, No. 1 (1978), pp. 26–29Google Scholar; Chü-yen, Kan-su k'ao-ku-tui chien-ts'e cheng-li hsiao-tsu, “Chien-wu san-nien hou-shu-chün so-tse k'ou-en shih shih-wen,” Wen-wu, No. 1 (1978), pp. 30–31Google Scholar.

96 The first report on the Ho-mu-tu discovery consists of five short articles in Wen-wu, No. 8 (1976), pp. 6–26Google Scholar. The more recent report on this early Neolithic culture which had rice cultivation and wooden-structure dwellings is sheng, Che-chiang wen-wu kuan-li wei-yüan-hui and Che-chiang-sheng po-wu-kuan, “Ho-mu-tu i-chih ti-i-ch'i fa-chüeh pao-kao,” K'ao-ku Hsüeh-pao, No. 1 (1978), pp. 39–94Google Scholar; po-wu-kuan, Che-chiang sheng, “Ho-mu-tu i-chih tung-chih-wu i-ts'un ti chien-ting yen-chiu,” K'ao-ku Hsüeh-pao, No. 1 (1978), pp. 95–108Google Scholar.

97 “The Summary of a Symposium on Neolithic Culture on the Lower Reaches of the Yangtze River,” Wen-wu, No. 3 (1978), pp. 35–39Google Scholar; Ping-i, Su, “Lüeh-t'an wo-kuo tung-nan yen-hai tich'ü ti hsing-shih-ch'i shih-tai k'ao ku,” Wen-wu, No. 3 (1978), pp. 40–42Google Scholar; po-wu-yüan, Nan-ching, “Ch'ang-chiang hsia-yu hsing-shih-ch'i shih-tai wen-hua jo-kan wen-t'i ti t'an-hsi,” Wen-wu, No. 4 (1978), pp. 46–57Google Scholar; Yung-k'ang, Mou and Cheng-chin, Wei, “Ma-chia-ping wen-hua ho Liang-chu wen-hua—T'ai-hu liu-yü yüan-shih wen-hua ti feng-ch'i wen-t'i,” Wen-wu, No. 4 (1978), pp. 67–73Google Scholar.

98 Shen-hsi sheng po-wu-kuan Chou-yüan k'aoku-tui, comp., Chou-yüan k'ao-ku t'ung-hsün, Nos. 10 and 11 (1978)Google Scholar; Wei-chih, Ssu, “Tsao-Chou ti li-shih ch'u-t'an,” Li-shih yen-chiu, No. 9 (1978)Google Scholar.

99 Shirakawa Shizuka, Kinbun tsūshaku (Kōbe: Hakutsuru Bijyutsukan, 1962–1975). Shirakawa, has also compiled a rather brief history of the Shang-Chou period from bronze inscription materials; see his Kinbun no seikai (Tokyo: Heibonsha, 1971)Google Scholar.