Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T21:17:00.510Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Development of Metallurgy in Southeast Asia: Reply to Loofs-Wissowa

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 April 2011

Donn Bayard  and
Pisit Charoenwongsa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

We find this a most curious attack, both in tone and in substance; Loofs-Wissowa appears to believe that we, Solheim, Gorman, and the media have been engaged in a conspiracy to cloud the minds of Westerners and Southeast Asians alike on the origins of metallurgy in the region. Loofs-Wissowa evidently feels that Southeast Asian laymen view this question as equal in importance to contemporary issues there (which is of course not the case). He also believes that it is the most burning issue in archaeology since Piltdown or Glozel, splitting the profession into “Believers” in the “long dates” and “Non Believers”. This is again rather an exaggeration; we would estimate the “Believers” to number not more than a few hundred, while the “Non Believers” may be counted on the fingers of one hand (Marschall, Sørensen, Sieveking, and of course Loofs-Wissowa himself). The remainder of the archaeological world (i.e., over 90%) has other questions to occupy it. However, Loofs-Wissowa is certainly correct in pointing out the attention paid to the question of early metallurgy over the past few years, and we welcome this opportunity to counter his arguments and distinguish between our views and those published by the media. This may best be done by first pointing out errors of omission in the facts presented by Loofs-Wissowa, by examining basic errors in his conceptual framework, and finally by answering the three specific questions he poses.

Type
Articles
Information
Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , Volume 14 , Issue 1 , March 1983 , pp. 12 - 17
Copyright
Copyright © The National University of Singapore 1983

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

Three of us should be writing this reply, but the tragic loss of our friend and colleague, Chet Gorman, has made this impossible. We believe we are answering Loofs-Wissowa's queries in the manner he would have chosen had he been spared to do so. We are grateful for the comments of Noel Barnard on an earlier version of this reply; the opinions expressed are of course strictly our own.

1 Bayard, D.T., Non Nok Tha: The 1968 Excavation. Procedure, Stratigraphy, and A Summary of the Evidence (Dunedin: University of Otago Studies in Prehistoric Anthropology 4, 1971)Google Scholar. Bayard, D.T., “Excavation at Non Nok Tha, Northeastern Thailand, 1968: An Interim Report”, Asian Perspectives XIII (1970, publ. 1972): 109–143Google Scholar.

2 Reed, C.A., “Origins of Agriculture: Discussions and Some Conclusions”, in The Origins of Agriculture, ed. Reed, C.A. (The Hague: Mouton, 1977), pp. 879–953CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Bayard, D.T., “The Chronology of Prehistoric Metallurgy in North-east Thailand: Silabhumi or Samrddhabhumi?”, in Early South East Asia: Essays in Archaeology, History, and Historical Geography, ed. Smith, R.B. and Watson, W. (New York and Kuala Lumpur: Oxford University Press, 1979), pp. 15–32Google Scholar.

3 Bayard, D.T., “Early Thai Bronze: Analysis and New Dates”, Science 176 (1972): 1411–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

4 Marschall, W., “On the Stone Age of Indonesia”, Tribus 23 (Stuttgart, 1974): 71–90.Google Scholar

5 Bronson, B. and Han, M., “A Thermoluminescence Series from Thailand”, Antiquity XLVI, 184 (1972): 322–26.Google Scholar

6 Loofs, H.H.E., “Thermoluminescence Dates from Thailand: Comments”, Antiquity XLVIII/189(1974): 58–62Google Scholar.

7 Fleming, S., Thermoluminescence Techniques in Archaeology (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1979), p. 10Google Scholar.

8 Twenty-seven of these are available in Gorman, C.F. and Charoenwongsa, Pisit, “From Domestication to Urbanization: A Southeast Asian View of Chronology, Configuration and Change”(paper presented at “Symposium on the Origin of Agriculture and Technology: West or East?” in Aarhus,Denmark, 1978, currently in press).Google Scholar

9 Gorman, C.F. and Charoenwongsa, Pisit, “Ban Chiang: A Mosaic of Impressions from the First Two Years”, Expedition 18/4 (1976): 14–26Google Scholar.

10 Gorman and Pisit, “From Domestication to Urbanization”.

11 Pisit Charoenwongsa and D.T. Bayard, “Non Chai: New Dates on Metal-working and Possible Trade from Northeast Thailand” (paper submitted to Science). D.T. Bayard, Pisit Charoenwongsa, and Somsuda Rutnin, “Excavations at Non Chai, Northeast Thailand” (to appear in Asian Perspectives XXIII/I; in preparation).

12 Chang, K.C., The Archaeology of Ancient China, 3rd ed. (New Haven: Yale, 1977), p. 455Google Scholar.

13 Loofs-Wissowa, H.H.E., “Report on an Archaeological Journey to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam”, Bulletin, Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association 11 (1980): 31–39.Google Scholar

14 Ibid., p. 36.

15 Tan, Ha Van, “Nouvelles Recherches Prehistoriques et Protohistoriques au Vietnam”, Bull. École Française d'Extrême-Orient LXVIII (1980): 129.Google Scholar

16 Bayard, D.T., “The Roots of Indochinese Civilisation: Recent Advances in the Prehistory of Southeast Asia”, Pacific Affairs 53/1 (1980): 97–98.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

17 Loofs-Wissowa, “Archaeological Journey”, p. 37.

18 Ha, “Nouvelles Researches”, pp. 135–36.

19 Ibid., p. 131.

20 Wertime, T.A., “The Beginnings of Metallurgy: A New Look”, Science CLXXXII/4115 (1973): 885.Google ScholarPubMed

21 Coghlan, H.H., Notes on the Metallurgy of Copper and Bronze in the Old World, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Pitt Rivers Museum Occasional Papers on Technology 4, 1975), p. 38Google Scholar.

22 Forbes, R.J., Studies in Ancient Technology IX (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1972), p. 134Google Scholar.

23 Dayton, J.E., “The Problem of Tin in the Ancient World”, World Archaeology III/I (1970): 49–70Google Scholar. Muhly, J.D. and Wertime, T. A., “Evidence for the Sources and Use of Tin During the Bronze Age of the Near East: A Reply to J.E. Dayton”, World Archaeology V/I (1973): 111–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Dayton, J.E.. “The Problem of Tin in the Ancient World; A Reply to Dr. Muhly and Dr. Wertime”, World Archaeology V/I (1973): 123–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar. T.A. Wertime, “New Look”, p. 884.

24 Charoenwongsa, Pisit, “The Resource Base in the Asian Bronze Age, with Special Reference to Southeast Asia”, Journal of Archaeology 7/2 (Bangkok: Silpakon University, 1977): 33–54Google Scholar. Charoenwongsa, Pisit, “Early Southeast Asian Bronze in the Light of Excavation in Thailand”, in Bronze Culture in Asia (Tehran: UNESCO, 1978), pp. 53–78Google Scholar.

25 Barnard, N., “Some Observations on Metal–Winning, and the ‘Societal Requirements’ of Early Metal Production in China”(paper presented at “Symposium on the Origin of Agriculture and Technology: West or East?” in Aarhus,Denmark, 1978, currently in press)Google Scholar.

26 Saurin, E. and Carbonnel, J.-P., “Evolution Préhistorique de la Péninsula Indochinoise d'Après les Donnes Récentes”, Paleorient II/I (1974): 149Google Scholar.

27 Pisit, “Resource Base”. Bayard, “Recent Advances”. Bayard, D.T., “An Early Indigenous Bronze Technology in Northeast Thailand: Its Implications for the Prehistory of East Asia”, in The Diffusion of Material Culture, ed. Loofs–Wissowa, H.H.E. (Honolulu: Social Science Research Institute, Asian and Pacific Archaeology Series 9, 1980), pp. 191–214Google Scholar.

28 Renfrew, C., “The Autonomy of the South-East European Copper Age”, Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society XXXV (1969): 12–47Google Scholar.

29 Chang, Ancient China, p. 279. N. Bernard and Tamotsu, Sato, Metallurgical Remains of Ancient China (Tokyo: Nichiosha, 1975)Google Scholar. Xuezheng, Zhang, Shuyun, Sun, Rubin, Han, and Wenlong, Hu, “Early Copper and Bronze in Gansu”(paper presented at “Symposium on Early Chinese Metallurgy”in Beijing,October 1981)Google Scholar.

30 Forbes, Ancient Technology, p. 229.

31 Barnard, B., Radiocarbon Dates and their Significance in the Chinese Archaeological Scene (Canberra: ANU, 1980), p. 38.Google Scholar

32 Barnard, N., “The Special Character of Metallurgy in Ancient China”, in The Application of Science in Examination of Works of Art, ed. Young, W.J. (Boston: Proceedings of the Museum of Fine Arts, 1967), p. 187Google Scholar.

33 Bayard, “Chronology”.

34 Gorman and Pisit, “From Domestication to Urbanization”, p. 26.

35 Ha, “Nouvelles Researches”.

36 Higham, C.F.W., “Excavations at Ban Nadi, Northeastern Thailand, 1980–1981”, South-East Asian Studies Newsletter 5 (1981): 1–2Google Scholar. Higham, C.F.W. and Kijngam, Amphan, “Ban Nadi, Northeastern Thailand: Further Radiocarbon Dates”, South-East Asian Studies Newsletter 7 (1982): 1–3.Google Scholar

37 Bayard, “Chronology”.

38 For example, see Coghlan, “Notes”, fig. 26.

39 Bayard, “Early Indigenous Bronze Technology”, p. 193.

40 Bayard, D.T. and Parker, R.H., “Interpretation of Sai Yok and Ban Kao Sites, Central Thailand”, Asian Perspectives XIX/2 (1976, publ. 1978): 289–94.Google Scholar

41 Loofs, H.H.E. and Watson, W., “The Thai-British Archaeological Expedition: a Preliminary Report on the Work of the Second Season 1967”, Journal Siam Society LVIII/2 (1970): 78.Google Scholar