Mapping Qijiaping: New Work on the Type-Site of the Qijia Culture (2300–1500 B.C.) in Gansu Province, China

Womack, Andrew; Jaffe, Yitzchak; Zhou, Jing; Lee, Hung; Wang, Hui; Li, Shuicheng; Chen, Pochan; Flad, Rowan K.

doi:10.1080/00934690.2017.1384669

Cited by 18 publications

(23 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Additionally, six samples of natural, local clay and four samples of locally produced modern pottery are analysed (Table 1). Samples from Dayatou and Qijiaping were retrieved primarily during surface survey; geophysical survey at each site, combined with coring at Dayatou and eventual excavation at Qijiaping (Womack et al 2017), allows us, however, to confirm the chronology and nature of subsurface remains underlying the survey areas at both sites (Figure 3). Additionally, comparison of surface and excavated materials at Qijiaping demonstrates that there are no significant differences between the two assemblages.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A petrographic analysis of clay recipes in Late Neolithic north-western China: continuity and change

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A petrographic analysis of clay recipes in Late Neolithic north-western China: continuity and change

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Following the fragmentation of the Qijia (roughly 2300-1500 BCE and see Jaffe and Flad 2018), a number of different ceramic traditions sprang up during the Second and First Millennia BCE (Table 1). These different ceramic types have been the basis for defining the archaeological cultures of Siba (1900( -1500 and Kayue (1600-700 BCE) in the northern parts of Gansu and Qinghai, and the Xindian (1600-600 BCE) and Siwa (1400-700 BCE) in the Center and Eastern part of Gansu (Womack et al, 2017). Both Xindian and Siwa are believed to have derived directly from Qijia and to have continued to influence each other over time (Li et al, 2010;Wang, 2012), however, the nature of this supposed connection between Siwa and Xindian is not clear and based solely on sporadic finds of items stylistically assigned to one culture in sites of the other (e.g., Nan, 1989;Rawson, 2013;Xie, 2002;Zhongguo, 2006).…”

Section: Climate and Social Transformation In Northwestern China Durimentioning

confidence: 99%

Considering change with archaeological data: Reevaluating local variation in the role of the ~4.2k BP event in Northwest China

Jaffe

Hein

2020

The Holocene

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Over the past two decades, environmental studies in research on prehistoric China have been gaining popularity and importance. For Northwest China in particular, climate change, especially the so-called ~4.2k BP event has been seen as the main reason for an alleged collapse of Late Neolithic societies and a transition to pastoral-heavy economies and mobile lifeways. Yet, these explanatory models tend to rely on limited archaeological and environmental data and non-contemporaneous historical data, resulting in simplistic causal relationships between environmental changes and social response. This paper re-evaluates the Incipient Bronze Age in China’s Northwestern region, discussing evidence for climate change and its exact dates, as well as textual and archaeological evidence. We argue that the old narratives perpetuating the image of a dichotomy between Steppe and Sown are inaccurate, while large-scale models of region-wide subsistence change in response to climate cooling tend to disregard local developments and group-specific responses as well as chronological issues. Focusing on the Xindian and Siwa archaeological phenomena, this paper provides a view into sub-regional responses to this climate event, warning against simplistic broad-brush reconstructions and calling for both a return to archaeological fundamentals and large-scale intensive fieldwork and interdisciplinary studies involving archaeologists, paleobotanists, zooarchaeologists, isotope specialists, and climate scientists.

show abstract

“…Thus, like Shimao, the Qijia archaeological culture seems to flourish during the so-called 4.2 ka BP event. In contrast to the commonly accepted image of the Qijia as a highly stratified society, cemetery remains (where almost all Qijia-related data derive from) point to a modest amount of inequality among Qijia communities and varying degrees of ceramic craft specialization between them (Chen 2013; Womack et al, 2017; Jaffe and Flad, 2018). Consequently, when considering the “collapse” of the Qijia it is not at all clear what this entailed.…”

Section: A Critique Of the Current Archaeological Application Of The mentioning

confidence: 93%

“…Hundreds of archaeological sites of the Qijia and later cultures have been identified over the past few decades. Yet, to date, very few Qijia habitation sites have been excavated and published (Womack et al, 2017). While many Qijia sites are recorded in the Gansu (and other) volumes of the atlas of cultural relics, they were found through unsystematic surveys and sporadic salvage excavations.…”

Section: A Critique Of the Current Archaeological Application Of The mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…2000 BC end date for Qijia archaeological culture as woefully inaccurate. Qijia culture ceramics are now viewed to have dates between 2300–1500 BC, as in the recent excavations at the Qijiaping site (Womack et al, 2017), where direct C 14 dating of samples obtained from carefully excavated strata have in fact yielded dates to the sixteenth century BC (Brunson et al, 2020, table 4). Thus, like Shimao, the Qijia archaeological culture seems to flourish during the so-called 4.2 ka BP event.…”

Section: A Critique Of the Current Archaeological Application Of The mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Mismatches of scale in the application of paleoclimatic research to Chinese archaeology

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Issues surrounding the difficult task of correlating archaeological and climatic trajectories are directly impacting the study of human-environmental interaction in Ancient China. We have chosen to focus on the 4.2 ka BP event due to the widespread belief in recent Chinese archaeological publications that it brought about the collapse of Neolithic cultures in multiple regions of China. Following a literature review concerning the many issues surrounding the reconstruction of the 4.2 ka BP event in East Asia, we present three short case studies from the Lower Yangzi, the Shaanxi loess plateau, and the Central Plains detailing a number of problems with Chinese archaeological attempts at using climate change as a causal mechanism for sociopolitical change. We then focus on a common but highly problematic methodology—the growing use of archaeological data compiled in the Atlas of Chinese Cultural Relics to correlate with climate proxies in order to generate linear, causal models explaining sociopolitical collapse. We follow with an example from Northeast China, where work from the past three decades has provided ample data with which to begin answering these questions in a more productive manner, and end with a set of suggestions for archaeologists and climate scientists going forward.

show abstract

Mapping Qijiaping: New Work on the Type-Site of the Qijia Culture (2300–1500 B.C.) in Gansu Province, China

Cited by 18 publications

References 8 publications

A petrographic analysis of clay recipes in Late Neolithic north-western China: continuity and change

A petrographic analysis of clay recipes in Late Neolithic north-western China: continuity and change

Considering change with archaeological data: Reevaluating local variation in the role of the ~4.2k BP event in Northwest China

Mismatches of scale in the application of paleoclimatic research to Chinese archaeology

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About