Ordos Daggers and Knives: New Material, Classification and Chronology. Second Part: Knives

Loehr, Max

doi:10.2307/3248690

Cited by 4 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…708-710]. При обсуждении контактов культуры Иньсюй с карасукской культурой Гао Цюйсюнь в основном использовал все англоязычные археологические публикации по теме, которые были ему доступны (см., например: [Karlgren, 1945;Loehr, 1949;1951;1956a;1956b;Jettmar, 1950]. На основании этих статей он сопоставил бронзовые изделия Иньсюй и карасукской культур.…”

Section: постоянно растущий интересunclassified

The Studies of the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Cultures of Southern Siberia by Chinese Archaeologists in the First Half of the 20<sup>th</sup> Century

Wang

2024

VNSUIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose. The article present the study of the cultures of the Bronze and Early Iron Ages in Southern Siberia by Chinese archaeologists in the first half of the 20th century and gives historiographical review of this study. The date of liberation, namely 1949, is an obvious chronological reference point for Chinese history and for the scientific development of China as well. But as for studying of Siberian cultures of Bronze and Early Iron ages in the 1950s, Chinese archaeologists simply continued previous tendencies. During this decade there was a quantitative increase in publications and even the first direct contacts were made, but external political obstacles prevented the transition of research to a higher level of quality.Results. We can state now that only the materials of Yinxu at Anyang were used by Chinese scholars for comparative analysis with Bronze Age finds from Southern Siberia. Consequently, in our investigation we address the period from 1920s to 1950s as one historiographical stage.Conclusion Nevertheless, it was in the 1950s that the foundation was laid for the subsequent rapid growth of scientific interaction in the field of archeology in general and in the study of the paleometal age of Southern Siberia in particular. The period of active research began in the late 1970s and early 1980s and continues to the present day.

show abstract

Section: постоянно растущий интересunclassified

The Studies of the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Cultures of Southern Siberia by Chinese Archaeologists in the First Half of the 20<sup>th</sup> Century

Wang

2024

VNSUIP

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…19 I. to establish a general or non-regional ("CD") category for the sixth to fourth century Huai style mirrors (at present there are ten Honan mirrors in "Shou-chou" Category C, and Karlgren himself said that at the earliest stage "there may have been a mirror industry identical in both centers5'"); and 2. to associate the later C Category examples with the art of the Ch'u kingdom in toto rather than with a particular center. The Ch'u manner is developed and unmistakable in fourth and third century mirrors of the C group.…”

Section: Category D: the Loyang Or Central Regional Group Mirrors DImentioning

confidence: 99%

The Early Chinese Mirror

Dohrenwend¹

1964

Artibus Asiae

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.. Artibus Asiae Publishers is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Artibus Asiae. All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions DORIS DOHRENWEND THE EARLY CHINESE MIRROR T hree small bronze disks unearthed from Chinese soil and published within the past decade suggest that the round metal mirror was known and used in China as early as the Western Chou and even the Shang period. One such find is a small disk from the Shang site at Houchia-chuang. It has a long central loop, a convex reflecting surface, and the back is decorated with a design of striated quadrants bordered by a band of scallops'. A second early specimen antedates 770 B. C. as it was found in a Chinese tomb of Western Chou date excavated in the region of the great dam site at San Men Hsia on the Yellow River2. It is round, rimless and perfectly flat, with a double loop; the decoration consists of two very primitive profile tigers flanking a wild horse or ass above the loop, and a bird below. The design, rendered in a thread-like relief line, brings to mind two mirrors of comparable style (one with dancing figures in the Yale University Museum3, the other with a coiled quadruped design in Kyoto4), and suggests a relation to Ordos rather than to Chinese art. The third piece, in the collection of Kyoto Uni-versity5, is perhaps the most significant. Its loop is analogous to the loop of the Shang mirror; its face is slightly concave; and it has a Middle Chou decor of interlacing, grooved, flat dragon bands. These examples are still isolated and thus problematical. Only one of them, the "Middle * I would like to express my gratitude at the outset to Professor Max Loehr of Harvard University and Professor Alexander Soper of Bryn Mawr and New York University's Institute of Fine Arts for their criticism and encouragement. Without it this paper would surely remain, as do so many old seminar papers, unreadable and unread. I See Kao Ch'u-hsiin, Yin-tai ti i-mien t'ung-ching chi ch'i hsiang-kuan chih wen-t'i (Problems of the Bronze Mirror Discovered from a Shang burial), Academia Sinica, Bulletin of the Institute of History and Philology, XXIX (Taipei, 195 8), Plate 2 and pp. 685-721. This button or lid-like bronze object was found in I934, loop down, at the western side of Hsi-peikang I005, a grave believed to date from the later Shang period which contained the remains of six individuals and was one of a group of thirty-seven other small graves. Polished metal is still visible on the face of the disk, which elsewhere shows traces of red pigment and of woven material. While he mentions the divergent opinion of scholars on the Chinese mainland and the(initial) doubts of the Japanese scholar Sueji Um...

show abstract

The Chinese Northern frontier: reassessment of the Bronze Age burials from Baifu

Csorba

1996

Antiquity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

All across the thousands of kilometres of northern central Asia — from the Baltic Sea to the Yellow Sea — burials have been key to the later prehistoric sequence. The immediate subjects of this article are three late Bronze Age burials from North China; rich and well-preserved with weaponry and horse fittings, with agate and rush matting, they tell also of the world outside China, for into one of the daggers is cast the full-face image of a Caucasian male, complete with handlebar moustache.

show abstract

Ordos Daggers and Knives: New Material, Classification and Chronology. Second Part: Knives

Cited by 4 publications

References 0 publications

The Studies of the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Cultures of Southern Siberia by Chinese Archaeologists in the First Half of the 20<sup>th</sup> Century

The Studies of the Bronze Age and Early Iron Age Cultures of Southern Siberia by Chinese Archaeologists in the First Half of the 20<sup>th</sup> Century

The Early Chinese Mirror

The Chinese Northern frontier: reassessment of the Bronze Age burials from Baifu

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About