This paper reviews the interpretation of Chinese Neolithic burials by Chinese archaeologists, comparing their approaches to those of some processual and symbolic archaeologists of the West and also of western Marxist anthropologists. Descriptions of recent Chinese burial practices provide ethnoarchaeological comparison. The author concludes that there may have been a shift from “matrilineal” to “patrilineal” organization, but that this shift cannot be documented from archaeological data alone. Exploration of the spatial and symbolic aspects of the burials is advocated. The paper concludes with a pilot project devoted to the statistical discovery of sets of ceramic vessels used in rituals ancestral to those of the Bronze Age.

The question whether the Xia and the Shang signify a relatively homogeneous culture or relatively distinct cultures is approached through efforts both to determine whether the late Erlitou culture dates to the final years of dynastic Xia or to the beginning of Shang and to identify, in turn, those early Bronze Age sites most likely to correspond to the first recorded Shang capitals. By contrasting traditional chronologies with the developmental sequences of artifacts, the author reaches the conclusion that the Bronze Age remains at Erlitou represent the late Xia culture and the discoveries at Zhengzhou, the period of the Bo capital. A close affiliation between the Shang and the Xia rulers in the time prior to the conquest, revealed by the Bamboo Annals, is shown to be consistent with the archaeological evidence which Indicates that the transition between the two dynastic periods was characterized primarily by continuous development, rather than by disruption or radical change. The proposal is also made that the most significant influence from the eastcoast cultures upon those of the Zhong Yuan may have occurred during Xia times, instead of during Shang.

By exploring the shift of ancestral worship centers in ancient China and its impact on art, the author argues that the genealogical/political structure of the Three Dynasties found its religious form in temple worship; however, following the decline of this system during the Eastern Zhou and the Qin, the tomb of an individual increased in importance. This process culminated during the Eastern Han: Problems in dynastic succession forced the Eastern Han rulers to abandon temple ceremonies and transfer them to graveyards. But this new system was again renounced by the following Wei dynasty, and many funerary structures were destroyed in an “iconoclastic” movement. The author contends that this complex development in religion strongly influenced and even governed the course of ancient Chinese art: Corresponding to the shift in religious center, the tomb assumed new symbolic imagery, and pictorial funerary art replaced ritual vessels to become the dominant artistic genre of early imperial China.

The location of the early Chu capital, Danyang, has never been definitively determined. Since Han times, several hypotheses have been offered. That advocating a southwest Hubei location (Zigui or Zhijiang xian), the standard opinion, has generally governed analyses of early Chu historical and cultural development, particularly of the archaeological data uncovered in the past few decades. Another hypothesis, that advocating a southwest Henan (Xichuan) site for Danyang, however, has recently gained popularity.

The Danyang problem can be approached from a number of angles. This paper attempts first to assess the relative probabilities of all of the hypotheses on the basis of a rather strict evaluation of the evidence provided by historical geography and then to judge the quality of the presently available archaeological evidence given in support of each. From the above perspectives, the author concludes that the relative probabilities favor the southwest Henan hypothesis.

This paper discusses some of the difficulties surrounding the interpretation of Mencius 2B. 13. After considering the most important traditional Chinese commentaries, the author discusses the interpretations of a number of modern scholars, from both the East and the West. He then offers two new interpretations and concludes that the second is the most appropriate.

This discussion of the different malfeasances subsumed under the general term “theft” in Ch'in-Han law is based on the Shih chi, the Han shu, and the Hou Han shu and their early commentaries, as well as on the Han commentaries to the Classics. Besides common theft and robbery, “theft” included bribery and corruption, receiving stolen goods, intimidation and embezzling, and, it seems, smuggling certain items. As far as possible, actual cases are quoted in illustration.

Archaeological finds of the last several decades in China, Mongolia, and South Siberia encourage a reconsideration of the nature and extent of cultural exchange between Zhou China and the early nomads. This paper considers a number of object types, artistic techniques, motifs, and stylistic characteristics that are frequently associated with a nomadic origin but that have not previously been carefully discussed. These include the use of inlay; the bronze standard top and the belt hook; certain pictorial elements such as the animal combat; and naturalism and the pictorial rendition of narrative. The conclusions emerging from this consideration indicate the necessity of rethinking terminology used in discussions of the nomad world and of its artistic traditions.