Page 36 - The Golden Age of Chinese Archaeology: Celebrated Discoveries from the People’s Republic of China

Ming dynasty (1368-1644) near Beijing is often related. Wu Han (1909-1969), vice mayor of
Beijing and a famed historian of Ming history, had proposed to excavate the mausoleums but
was rebuffed by Zheng Zhenduo and Xia Nai. Wu was insistent, and eventually the excavation
plan of the Wanli mausoleum was approved by the State Council. Xia Nai headed the assign-
ment, unwillingly. The excavation ultimately confirmed Xia's belief that existing conditions pre-
sented a major impediment to excavation, and the plan to excavate the largest of the Ming
mausoleums was abandoned. In 1961, the State Council forbade excavation of imperial tombs on
the basis of Xias reports. Later, Guo Moruo wanted to excavate a Tang dynasty mausoleum, but
when Xia Nai objected, Moruo capitulated. Xia frequently exhorted colleagues not to be moti-
vated by the possibility of exhuming treasures. Although settlements or residential sites often
contained only pottery fragments, their research value often surpassed that of many tombs. The
achievement of an archaeologist, Xia argued, should be measured not by what has been recov-
59
ered but rather by how the site has been excavated. Xia's words still guide archaeological
practices today.
In the 19508, Marxism-Leninism-Mao Zedong Thought became the mandatory theoretical
guideline for Chinese archaeology. Marxist historical materialism and the social evolutionary
60
model proposed by anthropologist Lewis Henry Morgan (American, 1818-i88i) and further
61
elaborated by Friedrich Engels (German, 1820-i895) informed the interpretations of archaeo-
logical data. (Guo Moruo had in fact advocated Marxist historical materialism and Morgan's
theory long before 1949.) In 1930, Guo published A Study of Ancient Chinese Society (Zhongguo
gudai shehuiyanjiu), the first scholarly interpretation of ancient Chinese history under the
Marxist model of social evolution with an emphasis on the forces and relations of production.
Adapting Engels' and Morgan's ideas, Guo classified ancient China as having primitive, succes-
62
sive slave societies. Guo's fresh approach not only won recognition from academic circles but
63
dominated archaeological studies from 1949 until very recently. Marxist historical materialism
captivated archaeologists because it proposed that social development was the consequence
of techno-economic and techno-environmental evolution, data manifested in archaeological
findings.
The politicization of archaeological research during this period did not change the data,
and dicta of Morgan, Engels, or Mao Zedong (1893-1976) were often confined to conclusions
or interpretations. One of the paradigms was the attempt to match archaeological discoveries
to the Marxist model of kinship and social organization, such as matriarchal or patrilineal
societies, and no one dared to criticize these efforts. Overall, the objective description and
analysis of archaeological data were not affected, as Chinese archaeologists continued to study
the typology, stratigraphy, and chronology of cultures — an approach that originated in tradi-
tional historiography. 64
Yet, between 1949 and the early 19705, no practical or theoretical exchanges took place
between China and the West. Scholarly and cultural dialogues between Chinese and foreign

35 I MODER N C H I N E S E A R C H A E O L O G Y