Abstract
The “independent invention versus diffusion” argument remains undecided regarding the inception—or rather inceptions—of copper-based metallurgy in China. The intriguing course leading to the substantial rise of a distinctive metallurgical tradition that can be confidently called “Chinese” was probably too perplexing to be explained by a single theoretical model. Even we choose to follow metallurgical diffusionism in understanding the case of early China, presumably two mechanisms of technological transmission existed simultaneously. One, was in the small-scale and irregular transregional communications of long standing, involving many cultural groups in China, the arc, Inner Asia, and southern Siberia. The other was rapid, direct, and long-distance transmission, represented by the diffusion of the Seima-Turbino metalwork. The current paradigm, unfortunately, still has difficulty explaining the isolated metal “alloys” from Middle Neolithic China, such as the fifth-millennium copper-zinc anomaly witnessed at Lintong Jiangzhai, Shaanxi province. If such incredible discoveries could finally be authenticated, that strange beginning in metal supposably had little, if anything, to do with the rest of the story (or a new story?) of Chinese metallurgy as a persistent endeavor; taking all things into consideration, the prehistoric “brasses” probably had nothing to do with, for example, the splendid Bronze Age of China. To better comprehend the origins of copper-based metalworking in China, we may need to move beyond “independent invention versus diffusion” for a new paradigm in Chinese archaeometallurgy.
Presenters
Peng PengAssistant Professor, Faculty of Arts, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
Details
Presentation Type
Paper Presentation in a Themed Session
Theme
KEYWORDS
Chinese Archaeometallurgy, Paradigm Shift, Shift Origins, Independent invention, Di!usion
