Yang Bo: Exploring the Unknown and Revealing the Origins: The Integration and Development of History and Archaeological Research

Author: Yang Bo

Source: "Pre-Qin Qin and Han History" WeChat public account

The original article was published in Chinese Historical Studies, No. 3, 2021

Archaeology and historiography (history in the narrow sense, i.e., documentary historiography) are two separate main components of the science of history. In his early years, Mr. Xia Nai likened the two to "two wheels of a car and two wings of a bird", which should not be abandoned. General Secretary Xi Jinping pointed out that history and archaeological research need to be integrated development, and the fundamental task of integrated development is to "explore the unknown and reveal the origin". So how to reflect the integration of the two in the new situation? How to understand the primary task of "exploring the unknown and revealing the origin"?

I. Disciplinary consensus on the integration and development of history and archaeological research

In terms of disciplinary attributes, archaeology originally existed two major systems of anthropological archaeology and historical archaeology. With the increasing development of research scope, methods and technical means, some scholars have also proposed that modern archaeology has actually become an independent and comprehensive discipline. Therefore, from the research orientation, research methods and academic concepts, there are currently three main research paths for the exploration of early Chinese civilization and culture. The first is the study of traditional literature and historiography, in recent years, the emergence of the Warring States Qin and Han Jian Shuai has emerged, supplementing a large number of informative accounts from the period of ancient history and legend to the Qin and Han Dynasties, prompting our understanding and cognition to be constantly updated. The second is the "multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary" research method based on the excavation of Yin Ruins, which combines archaeological data with documentary records, and objectively promotes the formation of the sentiment of supplementing history. The third is to adhere to the archaeological standard, that is, the "division and combination of attacks" advocated by Mr. Luo Tai and others, with specific emphasis on documentary historiography and archaeology, first of all, we must do our own independent research, and then carefully integrate on the basis of rich materials, and it is not easy to make a comparison of the number into the seat.

Whatever the path of study, archaeology is a discipline that reconstructs ancient history based on ancient remains. Its basic content is to explain the remains, to construct the past according to the remains. When modern archaeology was first introduced to China, it coincided with the re-examination of historical materials by the "Ancient History Discernment School" and the exclusion of non-historical discourses from historiography. The excavation of the Yin Ruins made the Shang Dynasty in the "Records of History" a history of faith, and also convinced people that "the reconstruction of ancient Chinese history" and archaeology is one of the necessary tasks of the foundation. Thus, the integration of Chinese archaeology and historical research is a natural selection that suits China's national conditions.

Of course, modern archaeology is becoming more and more rich and innovative in methods and means, and the research field is also deepening, but its research goal is still that archaeologists rely on the relics to construct or interpret the historical activities of ancient people, and constantly find new materialized carriers for historical research. At present, nearly half of the 19 professional committees established by the Chinese Archaeological Society are related to anthropology and natural sciences, among which the research scope of emerging technologies also includes dating, remote sensing, metallurgy, material structure and composition analysis, diet analysis, archaeological DNA research and the application of archaeological geographic information systems, such as the seeds of carbonized plants with a diameter of less than one millimeter excavated by flotation at the Liulihe Site in Beijing, and the identification of millet, millet, wheat, soybean, barley and other varieties by high-power microscopy. It reflects the dryland agricultural production and lifestyle of the ancestors of The Liulihe River, represented by millet and millet. In this sense, the in-depth exchange between Chinese archaeology and documentary history, anthropology and even natural science related disciplines, and the development of multidisciplinary cross-integration are the meaning of the topic of all-round ancient history exploration. Especially today, when the exchanges between Chinese archaeology and natural science have been normalized, archaeology and documentary historiography are the "allies" in the study of important topics such as the origin of civilization and the formation and development of the Chinese nation, and exchange and integration should be the basic direction of the development of historical science.

"Archaeology and history cannot be cut in two. The phenomenon that archaeology belongs to archaeology and history, and that those who engage in archaeology do not understand history and those who engage in history and do not understand archaeology are a strange phenomenon that should not be taken care of. "The integration and development of Chinese history and archaeological research has also become the main consensus of their respective disciplines, whether it is to take the research path of documentary historiography or archaeology, it is impossible to bypass." The study of the origin of Chinese civilization and the evolution of civilization will be lost without the support of archaeological discoveries; but archaeology will be lost without the guidance and support of history, and it will be lost and even lost. "Archaeology starts from the ruins and relics, based on the physical data of scientific field archaeological excavations, and truly and concretely expands the space-time field of historical research. At the same time, the access to archaeological data is accidental, and the data are often fragmented and one-sided, and cannot directly explain the process of historical development. Documentary historiography has a relatively complete system of ancient history, but the account itself is not completely true and reliable. On the basis of respecting the independence of their respective disciplines, documentary historians should understand the basic characteristics of the archaeological discipline and attach importance to the verification and enrichment of archaeological data on their research results; archaeologists should also learn from the results of the critical research of historical materials in documentary historiography. Whether it is the exploration of "the origin of Chinese civilization" or "Xia culture", any topic has its own historical scope. The primary task of research must be to clarify what historical materials are, how to treat them, and how to arrange and analyze them. "Historical Material Criticism Research" focuses on why historical materials have taken on the current form, explores how the existing historical narratives are formed, and strives to show the various possibilities of history, which requires the joint efforts of history and archaeology.

Second, the multiple possibilities of the integration and development of history and archaeological research

Chinese archaeology, which has historical and scientific attributes, is generally considered to include archaeological research on prehistory, original history and historical periods. This division method is mainly based on the difference in research materials, the key is the existence of words and the function of literature. Although the prehistoric period of China has not yet discovered the writing, it has the origin and development of civilization; the initial rise of the script in the original historical period is a key period for the foundation of the dynasty and the formation of the state. The archaeological remains of the historical period can correspond to the dynasties, nationalities and even historical figures recorded in the literature, such as the site of the Zhou Dynasty and the Western Zhou Dynasty, the northern Zhao Jin Marquis cemetery and the Jin Marquis, the Jin State, the Tomb of the Han Dynasty and the Marquis Liu He of Haixia. As a result, the discourse systems of the two major disciplines of archaeological culture and documentary history of the prehistoric period and the ancient history imperial lineage of the prehistoric period were formally merged. The site of Yin Ruins has also been recognized by the world for its oracle bone inscriptions, especially the excavation of the Huangzu Zhou sacrifice genealogy, and has become the starting point for the integration of archaeology and documentary historiography.

Prehistoric archaeology has the lowest correlation with documentary historiography. Chinese prehistoric archaeology has made remarkable achievements in major academic issues such as the origin of mankind, the agricultural revolution, the formation of civilization, and the emergence of the state. Compared with documentary historiography, archaeology specializes in refining the material remains of ancient behavior and daily life, and making long-term observations of historical processes such as social structure, people's livelihood, and ethnic development; and the grasp of typical people, historical events and chronologies is a long-term deep cultivation of documentary historiography. Therefore, we can see the diverse scenes of the origin of Chinese civilization between 8,000 and 5,300 years ago; we can also observe the long-distance communication network of the upper echelons of society in prehistoric regions, but there is no way to provide confirmation for specific issues that have long been concerned by literature and historiography, such as the existence of the Three Emperors, the Five Emperors, and even the Xia Dynasty, in the absence of direct written materials.

In view of this, the integration of prehistoric archaeology and documentary historiography should be coarse and not detailed. Because archaeology does not study the political system or the character events themselves that documentary historiography focuses on, its combination with social organization and political system requires the establishment of a set of discourse systems that can be transformed. The problem here, as scholars have mentioned, which archaeological and cultural remains can show the identity of the political community and can be used as a symbol of ethnic identity? Most of the remains are related to the daily production and life of the ancients, so pottery as a daily necessity is the main criterion for dividing archaeological culture at present. In this way, there is no small risk in making simple or complex correspondence between archaeological cultures, which are mainly based on daily necessities, and political systems and ethnic groups with institutional construction and ethnic cultural identity as the basic characteristics. The general trend of the integration and development of prehistoric archaeology and documentary historiography is to construct millions of years of human origin history and tens of thousands of years of human prehistory civilization history, to break through the blind spots of human memory and the limitations of legends, to show the historical context of the origin and development of Chinese civilization, and to strive to present a variety of possibilities of history.

The role of documentary historiography and archaeological research in the original historical period has always been the most concerned issue in the integration and development of history and archaeological research. Scholars who adhere to the archeological standard also argue about this. Indeed, the far-fetched interpretation of the cultural remains of archaeological excavations with documents that have not been credibility should be discarded. The inevitable existence of Yao, Shun, Yu, and even the Xia Dynasty does not seem to necessarily have a preset premise. At the same time, it should be recognized that archaeology and documentary historiography, although there are many differences, still have a point of convergence. Archaeology has basically established the cultural sequence of Xia and Shang Jixing through the exploration of the remains of Dengfeng Wangchenggang, Xinmi Xinzhan, Erlitou and Yanshi Shangcheng, Zhengzhou Shangcheng, etc.; although the documents belong to later generations, at least reflect the understanding of ancient history by the reciters. The intersection of these two kinds of historical materials should be able to map the same historical trend and provide a clearer basis for the integration of history and archaeology. For example, the discovery of the "Erlitou" site depends on Mr. Xu Xusheng's exploration of the "Summer Ruins" in western Henan based on documentary records. Even the "divide and attack" approach advocated by scholars who adhere to the archaeological standard does not ignore the important role of documentary historiography. Documentary historiography should be confirmed and tested by archaeology, and documentary records are an important model for archaeologists to interpret archaeological findings. Whether it is away from the archaeological evidence or the discursive background of documentary historiography within the framework system of ancient history research, it will only be one-sided if it is limited to the discussion of either side. The breakthrough of fusion research inevitably requires the convergence of the two. In this way, China's documentary historiography and archaeology urgently need a junction point, a set of operable discourse transformation systems, and the research integration between these two different historical materials and discourse systems still needs to be explored.

Third, the primary task of the integration and development of history and archaeological research

"Exploring the unknown and revealing the origin" is the primary task of the integration and development of history and archaeological research. In the work of revealing the origin, we have "empirically verified the history of mankind in our country for millions of years", and ancient humans have more than 2 million years of evolutionary history in the land of China, from Homo erectus all the way, endlessly, endlessly. Chinese civilization has developed continuously for 5,000 years without breaking, and we have a clearer understanding of the exchanges, interactions, convergence and integration between the regional civilizations of the Yangtze River, the Yellow River, the Huai River and the Liaohe River, and finally formed a historical pattern centered on the Central Plains. From "Yin Ruins" to "Zhou Yuan", archaeology and documentary historiography have enhanced the credibility of Chinese history. From "Huaxia" to "Zhonghua", we also have a clear concept of the concept of "Chinese nation" from indiscriminate and blindfolded to a complete and accurate historical process.

"Exploring the Unknown" can be regarded as an important junction of Chinese documentary historiography and archaeology. The two commonalities between documentary historiography and archaeology: the overlap of research objectives determines the historical and scientific attributes of Chinese archaeology; and the cognitive laws from known to unknown may create a new situation in the integration of two different historical materials and discourse systems.

Archaeology has always adhered to the disciplinary tradition of having a little bit of evidence and saying a few words. Mr. Yan Wenming often said to "take the clear to identify the unclear", which is from known to unknown. Of course, the study of ancient history allows hypotheses or speculations, but any unknown hypotheses or speculations must be developed on the basis of the known, such as the unknown Xia culture must be explored on the basis of the known Shang culture. There are also many successful examples, such as the excavation of Yin Ruins, the study of Tao Mane expanding the underground new materials from written to non-script, the investigation of bronze ceremonial vessels, especially the ding system, which clarified the fog of the ceremonial system recorded in the "Three Rites", and the archaeological discoveries of Zeng Guo in the two weeks explained the "Zeng Sui Mystery". The study of the Northwest Han Dynasty not only enriched the study of the history of the Tunshu system that literature and historiography had emphasized in the past, but also obtained a more comprehensive outlook of social life in the northwest of the Han Dynasty from the relationship between the buried environment and various relics. The integration of history and archaeology from known to unknown can not only construct a spatio-temporal framework for ancient history research, but also open up a broad vision of ancient history research.

The important handicap of "exploring the unknown" should be based on specific historical issues. The handling of archaeological materials should be carried out with specific historical problems; the understanding of archaeological materials should be as close as possible to the historical background. In this way, with the help of historical information such as documentary records, it is possible to effectively transform archaeological materials into historical materials. For example, comparing archaeological culture with the great changes in settlements and the wars or migration events recorded in ancient history, identifying key basic points is also an effective way to verify the authenticity of ancient history and legends. From the known starting point of documentary historiography confirmed by archaeology to the interpretation of unknown "materialized historical materials", such integrated research seems to be more in line with the search for historical truth. Even for the study of settlement archaeology that restores the face of ancient societies, documentary historiography is indispensable. For example, the formation and abandonment of the han dynasty agricultural settlements in Neihuangsanyangzhuang are further refined with the help of documentary records, and the formation of the Sanyangzhuang ruins is closely related to the "Hedu Wei County" in the three years of the founding of the New Mang. In this way, the picture of the rise and fall of the Yellow River beach reclamation and the development and evolution of agricultural settlement forms in the Han Dynasty is about to come out. Therefore, the "archaeological research in historical context" from the known to the unknown is a useful attempt to integrate the current development of history and archaeological research.

The integration of history and archaeology has maximized the "extension of the historical axis, enhanced the credibility of history, enriched the historical connotation, and revitalized the historical scene" to the greatest extent. In the past hundred years since the rise of the "Ancient History Discernment School" and the birth of modern archaeology, China's historical scientific research has adhered to the spirit of "having a material to say a word", practiced the primary task of "exploring the unknown and revealing the origin", constantly explained the formation and development process of the Chinese nation and the Chinese civilization as a pluralistic unity and the integration of the family and the country, and provided a thick ideological heritage and academic accumulation for the construction of the discipline system, academic system and discourse system of history with Chinese characteristics. Historical research is the foundation of all social sciences, and the understanding of history is inseparable from archaeology, and historical science is enriched through research, including archaeology. The integrated development of history and archaeological research will surely make new contributions to "condensing the genes of civilization, expounding traditional values, cultivating cultural self-confidence, and helping national rejuvenation".

The author is Yang Bo, an assistant researcher at the Institute of Ancient History of the Chinese Academy of History

Comments from omitted, the full version please refer to the original text.

Editor: Xiang Yu

Proofreader: Water Life

Official subscription number of the Chinese Academy of History

Historical China WeChat subscription account