Background: Hominids used stone tools for hundreds of thousands of years without exhibiting significant technological progress. The latter first occurred after the end of the last ice age, above all with the introduction of agriculture. At that time, agrarian societies emerged with production techniques, including ceramic technology, basketry, weaving, and cordage, that individuals could master and for which the raw materials could be obtained through subsistence farming. The question arises as to the process by which early societies – in this case in China – were able to advance to a higher level of technology. The working hypothesis is that this was made possible by the hybridization of technologies in urban centers. The exchange among specialized artisans led to cross-fertilization, which facilitated the development of new techniques. Objective: This study first discusses some prominent earlier models of thought on the development of urbanism. It then attempts to apply the concept of technology hybridization to the development of various technologies in ancient China. In particular, topics such as hydraulic engineering, bronze metallurgy, jade industry, and scribal art are discussed. Method: The approach of comparative archaeology allows an understanding of the dynamics of long-term social and technological change in early Chinese societies. A transdisciplinary and diachronic approach is used to reveal long-term social variability and cross-cultural connections. Results: Urbanism is both an expression of technology and a catalyst of further technological progress. Technology hybridization, the convergence and cross-fertilization of technologies of different natures in urban centers, is ultimately an important driving force of cultural progress. Conclusion: Despite great differences in terms of geological substrate, topography, climate, and vegetation, early Chinese cultures shared several common characteristics. These included complex social organization, the existence of social classes, and an increasingly urban landscape with specialized workshops and sophisticated technologies such as copper and bronze metallurgy, jade carving, divination, and writing. This Chinese civilization did not simply emerge from the Central Plains and then absorb and assimilate the cultures of the surrounding regions. Rather, it is the result of a process in which various traditions, peoples, languages, and ethnicities were woven into a historically complex and multilayered fabric. Presumably, the early polities were independent cities or city-states that retained their political autonomy. Actual technical progress took place primarily where population density was high, i.e., in urban centers.
| Published in | International Journal of Archaeology (Volume 10, Issue 1) |
| DOI | 10.11648/j.ija.20221001.14 |
| Page(s) | 24-30 |
| Creative Commons |
This is an Open Access article, distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, provided the original work is properly cited. |
| Copyright |
Copyright © The Author(s), 2024. Published by Science Publishing Group |
Urbanism, Technology, Early China, Hybridization, Hydraulic Engineering, Bronze Age, Jade, Writing
| [1] | Arthur, W. Brian. 2009. The Nature of Technology: What It Is and How It Evolves. New York: Free Press. |
| [2] | Boltz, William G. 1999. “Language and Writing.” In The Cambridge History of Ancient China – From the Origins of Civilizations to 221 B.C., edited by Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 74–123. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
| [3] | Childe, Gordon V. 1950. “The Urban Revolution.” The Town Planning Review 21 (1): 3–17. |
| [4] | Ebrey, Patricia Buckley. 2006. The Cambridge Illustrated History of China. Eighth printing. Cambridge Illustrated History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. |
| [5] | Demattè, Paola. 1999. “Longshan-Era Urbanism: The Role of Cities in Predynastic China.” Asian Perspectives 38 (2): 131–53. |
| [6] | Flad, Rowan. 2008. “Divination and Power: A Multi-Regional View of the Development of Oracle Bone Divination in Early China.” Current Anthropology 49 (3): 403–37. |
| [7] | Flad, Rowan. 2012. “Bronze, Jade, Gold and Ivory: Valuable Objects in Ancient Sichuan.” In The Construction of Value in the Ancient World, edited by John K. Papadoupoulos and Gary Urton, 258–87. Los Angeles: Cotsen Institute of Archaeology. |
| [8] | Flad, Rowan. 2018. “Urbanism as Technology in Early China.” Archaeological Research in Asia 14 (June): 121–34. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ara.2016.09.001. |
| [9] | Fried, Morton Herbert. 1967. The Evolution of Political Society: An Essay in Political Anthropology. Vol. AS 7. Random House Studies in Anthropology. New York: Random House. |
| [10] | Jiang, Leping, and Li Liu. 2006. “New Evidence for the Origins of Sedentism and Rice Domestication in the Lower Yangzi River, China.” Antiquity 80 (308): 355–61. |
| [11] | Li, Yung-ti. 2007. “Co-Craft and Multicraft: Section-Mold Casting and the Organization of Craft Production at the Shang Capital of Anyang.” In Craft Production in Complex Societies: Multicraft and Producer Perspectives, edited by I. Shimada, 184–223. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. |
| [12] | Li, Xueqin, Garman Harbottle, Juzhong Zhang, and Changsui Wang. 2003. “The Earliest Writing? Sign Use in the Seventh Millennium BC at Jiahu, Henan Province, China.” Antiquity 77 (295): 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00061329. |
| [13] | Liu, Bin, Ningyuan Wang, Minghui Chen, Xiaohong Wu, Duowen Mo, Jianguo Liu, Shijin Xu, and Yijie Zhuang. 2017. “Earliest Hydraulic Enterprise in China, 5,100 Years Ago.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 114 (52): 13637–42. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1710516114. |
| [14] | Liu, Li, Gyoung-Ah Lee, Leping Jiang, and Juzhong Zhang. 2007. “The Earliest Rice Domestication in China.” Antiquity 81 (313). |
| [15] | Liu, Siran, K. L. Chen, Thilo Rehren, Jianjun J. Mei, J. L. Chen, Y. Liu, and D. Killick. 2018. “Did China Import Metals from Africa in the Bronze Age?” Archaeometry 60 (1): 105–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/arcm.12352. |
| [16] | Lubbock, John. 1865. Prehistoric Times: As Illustrated by Ancient Remains, and the Manners and Customs of Modern Savages. London: Williams and Norgate. https://hdl.handle.net/2027/inu.30000128446832. |
| [17] | Mei, Jianjun, Yongbin Yu, Kunlong Chen, and Lu Wang. 2017. “The Appropriation of Early Bronze Technology in China.” In Appropriating Innovations: Entangled Knowledge in Eurasia, 5000‒1500 BCE, edited by Joseph Maran and Philipp W. Stockhammer, 1st ed., 231–40. Oxford: Oxbow Books. |
| [18] | Morgan, Lewis Henry. 1877. Ancient Society: Or, Researches in the Line of Human Progress from Savagery through Barbarism to Civilization. Chicago: C.H. Kerr. |
| [19] | Renfrew, Colin, and Paul Bahn. 2020. Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice. London: Thames & Hudson. |
| [20] | Schmidt, Klaus. 2006. Sie bauten die ersten Tempel – Das rätselhafte Heiligtum der Steinzeitjäger. München: C.H. Beck. |
| [21] | Service, Elman R. 1975. Origins of the State and Civilization: The Process of Cultural Evolution. First edition. New York: Norton. |
| [22] | Shelach-Lavi, Gideon. 2015. The Archaeology of Early China: From Prehistory to the Han Dynasty. New York: Cambridge University Press. |
| [23] | Wheatley, Paul. 1971. The Pivot of the Four Quarters: A Preliminary Enquiry into the Origins and Character of the Ancient Chinese City. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. |
APA Style
Eberhard Zangger. (2022). Urbanism in Prehistoric China as a Driving Force in Technology Hybridization. International Journal of Archaeology, 10(1), 24-30. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20221001.14
ACS Style
Eberhard Zangger. Urbanism in Prehistoric China as a Driving Force in Technology Hybridization. Int. J. Archaeol. 2022, 10(1), 24-30. doi: 10.11648/j.ija.20221001.14
Share This Article
Twitter
Linked In
Facebook
Copy
Download@article{10.11648/j.ija.20221001.14,
author = {Eberhard Zangger},
title = {Urbanism in Prehistoric China as a Driving Force in Technology Hybridization},
journal = {International Journal of Archaeology},
volume = {10},
number = {1},
pages = {24-30},
doi = {10.11648/j.ija.20221001.14},
url = {https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20221001.14},
eprint = {https://article.sciencepublishinggroup.com/pdf/10.11648.j.ija.20221001.14},
abstract = {Background: Hominids used stone tools for hundreds of thousands of years without exhibiting significant technological progress. The latter first occurred after the end of the last ice age, above all with the introduction of agriculture. At that time, agrarian societies emerged with production techniques, including ceramic technology, basketry, weaving, and cordage, that individuals could master and for which the raw materials could be obtained through subsistence farming. The question arises as to the process by which early societies – in this case in China – were able to advance to a higher level of technology. The working hypothesis is that this was made possible by the hybridization of technologies in urban centers. The exchange among specialized artisans led to cross-fertilization, which facilitated the development of new techniques. Objective: This study first discusses some prominent earlier models of thought on the development of urbanism. It then attempts to apply the concept of technology hybridization to the development of various technologies in ancient China. In particular, topics such as hydraulic engineering, bronze metallurgy, jade industry, and scribal art are discussed. Method: The approach of comparative archaeology allows an understanding of the dynamics of long-term social and technological change in early Chinese societies. A transdisciplinary and diachronic approach is used to reveal long-term social variability and cross-cultural connections. Results: Urbanism is both an expression of technology and a catalyst of further technological progress. Technology hybridization, the convergence and cross-fertilization of technologies of different natures in urban centers, is ultimately an important driving force of cultural progress. Conclusion: Despite great differences in terms of geological substrate, topography, climate, and vegetation, early Chinese cultures shared several common characteristics. These included complex social organization, the existence of social classes, and an increasingly urban landscape with specialized workshops and sophisticated technologies such as copper and bronze metallurgy, jade carving, divination, and writing. This Chinese civilization did not simply emerge from the Central Plains and then absorb and assimilate the cultures of the surrounding regions. Rather, it is the result of a process in which various traditions, peoples, languages, and ethnicities were woven into a historically complex and multilayered fabric. Presumably, the early polities were independent cities or city-states that retained their political autonomy. Actual technical progress took place primarily where population density was high, i.e., in urban centers.},
year = {2022}
}
TY - JOUR T1 - Urbanism in Prehistoric China as a Driving Force in Technology Hybridization AU - Eberhard Zangger Y1 - 2022/05/31 PY - 2022 N1 - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20221001.14 DO - 10.11648/j.ija.20221001.14 T2 - International Journal of Archaeology JF - International Journal of Archaeology JO - International Journal of Archaeology SP - 24 EP - 30 PB - Science Publishing Group SN - 2330-7595 UR - https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ija.20221001.14 AB - Background: Hominids used stone tools for hundreds of thousands of years without exhibiting significant technological progress. The latter first occurred after the end of the last ice age, above all with the introduction of agriculture. At that time, agrarian societies emerged with production techniques, including ceramic technology, basketry, weaving, and cordage, that individuals could master and for which the raw materials could be obtained through subsistence farming. The question arises as to the process by which early societies – in this case in China – were able to advance to a higher level of technology. The working hypothesis is that this was made possible by the hybridization of technologies in urban centers. The exchange among specialized artisans led to cross-fertilization, which facilitated the development of new techniques. Objective: This study first discusses some prominent earlier models of thought on the development of urbanism. It then attempts to apply the concept of technology hybridization to the development of various technologies in ancient China. In particular, topics such as hydraulic engineering, bronze metallurgy, jade industry, and scribal art are discussed. Method: The approach of comparative archaeology allows an understanding of the dynamics of long-term social and technological change in early Chinese societies. A transdisciplinary and diachronic approach is used to reveal long-term social variability and cross-cultural connections. Results: Urbanism is both an expression of technology and a catalyst of further technological progress. Technology hybridization, the convergence and cross-fertilization of technologies of different natures in urban centers, is ultimately an important driving force of cultural progress. Conclusion: Despite great differences in terms of geological substrate, topography, climate, and vegetation, early Chinese cultures shared several common characteristics. These included complex social organization, the existence of social classes, and an increasingly urban landscape with specialized workshops and sophisticated technologies such as copper and bronze metallurgy, jade carving, divination, and writing. This Chinese civilization did not simply emerge from the Central Plains and then absorb and assimilate the cultures of the surrounding regions. Rather, it is the result of a process in which various traditions, peoples, languages, and ethnicities were woven into a historically complex and multilayered fabric. Presumably, the early polities were independent cities or city-states that retained their political autonomy. Actual technical progress took place primarily where population density was high, i.e., in urban centers. VL - 10 IS - 1 ER -
Email: