The Emergence of the Conventional Archaeological Site Report Format in the People’s Republic of China

Clicks: 1
ID: 321990
2026
Free PDF
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score — reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal

Ranked #1,368 of 1,517 articles by views in Oxford University Press eBooks

Most read Least read

Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 1,517 in total.

Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet minted

Create a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.

5 SUSD one-off · no wallet required
Sign in to mint
Abstract
Abstract In the first half of the 20th century, authors of Chinese archaeological site reports adopted a variety of formats. The publication of the Huixian fajue baogao in 1956 marks the birth of a distinctive format that has been followed ever since by most archaeologists in the PRC. This chapter discusses the origin of this conventional format and its adoption in the PRC. This chapter traces the origin of the format to two pre-1949 publications—Yunnan cang’er jing kaogu baogao by Wu Jinding, Zeng Zhaoyu, and Wang Jiechen, and Sekihō Kōzankō by the Japanese archaeologists Hamada Kōsaku and Seiichi Mizuno. Although many of the first-generation Chinese archaeologists received their training in the US and the UK, it is the Japanese archaeological tradition that had the greatest impact on the standard format of PRC site reports. This chapter demonstrates that the centralised training provided by the Institute of Archaeology in the 1950s, the archaeological manuals published afterwards, and Xia Nai’s efforts to standardise reporting were the key factors in the wide adoption of the standard format. The standardisation of the site report format has had a limiting effect on the development of new archaeological theories and methodology but at the same time has prevented site reports from becoming means for the superficial application of Marxist theories. This study shows that site reports can be key to understanding how and why Chinese archaeology has developed in particular ways over time.
Reference Key
openalex_W7170061285 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Tianrui Zhu
Journal Oxford University Press eBooks
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197800324.013.0026
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197800324.013.0026
Keywords Keywords not found

Citations

No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org

Comments

No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.