The Concept of Archaeological Cultures in Chinese Archaeology

Clicks: 1
ID: 322104
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 #1,411 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 Archaeological cultures remain the prevalent ordering principle in Chinese prehistory. Attempts to deconstruct the concept in Anglo-American archaeology have largely passed by the Chinese scholarly sphere and concepts of culture are widely employed as a structuring category and an explanatory factor. This chapter illustrates how the culture concept of traditional Childean culture-historical archaeology became entrenched in Chinese archaeology through its impact on pioneers like Xia Nai. The alternative concepts of culture of processual and post-processual archaeology were received in China belatedly, although the decades of relative isolation before that saw debates of their own and the creation of models like Su Bingqi’s ‘regional systems and local cultural series’. An overview of recent publications highlights current critiques of the traditional concept of culture in Chinese archaeology and attempts to defend it. The question of associating historically defined ethnic groups with archaeological cultures remains key to this debate. An example of the problems with the archaeological concept of culture in China is provided by a decades-long dispute about the Qujialing Culture, which plays a pivotal role in the Neolithic of Central China. Both sides in this argument suffer from the same overreliance on ceramic typology while exhibiting the emblematic lack in Chinese archaeology of anthropological consideration of what the cultural practices reflected in the identified types might signify. The concept of archaeological cultures, while foundational in Chinese archaeology, is in urgent need of theoretical updates founded in anthropological studies of practice and behaviour.
Reference Key
openalex_W7170054881 Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
Authors Richard Ehrich
Journal Oxford University Press eBooks
Year 2026
DOI
10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197800324.013.0021
URL
https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780197800324.013.0021
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.