An Archaeology of History: The Wang Mang Nine Temples from Early Imperial China as Reconstructed by History and by Archaeology

In this paper, I examine the relationship between the construction of history by the textual history of early imperial China and by Chinese archaeology in the second half of the twentieth century, considering how these two fields of scholarship were directed by ideologies of the Chinese government. The locus for this investigation is the complex of imperial ancestral temples constructed by the emperor Wang Mang (r. 9–23 CE) for his brief interregnum dynasty. Although this group of buildings is described in the official dynastic history, compiled only fifty years after its construction, as having nine temple buildings with specific ancestors ascribed to each, its archaeological excavation in the late 1950s instead revealed twelve temples in a carefully organized plan. The discrepancy between the original construction of the temple complex and its subsequent revision in textual history is revealing in terms of the relationship between received tradition and individual action in the context of establishing imperial legitimacy, whereas the modern attempts to reconcile the discrepancy between textual history and excavated history are indicative of the relationship between Chinese archaeology of that period and the nationalist revision of history.     

National History, Non-national Archaeology: The Case of Denmark

The early development of Danish archaeology (including the centuries before AD 1800) is discussed in terms of its relationship with national history, and with various ideas about regional phenomena and concepts of cultural identity. Danish archaeologists followed a dual strategy, by subscribing both to national sentiment, but also to the 'un-national' notion of close culture-historical links between regions. Confusion of text-based historical aims, and those of archaeology, caused problems. The main strengths of archaeology – its unique material perspective and concepts, historical, spatial, and contextual (including social and mental dimensions) – are stressed.     

作为独立学科的考古学——考古学、人类学、历史学学科体系之比较

关于中国考古学的学科归属问题一直存在着争议,一种意见认为考古学属于历史学的范畴;一种意见认为考古学应是人类学的分支学科之一。本将考古学与历史学、人类学的学科体系加以比较,论述了在学科起源、研究内容、研究方法、研究对象、分支学科等方面,考古学与历史学和人类学的差异。从而认为考古学与人类学、历史学有极其密切的联系,但它作为独立学科的趋势是必然的。