Johan Gunnar Andersson, Ding Wenjiang, and The

book reviews 333

China Before China: Johan Gunnar Andersson, Ding Wenjiang, and the Discovery of China’s Prehistory/Zhongguo zhi qian de Zhongguo: Antesheng, Ding Wenjiang he Zhongguo shi qianshi de faxian. Magnus Fiskesjo and Chen Xingcan. Stockholm, The Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities (Ostasiatiska Museet), 2004. MFEA Monograph 15. 159 pp. Bilingual in English and Chinese. ISBN 91-970616-3-8. Kina före Kina. Eva Myrdal. Stockholm, The Museum of Far Eastern Antiquities (Ostasiatiska Museet), 2004. MFEA Exhibition catalogue No. 57. 181 pp. ISBN 91- 970616-1-1. Reviewed by Minna Franck, Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, University of Helsinki

These two books relate to the Kina före Kina tence hints at additional avenues of research, (China before China) exhibit at the Museum although they are here left unexplored. of Far Eastern Antiquities (hereafter MFEA) Among the most important revelations this in Stockholm, Sweden, which opened in chapter provides is that Andersson’s Neolithic September 2004. The Neolithic objects on discoveries were the result of purposeful in- display were collected by Johan Gunnar An- quiry into China’s past fueled by nationalistic dersson and his team in Central and Western sentiments back in Sweden. According to the China in the 1920s. Andersson’s discoveries authors, the endorsement of another Swedish depended not only on his personal interests, archaeologist, Oscar Montelius, partly ac- but also on the interest of others and on the counts for the support Andersson received political and economic realities in Europe and from the Swedish government and from the Asia at the time. Crown Prince Gustaf Adolf. Interesting also is The first book discussed here is the exhibit the description of the agreement between the companion volume, which tells the history of Swedish and Chinese collaborators over the these discoveries with a special emphasis on division of the collections and publication of the context of the events described. The book the findings. This chapter also reveals connec- is a joint project by Magnus Fiskesjö, a former tions between Andersson and the geographer director of the Museum of Far Eastern Antiq- Sven Hedin, and touches upon the history of uities, and Chen Xingcan, a prominent Chi- MFEA’s bronze collections. The chapter ends nese archaeologist. The authors did not mean with Andersson’s last trip to China when the this to be the ultimate study on Andersson location of the returned half of the collection and MFEA, but rather to provide a starting was last documented, and with MFEA’s his- point for a more extensive investigation into tory since Andersson’s death. the early years of archaeology in China as it In the third chapter, Chen examines relates to Andersson and the Museum. Andersson’s changing fame within China The second chapter provides a chronologi- since the start of his archaeological work until cal description of Johan Gunnar Andersson’s the present day. Chen notes that these career, his discovery of Chinese Neolithic changes are a reflection of the history of finds, and the birth of MFEA’s collections. It modern Chinese archaeology as the attitudes develops Andersson’s story in tandem with toward Andersson have changed according to that of Ding Wenjiang, Andersson’s employer, the political climate of any given period. This collaborator, and friend. This joint treatment same political climate determined how and highlights the crucial role Ding Wenjiang why archaeology was supposed to be prac- played in Andersson’s discoveries, a role that is ticed. Chen divides his treatment of the sub- often left unmentioned. The chapter is packed ject into three periods: the first covering the with information and it is by far the most years between 1921 and 1949, the second interesting part of the book. Nearly every sen- 1950 –1985, and the third covering the post-

1985 era. According to Chen, during the first for the wholesale return of artifacts to their period Andersson’s work faced normal schol- native lands. Instead he calls for a global pub- arly criticism focusing on his field methods lic access to museums and calls for openness and dating of archaeological cultures. During regarding objects in museum collections. the second period, Andersson was treated as The archival material revealed in the first an accomplice of Western colonialism and im- part of the book is extremely interesting. perialism mainly due to his initial hypothesis Among the most fascinating pieces are two that Chinese Neolithic painted pottery might letters confirming the division of the material be related to that of Central and Western Asia. Andersson collected and a list of objects This attitude clearly served the needs of con- returned to China in 1932. The book also temporary politics. After 1985, Andersson’s includes several black and white photographs accomplishments could again be discussed in a illustrating different aspects of Andersson’s scholarly fashion divorced from politics and archaeological career in China. These photo- his contribution to Chinese archaeology ac- graphs alone justify buying the book. cepted. This periodization is logical and the Despite chapter 4 not being integrated responses to Andersson’s work well represent very well with the rest of the book and typos the political changes in Chinese archaeology. throughout, I found this book to be interest- Unfortunately, Chen’s treatment of the sub- ing and rich in information. This does not ject is brief and mainly descriptive. It could only refer to the actual content of the book have benefited from more thorough analysis but also to its tone. The book clearly reflects of connections between politics and archaeol- our current era with its aim for a balanced ogy, the importance of archaeology in Chi- evaluation of the past and with the hint of nese politics, and the common practice of self-criticism that comes with such an aim. In attacking individuals in Chinese politics. With this evaluation are included Andersson’s ca- such an analysis, this chapter would have reer in China, the birth and subsequent served a wider audience not as knowledgeable enrichment of MFEA’s collections, and An- about the special role of archaeology in China. dersson’s treatment within China, especially Chapter 4 concerns the skeleton known as after 1949. With the topics it covers and with the “Banshan Chieftan.” Andersson and his an extensive bibliography relating to these team found this skeleton in a well-furnished topics, the first part of the book in particular grave at Bianjiagou, Gansu Province. In addi- would serve wonderfully as required reading tion to the description of circumstances sur- in an introductory class on Chinese archaeol- rounding the excavation of the burial, this ogy. chapter contains a brief summary of the phys- The second book, Kina före Kina by Eva ical characteristics of the skeleton as well as Myrdal, is the actual exhibition catalogue. plan maps of the find area and the actual This exhibit includes only Neolithic objects burial. Since the opening of the Museum in from the museum’s collections, but a later 1929, this skeleton and the accompanying exhibit will start from the Chinese Bronze grave goods have been on display in Stock- Age, a period for which the museum also has holm. According to the Sino-Swedish agree- extensive collections. The catalogue is written ment, this was the only full skeleton to be in Swedish with a one-page abstract describ- curated at MFEA. While museum staff were ing the goals of the exhibit at the beginning preparing for the exhibit between 2001 and of the book. It then begins with a short de- 2004, however, the remains of several addi- scription of Andersson’s work in China and tional individuals were located in museum the start of the museum’s collections. Unlike storage. traditional exhibition catalogues, this cata- The last chapter is a short ethical evalua- logue is not based on detailed descriptions of tion of MFEA and its collections and the individual art objects but is organized under work of art museums in general. Although thematic subjects, such as, “When life lasted the then museum director Fiskesjö does not 40 years,” “My fellow man: children, women approve of most of the methods used to en- and men, individual and representation,” and rich MFEA collections, he does not advocate “Millet and rice.” book reviews 335

Despite the thematic approach, the focus resulted in very active and destructive looting of the catalogue is on ceramics. This is under- activity of which Andersson became aware standable since the collection mostly consists and that troubled him greatly. These chapters of whole ceramic vessels. The catalogue is also contain interesting glimpses of the influ- richly illustrated both with object photographs ence contemporary politics had on the fate of and with graphic art depicting decorations on the material Andersson acquired. For exam- the ceramics exhibited. The photographs are ple, according to the Chinese-Swedish agree- extremely good and show a rich amount of ment approximately half of the material detail: the photograph of a fingerprint on a Andersson brought with him to Stockholm handle of a Banshan vase on page 32 illus- was to be sent back to China after he com- trates this. The thematic organization and pleted his studies. Seven such shipments left accompanying and appropriately chosen pho- Sweden between 1927 and 1936. This mate- tographs make the book a much more plea- rial unfortunately disappeared during the surable read than most exhibition catalogues. troubled years of Japanese invasion and Unfortunately the book is not very well Chinese civil war and its fate is currently bound. Individual pages fall out easily even unknown. While going through the museum with the most careful reading. collections for the exhibit, several vessels The “China before China” title of the ex- marked with “P” were discovered. This mark hibit and hence of the catalogue was chosen indicated that they also should have been sent deliberately and to be meaningful (as Fiskesjö to China but for some reason were not. and Chen explain in the first book). The title Myrdal tells us that the Chinese authorities was intended to highlight the point that the have been notified of this; until their future archaeological cultures included in the ex- fate has been decided upon, some of these hibit existed before such an entity as “China” items are still included in the exhibit. developed, although they certainly contrib- Early on in his archaeological career, uted toward that development. These cultures Andersson suggested that Chinese Neolithic are part of the collective heritage of mankind cultures derived from those in the West. He and should thus be of interest to us all. This revised this opinion later, but it is often justifies the existence and continued curation brought up when he and his work are dis- of these materials at the Museum of East cussed. Because this book deals with Anders- Asian Antiquities. This attitude comes with a son, who at times has been a controversial sense of duty, demonstrated also in the educa- figure among native Chinese archaeologists, tional tone of the catalogue. This duty not Myrdal is almost required to talk about the only applies to curating the archaeological possibility of cultural diffusion from the West cultures discussed here, but also to the meth- in connection with the ceramic traditions ods of archaeology. The catalogue is thus exhibited. Myrdal puts the view into a con- directed to an interested but nonspecialized temporary context by emphasizing that even audience. if connections can be demonstrated to have The chapters “Farming Stone Age in the existed between areas, such connections collections of the Museum of Far Eastern always have their own localized history and Antiquities” and “From Yangshao to Stock- do not consist of mere acceptance of the holm” briefly describe the history of Anders- new and replacement of the old material son’s archaeological work in China, how the culture. results of this work ended up in Stockholm, After this compulsory topic is dealt with, and the current status of the collection. the book turns to “Vessel makers of the Farm- Myrdal emphasizes the collaborative aspects ing Stone Age,” a chapter describing ceramics of Andersson’s work and the native blessing as manufactured objects and the ceramic tra- and interest his work enjoyed, but she also ditions Andersson uncovered in Henan, touches upon the negative aspects of Anders- Gansu, and Xinjiang. The principal value of son’s methods. Andersson acquired a large this chapter lies in its descriptions and the quantity of the material now housed in the well-illustrated examples of decorations char- museum through purchase from locals. This acteristic of each ceramic tradition discussed. 336 asian perspectives . 51(2) . fall 2012

Chapters that follow briefly discuss various is clear that the author relied on archaeological aspects of Neolithic life beginning with life material excavated since Andersson’s years, expectancy and burial practices. One chapter but those sources are not named. Such refer- is built around a skeleton excavated by Anders ences would have enhanced the catalogue’s son and his collaborators from the cemetery scholarly value. of Bianjiagou. As mentioned above, this skel- Throughout the book, Myrdal addresses eton has been a part of the permanent display the reader directly with questions intended to of the museum since 1929. The book also help us relate to the way life was in the past: examines shamanism, music and ritual, and Do you believe that the child you have will agriculture and animal husbandry of the Chi- live until adulthood? Do you believe that you nese Neolithic. Although the catalogue works will live to see your children become parents? well as an introductory book on selected This approach was probably adopted to en- archaeological cultures from the Chinese hance the educational aspect of this catalogue. middle Neolithic, its value is strongly dimin- She aims to build a personal relationship be- ished by the lack of appropriate references. It tween the reader and the past.

Correction Part of a phrase was inadvertently deleted from note 10 on page 18 of the Spring 2012 51(1) issue of Asian Perspectives. The complete note should have read: The unknown chief is characterized as dua na turaga ni yavusa liu, literally “a tribal [yavusa] chief from olden times,” implicitly one whose bloodline is not certainly known today.