Repatriation of Cultural Goods
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
UvA-DARE (Digital Academic Repository) Repatriation of cultural objects: The case of China Liu, Z. Publication date 2015 Document Version Final published version Link to publication Citation for published version (APA): Liu, Z. (2015). Repatriation of cultural objects: The case of China. General rights It is not permitted to download or to forward/distribute the text or part of it without the consent of the author(s) and/or copyright holder(s), other than for strictly personal, individual use, unless the work is under an open content license (like Creative Commons). Disclaimer/Complaints regulations If you believe that digital publication of certain material infringes any of your rights or (privacy) interests, please let the Library know, stating your reasons. In case of a legitimate complaint, the Library will make the material inaccessible and/or remove it from the website. Please Ask the Library: https://uba.uva.nl/en/contact, or a letter to: Library of the University of Amsterdam, Secretariat, Singel 425, 1012 WP Amsterdam, The Netherlands. You will be contacted as soon as possible. UvA-DARE is a service provided by the library of the University of Amsterdam (https://dare.uva.nl) Download date:01 Oct 2021 Chapter 7 Chinese Cultural Relics as Instruments to Cultural Identity At the meeting of the Sixty-fourth General Assembly of the United Nations, China’s permanent deputy representative to the United Nations in Geneva, Liu Zhenmin, said: ‘As symbols of identity of a nation or people, cultural property represented a valuable asset of human civilization. Illicit appropriation of and trafficking in cultural property was a sacrilege. Protecting cultural heritage and promoting the restitution of such property to countries of origin were inalienable cultural rights of people in all such countries.’682 7.1 Introduction I have described the interconnections between cultural objects and cultural identity in Chapter 6. In this chapter I seek to figure out how Chinese regard their cultural relics as instruments to their cultural identity, particularly the lost cultural relics. ‘Chinese culture’, dealt with in this chapter, refers to culture in ‘China proper’ (or ‘Inner China’, ‘agrarian China’), which is termed the ‘Chinese cultural sphere’, the ‘Sinic world’, or the ‘Sinosphere’.683 Being aware of the problems of defining ‘Chinese’,684 I mainly rely on a hermeneutic approach that views culture as a historically shaped, socially shared set of symbols, concepts, and ways of organizing them. The major concern of hermeneutic works is interpretation, a common theme of which is cultural identity.685 This chapter is divided into two sections. Before looking into Chinese perceptions of lost cultural relics, I will deal with how Chinese regard their cultural relics in the first section, as lost cultural relics are part of cultural relics. To understand how Chinese feel about the lost cultural relics, it is necessary to know the 682 See GA/10888, ‘General Assembly Considers Drat Text on Return, Restitution of Cultural Property’, November 16, 2009, viewed April 12, 2014, http://www.un.org/press/en/2009/ga10888.doc.htm. 683 See Reischauer (1974), 341; Huntington (1996), 45; Thorp & Vinograd (2006), 18. Within the Sinosphere, each major region is distinguished from others by its own dialect, landscape, native crops, cuisine history, famous persons, heritage sites, regional customs and characteristics. David Yen-ho Wu suggests that any expert on ethnic studies today will notice that the difference between two Han groups can, in some cases, be more pronounced than that between a Han and a minority nationality group. For instance, the regionally defined groups of Han-Cantonese, Shanghaiese, and Taiwanese, including those living overseas have obvious ethnic differences in speech, dress, customs, religious beliefs, and so on. See Wu, D. (1991), 167; Liu & Faure (1996), 1. 684 Some scholars are critical about the distinctiveness of ‘Chinese identity’ or the so called ‘Chinese-ness’. Some even argue that the ‘Chinese’ as a singular thing does not exist. For a critical perspective, see the collection of essays in Sinophone Studies (S. Shih, R. Chow, I. Ang & A. Chung (eds), Sinophone Studies, New York: Columbia University Press 2013). 685 This approach is qualified by Yu Ying-shih in 1991; another approach is the positivist approach. See ‘Clio’s New Cultural Turn and the Rediscovery of Tradition in Asia’, keynote address by Yu Ying-shih at the Twelfth Conference of the International Association of Historians of Asia, University of Hong Kong, June 24-28, 1991. I owe the source to Nathan (1993), 924-925. 150 Chinese attitudes towards their cultural relics. For better understanding of this issue, some observations on Chinese history and traditional Chinese culture have to be made. The second section is about how Chinese think of the loss of lost cultural relics in modern Chinese history, and what repatriation means to them. The loss of cultural relics is closely associated with the weakness of Chinese national power in modern Chinese history and the expansion of imperialism. And I will analyze this issue from Chinese nationalism. As to the second issue, I will summarize how Chinese consider repatriation and relate it with the recognition of their cultural identity. 7.2 Approaches to Chinese Cultural Relics In China, cultural relics are often linked to two concepts: history and culture. In effect, Chinese history and Chinese culture are two important elements to understand Chinese cultural identity. As proposed by a great Chinese historian, Qian Mu, to understand Chinese culture, one must look back to the Chinese history. In Qian Mu’s view, a culture is closely related to its history. Without knowing its history, it makes no sense to discuss a culture. One can only understand Chinese culture from knowing Chinese history. A culture has been formed and presented in the course of history.686 Because of the close interconnection with Chinese history and culture, culture relics are considered to be instrumental to Chinese cultural identity. 7.2.1 Symbolizing and Decoding Chinese History As Kissinger writes, ‘No other country can claim so long a continuous civilization, or such an intimate link to its ancient past and classical principles of strategy and statesmanship. Other societies, the United States included, have claimed universal applicability for their values and institutions. Still, none equals China in persisting - and persuading its neighbor to acquiesce - in such an elevated conception of its world role for so long, and in the face of so many historical vicissitudes’.687 The states were first brought together in a single great empire by the First Emperor in 221BC. In a general sense, there was a pattern of dynastic rise and fall, often reflected in historical accounts, poetry, and other literature of China. The theme of dynastic rise and fall resonates especially in the dynasties of Han, Tang, Song, Ming and Qing. These dynasties were separated from each other by periods of disunity and weakness, with several states in rivalry with other, or with tribes from the north and west conquering Chinese territory.688 In the long history of China, abundant cultural relics have been created and handed down. Now these cultural relics are regarded as witness to Chinese history. The National Museum of China published an eight-volume 686 For detailed introduction of Qian Mu’s view on history, cultures, and nation, see Wong, W. (2004). 687 Kissinger (2011), 2-3. 688 Seton-Watson (1977), 275. Seton-Watson notes the temptation to pay more attention to the continuity than to the breaches in it is almost irresistible. The Chinese is the only one of the great empires which imposed a single culture on the vast majority of its subjects and maintained, with only a few short intervals of confusion, its sovereignty over the same territory for three thousand years up the present time. Seton-Watson (1977), 275, 286. 151 work titled Chinese History in Cultural Relics in 1970.689 This series presents Chinese history from the prehistoric age to the Qing dynasty by exploring stories contained in cultural relics. For example, some rice grains in a pottery jar provide evidence of the rice cultivation in China 10,000 years ago; a title deed which had been cut into the insole shape by a housewife yields original information of the land system of dynasties of Song and Yuan. It suggests that as historical remains, each cultural relic contains historical information. Cultural relics are witness to history, and offer a way of decoding history.690 In history, ancient China had developed a branch of learning called jinshi-xue (the study of bronze and stone) that has been regarded as the embryo of the modern archeology and the study of cultural relics in China. Jin means ancient bronze objects in the Chinese language, and shi means stone tablets and stone statues.691 Scholars of Jinshi-xue studied the inscriptions on unearthed bronze wares, classical bronze statues, inscriptions of the stone tablets and statues, jade, inscribed bones, and other relics.692 However, jinshi-xue declined with the collapse of the Qing dynasty, and was replaced by archeology. Also the term jinshi was replaced by the terms of antiquities and cultural relics.693 In fact, either archeology or jinshi-xue is focused on the historical information of cultural objects. The profound Chinese scholar, Wang Guowei, proposed applying dual evidence method in historical research at the beginning of the twentieth century. The dual evidence refers to classics works of narratives history and cultural relics.694 It is known today that cultural objects and archeological sites provide sources to separate chronological facts from historiographical legends. Some of the legends are mentioned in the Book of History (Shangshu), believed to be compiled by Confucius. For instance, the Xia ruins excavated at Dengfeng in the 1980s have been confirmed as the remains of ‘Yangcheng’ of the early Xia dynasty.695 The most well- known case is the oracle bones, the mystery and value of which have been gradually made known to the 689 The most recent version of this work was published in 2011, see Xu, W.