Hunan Archaeology 2002 (Volume 1 & 2)

Author: Hunan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, etc. / Country:
Publisher:
Publishing Time: 2004-05-01
Features: The Chadong Site was discovered during a 1989 cultural relic review and yielded artifacts from the Neolithic, Shang-Zhou, and Han periods. In winter 2000, to support the construction of the Chadong Town Border Trade Street, our team conducted exploration and rescue excavation within the project area, which concluded on February 10, 2001. The excavation findings are described as follows:
1. Geographical Environment
The Chadong Site is located on the east (right) bank of the Qing River in Chadong Town, 25 kilometers southwest of Huayuan County, Xiangxi Autonomous Prefecture, at a second-order terrace 20 meters above the riverbed. The southeastern Huilong Mountain forms a crescent-shaped enclosure around the site. To the west, it overlooks Hong'an Town in Chongqing, at the junction of Hunan, Guizhou, and Chongqing provinces. Highway 319 crosses the Qing River from the west and passes through the southern part of Huilong Mountain (Figure 1).
2. Cultural Strata
Through exploration, we established four test pits in the central-southern and western parts of the site, covering an excavation area of 96 square meters and exposing 17.5 square meters of Paleolithic strata. Taking the southern wall of the western test pit as an example (Figure 2):
Layer 1: Modern disturbance layer, containing a large amount of domestic waste and Ming-Qing porcelain fragments. Thickness: 35–100 cm.
Layer 2: Gray soil with abundant charcoal, primarily distributed in the southwest of the test pit, sandy in texture, yielding a large number of Ming porcelain fragments and some Han pottery fragments. Thickness: 30–50 cm.
Layer 3: Black soil with scattered charcoal particles and carbon residue, intermixed with a large quantity of Song-Han pottery fragments. Thickness: 5–52 cm.
Layer 4: Dark brown soil with abundant charcoal particles and some carbon residue, loose in texture, containing a large amount of Western Jin pottery and Eastern Zhou artifacts. Thickness: 8–32 cm.
Layer 5: Dark gray soil with abundant charcoal and carbon residue, compact in texture, yielding some Eastern Han hard pottery fragments and Shang-Zhou artifacts. Thickness: 5–60 cm.
Layer 6: Relatively pure yellow soil, compact in texture, with heavily fragmented artifacts, primarily Eastern Zhou period. Thickness: 15–30 cm.
Layer 7: Relatively compact black soil, with uneven charcoal and carbon residue, containing numerous pottery fragments, primarily Eastern Zhou period with some Western Zhou pottery. Thickness: 5–0 cm.
Layer 8: Gray clayey soil with scattered charcoal, limited to the southeastern part of the test pit, with numerous but heavily fragmented pottery fragments, primarily Western Zhou period. Thickness: 5–42 cm.
Layer 9: Yellow-brown soil with scattered charcoal, compact in texture, containing numerous but severely fragmented pottery fragments, with Shang-Zhou period artifacts. Thickness: 5–20 cm.
Layer 10: Yellow soil with scattered charcoal, compact in texture, with very few pottery fragments, loose and fragile, primarily Shang-Zhou period. Thickness: 5–15 cm.
In terms of vessel types, the early period saw the disappearance of jars and bowls but the emergence of new forms such as tripods, jars, basins, cups, etc. Jars, basins, and lids inherited features from the previous period but exhibited new variations. Type A and B jars of Form I, II, and III showed clear distinctions from Form IV and V. Type A and B basins were relatively stable in form but varied in pottery type and firing temperature. New features included spindles with wavy edge decoration and longer, larger net weights, possibly reflecting the expansion of fishing nets. New styles such as fluted rims on jar rims and incised patterns on basins and bowls appeared in the middle period. The late period strata were mostly disturbed by lower-layer artifacts, with the pure cultural sequence unclear. The dating was based on the abundance of Warring States pottery fragments. The key characteristics were high-fired gray clay pottery, widely decorated with deep, sharp cord marks, with vessel types including tripods, basins, jars, basins, spindles, and net weights. The pottery assemblage differed significantly from the previous two periods.
Bronze artifacts appeared in the middle and late periods, primarily as weapons and small tools, with some fragments of containers. Bone artifacts were abundant throughout. The historical trajectory of the ancient Xiangxi ethnic groups relates to the origin of modern ethnic minorities. The description of porcelain from the Han, Wei, and Ming-Qing periods holds specific significance for understanding how regional cultural factors manifested in material remains during historical times.
Dating: The pottery of the early period matches that of the Zhujiatai Site in Sangzhi, dating to the Shang period. For the Western Zhou and Eastern Zhou periods, there are no formally excavated sites in Xiangxi for comparison. By comparing with nearby sites such as Zhongbao Island, Xianglushi, Lujiahe, Yangjiazui, Liulinxi, Xiaoxikou, and Liujiakou, the middle period was dated to the Western Zhou to Spring and Autumn period, and the late period to the Warring States period. Due to limited data, this absolute dating remains broad and approximate, and more precise chronological divisions await the establishment of a finer cultural sequence and chronology for the region.
We sampled charcoal and peat from T11④, T11⑤, and T11⑥ strata for radiocarbon dating, yielding results of 2305±70 years, 2570±80 years, and 2260±70 years, respectively. After tree-ring calibration (with a half-life of 5570 years), the corrected dates were 2395±39 years, 2725±120 years, and 2335±39 years. These results fall within the Western Zhou to Warring States period but appear slightly late and do not align with pottery typology findings. Further research is needed.
5. Conclusion
The cultural strata of the Baimen Site show a consistent cultural nature from top to bottom, indicating a long-lasting, stable, and self-contained cultural type. We believe the site does not belong to the same cultural system as the Shang-Zhou culture of the Jianghan-Dongting Lake region but shares a larger cultural system with the Shang-Zhou culture of the Xijiang and western Hubei mountainous areas. However, it also differs significantly, most notably in the unique incised-patterned pottery fragments that persisted from the Shang period to the Spring and Autumn period.
The economic life of the Baimen Site was primarily hunting and gathering, as evidenced by the large number of hunting tools such as bronze arrowheads, stone balls, and pottery net weights. The natural environment supported this, with the settlement located at the foot of a riverbank, an ideal setting for hunting and gathering, as confirmed by the abundance of animal bones. This situation is similar to that of related sites in western Hubei and the Xijiang region. To the southeast of the Baimen Site lies a narrow (river valley plain) and low-lying hills, which provided favorable conditions for dry-land agriculture. However, whether dry-land agriculture was developed and its scale remain questions for exploration.
The dwelling style of the Baimen Site was characterized by natural caves and rock shelters along the riverbank. We surveyed similar natural topography along the Mengdong River and Qing River. Notably, numerous Shang-Zhou sites, such as the Yanggongqiao Site, exist on the river terraces around Baimen. Thus, this cave-dwelling lifestyle is either a model of mountainous culture or a special case? Were there differences in production methods and ethnic affiliation between cave dwellers and terrace residents? The Baimen Site itself offers an ideal setting for micro-studies of mountainous settlements. For example, Shang period remains were found only near the river in rock shelters, while slopes and caves contained mostly Western Zhou and later strata. Additionally, the functional distinction between cave interiors and exteriors—taking T6 as an example—was evident. T6, divided into 11 layers, showed no surface remains, consisting solely of eastward-sloping living deposits. To the west of T6, there were no caves but a long, wide rock fissure, offering shelter, ventilation, and dryness, ideal for constructing sheds. Did these sheds and caves serve seasonal functions?
Specimen T5⑨:2, a Type B cup, was a fragment from T5:⑨ and T6:⑨, providing insights into the behavior of the inhabitants. If we view the site as an organic settlement—a family or clan’s living space—unearthing theoretical considerations through actual excavation would be a meaningful endeavor.
Artifacts reflecting spiritual life were limited. Oracle bones appeared in Layers 5 and 6, with processing and drilling methods similar to those in the Central Plains, indicating the presence of shamans in social spiritual life. The oracle bones from Baimen were later than those in neighboring Hubei and Chongqing, suggesting the preservation of divination traditions in this region was delayed. Other artifacts reflecting mountainous culture included bone tubes, which may have been musical instruments, and bird-shaped pottery sculptures.
The abundant animal bone and tooth specimens from Baimen provide rich material for ancient ecological research. The excavation of the Baimen Site has been a key part of our long-term exploration of ethnic archaeology in Xiangxi. Through this site, we have established a benchmark for Xiangxi’s Shang-Zhou culture. It has also deepened our understanding of cave sites in Xiangxi, which, unlike slope sites, are less prone to erosion, preserving cultural strata well and retaining strong indigenous cultural elements.
Additionally, the Xiangxi, western Hubei, and Xijiang regions all lie at the junction of the second and third geographical steps. The cultural unity revealed by the Baimen Site offers new insights into ancient cultural patterns and ethnic relations.
This work was guided by the enthusiastic advice of Mr. He Jiejun, Mr. Yuan Jiaying, Mr. Pei Anping, and others. We express our sincere gratitude.
Excavation and sorting: Chai Huanbo, Long Jing, Sha Lei, Lu Wei, Peng Genlin, Liu Dejing, Lin Yuan, Jiang Jianping, Su Jian, Zhao Yun.
Illustrations: Li Fuping.
Written by: Chai Huanbo, Long Jing, Sha.
Mortuary Practices:
The second period tombs were simple pit graves, totaling 10 (98M2, 98M12, 96M1, 96M2, 96M3, 96M5, 97M1, 97M3, 97M6, 97M8). The primary grave goods were boxes, jars, and pots, with no bronze or iron artifacts found. Grave pottery included Type A tripods, Type A ring-footed jars, jars, boxes, Type A polished stone discs, and polished stone cups. Some pots had flat lids, square upright ears, flat hoof-shaped legs, small bases, and some were painted, especially the spouts of tripods being carved into grooves or ridges, a feature common in the Chu tombs of Yutai Mountain in Jingling and in areas like Yiyang and Dayong. The Type A polished stone discs had large apertures, similar to the one from Tomb 14:1 in Santriangular Pingshan, while the polished stone cups resembled those from Tomb 65:7 in Santriangular Pingshan. Based on tomb shapes, grave goods, and assemblage characteristics, as well as the form of the polished stone discs, these tombs were dated to the early Western Han period.
The third period tombs included wedge-shaped graves, sloping shaft graves, and simple pit graves. Nine tombs (98M1, 98M4, 98M9, 98M14, 98M15, 98M16, 98M17, 98M18, 97M5) belonged to this period. Most assemblages followed the styles of the previous period but showed some differences. Notably, some tombs (e.g., 98M9) began to include model pottery items such as wells and kitchens, along with accompanying items like pots, steamers, and water jars. The introduction of model pottery items like kitchen and well models marked the transitional significance of this period. The lids of tripods were slightly raised with three-square upright knobs, while pottery incense burners evolved from cover-basin types to Boshan types. Hard-fired jar shapes included cylindrical and double-shouldered jars, with new decorative techniques like glazing appearing on jar bodies. Based on tomb shapes, grave goods, and assemblage features, along with materials such as the large number of Wudi five-hu, Xuandi five-hu, and cross-barred five-hu coins, this period was dated to the middle Western Han period.
The fourth period tombs were mostly wedge-shaped or sloping shaft graves, with six tombs (98M8, 98M10, 98M20, 96M4, 98M11, 97M9). Most assemblages followed the third period’s patterns, with five tombs (98M8, 98M10, 98M20, 96M4, 98M11) individually or in sets yielding kitchen and well models with accompanying items like pots, steamers, and water jars. In addition to the typological features of pottery, the proportion of imitating-bronze pottery in grave assemblages gradually decreased. For example, tripod leg decorations evolved from animal-face patterns to human-face patterns, tripod ears were externally folded at the top, jar quantities decreased, and no boxes were found in burials. Hard-fired jars appeared with some incised patterns. Polished stone discs showed a gradual reduction in aperture size, with engraved rhombic grids evolving into shapes formed by three parallel intersecting lines. Based on tomb shapes, grave goods, and assemblage characteristics, combined with materials such as the “”-character grid Zhaoming mirror from 98M10 and the Sunlight mirror inscriptions from 97M9, as well as coins like the lower-star five-hu, half-moon five-hu, and clipped-round five-hu, the tombs of this period were dated to the late Western Han period.