Animal Classification in Central China: From the Late Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age by Ningning Dong

Abstract

Reviewed by: Animal Classification in Central China: From the Late Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age by Ningning Dong You Yue Animal Classification in Central China: From the Late Neolithic to the Early Bronze Age. Ningning Dong. Oxford: BAR Publishing, 2021. 144 pp., 55 figures, 37 tables, bibliography. Paperback US $45, ISBN 9781407357928. Dong Ningning’s prominent contribution to the field makes a breakthrough in constructing animal classifications, human categories, and social conceptions associated with taxonomies in the past. Dong Ningning is a member of the Department of Cultural Heritage and Museology at Fudan University; she acquired her doctorate degree in Archaeology from the University of Cambridge in 2017. This research expands on Dong’s doctoral dissertation on the topic of animal classifications in ancient China. Her book consists of eight chapters: chapters 1 and 2 present research questions and methodologies; chapters 3–6 introduce the archaeological background and present three case studies of Neolithic and Bronze Age sites; and the last two chapters cover three classification topics and synthesize the findings into the broader archaeological context. Using archaeological materials and lexical evidence, Dong proposes that people in ancient China often classified animals and humans by age and by other factors that are quite separate from traditional categories employed by zooarchaeologists. To explain the motivations behind this book, Dong puts forward the view that ancient people were unlikely to encounter the concept of “species” as we think of it today (p. 1). The established model of classifying animals as wild or domestic, applied by most researchers in China, identifies animals according to Linnaean taxonomy; this system has influenced discourses surrounding the origins, appearance, and utilization of domesticated animals, as well as the exploitations of domesticated and wild animals for human subsistence. Dong points out the problems of applying Linnaean taxonomy to archaeological materials, including the over- or under-identifications that result from structural differences between taxonomic systems (p. 7). Then, in chapter 2, the author explains that, as material representations, archaeological depositions themselves reflect categories. Dong proposes an integrative methodology that includes reanalyses of faunal materials, isotope data, textual records, contextual analysis of spatial distributions, and so on. While recognizing how collating existing archaeological data relies on an etic construct, Dong seeks to connect archaeological assemblages and the understanding of taxonomies exerted by ancient humans from an emic perspective. Chapter 3 briefly but comprehensively introduces the cultural sequences and social developments of the Central Plain, including typical pottery types, ritual relics, burials, economic subsistence, handcraft development, settlement patterns, and regional networks of the Late Longshan (2600–1900 b.c.e.), Xinzhai (1850–1750 b.c.e.), Erlitou (1900–1500 b.c.e.), and Erligang (1600–1400 b.c.e.) periods. Highlighted alongside these other periods in Table 1.2, I expected the Late Shang Dynasty Yinxu period (1400–1050 b.c.e.) to be covered in more detail because the Late Shang was discussed in the synthesis in chapter 7. However, the introductions to the four key periods are sufficient for readers to immediately grasp the archaeological background and profiles of these sites from the Late Neolithic to Early Bronze Age. The zooarchaeological case studies of Wadian, Wangchenggang, and Xinzhai in chapters 4–6 were selected for their relatively good preservation conditions, rich contextual information, and cultural continuity of the sites. These sites played an important role in the formation and development of the early states. Some Chinese archaeologists believe Wangchenggang was the capital of the early Xia dynasty (Beijing and Henan 2007) and Xinzhai also dated to the early phase of Xia (Beijing and Zhengzhou 2008), so these sites [End Page 123] have been a major focus of academic attention over the past three decades. However, some scholars doubt the historicity of the Xia dynasty and attribute it to legend (Allan 1984, 2017). Thus, the materials in this book are relevant to one of the active academic debates in the field of Chinese archaeology. By compiling the available data, Dong delivers a comprehensive analysis that includes the location and excavations, “chronology and phasing,” and “spatial layout and feature types” of each site, in addition to regional networks where relevant. After summing up “previous zooarchaeological studies,” she conducts classification research...