Preliminary Notes on Sung Archaeology

Dados Bibliográficos

ID8993511
AutoresRichard C Rudolph (autor correspondente)
Ano1963
Volume22
Fascículo2
Páginas169-177
Data de publicação1963-02-01
Peer ReviewedSim
Open AccessSim
TipoARTICLE
PeriódicoThe Journal of Asian Studies (JOURNAL)
Identificadores do periódicoISSN: 0021-9118 • E-ISSN: 1752-0401
EditoraDuke University Press (PUBLISHER • US)
DOI10.2307/2050010
OpenAlexW2335455145
IdiomaEN
Citações recebidas6
Referências citadas4

We have heard much about the Sung archaeologists' mistakes but little about their important work, upon which much of our work in some fields is based today. They did not make spectacular discoveries of buried cities through the use of classical sources as did Heinrich Schliemann less than one hundred years ago. But they did use the early literature, together with a critical sense of judgment, some eight or nine centuries ago to discover much truth about the remote past and to dispel misinformation which had accumulated in the ensuing centuries. Many of the Sung scholars had a most enlightened and what might even be called a modern approach in their attitude towards this work. They had progressed far beyond the “cabinet of curiosities” stage, still current in Europe at a much later date, and were engaged in intelligent research concerned with identification, etymology, dating, and interpretation. Moreover, they practiced, within the limitations imposed upon them by the advancement of science at that time, most of the critical methods and devices used in modern archaeological work

Archaeological evidence · Archaeology · Art · Cabinet (room · Etymology · Interpretation (philosophy · Linguistics · Literature · Misinformation · Chinese history and philosophy · Classics · History · Law · Philosophy