Database of Early Chinese Manuscripts
By Enno Giele
Last update:
19.02.2001
What is this?
This is the full and
most update version of my database that in an abbreviated format accompanies my
review article “Early Chinese Manuscripts: Including Addenda and Corrigenda to New
Sources of Early Chinese History: An Introduction to the Reading of
Inscriptions and Manuscripts,” Early China 23-24 (1998-99), 247-337.
It tries to assemble basic information on all known manuscripts – fully
published or not - written in Chinese on bamboo, wood, and silk from the
pre-imperial to the early imperial period, i.e. roughly from the –3rd
to the 3rd c. However, a few other manuscripts written on or
inscriptions engraved in stone, bone, or paper from adjacent periods have also
been included.
This database is not
simply a compilation of others’ efforts in listing these kinds of source
materials, although quite a few of such lists have been used to provide a
starting point. Rather, the information contained in this database has been
directly culled from and/or checked against the original reports and
publications that are given at the end of each entry (although it is possible
that the reader will find slightly diverging data in these and other
publications, because many reports actually contradict each other and I have
been at a loss sometimes in determining which version to follow).
What is new?
1. Entries
Work on the database was
begun in 1997 and it was completed and submitted together with the article to Early
China in September 1998. As the process of publication dragged on, I have
tried to stay ahead of the field’s development and updated the files several
times adding (or deleting) entries, correcting or augmenting information
contained in already existing entries. This practice has been continued even
after the article went to the press and will be continued as long and as much
my time and resources permit.
New entries (made since
1999) are distinguished by an “a” (or “b,” etc.) added to the numerical code of
the site (for which see below). A very few entries have been deleted and this
resulted in a gap in the sequence of numerical codes, which should not occasion
bewilderment.
Two changes in
particular shall deserve mentioning:
The two entries IV.08
and IV.09 that still appear in the print version have been deleted altogether.
These two sites have been called text-producing tombs in Wenwu
1993,8:12. However, the recently published full-fledged archaeological report
on the cemetery of the area does not confirm this. Instead, it reports on
another text-producing tomb from the same area. This has been now been entered
as no. V.05b. The name of the area (see also entry no. V.06) is “Gaotai”
(correctly given in all reports), but I made a mistake and wrote “Gaotaishan”
instead. When I discovered it, the article was already at the press.
The order of the sites
Yangtianhu tomb no. 25/167 (formerly III.28, now III.27) and Yangjiawan tomb
no. 406 (formerly III.27, now III.28) has been reversed so as to be consistent
with the principle of listing geographically close sites together (site III.29
also belongs to the Yangjiawan cemetery).
2. Format
A detailed description
of the database is found in the print article. This shall not be repeated here.
However, the posting of the database onto the web and the introduction of the
full-text search function has made some reformatting inevitable. Also, users
with no access to the print version might want an explanation of the numerical
code that is given for each site. Except for cases in which it is found
misleading (one example being mentioned above), this code has remained and will
remain unchanged throughout all updates, whereas the serial numbers introduced
in the web-version might change.
This code is still found
in the “site” field of the SITES part. It contains a Roman numeral that
represents a rough division along chronological, geographical, cultural, and
archaeological lines:
I ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Pre-Qin manuscripts from the state of Jin (-597 to –386)
II ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Warring States manuscripts from the
state of Zhongshan (-313)
III ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Warring States manuscripts from the
cultural sphere of Chu (-500 to –223)
IV ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Qin manuscripts (-309 to –207)
V ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Early Former Han tomb manuscripts (-206 to –141)
VI ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Middle Former Han to Latter Han tomb
manuscripts (-140 to 220)
VII ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Han to Jin non-funerary documents (-206
to 420)
VIII ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Three Kingdoms & Jin tomb documents
(221 to 420)
IX ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Tang wooden strips (618 to 907)
X ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ ˙ Finds of uncertain date
The second part of the
code represents the sequence within each of these groups. Due to additions and
deletions this is no longer an unbroken and purely numerical sequence.
Three new fields have
been created for the web version of the database: “Distribution,” “Total
pieces,” and “Total graphs.” Principally, none of these contains new
information (save for updated data). Instead, these fields have been created to
hold information that had been included - somewhat unsystematically - in other
fields. “Distribution” now shows where within a tomb or other site the
manuscripts have been found. For the archival manuscripts from the Chinese
northwest that derive from a multitude of sites scattered over large areas, but
have been published together, a compromise solution is still adopted in this
database. Rather than according to single sites, these manuscripts are listed
according to archaeological campaigns and publications, which is also the
format they are usually referred to in secondary literature. In these cases,
the “distribution” field tries to make up for the inconsistency by showing how
many manuscripts were actually found at which site.
In the MANUSCRIPTS part,
users are urged to pay attention to the newly created “remarks” field. The reformatting
of the database has forced me to use clear-cut expression and values in most
other fields. Often the information in the archaeological reports is not so
clear-cut, however, and the “remarks” field draws attention to moot points.
High and round numerical values, like the amount of pieces or graphs, should be
considered approximate, anyway.
Generally, where no data
were found, fields have been left blank. I have done my best – and continue to
do so - to provide every bit of information that is accessible. But sometimes,
my determination may have faltered and I chose not to hunt for that tiny detail
in those 1,000 pp. reports. Therefore, I do not guarantee completeness in every
aspect. This database is supposed to be a research tool, making it easier to
review and find information on manuscript sources; any further research effort
should go back to the first-hand “reports” and “reproductions/transcriptions.”
What is next?
The format of the database as it is presented now is a step forward, especially because it is searchable. But it is still not ideal. For the future, I envision several changes that could include:
l the inclusion of Chinese graphs
l a more user-friendly search tool with lists of clickable search terms and options and a display that is easier to the eye
l the inclusion of more bibliographical data that are now buried in the print article
l the connection of the data to a digitised map in GIS-format
in this order of importance. However, these changes,
if possible at all, may take some time and for some of them I depend on the
kind technical assistance of others. The ultimate move would be to make full
transcriptions and images of the manuscripts (and the sites) available online
and connect them to this database. But this touches upon copyright issues and I
am in no position to harbour much hopes in this direction let alone make any
promises. Let me state for the record, however, that if any institution (or
individual) that (who) possesses copyrights for particular manuscripts would be
willing to cooperate on this matter, this would be highly welcome.
Further References
A flood of recent
publications, bibliographies, and compilations of manuscript finds makes it
ever harder for a single person to stay ahead of the news in all subfields into
which the study of these sources has been rapidly diversifying. The web is
offering a way to publish and look for related news much more quickly and
comprehensively than was hithereto possible. This database is only part of it.
If you want to follow the latest news on the excavation and interpretation of
new finds, you should visit the site Jianbo yanjiu 簡帛研究 (http://www.bamboosilk.org/index.htm)
by the International Center for Research on Bamboo and Silk Documents
(Beijing), which also publishes a newsletter in print form. This has so far
focussed particularly on Warring States bamboo strips like those from Guodian
or the Shanghai Museum strips, but has the format to cover other materials as
well. For the strips from the Three Kingdoms state of Wu (wujian 吳簡) found at the
Changsha Zouma Building site, you will find two related subsections at the Xiangyata
象牙塔
website (http://www.ssdph.com.cn/sailing/subject/wujian/index.htm)
managed by the Institute of History, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. By far
the most comprehensive fulltext-database of published transcriptions of
manuscript texts as well as of related bibliographical items is still found at
the website of the Wenwu tuxiang yanjiushi 文物圖象研究室
at the Institute for History and Philology, Academia Sinica (http://saturn.ihp.sinica.edu.tw/~wenwu/ww.htm).
Note that this is not a database for browsing complete texts, but only for
searching for particular keywords that are then displayed in their immediate
context (like a single strip or paragraph). Only the newest finds have not yet
been included there. This gap can partly be filled by the Guodian Chujian
郭店楚簡
website (http://decapps.lib.cuhk.edu.hk/basisbwdocs/bamboo/bam_main.html)
at the Chinese University of Hong Kong. All these websites require Chinese
browser capabilities. An independent bibliography of related research with
short German descriptions of the sites and finds has been compiled by Joachim
Gentz (http://sun.sino.uni-heidelberg.de/staff/gentz/biblio.html).
Acknowledgements
Many more friends and
friendly persons than I can enumerate and even remember have helped me over the
years with numerous details. These include (in alphabetic order of family
name): Chen Wei 陳偉,
Ulrich Lau, Lin Suqing 林素清,
Luo Shijie 羅仕杰
(Luo Shih-chieh), Peng Hao 彭浩,
Matthias Richter, and Tomiya Itaru 富谷至.
The following deserve special mention: My teacher Xing Yitian 邢義田 (Hsing I-tien) initially
asked me to compile a (Chinese) list of excavated early Chinese manuscripts for
a seminar at the Academia Sinica. This became the prototype of this database.
Donald Haper invited me to contribute an article on the topic and with this as
well as his continued support acted as midwife to the English version. My
friend Wang Ding 王丁
sent in a dozen pages of comments and corrections not only for the Chinese
prototype but also for the English version in letters from Berlin. Finally,
David Sena and Charles Blair have put in their expertise and much time and energy
to reformat the file (including the creation of new fields) and make the whole
thing work on the web. None of those mentioned is responsible for the contents
of the database and of this introduction, for which I alone have to take the
blame.
I welcome criticism and
suggestions for the improvement of this site.
Enno Giele (紀安諾)