THE MEANING OF THE TAOTIE A Discussion o

THE MEANING OF THE TAOTIE
A discussion on the theoretical frameworks around the

enigmatic Shang bronze vessels décor
Enrica Medugno
Thesis Submitted in Fulfilments of the Requirements for the Degree of

MA in Art History and Visual Culture
Richmond University, the American International University in London
7th August 2020
Words count: 19,368

MA Art History and Visual Culture Thesis Declaration Form
1. This dissertation is being submitted in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
MA in Art History and Visual Culture and has not previously been accepted in substance for any
degree and is not being concurrently submitted in candidature for any other degree.
Signed candidate:
Date: 2/08/2020
2. This dissertation is the result of my own independent work and except where otherwise stated
other sources are acknowledged by explicit references.
Signed candidate:
Date: 2/08/2020
3. I have considered the ethical issues raised by the research and, where relevant, have stated
clearly to my informants that I am conducting MA research, collected interview release forms
signed by interviewees and assured anonymity by changing the names of individuals where
requested.
Signed candidate: Type text here
Date: 2/08/2020
4. I hereby give consent for my dissertation, if accepted, to be available for photocopying, inter-
library loan and for deposit in the University’s digital repository. I understand that the work will
be accessible to a wide variety of people and institutions including search engines via the World
Wide Web. I understand that the work and its metadata may be incorporated into public access
catalogues or services such as national databases of electronic theses. I understand that
Richmond University does not hold any obligation to take legal action on my behalf, or other
rights holders, in the event of a breach of intellectual property rights or any other right, in the
material deposited. I undertake to indemnify Richmond University against all actions, suits,
proceedings, claims, demands and costs occasioned by the University in consequence of any
breach of this agreement.
Signed candidate:
Date: 2/08/2020
ABSTRACT
This paper aims to highlight the influences of the colonial discourse in the discussion of ancient
art form China, with particular regard to the taotie motif of Shang bronze ritual vessels. On this
topic, two main opposite schools of thought developed in Western countries, specifically the
anglophone ones. A third approach emerged among those scholars who conducted their
studies mainly in the People Republic of China and Taiwan. The principal difference between
these theories is the theoretical framework they are based on. Specifically, those developed in
Western countries, namely the formalist-oriented theory and the iconographical approach,
mostly rely on those Western art history theories implemented by Heinrich Wölfflin and Erwin
Panofsky, respectively. Contrariwise, the third approach is deeply rooted in the Chinese
Archaeological tradition of relying on written sources, such as historical records, oracle bones
and literary sources. The primary issue with the formalism-oriented theory and the
iconographical approach lies in the fact that, by relying on Western art theories to discuss non-
Western art, they not only decontextualize the Shang bronzes, but also perpetuate colonial
stereotypes and preconceptions on art from China. While the third approach does not take the
objects of study out of context, nonetheless it relies on uncertain sources, as well as neglects
one crucial aspect, namely the agency of the artists/craftsmen. Because all these perspectives
tend to exclude one of the other possibilities, a mixed-method should be implemented in order
to overcome the shortcomings of both Western-centric and historiography-based theories. In
so doing, different fundamental elements can be highlighted to solve the mystery of the taotie.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Having reached the end of this wonderful chapter, I would like to express my gratitude. First, I
would like to thank the MA AVC faculty of Richmond University for their time, professionality
and efforts especially in these challenging times.
Then, I would like to extend my deepest gratitude to my amazing brother and my incredible
partner whose support and love helped me to achieve this goal. Thank you to my parents who
gave me the possibility to follow this dream and for introducing me to the art world in the first
place.
Finally, I would like to thank my fellow classmates who turned this academic year into an
amazing journey and who became my system of support.
Table of Contents
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 1
1. Thesis and relevance .......................................................................................................... 1
2. Methodology and Sources ................................................................................................. 5
3. Outline of the Chapters...................................................................................................... 5
CHAPTER 1: THE SHANG AND THE METAL WORK ...................................................................12
1. The Shang and The Royal Cult ..........................................................................................13
2. Bronze and Power: A Symbol of Social Order ..................................................................18
3. Ritual Vessels and Where to Find Them ..........................................................................20
4. Casting In Anyang .............................................................................................................23
5. Taotie: A Formal Analysis .................................................................................................26
6. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................31
CHAPTER 2: TAOTIE AS PURE FORM ........................................................................................33
1. Max Loehr: Denying the Meaning....................................................................................34
2. Robert W. Bagley: The Secret in the Eyes ........................................................................38
3. When the West Explains the East ....................................................................................42
4. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................46
CHAPTER 3: THE MEANING OF THE TAOTIE.............................................................................48
1. K. C. Chang: Shamanism and Historiography ...................................................................49
2. Sarah Allan: Myth, Religion and Art .................................................................................54
3. Iconographical Generalisation and the Colonial Discourse .............................................58
4. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................63
CHAPTER 4: ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORIOGRAPHY AND APPROACHING THE TAOTIE IN CHINA 64
1. Archaeology in China: A Brief History ..............................................................................65
2. Historiography and the Quest for the Origins .................................................................70
3. Approaching the Taotie....................................................................................................73
4. Prioritising China ..............................................................................................................78
5. Conclusion ........................................................................................................................81
CONCLUSIONS ..........................................................................................................................83
BIBLIOGRAPHY .........................................................................................................................89
ESSENTIAL CHRONOLOGY OF ANCIENT, MODERN AND CONTEMPORARY CHINA
FROM 1900 BCE TO 1980
BRONZE AGE, CENTRAL PLAINS Northern Song: 960 – 1127

Southern Song: 1127 – 1279
Erlitou culture: ca. 1900 – 1600 BCE Liao dynasty: 907 –1125
Erligang culture: ca. 1600 – 1400 BCE Jin dynasty: 1115 – 1234
Western Xia dynasty: 1038 – 1227
Shang dynasty: ca. 1600 – 1046 BCE Yuan dynasty: 1271 – 1368
Early Shang: ca. 1600 – 1400 BCE
Middle Shang: ca. 1400 – 1250 BCE Ming dynasty: 1368 – 1644
Late Shang: ca. 1250 – 1046 BCE
Qing dynasty: 1644 – 1911
Zhou dynasty: 1046 – 221 BCE Opium Wars:
Western Zhou: 1046 – 771 BCE First Opium War: 1840 – 1842
Easter Zhou: 770 – 221 BCE Second Opium War: 1856 – 1860
First Sino-Japanese War: 1894 – 1894
Spring and Autumn period: 770 – 476 BCE Boxer Rebellion: 1899
Warring States period: 475 – 221 BCE
REPUBLICAN ERA (1912 – 1949)
EMPIRES AND DYNASTIES
The Republic of China/End of the Empire: 1912
Qin dynasty: 221 – 206 BCE May Fourth Movement: 1919
Han dynasty: 206 BCE – 220 CE Academia Sinica: 1928
Western Han: 206 BCE – 9 CE Civil War: 1931 – 1949
Wang-Mang interregnum: 9 – 23 Japanese invasion of Manchuria: 1931
Eastern Han: 25 -220 Second Sino-Japanese War: 1937 – 1945
Six dynasties: 220 – 589 PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (1949 –)

Three kingdoms: 220 –280
Jin: 265 – 420 Mao Era: 1949 – 1976
Institute of archaeology Kaogu Yanjiu
Southern and Northern Dynasties: 420 – 589 Suo: 1949
Sui dynasty: 581 – 618 Great Leap Forward: 1958 – 1962
Tang dynasty: 618 – 907 Cultural Revolution: 1966 – 1976
Deng Xiaoping presidency: 1978 – 1989
Five dynasties: 907 – 960 Open Door policy: 19
Song dynasty: 960 – 1279
INTRODUCTION
1. Thesis and relevance
The manufacture of bronze artefacts in ancient China has often been the subject of animated
discussions among art historians and archaeologists, both Western and Chinese. Besides the
astonishing craftsmanship, the scholarship on Chinese Bronzes principally concerns the
decorations’ motifs, especially the taotie. The meaning and the origin of this specific décor is
the source of much speculation because the sources upon it are enigmatic. Contributing to this
ongoing debate, the examination of the taotie in this thesis engages critically with such key
issues as the veracity of Eurocentric and Sinocentric theories, the literary and archaeological
sources and a Neolithic ‘shamanism’ in China.
In the debate on the meaning and function of the taotie, three leading schools of thought
emerged in the scholarship produced in both Western countries, the Anglophone ones in
particular, and China and Taiwan. First, scholars like Max Loehr and Robert Bagley have focused
attention on the formal qualities of the design, either denying or setting aside the importance
and the existence of meaning. Second, academics like K. C. Chang and Sarah Allan pursued an
iconographical-oriented scholarship in relation to the shamanic context. The polarity of these
two schools of thoughts has now eased in favour of more wide-ranging, contextual
interpretations, which acknowledge and underscore the formal and the technical qualities of
the decorative motifs on Shang and Zhou bronze vessels and, concurrently, recognise their
1
symbolic function. Nevertheless, the thinking that characterised the decades between the
1950s and the early 2000s still endures and remains a source of debate.
In addition to these two contrasting approaches, a third school emerged among those Chinese
scholars who completed their education mainly in the People Republic of China and in the
Republic of China (Taiwan). These academics seem to focus more on the origins of the taotie
both in terms of design and language, rather than debating a possible meaning or function.
Therefore, these scholars prefer a different approach to the topic of Shang bronzes decor if
compared to Anglophone studies on the same subjects. Although over the last thirty years the
development of the discipline of art history in Chinese academies has been influenced by
Western theories, nevertheless the importance of ‘finding the origins’ and studying literary
sources still survives in modern Chinese art history and archaeology. 1 This tendency
undoubtedly impacts the ways in which Chinese scholars discuss the artistic production coming
from their motherland. Nevertheless, Western and Chinese scholars examined the subject but
addressed different issues. Hence, the comparison between the two schools of thinking might
bring to light a more balanced and perhaps comprehensive approach, as well as a better
understanding on how Western countries should discuss and consequently display Shang
bronzes in Western museums.
Therefore, this paper aims to review the literature produced around this subject matter, with
particular regard to the theories produced from the 1950s and the early 2000s. The choice of
1Hung Wu “Western Concepts Have Drastically Shaped the History of Chinese Art. But the Artworks Have Their
Own Stories to Tell”, Artnet.com, April 25, 2019. Last accessed April 25, 2020, https://news.artnet.com/art-
world/wu-hung-mellon-lecture-excerpt-1526068.
2
this period depends on the fact that the most animated discussions on Shang bronzes’ motifs
were formulated during those years. This proliferation of studies might derive from the fact
that the insularity of the People’s Republic of China was about to end with the ‘Open Door
Policy’ (1978) under the rule of Deng Xiaoping (1904–1997), granting a more agile cooperation
between Chinese and Western archaeologists, as well as permitting access to Chinese
archaeological sites. Furthermore, I will compare how art historians and curators study and
analyse Shang bronzes in the United Kingdom, USA, and China, thus identifying the theoretical
frameworks that scholars use to support their interpretation. I argue that a significant part of
the discussion on the subject in Europe and America relies on Western art history theories and
archaeological studies and is problematically Western-centric. In order to reinforce my
argument, I will analyse theories produced in China thus highlighting the different approach I
have already sketched before.
The Western-centric practice characterises the ongoing discussion about non-Western art that
mainly focuses on how Western countries see, perceive and, consequently, display and exhibit
non-Western art.2 Over the last century, the representation and analysis of non-Western art
changed and developed in a more ‘politically correct’ view, which tried to take into account
non-Western criteria and ideas of what is considered ‘art’. Although this approach is
undoubtedly characterised by a certain degree of ‘openness’ and ‘understanding’, nonetheless
it still depends on Western art history criteria and, in some instances, colonial discourses.
Consequently, the ethnographic purpose and a sense of ‘otherness’ inform the museums’
displays and collections of world arts. However, over the last twenty years, scholars and
2 Tan Chang, “Telling Global Stories, one at a Time: The Politics and Poetics of Exhibiting Asian Art”, World Art 5,
no. 2 (2015): 307-330.
3
curators have been moving towards the decolonisation of museums’ collections. 3 In other
words, they attempt to find different ways of displaying world arts, avoiding the colonial
discourse that still informs prestigious institutions such as the Victoria and Albert Museum and
the British Museum.
The relevance of this paper lies precisely in this aim to overcome the limitations of the colonial
criteria applied to non-Western art. By deconstructing the ways ‘we’ see and perceive Chinese
art, we might develop a better understanding of ‘their’ art, as well as of the criteria according
to which it should be discussed and displayed in Western museums. In saying this, I am not
suggesting a systematic rejection of Western theories, but rather their inclusion in a broader
dialogue that involves Chinese scholars and their point of view. Bringing Chinese art and art
history into focus is relevant for two reasons. First, Chinese art has always been affected by a
double standard according to which Chinese artworks were considered highly valuable in
Europe and North America, whereas Chinese people shifted from virtuous to ‘barbaric’,
‘lawless race’. Nevertheless, since art metonymically denotes a whole country and its people,
Chinese art is systematically reduced to a series of preconceptions based on the idea of China
shaped by the West.4 Second, the criteria that scholars from the UK and North America use to
discuss ancient artworks from China also affect the ways we see and perceive contemporary
Chinese art. In particular, the West still longs for the element of stereotypical ‘Chineseness’,
namely those aesthetic traits commonly associated with China also thanks to museums
displays.
3 Valentina Gamberi, “Decolonising Museums: South-Asian Perspectives”, Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society 29,
no. 2 (2019): 201-218.
4 Harley Wong, “Orientalism Persists in Conversations Around Chinese Contemporary Art”, in Hyperallergic.com,
December 12, 2018. Last accessed January 31, 2020, https://hyperallergic.com/475446/art-and-china-after-

1989-sfmoma/
4
2. Methodology and Sources
Concerning the methodology, I will mainly focus on sources written in English. This does not
mean that my analysis will merely include native English-speaking scholars. On the contrary, I
will discuss texts written by Chinese experts such as Cao Wei and Wang Tao. I will not divide
the paper according to the scholars’ country of origin, but rather to the theories produced on
the topic. It should be said that some of the Chinese scholars I will take into account undertook
at least part of their studies in Western countries; therefore, their theoretical perspectives
might have been influenced by the dominant discourse in the West. Nevertheless, I believe
that acknowledging their theories might represent an interesting starting point to combine
both the Western and the ‘native’ perspective.
Accordingly, I will consult sources by American and English scholars, as well as by Chinese art
historians, among whom some conducted their studies in PRC and Taiwan, whereas others
attended Western universities. The use of specific sources is strongly linked to the structure of
this paper. Indeed, I will consult different texts according to the chapter and the section. The
paper will be divided into an introduction, four chapters and a conclusion.
3. Outline of the Chapters
In the first chapter, “The Shang and Metal Work”, I will lay out the general historical context of
the Shang dynasty, with specific regard to the religious system and the cult of the ancestors.
Second, I will focus on the production of bronzes, providing a formal analysis of the taotie
motifs. In order to carry out this study, I will ground the discussion in Chinese art history and
5
history books, with particular regard to the texts by Craig Clunas, Robert L. Thorp, Richard Ellis
Vinograd, Michael Sullivan and Jessica Rawson. Certainly, the historical background is
fundamental to understand the developments of the theories I will discuss in this paper, as
well as to contextualise the long history of the debate around the topic.
The first systematic investigations on Bronze Age ritual vessels (3000–1200 BCE) have roots in
the Song dynasty (960-1279), when scholars started consulting the bronzes inscriptions in
order to supplement and revise the histories produced until that moment, including Confucian
classic.5 The results achieved by Song’s antiquarians and scholars, through the interpretation
of archaic inscriptions on bones and shells, the so-called ‘Oracle bones’, provided us with an
overall understanding of Shang bronzes in their religious, chronological and geographical
context.6
In regard to the use of bronzes, it is generally accepted that this production was designed for
the exploitation of the Shang and Zhou elite, which represented not only the ruling class, but
also the political power.7 Hence, bronze vessels, which are mostly found in tombs, are not only
a sign of a stratified society, but also symbols of power and authority. It is indeed believed that
the casting was commissioned and controlled by the king. The technological process was
undoubtedly sophisticated and more advanced than other civilisations.8 In order to produce
5 Robert L. Thorp, Richard Ellis Vinograd, “The Early Bronze Age: Shang and Western Zhou”, in Chinese Art and
Culture, (New York: Harry N. Abrams Inc., 2001), 55-88.
6 Robert W. Bagley, “Shang Archaeology”, in The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of
Civilization to 221 B.C., ed. Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1999), 124-231.
7 Rui Oliveira Lopes, “Securing the Harmony between the High and the Low: Power Animals and Symbols of
Political Authority in Ancient Chinese Jades and Bronzes”, Asian Perspectives 53, no. 2 (2014): 195-225.
8 Robert W. Bagley, “Shang Ritual Bronzes: Casting Technique and Vessel Design”, Archives of Asian Art, 43 (1990):
6-20.
6
such elaborate decorations, a piece-moulds technique was used. The inner part of the moulds
was engraved with the motif, among the which, three main categories can be recognised:
zoomorphism, real animals and human motifs.9 The taotie is part of the first category since it
presents features that can be found in real animals, such as horns and eyes. This motif
represents the foremost décor of Shang ritual vessels; 10 however it lost popularity and
eventually disappeared during the end of the Western Zhou (1050—770 BCE) and the Eastern
Zhou (770—256 BCE) dynasties.11 Due to the fact that the taotie can be found in objects cast
in such a specific period, some scholars hypothesised that this motif could only be understood
in the context of the Shang system of beliefs and values.
In the second chapter, “Taotie as Pure Form”, I will discuss one of the leading schools of
thought on the taotie, the so-called formal-oriented theory. This section will refer to the
theories of Max Loehr and Robert Bagley as representative of this scholarship. In particular, to
underline the influences of Western theories on their argumentations, I will critically discuss
their works. The main aim of this chapter is to provide a critical analysis of the formal-oriented
approach, underlying the problems that result from applying Western art theories to non-
Western art. In fact, I will show that the formalism-oriented method is based on theories
formulated by Western art historians of the formalist school, such as Heinrich Wölfflin (1864—
1945) to name one.
9 K. C. Chang, “The Animal in Shang and Chou Bronze Art”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 41, no. 2 (1981): 527-
554.
10 On the contrary, some inscriptions are found in the internal surface of the vessels. (Thorp, 2001).
11 Mario Bussagli, Chinese Bronzes, trans. by Pamela Swinglehurst, (Milano: Fabbri Editori, 1966, 1987), 51-58.
7
The key point of this scholarship is the denial of any iconographic meaning of the taotie.
According to Loehr, motifs in art designs should be understood merely as pure forms, thus
iconographically meaningless. Concerning the taotie, Loehr stated that the motif does not hold
any reference or allusion to reality, since there is no substantial evidence to it of any kind.12
Thus, the taotie should be regarded as ‘art for art sake’. 13 However, the consistent presence
of the taotie on Shang ritual vessels reasonably suggests the idea that the motifs were
somehow endowed with a certain degree of importance, if not specific symbolic meanings.
Robert W. Bagley does not go as far as Loehr in flatly rejecting the iconographic-oriented
theory. Nevertheless, due to the lack of pieces of evidence and sources, the technical and
formal aspects of the decorative motif’s production represent the focus of his theory. 14
The main issue with Bagley’s and Loehr’s approaches is the implementation of a theoretical
framework that relies on Western art history, namely the formalist theory. The problem lies in
the fact that art historians, such as Wölfflin, did not take into account non-Western art in their
discussion about the artistic development through the centuries. Consequently, applying these
methods to art from China results in the de-contextualisation of the objects, since these are
discussed according to the European standard of ‘fine art’. Therefore, Bagley’s and Loehr’s
theories are informed by the underlying judgment that characterised the discussion of non-
European art during the colonial period.
12 Loehr, (1974).
13 Ibid.
14 Robert W. Bagley, “Meaning and Explanation”, in The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes, ed.
Roderick Whitfield, (London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993), 35.
8
In the third chapter, “The Meaning of the Taotie”, discusses the iconographical approach to
the taotie by acknowledging the work of K. C. Chang (1931—2001) and Sarah Allan. While
Bagley and Loehr defined the taotie as mere design, Allan and Chang understand this motif as
‘totemic’ animal, a protective spirit of the king-shaman. In particular, K. C. Chang supports his
thesis by relying on ancient texts, where the term taotie is found together with other names
for mythical animals. Also, both Allan and Chang generalise the notions of ‘shamans’ and
‘shamanism’ to a unified phenomenon among Neolithic and present-day cultures.15
The merit of these authors is the fact that they discuss, thus take into account, the specific
context in which the vessels were cast. Therefore, conversely to the formalism-oriented
method, Shang bronzes are not entirely described out of their context. Nonetheless, a certain
level of decontextualisation occurs. Indeed, the generalisation of ‘shamanism’ and the
constant comparison with objects produced by other Neolithic or ‘shamanic’ cultures take
Shang vessels in a broader background that implies the universal validity of theories on
Neolithic Europe.
In the fourth chapter, “Archaeology, Historiography and Approaching the Taotie in China”, I
will present a third scholarship which mostly discusses the origins of the taotie, with a
particular focus on the works by Li Xueqin, Wang Tao and Cao Wei. As mentioned, I will mainly
examine Chinese scholars who completed most of their education in the People Republic of
China or the Republic of China. These authors differ from those previously mentioned because
their interest lies in the origins of the taotie motif, the technology of the casting process and
15Qu Feng, “Anthropology and Historiography: A Deconstructive Analysis of K.C. Chang’s Shamanic Approach in
Chinese Archaeology”, Numen 64, no. 5-6 (2017): 497-544.
9
the textual analysis of the literary sources. The goal of this chapter is to underscore the
difference between this scholarship and those analysed in the previous chapters. In particular,
I will demonstrate how the studies by Li Xueqin, Wang Tao and Cao Wei are deeply rooted in
the Chinese archaeological tradition, rather than relying on Western art theories. In doing so,
before engaging with these discussions, the history of archaeology in China should be
introduced, highlighting the close relationship between this discipline and historiography.
Therefore, the main features of the theories analysed in this chapter include the quest for the
origins, the importance of the specific context, the significance of written sources and the lack
of comparison with other civilisations. For instance, Cao Wei extensively describes the
geographical and historical background by quoting modern history manuals as well as written
sixth-century sources such as the Shuijingzhu (The Commentary on the Water Classic) by Li
Daoyuan.16
In regard to the importance of written sources, Wang Tao relies on literary records relating to
the taotie motif and Shang’s bronzes since.17 Also, Li Xueqin focuses on the question of the
origins of the taotie. The answer is sought by comparing this with other motifs that appear on
other Chinese artefacts. Therefore, there is no connection with other Neolithic cultures. The
author finally states that the taotie motif was inherited in the Shang from pre-historic times as
a case of continuing not only an artistic tradition, but probably also beliefs and myths.18 The
16 Wei Cao [曹玮], Hanzhong chutu Shangdai qingtongqi [汉中出土商代青铜器] [Shang Bronzes From Hanzhong],
(Chengdu: Sichuan Publishing Group, 2006).
17 Tao Wang, “A Textual Investigation of the Taotie”, in The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes,
ed. Roderick Whitfield, London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993.
18 Xueqin Li, “Liangzhu Culture and the Shang Dynasty Taotie Motif”, in The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese
Ritual Bronzes, translated by Sarah Allan, ed. by Roderick Whitfield (London: School of Oriental and African Studies,
1993), 56-65.
10
issue with written sources lies in the lack of texts contemporary to the Shang that present any
specific information about the meaning of the taotie. Additionally, later texts, although
discussing Shang bronze in a more detailed manner, can only be acknowledged as
interpretations of the ritual vessels and their motif. Even though this third scholarship presents
some issues, such as focusing on a narrow aspect of the problem of Shang bronzes,
nevertheless, this approach overcomes the problem of the decontextualisation.
11
CHAPTER 1
THE SHANG AND THE METAL WORK
The fascination for the mystery of Chinese Bronze Age ritual vessels, with particular regard to
the Shang dynasty (c. 2000/1500-1050 BCE), has roots in the Song dynasty (960-1279). Indeed,
scholars started investigating these objects and consulting the bronzes’ inscriptions as “a
means of supplementing and correcting the testimony of the Confucian classics and
histories”.19 Through the interpretation of archaic inscriptions on bones and shells, the so-
called ‘oracle bones’, Song’ scholars and antiquarians developed an overall understanding of
Shang bronzes and their relations to the system of beliefs and religion of their particular
chronological and geographical context. 20 Undoubtedly, this cataloguing work produced a
lexicon still used today. For instance, during this dynasty, the term taotie appeared for the first
time as indicative of the bronze vessels motifs.21 Despite the long tradition of discussing this
topic, the meaning of the decorative motifs still represents a dilemma.
The historical background in which the Shang bronzes were designed and used is fundamental
to understand the reasons behind the developments of the theories and the long history of
the debate around the topic. Therefore, in this chapter, I will outline the historical context of
19 Thorp and Ellis Vinograd (2001), 55.

20 Yu Liu, “Emperor Qianlong’s Four Catalogues on Bronzes”, in Mirroring China's Past: Emperors, Scholars, and
Their Bronzes, ed. Wang, Tao (Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago, Organizer, Host Institution, 2018), 140-143.
21 Sarah Allan, “Interpreting the Decoration on Early Chinese Bronze Vessels”, in Mirroring China's Past: Emperors,
Scholars, and Their Bronzes, ed. Wang, Tao, (Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago, Organizer, Host Institution, 2018),
38-42.
12
the Shang dynasty, focusing attention on two relevant socio-political aspects: the importance
of religion and the cult of the ancestors. Then, I will present the function and the prominence
of the bronze ritual vessels during Shang’s reign. Lastly, I will provide a formal analysis of the
taotie motifs, highlighting the similarities of different decorative styles.
1. The Shang and The Royal Cult
The Shang originally settled along the lower reaches of the Huang He (Yellow River), then
expanded their domain and influence in the territory that today corresponds to the northern
and central Henan Province (figure 1).22 The five hundred years of Shang history are usually
divided into three phases: first, the Early Shang (c. 2000/1500 – 1400 BCE), which encompasses
two periods, namely the Erlitou (c. 2000/1900 – 1600 BCE) and the Erligang (1600 – 1400 BCE),
second, the Middle Shang (1400 – 1250 BCE), and the Late Shang (1250 – 1046 BCE) which
encompass the history of this dynasty until the conquest by the Western Zhou (c. 1046-771
BCE), in the mid-ninth century BCE. 23 The two civilisations of the Early Shang period represent
a lively source of debate, in particular the Erlitou, because some scholars associate the latter
to the mythical Xia dynasty, of which, however, we have no evidence other than later legends.
22 Chengyuan Ma, “The Splendor of Ancient Chinese Bronzes”, in The Great Bronze Age of China: An Exhibition
from the People’s Republic of China, ed. Wen Fong, (New York City: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980), 1-
19.
23 Riccardo Fracasso, “Esordi Storici: La Dinastia Shang”, in La Cina, ed. Maurizio Scarpari, (Torino: Giulio Einaudi
editore, 2013), 39-76.
13
Figure 1: Map of Shang’s ruling area, as well as the sites yielding Shang-dynasty bronzes. (Source: Jianjun Mei
Kunlong Chen, Wei Cao, “Scientific examination of Shang-dynasty bronzes from Hanzhong, Shaanxi Province,
China”, Journal of Archaeological Science 36 (2009):1881–1891).
Conversely, the Erligang culture is undoubtedly recognised as part of the Shang dynasty thanks
to the presence of significant texts in the form of bronze vessels inscriptions, oracle bones and
subsequent sources that matched the information found in those contemporary to that
period.24 The main difference between these phases consists of the vessels’ shapes and types
and the style of the decoration motifs, to which I shall return later.
24Robert L. Thorp, “A Primer on the Bronze Caster’s Art”, in Spirit and Ritual: The Morse Collection of Ancient
Chinese Art, ed. Robert L. Thorp and Virginia Bower, (New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1982), 11-38.
14
The Shang represent the oldest ancient ruling dynasty of China which existence is supported
by both archaeological evidence and written texts.25 The relevance of this specific dynasty lies
precisely in this certainty. In fact, a combination of facts, records and myths marked the history
of ancient China rulers, until the discovery of the site of Anyang, Shang capital city, which
proved the reality of this dynasty. 26 Certainly, the turning point was represented by the
inscription found on the so-called ‘oracle bones’ (figure 2), in which nine of the eighteen Shang
kings’ names mentioned matched those of later sources, including Wu Ding, the first Shang
ruler.27 Nevertheless, uncertainties concerning the origins and the development of the rituals
traditions and the cast-bronze technology persist, as I will show in the following paragraphs.
Figure 2: Example of ‘oracle bones’ with inscription on a turtle shell.

(Source: http://museum.sinica.edu.tw/exhibition_item.php?id=21&item=508#detail-wrapper, Accessed July 27,
2020)
25 Fracasso, (2013).
26 Craig Clunas, Art in China, (Oxford, New York: Oxford University Press, 1997).
27 Ibid.
15
Together with the inscriptions on the ‘oracle bones’, much of the information about the Shang
dynasty can be found in royal tombs. Both these evidence sources emphasise the importance
of the cult of the deity Di, or Shang Di, and the ancestors. 28 Shang Di was considered the most
powerful among the spirits, who was able to bring fortune to the whole of the Shang society.
The intermediaries between the Shang and this god were the ancestors; thus, the progenitors
were believed to have the power to affect fundamental aspects of Shang society and lifestyle.
Since the king was the only person entitled to interface with the ancestors, thus granting a
direct communication with the latter, the cult was a fundamental sign of authority and defined
the role of the king himself. Moreover, the worship predominantly regarded the royal lineage
of dead kings, including some ancestors that appear in Zhou mythology.29 Furthermore, the
cult was not only considered a familial, but also a societal, lineage and political matter, as it
dictated status and relationships. Finally, it provided an understanding of the natural world and
its phenomena. 30 Therefore, despite the evident significance of Di, the ancestral spirits
represent the most important and common supernatural figures that appear in the oracle
bones inscriptions, since only the ancestors mediated the relationship between the Shang and
the Di.31
The importance of the ancestor cult also lies in the idea of death that Shang people had. Indeed,
status, everyday needs and habits did not end after passing away but, instead, they were
altered. Consequently, power and more general social relationship transcended mortality. This
28 Robert L. Thorp, “Shang Cult: Divination and Sacrifice”, in China in the Early Bronze Age: Shang Civilization,
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006), 172-213.
29 Thorp (2006).
30 W.W. Howells, “Origins of the Chinese People: Interpretations of the Recent Evidence”, in The Origins of Chinese
Civilization, ed. David N. Keightley (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1983), 297-320.
31 David Keightley, “The Shang: China’s First Historical Dynasty”, in The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From
the Origins of Civilisation to 221 B.C., ed. Michael Loewe, Edward l. Shaughnessy (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1999), 323-291.
16
belief might explain why sacrifice rites included banquets, and tombs were furnished in
resemblance of the possession the dead had in life. 32 This tradition perpetuated in later
dynasties, which also included the reproduction of objects, people and animals. A well-known
example of this practice is the mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor (259–210 BCE) and his
terracotta army (figure 3).33 The idea of transferring the possessions from one dimension to
the other integrated sacrifices as a defining feature of Shang cult, which procedures are
described in the oracle bones. These rites changed according to the occasion as well as which
bronze vessels should have been used.
Figure 3: a section of the terracotta army in Xi’an (Shaanxi) showing statues of the Emperor Qin Shi Huangdi
soldiers. (Photo taken by Enrica Medugno, November 2016 at the Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor in Xi’an,
Shaanxi.)
32 David Keightley, “The ‘Science’ of the Ancestors: Divination, Curing, and Bronze-Casting in Late Shang China”,
Asia Major 14, no. 2 (2001), 143-187.
33 Mario Sabattini and Paolo Santangelo, Storia della Cina, (Roma-Bari: Laterza, 2010).
17
2. Bronze and Power: A Symbol of Social Order
Since the rites in which bronze vessels were employed are generally identified as
representative of authority, the objects themselves and the material used are usually
recognised as an indicator of power relationship. In the case of the Shang dynasty, this allusion
can be linked to two main types of artefacts: weapons and bronze vessels. In this paper, I will
only focus on the latter group due to the importance of these objects in Shang cult rituals and,
consequently, in denoting authority and power.
In regard to the material, for more than a thousand years, bronze played a key role in Chinese
life, until it lost its centrality in favour of iron. This change was not abrupt, but rather a gradual
passage that lasted for several centuries. Conversely, the origin of metallurgy in the history of
China is less clear.34 Evidence of the use of metal was found in the site of Banpo (Shaanxi
Province) of the Yangshao culture (c. 5000-3000 BCE), but also the later cultures of Qijia in
Gansu and lower Xiajiadian in western Liaoning presented ornaments and small objects made
of copper (figure 4). Therefore, metallurgy appeared in China three thousand years before the
Shang came to power, at least. This might mean that the achievements of the Shang craftsmen
are the results of a long process which began around 5000 BCE. However, the amount and the
quality of the artefacts dating before 2000 BCE is not as significant as the presence of pottery
and stone objects.35
34 K. C. Chang, “The Chinese Bronze Age: A Modern Synthesis”, in The Great Bronze Age of China: An Exhibition
from the People’s Republic of China, ed. Wen Fong, (New York City: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980), 35-
50.
35 Sullivan Michael, The Arts of China, (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999).
18
Figure 4: Map of the areas occupied by different Neolithic cultures, including the Yangshao and the Qijia culture.
(Source: Rui Oliveira Lopes, “Securing the Harmony between the High and the Low: Power Animals and Symbols
of Political Authority in Ancient Chinese Jades and Bronzes”, Asian Perspectives 53, no. 2 (2014):198)
It is in the sites of the Erlitou’s culture that the consistent finding of bronze objects became a
tool to understand “the real significance of bronze in the Chinese Bronze Age”.36 Indeed, the
question of Chinese bronzes can be examined in terms of ancient artefacts, hence addressing
formal qualities, and the type and the technology used to produce them. Nonetheless, this
discussion should not neglect the specificity of the social context in which they were employed.
Metal-production is usually linked to social stratification, professional specialisation and
perhaps the presence of permanent production centres. These elements are often suggested
to be the consequence of the development of metallurgy. Therefore, in the case of Chinese
bronzes, Shang technology and metallurgy seems to have represented a response and not a
36 Chang (1980).
19
determinant of the social stratification.37 This is because that the amount of material produced,
the technology and the siting of the objects indicate a social order “with sufficient organisation
and force to generate and replenish the required reservoir of forced labour”. 38 Thus, the
flourishing of bronze metallurgy in an already stratified society resulted in reinforcing the
particular social order and the power relations within.
3. Ritual Vessels and Where to Find Them
As mentioned in the previous sections, a significant part of the knowledge we have about the
Shang dynasty is the result of tombs excavations. Indeed, according to Roderick B. Campbell,
an important sign indicating of the ancestral cult in China is the presence of ritual deposits in
tombs and cemeteries.39 The most famous example is the tomb of Lady Hao, found in 1976 in
Anyang, in which over two hundred vessels were found (figure 5). The discovery of royal tombs
validated the idea of a stratified society in which the production of bronze vessels was designed
for the exploitation of the Shang and Zhou elite, thus representing political and religious
power.40 This exclusivity is an important starting point in order to understand some of the
theories on the meaning of the taotie and, more broadly, of the bronzes’ unique motifs, as I
will discuss in the following chapters.41
37 Ursula Martius Franklin, “On Bronze and Other Metals in Early China”, in The Origins of Chinese Civilization, ed.
David N. Keightley, (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1983), 279-297.
38 Ibid, 288.
39 Roderick B. Campbell, “Memory, Power and Death in Chinese History and Prehistory”, in The Archaeology of
Ancestors: Death, Memory and Veneration, ed. Erica Hill and John B. Hageman (Gainesville: University Press of
Florida, 2014), 81-101.
40 Thorp (2001).
41 Ibid.
20
Figure 5: Lady Hao (Fu Hao) tomb in Anyang, with reproductions of bronze vessels and jade discs. (Source:
https://www.chinasage.info/early-dynasties.htm. Accessed July 27, 2020)
Concerning the practical use of bronze vessels, these objects were generally exploited during
ancestor cult rituals and offers. Nevertheless, different shapes implied different purposes.42
For instance, the most common types were gu and jue (figure 6 and 7), for drinking and pouring
liquids, respectively. Usually found in pair, these vessels were among the first produced in
Erlitou. Another typology is represented by the tripods ding (figure 9) present in Erligang sites
and, later, in the Western Zhou. Together with the four-legged fangding (figure 9), the function
of these vessels was to serve steamed grain. The number of shapes and function is remarkable
and includes subtypes.43 However, this paper will mainly focus on the décor that characterises
these objects since it represents the primary source of debate among scholars.
42Chang (1980).
43Roderick B. Campbell, Archaeology of the Chinese Bronze Age: From Erlitou to Anyang, (Los Angeles: Cotsen
Institute of Archaeology Press at UCLA, 2014).
21
Figure 6 and 7: example of gu (left) and jue (right) vessels decorated with a taotie motif, late Shang dynasty, 12th
–11th century BCE.
(Source: https://www.christies.com/lotfinder/lot_details.aspx?intObjectID=5776642&lid=1. Accessed July 26,
2020)
Figure 8: example of a ding vessels decorated with a taotie motif, late Shang dynasty, 12th – 11th century BCE.
(Photo taken by Enrica Medugno, November 2016 at the Mausoleum of the First Qin Emperor in Xi’an, Shaanxi.)
22
Figure 9: example of fangding vessel decorated with a taotie motif, Anyang period, ca. 1300 – 1030 BCE. (Source:
The Great Bronze Age of China: An Exhibition from the People’s Republic of China, ed. Wen Fong, New York City:
The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980.)
4. Casting in Anyang
Concerning the casting method, it is generally recognised that Chinese technical traditions
were more advanced than other civilisations. However, the casting technique was not a key
factor in the study of Shang bronzes until the 1960s, when art historians realised that the
casting process represented a fundamental aspect in understanding Shang ritual vessels and
their décor, so much that some scholars, such as Robert W. Bagley believes the casting
techniques to represent the reason behind the formal qualities of the taotie, as I will discuss in
23
the next chapter.44 Certainly, the process of production influenced the choice of the shape of
the vessels as well as the aesthetic of the decors, inasmuch as the skills of the artisans and the
possibility of casting specific designs according to the technology available at the time.
In regard to the technical aspects of the casting process, thanks to the discoveries at Anyang,
the lost-wax process was excluded early on. Indeed, the artist/artisans began with a clay model
as the starting point to make a mould of the model, which was used to cast the bronze replica
(figure 10).45 The mould did not consist of a single unit; on the contrary, it was made out of
piece-moulds. Before the mould pieces could be used, a core was placed in the centre in order
to produce a hollow vessel. Studies have demonstrated that the material used for the core was
yellow earth, which can be found in northern China, possibly blown from Central Asia and the
Gobi Desert.46 The mould pieces, instead, were usually made of clay. This material not only
facilitated designing the mould and production series, but also the casting of thin-wall bronze
vessels. 47 The use of clay and the possibility of producing bronze also determines the
availability of specific natural resources in the production area. Hence, the geographical
circumstances were fundamental in the development of bronze casting technology as well as
the use of bronze itself.48
44 Robert W. Bagley, “Shang Ritual Bronzes: Casting Technique and Vessel Design”, Archives of Asian Art, 43 (1990):
6-20.
45 Jessica Rawson, “Reviving Ancient Ornament and the Presence of the Past Examples from Shang and Zhou
Bronze Vessels”, in Reinventing the Past: Archaism and Antiquarianism in Chinese Art and Visual Culture, ed. Wu
Hung (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010), 47-76.
46 Jenny So, “Innovation in Ancient Chinese Metalwork”, in China 5,000 Years: Innovation and Transformation in
the Arts, ed. Howard Rogers, Naomi Richard and Sylvia Moss (New York: Guggenheim Museums Publications,
1998), 75-88.
47 Rongyu Su, “Bronze-casting Technology in the Late Shang Dynasty”, in Mirroring China's Past: Emperors,
Scholars, and Their Bronzes, ed. Wang, Tao (Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago, Organizer, Host Institution, 2018),
32-37.
48 Wei Cao[曹玮] Hanzhong chutu Shangdai qingtongqi [汉中出土商代青铜器] [Shang Bronzes From Hanzhong],
Chengdu: Sichuan Publishing Group, 2006.
24
Figure 10: Schematic drawing of the piece-moulds casting. In this case the pieces were used to cast a fang yi. The
drawing also shows the engraved mould pieces and the core. (Source: Bagley, 1990)
Both the décor of the vessels and its shape were determined by the inner surface of the moulds.
Thus, the decoration was engraved on the mould pieces.49 This explains why decorations are
usually found in the outer part of the vessels. Understanding the ways in which bronze vessels
were cast fostered the hypothesis that the production of these objects developed from clay
techniques, hence the shapes of Shang bronzes originated from clay artefacts. This theory is
supported by many scholars, such as Max Loehr, who also argue that the formal qualities of
taotie my derive from white pottery. Additionally, the intricacy of the décor is as sophisticated
49T. W. Chase, “Chinese Bronzes: Casting, Finishing, Patination and Corrosion”, in Ancient & Historic Metals:
Conservation and Scientific Research, ed. David A. Scott, Jerry Podany, Brian B. Considine (Los Angeles: Getty
Publications, 1994), 85-182.
25
as the one of jade objects. Indeed, similar motifs can be seen in jade artefacts that are either
contemporary to Shang vessels or earlier.50
5. Taotie: A Formal Analysis
In regard to the decoration of Shang bronze vessels, scholars have adopted different
approaches in order to understand their possible meaning, design and technique, as well as
the origin of the motif, especially in the case of the taotie. The variations between these three
theories will be discussed in the following chapters, whereas in this section I will exclusively
address the formal qualities of the motifs. Among the bronze decorations, we could include
three main categories: zoomorphism (figure 11), real animals (figure 12), and human motifs
(figure 13) . 51 The zoomorphic motif of the taotie, typical of the Shang dynasty and usually
found on the external surface of the vessels, 52 lost popularity and eventually disappeared
during the end of the Western Zhou and the Eastern Zhou (770—256 BC) dynasties.53 Although
the former initially acquired most of Shang’s traditions, as well as their language and form of
government, the disappearance of bronze motifs with the Eastern Zhou indicates a shift from
the Shang legacy to a new system.54 This limited production of artworks decorated with the
taotie fostered the hypothesis of a connection between this motif and not only the system of
beliefs and values, but also the political model implemented among the Shang.
50 Robert W. Bagley, “The Beginning of the Bronze Age: The Erlitou Culture Period” in The Great Bronze Age of
China: An Exhibition from the People’s Republic of China, edited by Wen Fong, 67-77. New York City: The
Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980.
51 K. C. Chang, “The Animal in Shang and Chou Bronze Art”, Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies, 41, no. 2
(1981): 527-554.
52 On the contrary, some inscriptions are found in the internal surface of the vessels. (Thorp, 2001)
53 Jessica Rawson, “The Shang Dynasty: Bronze decoration”, in Chinese Bronzes: Art and Ritual (London: British
Museum Publications Ltd, 1987), 26-32.

54 Fracasso (2013).
26
Figure 11 and 12: an example of jia vessel, ca. 15th–14th century BCE, decorated with a zoomorphic motif, in this
case a taotie, height 54 cm (right) and an example of fangzun, Anyang period (ca. 1300–1030 BCE) decorated with
real animal motif. Height 58.3 cm (left).
(Source: Wen Fong, 1980, p. 141 and 147)
27
Figure 13: a late Shang period fangding, decorated with a human mask design, height 38.5 cm.
(Source : http://www.hnmuseum.com/en/content/bronze-ding-food-container-human-mask-design. Accessed
July 28, 2020)
From a formal point of view, according to Jessica Rawson (1943–), bronzes decorations result
from those on jade objects. Therefore, the author suggests the necessity to investigate “the
jade ancestry of the taotie” in order to understand the formal qualities of the décor, starting
with the always present symmetry of the images.55 Because of the symmetrical development
of the mask, the taotie is the representation of a creature viewed frontally, but it can be seen
either as two animals joined together or as a single creature.56 Loehr identified five stages that
mark the stylistic representation of the taotie (figure 14).
55Rawson (1987).
56Robert W. Bagley, “The High Yinxu Phase (Anyang Period)”, in The Great Bronze Age of China: An Exhibition from
the People’s Republic of China, ed. Wen Fong (New York City: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980), 175-190.
28
Figure 14: Max Loehr five styles of the taotie (Source: Elena Moreno, “The Problem in the Interpretation of the
Taotie motif on Shang Bronzes,” East Asia Journal, 1 (2003): 10)
The difference between the stages lies in the increasing abstraction and sophistication of the
motifs.57 Indeed, in the first and the second style, the mask looks less elaborate than the others.
It should be highlighted that Loehr’s division represents an impressive tool not only for
identifying technical and artistic variations on the same subject, but also for approximately
dating the vessels. The detectable variations of the motif, together with the fact that no
Max Loehr, “The Bronze Styles of the Anyang Period (1300-1028 B.C.)”, Archives of the Chinese Art Society of
57
America, 7 (1953): 42-53.
29
identical taotie has been found, result in different interpretations, which will be discussed in
the following chapters.
Figure 15: A scheme of the taotie motif where the main features are highlighted (Source: Moreno, 2003).
Nevertheless, a couple of stylistic elements emerged as constant over the five stages (figure
15). First, the eyes, in relief or engraved, are the feature that allows us to recognise the mask
motif.58 Rawson particularly stressed the importance of this element, endowing them with an
attention-grabbing function, which is also, at least according to Rawson, the purpose of the
taotie.59 The second element is the absence of the lower jaw of the taotie.60 This might be the
consequence of the frontal perspective from which one can view the mask, but Brian Hogarth
interpreted this lack as a sign of the fact that the ‘monster’ is portrayed while devouring a prey,
58 Thor, (2001).
59 Jessica Rawson, “Late Shang Bronze Design: Meaning and Purpose”, in The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese
Ritual Bronzes, ed. Roderick Whitfield, (London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993), 67-92.
60 Mario Bussagli, Chinese Bronzes, trans. by Pamela Swinglehurst, (Milano: Fabbri Editori, 1966, 1987), 51-58.
30
possibly a human.61 This interpretation derives from mythological texts, in which the taotie
appears as a human-eating creature whose body would dissolve before entirely devouring the
prey.62
This argument is often considered as an explanation for the peculiar form of the taotie’s body,
usually of intricate shapes and lines. Thus, scholars have seen the split in two symmetrical parts
of the body as the representation of the death of the creature.63 As a result, these theories
identified the taotie’s body as a symbol of ‘transformation’, ‘death’ and ‘travel’, traits that are
often associated with shamanism.64 A further common element is the presence of horns. These
could be in different forms and shapes, which are often associated with animals of the real
world, such as goats and deer.65 This feature led to the idea that the taotie denoted the animals
killed during ritual sacrifices, a function supported by Sarah Allan, who states that “primitive
or mythic art is neither pure decoration, nor representation. Like myths, it alludes to reality,
but it does not depict it”.66 The mystery of the taotie does not only lie in its formal qualities
but is, in fact, deeper when discussing its meaning.
6. Conclusion
In general, Shang bronzes represent a singularity in World art history, for their sophistication
in terms of technology of production, formal qualities and quantity found. Additionally, the
61 Brian Hogarth, Ancient China: From the Neolithic Period to the Han Dynasty, (New York: Asian Art Museum,
1999), 1-103.
62 Tao Wang, “A Textual Investigation of the Taotie”, in The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes,
ed. Roderick Whitfield, (London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993), 102-118.
63 Ibid.
64 Sarah Allan, “Art and Meaning”, in The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes, ed. Roderick
Whitfield, (London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993), 10-32.

65 Ibid.
66 Ibid. 14.
31
presence of vessels in tombs highlight the connection between these objects and the system
of belief among the Shang, as well as the existence of a stratified society and of a political and
religious order. This association between specific context and the objects is generally accepted,
whereas the same cannot be said for the decoration motifs, with particular regard to the taotie.
Indeed, this mysterious décor represents the source of a lively debate that still divide scholars
who, on the one hand, prioritise the formal qualities and, on the other, focus on the possible
meaning of the motif. Additionally, the question of the origin of the taotie is another unsolved
dilemma. These three scholarships are complex and marked by the influence of different
theories of art history as I will explain in the following chapters.
32
CHAPTER 2
TAOTIE AS PURE FORM
In the debate on the meaning of the taotie, two main opposite schools of thought emerged.
On the one hand, scholars like Max Loehr (1903-1988) and Robert Bagley focused the attention
on the formal qualities of the design, denying or neglecting the possibility of the existence of
meaning. On the other hand, academics like K. C. Chang and Sarah Allan pursued an
iconographical-oriented scholarship about the shamanic context.67 Nowadays, this polarity is
eased in favour of more comprehensive theories, which acknowledge and underscore formal
and technical qualities and, concurrently, recognise a potential symbolic function of the
decorative motifs on Shang bronze vessels. Nevertheless, the discussions that characterised
the five decades between the 1950s and the early 2000s still represents a fruitful source of
debate.
In this chapter, I will address the formal-oriented theory, with particular regard to the work of
Loehr and Bagley. Hence, I will provide a literature review, and, at the same time, I will outline
the theoretical framework on which their hypothesises rely on. This chapter aims to address
the fact that these scholars based their discussions on theories of ‘fine art’ and art history
originated and developed in Western countries, by Western philosophers and art historians
such as Ernst Gombrich (1909—2001). Heinrich Wölfflin (1864—1945), Alois Riegl’s (1858-
67Ladislav Kesner, “The Taotie Reconsidered: Meanings and Functions of the Shang Theriomorphic Imagery”,
Artibus Asie 51, no. 1/2 (1991), 29-53.
33
1905) and Immanuel Kant (1724-1804). The main problem of the application of these theories
to the context of the Asian art lies in the fact that when they were produced, the art from China
was not considered as ‘fine art’, nor represented the focus of such theories. Therefore, these
concepts and principles did not take into account the peculiarities and diversities between
Chinese and Western art, for which these theories were conceived in the first place. As a result,
the following implementation of these formal-oriented approaches in the discussion on the
taotie has presumed a level of universality of Western schools of thoughts, which is a typical
attitude of the colonial perspective.
1. Max Loehr: Denying the Meaning
Max Loehr’s work on the taotie undeniably represents one of the foremost investigations on
Shang bronzes decorations. His study of the formal qualities of the design, and the consequent
differentiation in five styles immensely contributed to the categorisation of the motif and
facilitated a formal analysis of the latter, as well as it helped with the dating process. Indeed,
Loehr focused attention on the visual aspect of the decoration, identifying five different styles,
which differs in complexity, dimensions and relief.68 This differentiation allows us to determine
the relative date of the vessels, whereas no reference to a king or a year occurs in the
inscriptions. Additionally, Loehr investigated a possible origin of the motif in pottery’s and
jade’s decorations of objects produced prior to the Anyang phases. This hypothesis stems from
the fact that the shape of most bronze vessels derived from preceding pottery objects.
68 Max Loehr, Ritual Vessels of Bronze Age China, New York: The Asia Society, 1974.
34
Furthermore, according to Loehr, decorations similar to those on bronze vessels can be found
in white pottery, like zigzag and spiral patterns.69
Both the discussions on the origins and the different styles are based on a comparative method,
which was introduced by Heinrich Wölfflin and subsequently promoted by Aby Warburg (1866-
1929). 70 Undoubtedly, the former played an important role in the development of Loehr’s
theory. Indeed, Wölfflin’s significant influence can be easily recognised in Loehr’s thesis. The
first and most evident shared feature between the two scholars is the emphasis on the formal
aspect of the taotie motif. As abovementioned, Loehr mainly addressed, if not exclusively, the
visual qualities of the ornament and its development over time. The prioritisation of the forms
over the meaning is justified by the lack of contemporary evidence that explains the motif as
the carrier of a specific meaning. As discussed in the previous chapter, the reference to the
décor on the Shang bronzes as taotie dates back to the Song dynasty, thus centuries after the
Shang reign.71
The influence of Wölfflin can also be seen in the description of the five styles. The development
of these refers undeniably to Wölfflin’s five pairs, as explained in Principles of Art History (1915).
For instance, Loehr summarised the formal qualities of the taotie’s first style as simple and
light, whereas the second appears as ‘harsh’ and heavy. 72 This opposition can be linked to the
first Wölfflin’s pair of ‘linear versus painterly’.73 Furthermore, Loehr argued that ornaments
69 Loehr (1953).
70 Michael Hatt and Charlotte Klonk, “Formalism: Heinrich Wölfflin and Alois Riegl”, in Art History: A Critical
Introduction to its Methods, (Manchester: Manchester United Press, 2006/2018), 65-95.
71 Ibid.
72 Loehr (1974).
73 Heinrich Wölfflin, “Principles of Art History,” in The Art of Art History: A Critical Anthology, ed. Donald Preziosi,
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), 115-126.
35
and décor motifs in Chinese art followed the same cyclical fate of Western art’ styles suggested
by Wölfflin. Indeed, Loehr did not imply a complete disappearance of Shang bronzes motifs,
but instead suggests a transformation in more complex and abstract patterns. Similar to
Wölfflin, Loehr did not aim to highlight a decline or a rise in quality, since the changes in styles
are perceived as a consequence of the development in perception. Neolithic geometric
patterns and subsequent motifs turned into more representational designs “partly organism
and partly ornament”.74
From the focus on the pure form, Loehr made the denial of any iconographic meaning of the
taotie the key point of his thesis, namely According to the author, motifs in art design are
merely forms and should be regarded as such, rather than considering them as works of art.
Concerning the taotie, Loehr stated that the motif “came into being as sheer design, form
based on form alone, configurations without reference to reality or, […] with dubious allusions
to reality”.75 Since there is no solid evidence to it, the décor does not hold any reference or
allusion to reality. Thus, the taotie is iconographically meaningless, and it only exists as a pure
form. Therefore, according to the author, “we must renounce attempts to explain these elusive
images in terms of cosmology or religious lore”. 76 Loehr also added that any reference to real
animals is due to necessity in providing a more precise description, hence meaningless
otherwise, since the ornament exists solely as ‘pure art’.
This interpretation of the meaning of the motif as a mere ‘beautiful’ technical and artistic
achievement can be linked to Immanuel Kant’s idea of art. Indeed, according to the
74 Max Loehr, “The Fate of the Ornament in Chinese Art”, Archives of Asian Art, 21 (1967/1968): 13.
75 Loehr (1974), 13.
76 Ibid.
36
philosopher, art purpose can be found in art itself since the aim of art lies in the pleasure that
derives from the forms, hence in the formal qualities. Indeed, Kant stated that beauty is the
key element we use to judge and distinguish things. Hence, our response to objects and
artworks is purely aesthetic. This concerns only the formal qualities and the design, thus
excluding the historical, political, socio-economical context in which the work of art is
produced.77 This approach certainly represents the foundation of a formalist perspective.
Another two examples of the influence of Western theories are Alois Riegl’s (1858-1905)
Kunstwollen and the idea of autonomous artistic development.78 Although Loehr, like Wölfflin,
did acknowledge the specific context in which the décor manifested, he never seemed to
explicitly take into consideration the influence of historical and social conditions on art and its
development. Loehr overlooked the influence of the historical, socio-political and religious
background on the production of the bronze vessels and the creation of the motif. However,
the consistent presence of the taotie on Shang ritual vessels reasonably suggests the idea that
the motifs were somehow endowed with a certain degree of importance, if not specific
symbolic meanings. After all, it is exclusively found on ritual vessels. Therefore, categorically
stating the lack of any meaning in the taotie results in the exclusion of a wide range of
possibilities that may eventually lead to understanding this motif contextually, both at the
formal and symbolic level. Certainly, the absence of contemporary direct sources on the
subject does not allow us to formulate definitive answers and explanations to the mystery of
the taotie. Consequently, the solution is to conceive theories based on the evidence found in
77 Immanuel Kant, “The Critique of Judgement”, in The Art of Art History: A Critical Anthology, ed. Donald Preziosi
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999), 62-79.
78 Hatt (2006).
37
archaeological sites. Thus, we must acknowledge that every hypothesis cannot but remain such,
and that a wider variety of possibilities might be as valid as the opposite approach.
Furthermore, the disappearance of the taotie in later bronzes and ritual vessels might denote
a shift in the social, political and beliefs system. As discussed in the first chapter, the
importance of bronze as a material, and consequently of the ritual vessels, derived from the
political and social structure, as well as the religious one. These three elements were
undoubtedly entangled to such an extent that bronze was a symbol of authority and power,
thus of a stratified society. 79 Indeed, the production of the vessels was destined for the
consumption of the political élite and for ancestors’ worship rituals, which were mainly
performed by the king. Consequently, it is reasonable to assume that the context had, in fact,
influenced the art of the bronze ritual vessels.
2. Robert W. Bagley: The Secret in the Eyes
Similar to Loehr, Robert W. Bagley rejects the iconographic-oriented theory. He states that “we
do not have the evidence needed to make a case for any particular symbolic interpretation”,
so that the technical and formal aspects of the decorative motif’s production should be the
main focus. 80 Nevertheless, Bagley himself admits a certain degree of meaning in the taotie.
According to the author, the motif must have been representative of the wealth of the owners,
since decorations were “valued […] not because of what it said about their religion but because
79Franklin (1983).
80Robert W. Bagley, “Meaning and Explanation”, The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes, ed.
38
of what it said about their bronzes”.81 Consequently, the taotie denoted the importance of the
possessor. Considering that the Shang society consisted of a stratified system ruled by an elite,
the development of Bagley’s theory seems legitimate. Nonetheless, his critique of the
iconography-oriented scholarship presents some issues I will examine in the following
paragraphs.
For instance, in “Meaning and Explanation” (1993), the author criticises the iconographic
reading showing a double understanding of the notion of ‘meaning’. On the one hand, we have
the meaning that the viewer attaches to the objects and, on the other, that of the artist.
Therefore, the author suggests that the idea of ‘meaning’ is not absolute, but rather it consists
of a relative concept that can also be extended to the ways in which scholars have approached
the study of the taotie. Indeed, Bagley states that the theories on the topic can be understood
in relation to the time in which the theories were developed. For instance, the author argues
that in the 1940s, scholars were discussing Shang bronze decoration as a symbol of fertility and
sex according to a universal symbolic vocabulary that stemmed from comparative studies on
82
other cultures contemporary to the Shang. Consequently, the iconography-oriented
approach, to which I shall return in the next chapter, is highly embedded in the general context
in which it is produced. Thus, this viewpoint might say more on ‘us’ than the intentions of
Shang’s artists and craftsmen. Nonetheless, the comparative and contrasting method also
characterises Bagley’s approach.
81 Robert W. Bagley, “Meaning and Explanation”, The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes, ed.
82 Robert W. Bagley, “Meaning and Explanation”, The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes, ed.
39
Although Bagley’s objections are certainly valuable, they are in fact based on theories and
methods formulated by Western art historians such as Heinrich Wölfflin, for his comparative
approach, and Ernst Gombrich (1909—2001). Indeed, the latter juxtaposed the taotie with
other eyed motifs of different cultures. His psychological analysis of the motif resulted in the
identification of an apotropaic function of the taotie. However, Gombrich completely
neglected the cultural and historical background of the artworks and the Shang. 83 This
psychological approach also appears in Bagley’s discussion on the taotie, with particular regard
to the presence of the ‘eyes’ in the motif. According to the author, these eyes should not be
discussed as an actual anatomic part, but rather as a focal point of the décor. In other words,
the eyes represent a mere strategy to attract attention and have a more substantial impact on
the viewers.84 In arguing this, Bagley assumes that Shang craftsmen were aware of human
psychology theories, which in fact appeared thousands of years later. It might be possible that
the Shang developed a certain degree in understanding the human psyche, but there is no
evidence of that.
Furthermore, Bagley dismisses iconography-oriented theories, especially the work of Sarah
Allan and K. C. Chang, arguing that their approach is based on ethnographic analogy and
comparisons with other cultures contemporary to the Shang. This method presupposes “an
almost mystical Hegelian unity culture” that, therefore, does not take into account the
peculiarity of the specific context in which the objects were created. 85 However, the author
compares the taotie with the ornamental decors of religious objects from the Christian and
Celtic tradition, as well as other cultures from the Middle-East. Indeed, Bagley discusses
83 Wang (1993).
84 Bagley (1993).
85 Bagley (1993) 46.
40
similarities with artefacts not only of other societies with whom the Shang did not have
contacts, but also of different centuries. For instance, the author presents artworks from
European Middle-Age, Athenian vases from the fourth century BCE and lion-gryphons from the
Palace of Darius at Susa, fifth century BCE.86 Hence, he completely decontextualizes Chinese
bronze vessels by neglecting the information we hold about the Shang people, as well as the
specific era in which the objects were created.
Another argument that Bagley discusses is the idea of the taotie as being a representational
motif. Similar to Loehr, the author claims that the décor cannot be linked to any ‘organic’ or
natural depiction, since it is reminiscent of different animals, but does not possess any definite
characteristic that identifies a particular living creature. 87 According to Bagley, we tend to
associate abstract patterns to more tangible and defined figures. In this case, the forms that
remind of eyes, horns, and jaws lead to connecting the taotie with an actual animal, which is
not the case.88 Nevertheless, the fact that the Shang bronzes motifs cannot be identified with
real animals does not mean that it cannot represent a sort of fantastic creature. After all,
Bagley himself states that this décor eventually evolved in a more distinct dragon figure. Hence,
is it not possible that the taotie was, in fact, the depiction of a mythical beast? Once again, the
explanation Bagley provides stems from the comparison with other cultures, by arguing that
fantasy-based creatures are usually depicted as a mixture of human and animal feature or are
easily referable to a real animal. The consistent application of Western art theories, together
86 Robert W. Bagley, “Ornament, Representation, and Imaginary animals in Bronze Age China”, Arts Asiatiques, 61
(2006): 17-29.
87 Ibid.
88 Bagley, (1990).
41
with comparing non-Western art with European artworks, might cause a series of issues I will
address in the following section.
3. When the West Explains the East
In this chapter, I highlighted the contradictions and the inconsistencies of Loehr’s and Bagley’s
theories. However, my aim is not to dismiss the work of these two scholars, or the formalism-
oriented theory per se, but instead, I wish to underline two main critical concerns I noticed.
First, both Loehr and Bagley tend to exclude and neglect the possible accuracy of the opposite
interpretation, thus the existence of a symbolic and iconographic meaning of the taotie.
Certainly, the lack of evidence does not allow us to affirm the presence of a meaning in
absolute terms; however, we are not able to exclude it either. In so doing, Loehr and Bagley
omitted potential shared explanations while, considering the uncertainty of the sources, a
more extensive range of possibilities should have been taken into account. This exclusion also
marks the iconographic reading of the taotie, as I will demonstrate in the following chapter.
Second, the theses of these two scholars highly rely on Western, if not only European, art
history theories. Consequently, both Bagley and Loehr consider the Eurocentric narrative and
the Western normative as a universal referential point.89 Indeed, even though the methods
that the two scholars apply seem legitimate and reasonable, especially Wölfflin’s comparing
and contrasting approach, nonetheless they are developed in a culture that presents
considerably different characteristics, traditions and values than the Shang’s one. As a result,
89Ella Shohat and Robert Stam, “Narrativizing Visual Culture: Towards a Polycentric Aesthetics”, in The Visual
Culture Reader, ed. Nicholas Mirzoeff (New York: Routledge, 2002), 37-57.
42
the Shang bronzes are entirely eradicated from their original context. Undoubtedly, the Shang
vessels are like no other, not only in China, but also among all the artworks from all around the
world. They were created in a very specific society, for such a defined period of time so that
we cannot set the historical, socio-political, cultural and religious background aside. However,
the use of Western art theories does place the Shang vessels in surroundings that are not those
where they come from. As a consequence, focusing only on the formal qualities does not
guarantee objectiveness, but rather fosters the presumed universality of the Western
referential point.
In addition, the methods applied by Loehr and Bagley were indeed conceived for an artistic
discussion that addressed European art and its development through the centuries, starting
with what is defined as ‘classical’ art, namely ancient Greek and Roman art. Therefore, non-
Western art was not taken into account in the first place, nor artefacts from the Neolithic or
the Bronze Age. The application of Western theories in the discussion of non-Western art is
not new in art history. Indeed, during the colonial control of China, in the nineteenth century,
art historians came across the problem of placing the art from China within the canon of art
history known at that time. Although the interest in art from other than European countries
raised with the colonial empires, however artworks of non-Western origins were never
considered as ‘fine art’ according to Western criteria. At that time, non-Western art and
artefacts “rarely made their way into academic art-historical research”. 90 Indeed, the first
‘specialists’ in art from China, and more in general non-European artefacts, were not art
90Julia Orell, “The Emergence of East Asian Art History in the 1920s: Karl With (1891-1980) and the Problem of
Gandhara”, in The Making of the Humanities: Volume III, The Modern Humanities, ed. Rens Bod, Jaap Maat and
Thijs Weststeijn (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2014), 431.
43
historians, nor archaeologists. 91 Instead, early twentieth century expeditions in China were
guided by philosophers, anthropologists, museum curators and private collectors, who
familiarised themselves with East Asian Art moved by an ‘Orientalism’ feeling. 92
Through the work of the scholar Edward Said, the term ‘orientalism’ came to define “the way
of coming to terms with the Orient that is based on the Orient’s special place in European
Western experience”.93 According to Said, the Orient94 became part of Europe not only due to
colonialism, but also because Europe defined itself in comparison to something different from
it, i.e. the so-called ‘Orient’.95 In the specific case of China and Chinese art, ‘Orientalism’ deals
with the Western vision that promotes a narrative about China based on the perception of the
primitive and the exotic, therefore racialised, feminised, and often sexualised culture of a
distant land. Regarding ancient Chinese art, the Western understanding of the latter is still
grounded in the contradictory opinion about China developed during the nineteenth century.
Whereas China was previously regarded as a land of wisdom and virtue, after the first Opium
war (1839-42), the idea about Chinese people shifted from virtuous to ‘barbaric’ and ‘lawless
race’. Nevertheless, Chinese art maintained its high status as well as its monetary value. 96
However, due to the preconceptions and the adverse judgment on Chinese people, art from
91 Julia Orell, “The Emergence of East Asian Art History in the 1920s: Karl With (1891-1980) and the Problem of
Gandhara”, in The Making of the Humanities: Volume III, The Modern Humanities, ed. Rens Bod, Jaap Maat and
Thijs Weststeijn (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2014), 431.
92 Edward Said, Orientalism (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, 1980).
93 Ibid, 9.
94 Orient originally referred, broadly speaking, to the Middle East, North Africa, and Asia. Ibid.
95 Edward Said, Orientalism, 9.
96 Catherine Pagani, “Chinese Material Culture and British Perceptions of China in the mid-nineteenth Century,”
in Colonialism and the Object: Empire, Material Culture and the Museum, ed. Tim Barringer and Tom Flynn
(London: Routledge, 1998), 28-40.
44
China was never associated with ‘fine art’, but rather as a wonderful and valuable decorative
art production. 97
Consequently, even though Chinese art had a high monetary value did not submit Western
aesthetic standards.98 Therefore, in regard with the formalism-oriented approach, the level of
universality of the Western-centric practice stems from a colonial perspective that is rooted in
the idea of the superiority of the West, thus of European and North American countries.99 As
a result, this underlying concept underpins how we discuss, present and display non-Western
art. Despite the development of new theories and the increasing awareness of the fact that
colonial biases underpin the discussion on non-Western art, expectations on viewership still
exist and inform the ways in which we discuss Chinese art.100 Specifically, we tend to analyse
and ‘judge’ non-Western art according to art theories developed in Europe and in the USA.
After all, these approaches represent the ‘art language’ we know, since it is characterised by a
high level of familiarity and ‘normality’.101 Hence, it is understandable that the first analysis of
Chinese art is marked by a theoretical framework that was more suitable for European art
history. However, this should not be found in more recent discussions on world art.
Although neither Loehr and Bagley have discussed Shang bronzes decoration as a ‘lesser art’,
overlooking the original context nonetheless reduces the importance of both culture and
97 Richard John Lynn, “The Reception of European Art in China and Chinese Art in Europe from the Late Sixteenth
Through the Eighteenth Century”, International Communication of Chinese Culture 4 (2017): 443–456.
98 Pagani (1998).
99 Tan Chang, “Telling Global Stories, one at a Time: The Politics and Poetics of Exhibiting Asian Art”, World Art 5,
n. 2 (2015): 307-330.
100 Jennifer Purtle, “Looking at Viewers: Spectatorship, Chinese Painting, and Art History” Art History 41 (2018):
988-992.
101 Lynn (2017).
45
society, as if these objects were created in that specific place and time for a mere case.
Therefore, the application of Western criteria in non-Western art might lead to a flawed
approach that highlights certain aspects and neglects others that perhaps are not relevant in
the Western discourse, but in fact are fundamental in non-Western cultures. In saying this, I
am not suggesting a systematic rejection of Western theories, but rather their inclusion in a
broader dialogue that involves Chinese scholarship of art history and archaeology.
4. Conclusion
The formalist reading of the taotie and Shang bronze decorations prioritises the formal and
visual qualities of the artworks over the discussion of a possible meaning. In particular, Loehr
and Bagley argue that the taotie was essentially iconographically meaningless. Thus, the value
of the décor lies in the fact that it was representative of the wealth of the owners, as well as in
differentiating ritual vessels from other objects. Loehr and Bagley discuss the importance of
focusing on the aesthetics of the design due to the lack of evidence that confirms the existence
of meaning. Even though this theory is logical, it categorically excludes any other
interpretations. Since there are no contemporary sources that explain Shang’s decoration, we
should not flatly reject different theories and approach.
Moreover, Loehr and Bagley rely on Western art theories in order to develop their thesis.
Consequently, the evaluation and discussion of non-Western art follow criteria that are deeply
influenced by the general context in which they are created and used. Therefore, non-Western
the principles, traditions and codes of art are overlooked in the Chinese case. As a result, some
fundamental aspects of the artworks may be omitted. This non-inclusive practice also
46
characterises the iconography-oriented approach on the taotie, as I will demonstrate in the
following chapter.
47
CHAPTER 3
THE MEANING OF THE TAOTIE
In this chapter, I will address the iconographical-oriented scholarship by discussing the work of
K. C. Chang (1931—2001) and Sarah Allan. Thus, I will provide a literature review in order to
outline the key-points of the theories of these two scholars. Then, I will underline the
theoretical framework that characterises Allan’s and Chang’s work. Also in this case, the
analysis aim to show how the very idea of the taotie being iconographically meaningful stems
from Erwin Panofsky (1892–1968), who discussed three levels of understanding a work of art,
namely the primary and secondary subject matter and the ‘intrinsic meaning or content’. 102 As
I showed in the previous chapter, the application of Western studies results in the
decontextualisation of the Shang bronze vessels. In addition, it presupposes that the
Eurocentric viewpoint is universal, hence the artistic development experienced by Western
societies is shared among all the cultures, regardless of the time and the geographic location
of such societies. Undoubtedly, this universality is a result of the colonial discourse and the
presumed superiority of Europe and, more in general, of the West.
The aim of this chapter is then to demonstrate that both Allan and Chang relied on Western
studies conducted on civilisation from the European Neolithic era (4500–1700 BCE),
Mesoamerica and North America, as well as on present-day shamanic societies from Siberia,
102Erwin Panofsky, “Iconography and Iconology: An Introduction to the Study of Renaissance Art”, in Studies in
Iconology: Humanistic Themes in the Art of the Renaissance (New York: Harper & Row, 1939/1972), 3-16.
48
instead of uniquely focusing on civilisations that flourished in northern China and
contemporary, or at least close in time, to the Shang dynasty. Although both Allan and Chang
stressed the significance of knowing the specific context of the Shang dynasty in order to
understand the bronze vessels and their décor, they mostly rely on studies conducted in
Western countries, as well as Western art history theories whose authors did not include non-
European art in their theorisation.
1. K. C. Chang: Shamanism and Historiography
Concerning the iconographical approach, the most discussed author is undoubtedly the
archaeologist and sinologist K. C. Chang. According to the author, the taotie can be understood
as a totemic animal, a protective spirit of the king-shaman.103 Furthermore, Chang identified
the taotie as a mythological animal that “served as a link between the world of man and the
world of the ancestors and the gods”.104 Indeed, the author argued that the key to unlocking
the secret of Shang bronzes decoration could be found precisely in the role of agents of
communications that this figure played. The main issues with Chang’s thesis lie in the methods
and the theoretical framework he implemented to support his arguments. 105
First, Chang understood the taotie in the light of Western anthropological theories based on
studies conducted on European Neolithic cultures as well as ethnographic observations of
societies form Central America and Siberia that are defined as ‘shamanic civilisations’.
103 Chang, (1981).

104 Ibid, 527.
105 Qu Feng, “Anthropology and Historiography: A Deconstructive Analysis of K.C. Chang’s Shamanic Approach in
Chinese Archaeology”, Numen 64, no. 5-6 (2017): 497-544.
49
Although the comparative observation of present-day shamans might be useful to untangle
the question of shamanism in Neolithic cultures, we should not regard these practices as
unchanging and stable over time. Second, Chang supported his thesis by relying on ancient
texts, where the term taotie, together with other names for mythical animals, is found.106 The
use of literary sources, which represents, at least during the 1980s, the orthodox praxis in
Chinese archaeology, is an important element of Chang’s theory. 107 Both these methods
present different problematic aspects, which I will discuss in the following paragraphs.
Concerning the first theoretical framework I mentioned, the controversy of Chang’s theory is
represented by the generalisation of the notions of ‘shamans’ and ‘shamanism’ as a shared
and unified practice among Neolithic cultures and across the Bronze Age. Indeed, the author
suggested that the meaning of the taotie lies in a religious framework, especially in the practice
of communicating with the spirit-ancestors’ world, as well as crossing the line between heaven
and earth, thus entering the spirit world.108 Chang stated that “insofar as the shamanistic task
of crossing worlds and the role of animal helpers are concerned, they are found in oracle-bone
inscriptions of the Shang”.109 To carry out his thesis, Chang often referred to Mircea Eliade’s
(1907-1986) anthropological definition of ‘shaman’ and ‘shamanism’, in which the latter is
equivalent to ‘ecstasy’ techniques.
According to Eliade, a ‘shaman’ can be defined as such if capable of performing ecstatic trance,
namely the soul journey to heaven or the underworld. This definition is rather narrow since it
106 K. C. Chang, “Archaeology of Ancient China”, Science 162, no. 3853 (1968): 519-526.
107 Feng (2017).
108 K. C. Chang, Art, Myth, and Ritual (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1983).
109 Chang (1981) 543.
50
excludes other, for instance, forms of ecstasy, such as spirit possession. Furthermore, although
the taotie decoration is certainly found on the Shang ritual vessels, hence religious objects, in
fact, according to David Keightley, no evidence supports any link between Shang divination and
the shamanic practice of entering other realms. Archaeological and literary sources, as well as
contemporary texts, do not seem to imply that Shang communication with ancestors’ spirits
required any disruption of the ordinary state of the officiant.110 Besides, Eliade discussed the
figure of the ‘shaman’ as “l’homme-médicine” [the medicine man], and as “magicien primitive”
[primitive magician].111 Furthermore, Eliade referred to ‘shamanism’ in the context of hunting
activities.112 Concerning the Shang context, these three definitions are problematic because
there is no archaeological or literal evidence that the Shang ‘shamans’, besides communicating
with ancestors spirits, performed the role and duties of ‘healers’. Moreover, Shang ritual
vessels were used in the cult of the ancestors, so no correlations to hunting and gathering
activity occurred. In fact, the few sources we can consult, such as oracle bones and later
historiographies, solely report information on ancestral cult and rituals. 113
Another concern with Chang’s theory involves the fact that the author took into account tribes
from Siberia and Mesoamerica and applied their system of beliefs and symbols to the whole
of the Neolithic society world-wide. Specifically, Peter Furst’s Asian-American model of
shamanism inspired Chang’s view, according to which Neolithic cultures from Asia and America
shared the same ideological and cosmological substratum. 114 Relying on this thesis, Chang
110 Kesner (1991).

111 Mircea Éliade, “Le problème du chamanisme”, Revue de l’histoire des Religions, 131 (1946): 11.
112 Victoria Walters, “The artist as Shaman: the work of Joseph Beuys and Marcus Coates”, in Between Art and
Anthropology: Contemporary Ethnographic Practice, ed. Schneider Arnd and Wright Christopher (Oxford: Berg,
2010), 35-48.
113 Fracasso (2013).
114 Feng (2017).
51
hypothesised a Maya-China substratum, i.e. a shared shamanistic model that marked both
civilisations. By comparing Central America ancient cultures with the Shang, Chang removed
the ritual bronzes from their local context and investigated these objects according to
generalised models and theories. About the Siberian influence, it might be argued that
civilisations that inhabited Siberia at the time may have had contacts with the Shang. According
to Bagley, some exchanged and mutual influences occurred between populations from Siberia
and northern China. Nevertheless, these events seemed to have taken place after the fall of
the Shang dynasty.115
Moreover, the artefacts Chang discussed were produced by civilisations that differed one from
another with regards to the socio-political and cultural context. Due to the vastity of the
geographical area and the fact that these artefacts and civilisations date back to a period of
thousands of years, these objects and cultures can be hardly considered as part of the same
homogeneous model.116 Artistic resemblance should not be applied as the ultimate evidence
of a common substratum, disregarding other factors such as the cultural, political context as
well as the society and belief systems. On the contrary, as Feng argued, the specific background
of the civilisations to which the artefacts belong represents the foremost elements on which
to base one’s theory. Hence, the comparison should not merely address the formal qualities
of the objects, but rather it should focus on the potential contextual similarities. 117
115 Bagley (1990).

116 Feng (2017).
117 Qu Feng, “Eskimo Art Prototypes in the Chinese Neolithic: A Comparison of Okvik/Old Bering Sea and Liangzhu
Ritual Art”, Sibirica 13, no. 3 (2014): 45-78.
52
The second main issue with Chang’s method is the use of literary sources and the importance
given to myths. As I mentioned earlier in the chapter, the implementation of this theoretical
framework represents one of the leading praxis in Chinese archaeology. 118 As I will discuss
more in-depth in the next chapter, the methodological tradition of historiographical
archaeology mainly relies on textual materials, in this case on later historical texts produced
during the Song period, when the world taotie, with regard to the bronzes, appeared for the
first time. In fact, the taotie occurred relatively late in literary texts, as initially referred to
animals or personified mythical figures.119 In particular, Chang discussed the presence of the
taotie in the Lüshi chunqiu (third century BCE) as a monster that devoured humans. In order to
support this argument, Chang presented a few objects in which beast-human interactions
occur. 120 Undoubtedly, the position the author proposed might be a possible explanation;
however, it should be regarded as a mere possibility, since the motifs Chang refers to are an
exception, rather than the main decoration found in Shang bronze vessels. Indeed, human
figures are infrequent in Shang decors, hence the presence of a monster-human motif in few
pieces cannot be considered as a pattern, even less as reliable evidence. 121
Another literary source commonly examined is the ‘Oracle bones’. Although these do not
mention the taotie itself, a link between the motif and the bronzes occurs in the form of a
graph, found on both the vessels decorated with the motif and the ‘Oracle bones’. 122
Nevertheless, this connection should be considered only as part of a possible answer, rather
than the last piece of the puzzle in the taotie mystery. Furthermore, the sources Chang cited
118 Feng, (2017).

119 Wang (1993).
120 Chang (1981).
121 Kesner (1991).
122 Wang (1993).
53
are marked by a historical gap of thousands of years between not only us and the texts but
also between the latter and the archaeological material. 123 Hence, a problem of ‘double
interpretation’ occurs: first, the one provided by Song’ scholars and, second, the one we give
to Song’s texts. Since we cannot rely on literary sources contemporary to the Shang other than
the ‘Oracle bones’, we should acknowledge a certain margin for error. However, even though
Shang historical texts had been available, most likely we would have needed to interpret them
since the language differs significantly from the modern Mandarin. Therefore, what Chang
proposed could be perceived as an interpretation of the interpretation, hence it should be
regarded solely as such.
2. Sarah Allan: Myth, Religion and Art
The application of studies on ‘shamanism’ represents an issue also in Sarah Allan’s work.
Although Allan recognises that the meaning of the taotie is not established in a literary sense,
she claims meaningfulness in the religious context and in relation to ‘mythic art’. As discussed
in the previous paragraphs, the link between religion and Shang bronze vessels is undeniable;
hence, the presence of the taotie motif on these objects logically suggests such a connection.
Nevertheless, this association should be discussed in light of the evidence available in the
specific context, hence in Chinese archaeological sites and sources. On the contrary, Allan
includes the Shang bronzes in a more general background, since, according to the author,
‘mythic art’ is typical of every Neolithic culture.124 Even though the author states that “In order
to understand the decoration on early Chinese bronzes, we must place them within their
123Ibid.
124Sarah Allan, The Shape of the Turtle: Myth, Art, and Cosmos in Early China, (New York: State University of New
York Press, 1991).
54
original context”, she eventually discusses common elements among different Neolithic
cultures, as I will demonstrate.125
To support her statement, she presents David Lewis-Williams’ theory based on
neuropsychological researches conducted on people under the effect of hallucinogens like LSD.
Lewis-Williams highlights similarities in behaviour between Western subjects under the effect
of drugs, such as LSD, and shamans experiencing trance phases. This led to the idea that some
brain experiences are universal, thus applicable to any human being regardless of different
cultural backgrounds, time or space. 126 In particular, in the chapter “Interpreting the
Decoration on Early Chinese Bronze Vessels”, in Mirroring China's Past: Emperors, Scholars,
and Their Bronzes, Allan applies Lewis-Williams’ thesis in explaining the reasons behind the
formal qualities of the taotie. Allan stresses the importance of the eyes in primitive art and
their neurological effects of fear and discomfort in the beholder. In the context of the Shang,
the eyes of the taotie should be regarded as an allusion to the eyes of the ancestors, of the
dead. As I highlighted in the previous chapters, many other scholars, such as Robert Bagley and
Jessica Rawson, underlined the significance of eyes as ‘attention catchers’. 127 However, like
Bagley and Rawson, Allan generalises a theory that was developed initially to understand
Southern African rock art and the shamanic rituals of the San people. Therefore, by referring
to Lewis-Williams’ argument, Allan not only removes the artworks from their original
background, but also understands the Shang system of belief as universal and shared by most
125 Allan (2018), 38.

126 J. D. Lewis-Williams, and T. A. Dowson. Images of Power: Understanding Bushman Rock Art. (Johannesburg:
Southern Book Publishers, 1999 [1989]).
127 Rawson (1993).
55
Neolithic cultures. Similar to Chang, Allan applies universalising methods and models to specific
and non-Western cultures.
Furthermore, the author always finds traces of the real animal world in the taotie, thus making
this become a sort of mix that symbolises the animals used in the sacrifices. In this way, the
taotie can be seen as an allusion to reality, rather than a representation of it.128 Hence, Allan
identifies the taotie formal qualities as a metaphor for the passage from a world to another,
the communication between Heaven and Earth, thus as a symbol of ‘transformation’ and
‘death’.129 At the same time, Allan seems to add another level to the metaphorical meaning of
the décor. For instance, Chang explained the disappearing and elusive body of the taotie with
the myth of the human-eating monster, thus understanding the motif like an illustration, a
representation of the myth itself. On the contrary, in Allan’s work, the taotie is described as an
allusion to the passage from life to death, thus as a representation of the ancestors. 130
This description of the meaning of the taotie derives from the most significant feature of Allan’s
theory, namely the constant reference to mythical narratives, in particular myths that can be
defined as ‘sacred narratives’. According to the author, myths “violate ordinary reality both as
a matter of course and as a matter of necessity” since they represent a world beyond ours. 131
Similarly, “primitive art derives from the same religious impetus”; 132 therefore, both the prior
art and myth transcend nature and are characterised by transformations and illusions.
128 Sarah Allan, “Erlitou and the Formation of Chinese Civilization: Toward a New Paradigm”, The Journal of Asian
Studies 66, no. 2 (2007): 461-496.
129 Allan (1993).
130 Allan (1991).
131 Sarah Allan, “Myth and Meaning in Shang Bronze Motifs”, Early China 11/12 (1985-1987): 284.
132 Ibid.
56
Religious art, as a consequence, must have a meaning related to this mythical context.
However, this does not imply that the décor presents a representational meaning, but rather
it evokes the structure of Shang mythology. The taotie motif should be perceived as an allusion,
not as a representation of reality.133 With this argument, Allan indeed takes into account the
Shang context and the specific system of beliefs of that particular culture, thus, we might say,
the author succeeds in relocating Shang bronze vessels back into their context. Nonetheless,
the theoretical framework she relies on stems from studies on Neolithic culture in Europe or
ethnographic observations of present-day shamanic society, such as Native American
cultures.134
Furthermore, with ‘primitive art’, Allan refers to Neolithic art according to criteria that were
agreed upon in Europe to define European ‘primitive art’. Moreover, this art was produced in
a different time than Shang bronze vessels, which indeed appeared during the Bronze Age in
Easter Asia and not in Europe. Undoubtedly, Shang ritual vessels are universally recognised as
unique objects in relation to style, material and the time during which they were cast and used.
As a result, Allan places the Shang in a broader and generalised context that aims to describe
and explain different cultures that inhabited a vast territory in different periods. If indeed there
is nothing like Shang bronzes, generalisation and comparisons with artefacts designed in
another time and space sound even more problematic.
133 Sarah Allan, “The Taotie Motif on Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes”, in The Zoomorphic Imagination in Chinese Art
and Culture, ed. Jerome Silbergeld and Eugene Y. Wang, (Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press, 2016) 21-66.
134 Allan (1991). In particular, the author quotes Claude Lévi-Strauss (1908-2009) and the structuralist theory of
mythology.
57
3. Iconographical Generalisation and the Colonial Discourse
Opposite to the formalism-oriented theory discussed in the previous chapter, the scholars who
support the iconographical approach indeed acknowledge the existence of a meaning in the
taotie and that such meaning should be understood in relation to the religious context of the
Shang. In particular, K. C. Chang and Sarah Allan link the taotie to shamanistic societies and
rituals. The merit of these theories is to have recognised the importance of the specific
historical, socio-political, cultural and religious context of these objects. In the second chapter,
I argued that the scholars who supported the formalism-oriented theory often neglected the
significance of this distinct background. As Allan herself states, I believe that we cannot
understand Shang bronzes and the taotie unless we acknowledge the context in which they
were produced.135 Because of the very function of the ritual vessels, this context is indeed
religious, with particular regards to divination and the ancestral cult. Nonetheless, both
authors relied on Western theories to carry out their studies.
First and foremost, by stressing the importance of an iconographical meaning, both scholars
referred to Erwin Panofsky’s theories of pre-iconographical description, iconography and
iconology.136 This approach was developed by discussing and studying Renaissance art, which
represents a rather specific period of time and a narrow artistic production. Nonetheless,
Panofsky’s method, because it acknowledges and stresses the importance of the cultural,
political and social context, might be perceived as universal. Indeed, this approach represents
the underlying scheme that Allan and Chang followed in the development of their theories. For
135 Allan (2018).

136 Panofsky (1972).
58
instance, both the sinologists presented a pre-iconographical description of the taotie, which
in synthesis answers to the question ‘what is it’. Indeed, Allan and Chang identified the pure
forms of the décor as representations of natural elements, such as eyes, jaws and horns. This
association with the real world is certainly a common practice since, like Bagley and Loehr
argued, it facilitates the understanding of the shapes. However, in Allan’s and Chang’s works,
the similarities of the pure forms with natural objects are not used to simplify the description.
On the contrary, both authors suggested that those forms are actual representations.
Then, similar to Panofsky, Allan and Chang discuss the ‘secondary or conventional subject
matter’. This is given by the identification of the artistic motifs as carriers of conventional
meanings. While the pre-iconographical description is based on the observers’ practical
experience, the ‘secondary subject matter’ cannot rely on the latter but needs a certain level
of awareness and understanding of the themes and the concepts that the artwork conveys.
Nonetheless, both these analyses cannot be blindly applied to any artwork. If so, we would fall
into inaccuracy. Concerning the pre-iconographical description, the artwork might represent
something different from the recognised form. Similarly, “a correct iconographical analysis in
the narrower sense presupposes a correct identification of the motifs”.137
In Allan’s and Chang’s works, these two passages are functional to answer the ultimate
questions these scholars aimed to unfold, namely ‘what does it mean?’. Panofsky described
this practice as the ‘intrinsic meaning or content’. It identifies the indices of a period, religion
or philosophy; hence, the artwork is representative of the culture, society and time in which it
137 Panofsky (1972), 7.
59
was conceived and created. 138 According to Panofsky, in order to accomplish this type of
analysis, we must have a deeper understanding of the historical context.
Even though both Allan and Chang recognised the specificity of Shang ritual vessels and their
décor, as well as of the entire Shang civilisation, nonetheless they still referred to a Western
theoretical framework. Like the formalism-oriented theory, the iconographical approach
separates the Shang from their original context by applying theories elaborated by Western
scholars to discuss other than Chinese civilisations. As I argued in the previous paragraphs,
both Allan and Chang cite ethnographic observations of shamanistic societies in Siberia and
Mesoamerica, together with studies on findings of Neolithic cultures in Europe. In so doing,
some issues might be highlighted. First, by comparing Shang society and art to present-day
shamanic cultures, these theories imply that these societies remained unchanged for
thousands of years, which is not the case. Second, the juxtaposition of the Shang and other
Neolithic European cultures places this Chinese civilisation in a different time and context.
After all, the Shang dynasty flourished during the Bronze Age. In addition, recognising the
uniqueness of Shang ritual vessels in terms of technique, artistry and style, does contrast with
the constant comparison with other cultures, which were unrelated and distant in time and
space.
It should be added that relying on ‘shamanism’ as the key element to understand the taotie
might represent an issue because the definition of what can be identified as ‘shamanistic’ is
relatively problematic and complicated. Indeed, the terms ‘shamanism’ was used “to refer to
138 Panofsky (1972), 7.
60
a wide range of ritual practices involving healing, divination and magic”. 139 This categorisation
was mainly based on studies conducted on Siberian shamans in the late seventeenth century.
However, this definition began to be used to discuss practices of other areas, thus including
“lots of entirely different phenomena […] and although they are interesting, they are not all
one thing”.140 Consequently, the terms ‘shamanism’ and ‘shaman’ are vague and, at the same
time, universal. Undoubtedly, this theoretical framework comes from a long European
tradition that links the early artistic production to shamanism. This approach implies that the
relationship between art and shamanism remained almost unchanged from prehistory to the
141
present day. This immutability, nowadays, has been discredited by many scholars,
nonetheless it survived in the non-academic contexts, as well as in the contemporary artistic
production as a “primitivist stereotype”.142
Hence, similar to the application of the Eurocentric narrative in formalism studies on Shang
bronzes, the generalisation of the notion of shamanism, the function and structure of
mythology and ‘mythic art’ suggest the imposition of a Western-contrived universal in specific,
diverse contexts. The main issue in relying on these theories is the fact that similarities
between Neolithic cultures and the Shang dynasty are taken for granted, rather than being
investigated. The temporal proximity of these societies seems to represent the ultimate
evidence for a similar pattern, or substratum. However, this certainty overlooks the significant
geographical distance that suggests a lack of contacts between these civilisations. Therefore,
following Feng Qu, I argue that similarities should be first found in the contexts, then in artistic
139 Robert J. Wallis, “Art and Shamanism: From Cave Painting to the White Cube.” Religions 10, no. 1 (2019): 54.
140 Graham Harvery and Robert Wallis, introduction to Historical Dictionary of Shamanism, (London: Rowman &
Littlefield International, 2015), 2.
141 Wallis (2019).
142 Walter (2010), 37.
61
development. To the present day, the evidence is still too little to conclusively affirm that the
Shang indeed performed shamanic rituals.
As discussed in the second chapter, the supposed universality of the Western viewpoint
definitely finds its roots in the colonial perspective, which undoubtedly implies a certain level
of superiority over other cultures.143 Even though this issue also informs Allan and Chang’s
hypothesis, nevertheless it should be recognised that both the author, in particular the latter,
tried to overcome this Western-centric practice by combining Chinese historiography with
archaeology and art history theories. In particular, Chang greatly emphasises the importance
of historiography in the two other fields mentioned, at least regarding Chinese art. Certainly,
the close relationship between these disciplines is typical of Chinese archaeology and theories,
as I will discuss in the next chapter.
This mixed method represents a step forward if compared to the theoretical framework of the
formalist approach; nonetheless, the sources presented as support to Chang and Allan thesis
are problematic. The issue does not stem from the sources themselves, but instead to the ways
in which these are used. Indeed, the literary sources and the contemporary texts are referred
to as undeniable evidence of their argument. However, as discussed, we can only rely on
interpretations and, therefore, it is not possible to deny a thesis to support the other. Thus, I
suggest the necessity of a more comprehensive approach that does not exclude both
possibilities. By referring the taotie formal qualities to a specific meaning, Allan and Chang did
take a step in a more comprehensive direction.
143 Shaun, Hides, “Other’s Art: Approaching Non-European Cultures,” in Guide to Art, ed. Shearer West, (London:
Bloomsbury Press, 1996), 109-28.
62
4. Conclusion
In this chapter, I outlined the iconographical approach to Shang bronzes and their décor, with
regard to the works of K. C. Chang and Sarah Allan. Specifically, I highlighted the fact that their
theories mainly rely on Western studies conducted on non-Chinese cultures, in particular
Neolithic European societies, as well as civilisations from North and Central America, Southern
Africa and Siberia. The main theoretical framework is the method developed by Erwin Panofsky,
who discussed the importance of iconography and iconology in works of art. As a result, Shang
bronzes were decontextualised from their specific context and placed in a more general
background, in which different periods and locations were discussed as a homogeneous
ensemble, implying the universality of the Western point of view.
At the same time, these two authors might represent the bridge between the Eurocentric
narrative and the Chinese archaeological praxis, thanks to the combination of Western
theories with Chinese historiography. A more inclusive approach might indeed call the
attention on aspects that have not been considered before, due to the specificity of these
approaches. On the one hand, it might give more importance to the Shang historical,
geographical, cultural context. On the other, it might expand the Chinese historiographical
method that mainly, if not uniquely, focus on literary sources, as I will discuss in the following
chapter.
63
CHAPTER 4
ARCHAEOLOGY, HISTORIOGRAPHY
AND APPROACHING THE TAOTIE IN CHINA
In this chapter, I will present a third scholarship on Shang ritual vessels, which aims to seek the
origins of the taotie. In particular, I will focus on the work of scholars who have conducted
most of their studies in the People Republic of China and the Republic of China, like Wang Tao,
Li Xueqin and Cao Wei. Before discussing their approach to the Shang bronze vessels and their
décor, I will outline the practice of archaeology in China, with regard to the history of
archaeology and its close relationship with historiography. These clarifications are
fundamental to understand the reasons behind the attention that scholars from the PRC and
Taiwan give to the problem of the taotie origins and, more in general, of the vessels design.
Additionally, also the technology used to cast such objects has received significant attention.
Therefore, I will present, at a diachronic level, the development of archaeology in China. Then,
I will review the literature produced on the specific topic of this paper. The main aim of this
chapter is, thus, to highlight the differences between this approach and those analysed in the
second and third chapters. Indeed, differently from the formalism and iconographical oriented
theories, the former does not seem to rely on Western art history, but rather it is deeply rooted
in Chinese archaeological traditions. As a result, this method should not hold any bias derived
from the colonial discourse or suppose any universality of its theories. Hence, the subject of
64
the study is not taken out of the context, but conversely, it is understood precisely as a product
of that particular time and civilisation. By arguing this, I do not aim to deny any level of Western
influence in Chinese archaeological practice or art history. Nonetheless, I believe that the
theoretical framework of the theories I will present in this chapter, predominately address the
specific context of production as the main and foremost starting point to untangle the mystery
of Shang bronzes and the taotie.
1. Archaeology in China: A Brief History
Archaeology and historiography have always been perceived as inevitably linked together in
China. The reason for this bond is the result of the great importance of the impressive Chinese
historiography tradition. Indeed, archaeology research, as intended in Western countries,
began only at the end of the eighteenth century. From a theoretical and methodological
perspective, regardless of the introduction of methods and technology from the West, Chinese
archaeology remains deeply connected to historiography, as I will demonstrate.144 Indeed, in
China, archaeology was always considered as part of history, as well as a way to review and
correct records and chronicles written by previous dynasties. Hence, ‘archaeology’ in those
early days started as a tool of history and continued to have a historical focus until the
twentieth century.145
144 Fong Wen, “The Study of Chinese Bronze Age Arts: Methods and Approaches”, in The Great Bronze Age of
China: An Exhibition from the People’s Republic of China, ed. Wen Fong, (New York City: The Metropolitan Museum
of Art, 1980), 20-34.
145 David B. Madsen, Fa-Hu Chen, and Gao Xing, “Archeology at the margins: Exploring the Late Paleolithic to
Neolithic transition in China’s arid west”, Developments in Quaternary Science 9 (2007): 3-7.
65
In the case of Shang bronzes, the collection and interpretation of these objects date back to
the Han dynasty (206 BCE–220 CE). Shang vessels, and more in general bronzes, were first
discovered during the Han dynasty, together with oracle bones and other inscribed objects.
According to some scholars, that time can be seen as the beginning of collecting bronzes and
studying the inscriptions. The fact that few Shang bronze vessels were found in Han tombs
further support this thesis and, also, evidence of interpretations of the inscriptions appears in
Han historical records, such as the Han Shu [the Book of Han]. Similarly, after the reign of the
Han to the Tang dynasty (618–907), discoveries of Shang and Zhou ritual vessels were recorded
in official documents. 146
It was under the Song (960-1279) that the study of Shang bronze vessels flourished. In 1061,
the scholar Ouyang Xiu (1007-1072) completed one of the earliest works on epigraphy Jigu lu
[Collection of Ancient inscriptions], in which the author recorded and interpreted inscriptions
of oracle bones and ritual vessels. Thirty years later, in 1092, the antiquarian and historian Lü
Dalin (1046–1092) compiled a catalogue, Kaogutu [Illustrated Book of Antiques] that included
the description of 211 bronzes, with illustrations, measurements, provenance as well as
transcriptions of the inscriptions. A later catalogue, Chong Xiu Xuanhe bogu tu [Illustrated
catalogue of antique objects in the Xuanhe collection], compiled from 1111 to 1125, and
commissioned by the Northern Song emperor Huizong, included 836 objects accompanied by
introductory essays, illustrations, transcriptions and measurements. 147
146Jingsong Shi, “Archaeology in China”, Acta Archaeologica 72, no. 2, (2001): 55-59.
147Robert E. Jr. Harrist, “The Artists as Antiquarian: Li Gonglin and His Study of Early Chinese Art”, Artibus Asiae
55, no. 3-4 (1995): 237-280.
66
During the Qing dynasty (1644-1911), the study of Shang bronzes reached a further level of
sophistication, and many illustrated books appeared and circulated. However, the
investigation of ancient objects that occurred before the twentieth century, hence the
implementation of modern archaeology, is considered to be more similar to the work of
antiquarians than archaeologists, at least according to Western criteria. 148 Nonetheless, the
cataloguing of imperial historians and antiquarians represents a fundamental source of
knowledge and lexicon in the discussion of Shang bronze vessels, and it can be seen as a
prototype of modern archaeology in China.149
The next stage of Chinese archaeology is marked by the introduction of scientific methods from
the West, as a consequence of European expeditions in the first half of the twentieth century.
These missions were the consequence of a growing interest in art from Asia, and more in
general from the colonies as part of the Orientalism feeling, which eventually evolved in an
ethnographic discourse that served to define Europe and, more in general, the West as
opposed to the ‘Orient’. Unfortunately, this curiosity towards Asia and China did not result in
a genuine understanding of the culture. Rather, it led to the fetishization of East Asia as an
exoticised Orient and of the objects produced and their aesthetics as well, because they
represented a difference from the ‘norm’, hence they were ‘Other’.150
The passion for these ‘exotic’ civilisations and artworks was followed by the greediness of
collecting art from China, which consequence was the looting and massive acquisition of goods
148 Tao Wang, “How to read Ancient Chinese Bronzes”, in Mirroring China's past: Emperors, Scholars, and Their
Bronzes, ed. Wang, Tao, (Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago, Organizer, Host Institution, 2018), 17-31.
149 Chang (1968).
150 Michaela Pejčochová, “The First Exhibitions and the Origins of Collecting Modern Chinese Art in Europe”,
Bulletin of the National Gallery in Prague 27 (2017): 6-22.
67
to sell to museums and private collectors. In particular, exhibiting these objects in private
houses as part of ‘cabinets of curiosities’ represented a sign of wealth and power. 151 The
outcome of what discussed in this paragraph is what Stuart Hall defined as ‘the spectacle of
the Other’, or the sensationalism in displaying objects different from the well-known ones, thus
confining them to an inferior level.152
In response to Western archaeological activities in China between 1928 and 1937, Chinese
archaeologists from the newly founded Academia Sinica (1928) discovered the ruins of Anyang
(Henan), capital of the Shang reign. Undoubtedly, this institution can be seen as a reaction to
Westerns expeditions that resulted in the acquisition and looting of ancient objects.
Consequently, moved by a strong desire of re-appropriation, Chinese scholars like Li Chi (1896-
1979)153 who received their education in Europe, the United States and Japan, returned to
China and began training programs for archaeologists.154 Indeed, the majority of participants,
both Chinese and Western, to expeditions in China did not consist of professional
archaeologists, but instead of an ensemble of experts in other academic disciplines such as
palaeontology and anthropology to name two. 155 Unfortunately, due to the Second Sino-
Japanese war (1937-1945) and the consequent invasion of North China by Japan, the
excavation stopped in 1937 until after the 1950s. Furthermore, after the People Republic of
151 Iside Carbone, China in the Frame: Materialising Ideas of China in Italian Museums (Newcastle Upon Tyne:
Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015).
152 Stuart Hall, Representation: Cultural and Signifying Practices, (London: Sage, 1997) 225-283.
153 Li Chi, pinyin name Li Ji, was the archaeologist who proved the historical authenticity of the Shang dynasty
during the Anyang excavations between 1928 and 1937. “Li Chi”, Encyclopaedia Britannica. Accessed on July 14,
2020. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Li-Chi
154 Perry Johansson, “Cross-Cultural Epistemology: How European Sinology Became the Bridge to China’s Modern
Humanities”, in The Making of the Humanities: Volume III, The Modern Humanities, ed. Rens Bod, Jaap Maat and
Thijs Weststeijn (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2014), 449-462.
155 Xingcan Chen, “Archeological Discoveries in the People’s Republic of China and Their Contribution to the
Understand of Chinese History”, Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 19, no. 2 (2009): 4-13.
68
China was founded (October 1, 1949), the Academia Sinica followed the Nationalist movement
in Taiwan.156
However, in 1949, the government established a series of public research institutions among
which the institute of archaeology Kaogu Yanjiu Suo under the direction on the archaeologist
and historian Guo Moruo (1892-1978). The modus operandi proposed by Guo included modern
scientific methodology and Marxist approach to art. The latter is often discussed in the context
of the communist government; 157 thus, some western scholars have defined Chinese
archaeology as political, at least during the Mao Era (1949-1976). Therefore, it might be argued
that archaeology studies during that period were highly driven by the general political and
ideological purpose. Specifically, Marxist art history in China aimed to underline the fact that
the Empire and the kingship before that were based on a feudal system, hence unequal and
comparable to the bourgeoise.158 Being the evolution of class society a fundamental part of
Marxism, scholars implemented this approach to explain the evolution of society in China. The
interest for the origin of Chinese civilisation fostered the curiosity in the Neolithic and the
Bronze age, thus in those that were considered the first dynasties. Consequently, the number
of research and studies on this period increased together with the creation of institutions to
coordinate these projects.159
156 Campbell (2014).

157 Tracey Lie-dan Lu, “The Transformation of Academic Culture in Mainland Chinese Archeology”, Asian
Anthropology 1, no. 1 (2002): 117-152.
158 Judith M. Treistman, “Problems in Contemporary Asian Archeology”, The Journal of Asia Studies 29, no. 2
(1970): 363-371.
159 Madsen et al. (2007).
69
Taking into account the PRC rhetoric and the glorification of the working classes, the
application of Marxism might have served a political and ideological purpose. It is indeed true
that the Marxist theory in art history highlights certain aspects more than others; nonetheless,
this method has also been used in Western countries in order to underline the significance of
the socio-economic context in the production of art. Thus, the Marxist approach helps to
identify the artworks as a product of a specific society and time, rather than accounting art as
a separate independent entity.160
After the Open-Door Policy (1978) under Deng Xiaoping (1904-1997), a fruitful collaboration
between scholars from China and Western countries characterised Chinese archaeology and
excavations projects. The methodological approach included a collaboration with other
disciplines comprising anthropology, geology, stratigraphy, geography and art history, as well
as higher regards towards archaeological sources. At the same time, Chinese institutions
maintained traditional studies such as the systematic investigation of historical documents,
with literary sources at the core of the theoretical framework of ancient art studies. In
particular, the importance of history and historical records never dissolved, as I will discuss in
the following section. 161
2. Historiography and the Quest for the Origins
In general, historiographical archaeology consists of the consultation of both archaeological
findings and textual materials. As shown in the previous chapters, in the case of the Shang
160 Anne D’Alleva, “Art’s Context”, in Methods and Theories of Art History (London: Laurence King Publishing Ltd,
2005), 46-87.
161 Madsen et al., 2007.
70
bronze vessels, scholars rely on texts of the Song dynasty, in which word taotie came to be
used for the first time in the context of ritual vessel decoration. The examination of historical
records and antiquarians catalogues such as those mentioned in the previous section is often
accompanied by the study of the ‘Oracle bones’. 162 The significance of history and
historiography has its roots in the early Chinese Empire, when the study of ancient objects and
inscriptions represented a tool to revise and corrects history as reported in official records.
However, what is important to emphasise is the relevance of history not only for recording
events but also as a tool of ideological affirmation and authority confirmation. It represented
guidance for the future, thus was endowed with a moral purpose. Chinese historiography is
marked by a millenary tradition that continued through the dynasties without losing its
prestige. It evolved and adapted to the changing times, and has been “enriched by new
techniques, new methods, and new theories”.163 Because of the continuity and the high value
of historiography in China, it should not come by surprise that this discipline still holds a key
role in Chinese archaeology. Indeed, even though Western scholars during the Imperialistic era
introduced modern Western archaeology based on fieldwork and excavations, nonetheless Li
Chi and his colleagues epitomise the combination of Western methods with the traditional
Chinese approach, which made of archaeology an “effective instrument of Chinese
historiography in the modern world”.164
Considering the emphasis that Chinese archaeologists and art historians place on historical
records, the importance given to chronology and to understanding the origins seem logic. This
162 Wang (1993).

163 K. C. Chang, “Archaeology and Chinese Historiography”, World Archaeology 13, no. 2 (1981): 156.
164 Ibid, 164.
71
also explains the great interest for the early dynasties such as Xia and Shang, inasmuch as these
are thought to represent the dawn of Chinese civilisation.165 The search for origins can also be
understood as a cultural and social phenomenon. In other words, the historical events that
occurred in China from the beginning of the twentieth century undoubtedly led to emphasising
specific movements, such as the reappropriation of Chinese culture from foreign colonisers
first, and second from a strong anti-Empire ideology during the May Fourth Movement (1919),
and the Mao era (1949-1976).166
As discussed, the exploitation of Chinese territory and the looting activity by Western explorers,
especially Europeans, led to a strong nationalistic movement that also influenced disciplines
such as literature and archaeology, to name two. In a more and more colonised and
Westernised China, the reaction to the colonial power meant looking back to those
fundamental principles that differentiated China from the ‘Others’, in this case the foreigner
colonisers. Concerning the 1920s and the Mao Era, these periods were marked by a reaction
against the Chinese imperial system. 167 In particular, during the Cultural Revolution (1966-
1976), a systematic rejection of Confucian values and Chinese history before 1911, the fall of
the Chinese Empire, was promoted. As a consequence, literature, art history, archaeology and
artistic production were massively redefined to serve the ideological purpose of the
Communist Government, which saw the past as a symbol of bourgeoise values. 168 After Mao’s
165 Madsen et al. (2007).

166 Iside Carbone. Personal interview by Enrica Medugno at the Anthropology Library, British Museum (London),
28 November 2019.
167 The May Fourth Movement represented the rebellion of the youth of the early twentieth century against the
Confucian values that stressed the importance of the community over the individual. In this regard, young people,
especially university students reclaimed the right to self-determination instead of having to give up their
individuality in favour of the filial piety and their duties to the elders and of the entire society. Nicoletta Pesaro
“Letteratura cinese moderna e contemporanea”, in La Cina, vol. III (Verso la Modernità), ed. Guido Samarani and
Maurizio Scarpari (Torino: Einaudi, 2009), 693-745.
168 Guido Samarani, La Cina del Novecento: dalla fine dell’Impero a oggi, (Torino: Giulio Einaudi editore, 2004).
72
death and the new policy from the 1980s, Chinese scholars worked towards a rediscovery of
the origins of their civilisation. This was also encouraged by the reintroduction of Confucian
values in order to avoid a systematic Westernisation of Chinese society consequent to the
Open-Door policy.169
3. Approaching the Taotie
Having outlined the history of archaeology in China and the significance of historiography, I will
now examine the discussion on Shang ritual vessels highlighting the main characteristics of
these studies that differentiate them from those discussed in the previous chapters. A first
divergence is the importance given to the specific context in which Shang bronzes were
produced, in terms of geography, as well as a socio-political and religious system.170 In addition,
the theoretical framework of these studies is deeply embedded in Chinese archaeological
tradition, thus prioritising literary sources and historical records. Although the iconography-
oriented theory does include, to a certain degree, the specific background, however, this is
often overshadowed by the constant comparisons with objects of Western cultures, which
result in the decontextualisation of Shang ritual vessels, as I demonstrated. On the contrary, in
the studies I examine in this chapter, Shang bronzes and their décor are uniquely discussed in
relation to their culture.
169 Shuqin Xu, “Cultivating national identity with traditional culture: China’s experiences and paradoxes”,
Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 6306 (2017): 1-14.
170 Chu Tsing Li, “The Great Bronze Age of China”, Art Journal 40, no. 1-2 (1980): 390-395.
73
For instance, Cao Wei extensively outlines the geographical context acknowledging the
possible influences this might have had on the historical and cultural background, in terms of
proximity to rivers, natural protection given by mountains, as well as a favourable climate for
agriculture activities. Then, the author addresses the history of both Shang dynasty and the
bronzes themselves, with regards to the archaeological history. To do so, Cao relies on modern
history manuals as well as written sources from the sixth century, such as the Shuijingzhu (The
Commentary on the Water Classic) by Li Daoyuan. Indeed, Cao underlines the importance of
cross-checking with historical texts, inscriptions and oracles bones in order to understand
where the bronzes and their motif originated from.171 However, the most significant element
is represented by the fact that the author exclusively refers to theories and studies carried out
by Chinese scholars, such as Li Xueqin to name one, who studied in mainland China or Taiwan
for most of their career. In this way, any comparison and link with other cultures are avoided.
The only other civilisations mentioned are indeed cultures from China, like Ba and Shu people
(ca. fifth and fourth century BCE). 172 Therefore, we could affirm that the author sets the scene
by meticulously describing the circumstances in which Shang bronzes were produced.
Another author that emphasises the importance of the specific context is Li Chi. Similar to Cao,
Li outlines the geographical and historical factors that played a significant role in the
production of early Chinese bronzes. In particular, the author addresses the conformation of
the territory as a possible element of influence. The importance of the geographical conditions,
such as the presence of certain minerals, rivers and hospitable areas for settling, certainly had
an impact on the development of Shang civilisation, thus also the production of art during that
171 Cao (2006).

172 Ibid.
74
time.173 As discussed in the first chapter, the accessibility of certain materials, such as clay and
yellow earth, shaped the casting method of Shang bronze vessels.
Therefore, a discussion of the specific context of production is imperative in order to
understand Shang ritual vessels. Moreover, the geographical influence concerns the
comparison between bronze vessels found in Anyang, Yuanchu and Paochi. According to Li,
geographical factors might have influenced the “divergent evolution and type differentiations
of early Chinese bronzes”, hence “there might be local distinctions that should be
independently analysed”.174 If comparing artefacts contemporary to Shang vessels and found
in an area relatively close to Anyang with Shang bronzes might result problematic, the
juxtaposition of non-Chinese objects with Shang vessels is even more controversial.
Consequently, a comparison between Shang bronze vessels and other artworks from Neolithic
Europe should be avoided.
The focus on technological development represents another element of the Chinese approach
to the bronzes. For instance, Liu Yang exclusively discusses the history of casting, highlighting
the development of the technology used for the production of such objects and decorations.
In the book Cast for Eternity: Ancient Ritual Bronzes from the Shanghai Museum (2014), the
author outlines the history of bronze casting in China, from the Erlitou period to the end of the
Eastern Zhou. In regard to the Shang dynasty, Liu describes the formal qualities of the décor,
without, however, suggesting the existence or the absence of an iconographical meaning. 175
173 Chi Li, “The Tuan Fang Altar Set Reexamined”, Metropolitan Museum Journal 3 (1970): 51-72.
174 Ibid, 70.
175 Yang Liu, Cast for Eternity: Ancient Ritual Bronzes from the Shanghai Museum, (New Haven and London: Yale
University Press, 2014).
75
Similarly, Su Rongyu examines the technology and the method of casting early Chinese bronzes.
First, the author discusses the development of the techniques from the Erligang culture
throughout the Shang dynasty, during which the bronze production reached its apogee. Then,
Su presents the bronzes as symbols of authority and political power. Indeed, the majority of
the bronzes were found in tombs of the social class. Additionally, according to archaeological
excavations at Anyang and the surrounding areas, the author argues that the proximity of the
forgeries to the capital might indicate a royal prerogative and control on the production of the
bronzes.176
Nevertheless, the focus and the prioritisation of the specific context as the main influence in
the production of the vessels neglects the existence of other elements. In particular, this
approach overlooks the personal agency of the artists/craftsmen. This is conversely highlighted
by Loehr who argued that, although controlled by the royal authority, the production of the
bronzes and the creation of the design must have been the idea of the head-artisans, if not the
collective work of the craftsmen involved in casting the vessels. 177 Even though this idea can
be linked to Kant’s notion of ‘genius’ and its importance in defining the ‘artist’, nonetheless
the free will and the personal agency of the craftsmen should be taken into account in the
quest for the origins of the taotie.
The heart of Chinese studies of Shang bronzes and the taotie, however, is represented by the
quest for the origins of the objects and the décor. In this regard, Wang Tao discusses the
development of literary records relating to the taotie motif and Shang’s bronzes decoration in
176 Su (2018).
177 Loehr (1974).
76
general. Chinese literature includes many texts relevant to the discussion of the origins of the
taotie. 178 Nevertheless, these do not mention the bronze motif itself. In particular, Wang
mentions the Zuozhuan (fourth century BCE) and the Lüshi chunqiu (third century BCE). In the
former, the term taotie occurred for the first time, whereas the latter represents the first
reference to this motif as such on the bronzes. Nevertheless, these texts do not link the term
taotie to the motif. In fact, it is in the eleventh century, with Lu Dalin’s Kaogu tu, that the term
was related to the bronze’s decoration.
To carry out his argument, Wang implements a textual analysis, comparing terms characters,
and graphs used both in later texts and Oracle bones. Wang points out that the oracle bones
present more than one character similar to the one identified as equivalent to the taotie. The
main problem, according to Wang, is the five hundred years gap between Shang inscriptions
and the literary corpus. 179 Indeed, as discussed in the third chapter, the main issue with
consulting literary texts, catalogues and history records of later dynasties is the fact that these
sources represent an interpretation of the inscriptions on the vessels and of the Oracle bones.
Therefore, a certain margin of error must be acknowledged.
Likewise, Li Xueqin focuses on the origin of both the name and the taotie motif itself, rather
than the meaning and the formal qualities. By citing Chen Mengjia and Zhang Changshou, Li
states that the origins of the décor are to be found in the Erlitou culture; thus, the dawn of the
taotie should be sought in the pre-history of China. The hypothesis steaming from this theory
concerns the jade objects produced during the Liangzhu culture (3300-2100 BCE). Indeed,
178 Wang (1993).

179 Wang (2018).
77
some formal similarities occur, hence creating a link between the jades’ and the bronzes’
motifs.180 The author states that the taotie motif was inherited in the Shang from pre-historic
times as a case of continuing not only an artistic tradition, but probably also beliefs and
myths.181 Therefore, Li attempts to solve the problem of the taotie’s beginnings by comparing
the décor with motifs that appear on other Chinese artefacts preceding Shang ritual vessels.
Hence, there is no connection proposed with other Neolithic cultures outside China.182
4. Prioritising China
In general, concerning the taotie, some of these scholars hypothesised the existence of
meaning, but these theories are regarded as mere possibilities. Indeed, in the work of these
scholars, the presence of a meaning is never denied, and in some is discussed. Therefore, one
might argue that these studies are closer to the iconographical-oriented theory than the
formalism approach. In terms of subject matter, this might be the case. However, the
methodology and theoretical framework differ. While the scholars discussed in the previous
chapters relied on Western art history theories, conversely, what strikes the most about these
authors is the fact that they mainly apply studies conducted in PRC and in the Republic of China
to support their arguments.
180 Xueqin Li, “Liangzhu Culture and the Shang Dynasty Taotie Motif”, in The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese
Ritual Bronzes, translated by Sarah Allan, ed. by Roderick Whitfield (London: School of Oriental and African Studies,
1993), 56-65.
181 Xueqin Li, “The Xia-Shang-Zhou Chronology Project: Methodology and Results”, Journal of East Asian
Archaeology 4 (2002): 321-333.

182 Li, 1993.
78
This prioritisation is understandable in relation to the desire of reappropriation that led to the
foundation of the Academia Sinica in 1928. Indeed, the importance given to Chinese scholars
might be linked to the anti-colonialism and anti-western rhetoric and to that constant
comparison between China and Western countries that aimed to celebrate the ideology and
moral values of the Chinese empire first and PRC then.183 This underlying sentiment occurs
especially Li Chi, Li Xueqin and Cao Wei, whose theories are regarded as the main referential
points. This might be the result of the fact that these scholars were indeed active or received
their education during those periods marked by anti-westerns feelings. Conversely, authors
like Wang Tao and Liu Yang, who conducted their studies in Chin, but obtained the doctorate
in the United Kingdom, acknowledge the theories developed in Western countries.
Nonetheless, they seem to dismiss or to avoid participating in the ‘feud’ between the
formalism-oriented theory and the iconographical approach.
Despite this difference, the foremost element of the works analysed in this chapter is the great
emphasis given to the specific context in which Shang ritual vessels were designed. This is
obtained by carrying out significant discussion of the history, politics and the religious system
of the Shang, together with a presentation of geographical elements. Furthermore, all these
studies avoid comparing Shang bronzes with contemporary objects of cultures from Europe or
North America. Therefore, these works do not fall into the systematic decontextualisation that
characterises the theories discussed in the previous chapters. The absence of the constant link
between Europe and China, and of the presumed universality of Western art criteria and
Christos Mais, “Maoism, nationalism, and anti-colonialism”, The Palgrave Encyclopaedia of Imperialism and
183
Anti-Imperialism, ed. Immanuel Ness and Zak Cope (New York, Palgrave MacMillan, 2016), 875-81.
79
theories in Chinese studies proves the fact that these elements stem from the colonial
discourse and the Eurocentric narrative discussed in the previous chapters.
An interesting exception can be found in K. C. Chang’s work. This scholar was indeed Chinese
and received his education in China. However, similar to Wang Tao and Liu Yang, Chang
completed his education in the United States. Despite the issues that affect his methodology,
Chang can be regarded as the bridge between Western and Chinese theories and approaches.
As I stated in the third chapter, this mixed method that takes into account both scholarships
might represent the most effective approach in the study of Shang bronzes and the taotie.
Undoubtedly, consulting a different perspective helps to highlight aspects that might have
been neglected or were problematic.
In regard to Chinese studies on the Shang vessels, the main concerns lie in entrusting literary
sources, texts that are not contemporary to the Shang, as well as in the consultation of bronze
inscriptions and Oracle bones. As stressed in this chapter, these sources cannot ensure
achieving a definitive answer due to the time gap between the objects in questions and the
texts, as well as between the bones’ and bronzes’ inscriptions and the present day. In the latter
case, the problem is mainly linguistic, since the graphs and characters differ from modern
Chinese, both simplified and traditional characters. Consequently, the result cannot but be an
interpretation and it should be discussed as a mere possibility. Certainly, the study of ancient
artefacts based on historical records of various dynasties is not entirely objective. This is due
to the problem of authenticity, which Chen Guangchen defines as a regime constructed out of
the relationship between persons, names, and artefacts to serve a specific purpose. This
system changes continually, thus influencing how artefacts are perceived. Hence, we can rely
80
only on contemporary written sources.184 However, the consultation of contemporary sources
is problematic too, as already discussed.
5. Conclusion
In conclusion, three main focal points characterise the study of Shang bronzes in China: 1) the
influence of the specific context in the artistic production, 2) the origins of the taotie, 3) the
technological development, and 4) the analysis of written sources, namely inscription, Oracle
bones, later annals, catalogues and literary texts. The core of these studies lies in the interest
for the origins of the taotie motif, rather than the meaning or the formal qualities per se. This
approach is deeply embedded in Chinese archaeological tradition. First, these scholars
prioritise the use of literary sources and historical records. This stems from the long and solid
tradition of historiography. Because history has always occupied a central role together with
the important moral function of historical records, scholars like Cao Wei to name one often
entrust the authenticity and accuracy of these sources, which, however, might present
mistaken interpretations, due to the time gap between the object of study and the years in
which these sources were produced.
A further important element of the works analysed in this chapter is the importance of the
specific context in terms of geography, history and political and cultural background. Therefore,
conversely to the formalism-oriented theory and the iconographical approach, Shang bronzes
are not decontextualized, nor juxtaposed to artefacts produces in other non-Chinese
184Guangchen Chen, “The Biography of a Ritual Vessel: On Naming and the Dialectics of Authenticity”, Études
Chinoises, La vie des objects en Chine 37, no. 2 (2018): 101-138.
81
civilisations. This is also achieved by the focus of the technological development in the
production of the bronzes and the peculiarity of the methods of casting described in the first
chapter, which is considerate unique. However, this approach tends to neglect the importance
of the individual craftsman’s personal agency, as well as the collective work of the artisans.
Indeed, the design of the taotie must have been influenced by the aesthetic choices of those
who cast the bronzes.
Moreover, while the theoretical frameworks on which Western studies on Shang bronzes are
based stem from the colonial discourse and the supposed universality of the Eurocentric
principles, the root of the Chinese approach can be found in the anti-western rhetoric
promoted throughout the twentieth century. In particular, Chinese studies on Shang bronzes
prioritised the work of scholars from China as well as methods in accord to the archaeological
tradition, such as historiography, and the ideological background of the communist
government, namely the Marxism theory of art history. This prioritisation can be seen as a
reaction to the looting of ancient Chinese objects by Westerners in the end of the nineteenth
century and beginning of the twentieth century. At the same time, it is also a symptom of the
anti-western rhetoric that marked PRC ideology after the open-door policy in the 1980s, which
resulted in a systematic westernisation of Chinese society.
82
CONCLUSIONS
The mystery of Shang bronze ritual vessels and their ornaments has been the subject of a lively
debate, especially in the second half of the twentieth century, due to their sophisticated
craftsmanship and unique design. However, the core of this discussion is represented by the
enigmatic decoration motif, generally known as the taotie. Specifically, scholars have been
questioning the existence of meaning in this motif, as well as its origins. This conversation led
to the development of two opposite primary schools of thought in Western countries, precisely
in Anglophone ones, and a further approach that mainly characterise the discussion on this
topic among scholars who completed most of their studies in mainland China and Taiwan. This
paper aimed to demonstrate that the two approaches applied in Western countries are based
on a theoretical framework that relay on art history theories and method developed in
Western countries, especially in Europe, thus promoting a Eurocentric narrative typical of the
colonial discourse. Conversely, the school that emerged among those academics that were
trained in China is deeply embedded in the Chinese archaeological tradition, thus does not
apply Western art theories to discuss their art.
In particular, two different schools of thoughts developed in Anglophone countries address the
existence of an iconographical meaning in the taotie. On the one hand, the formalism-oriented
approach, represented in this paper by the work of Max Loehr and Robert W. Bagley,
prioritised the discussion on the formal quality of the motif, rather than on the iconography of
the taotie. Specifically, Loehr defined the motif as iconographically meaningless, hence existing
83
only as ‘pure form’. Similarly, Bagley addresses the taotie concerning the importance of the
formal qualities and the casting process. Furthermore, the author states that this motif should
be understood as a sign of wealth and power, rather than in relation to the religious context.
This theory might have stemmed from the fact that bronze was indeed a symbol of power and
authority in Shang society; hence bronze vessels denoted the wealth of the owner, and
the taotie functioned as an attention-grabber. To discuss this topic, both Bagley and Loehr
compare Shang bronzes with other ancient religious artworks from different periods and
places, such as Celtic and Christian artefacts.
Conversely, the iconographical reading of the taotie, discussed in this paper through the work
of K. C. Chang and Sarah Allan, understand the motif in relation to the religious context of the
Shang. In particular, Chang discussed the motif as ‘totemic animal’, while Allan links
the taotie to ‘mythic art’, hence Shang mythology, but also to the idea of ‘transformation’ and
‘passage’ from earth to heaven and vice versa. Both these authors address Shang bronzes motif
in relation to ‘shamanism’ and ‘shamanic practice’ theorised by Western scholars in the
context of Neolithic cultures, or seventeenth-century observation of ‘shamanistic’ cultures in
Siberia.
Due to the lack of evidence, it is impossible to discuss the lack of meaning in the taotie in
absolute terms. Therefore, the focus on formal qualities seems logic. Nonetheless, this should
not lead to denying the possibility of a certain degree of meaning related to the religious and
cultural context of the Shang, since the artefacts in questions are ritual vessels. Furthermore,
the main issue with the work of these scholars lies in the theoretical framework they apply.
84
Indeed, they rely on art history and anthropology theories developed in Western countries to
discuss artistic production in the same area.
Concerning the formalism-oriented theory, Bagley and Loehr applied the comparing and
contrasting method developed by Heinrich Wölfflin and Alois Riegl, as well as their cyclical fate
of artistic styles. Even though this approach might represent a useful tool to describe and
define the stylistic variations of the same subject, we must keep in mind that these theories
did not take into account non-Western art not only as part of the ‘fine art’, but also a part of
the spectrum of artistic movements discussed. Additionally, this method is used to compare
the Shang bronzes with non-Chinese artefacts, resulting in a systematic decontextualisation of
the Shang vessels. The omission of the specific context of these objects and the application of
Western art theories stems from the colonial discourse that viewed non-Western art as ‘lesser’,
in the case of Chinese art as a fine ornamental production. Consequently, the formalism-
oriented approach is characterised by underlying biases of the colonial discourse that
perceived Chinese people and culture as ‘barbaric’.
Furthermore, the application of the Eurocentric narrative presupposes the universality of the
Western referential point. This can also be seen in the iconographical reading promoted by
Sarah Allan and K. C. Chang. In this case, the universality is given by the generalisation of
theories developed from studies on Neolithic European societies, as well as civilisations from
North and Central America, Southern Africa and Siberia, in regard with ‘shamanism’ and
‘mythic art’. Moreover, these authors follow the method drawn by Erwin Panofsky, who
proposed an analysis of works of art according to a pre-iconographical description,
85
iconography and iconology. Similar to the formalism-oriented approach, this theoretical
framework supposes the universality of the Western-centric viewpoint.
However, it should be pointed out that both Chang and Allan do not wholly neglect the specific
context of the Shang dynasty, as they discuss the Shang religious system. Furthermore, these
scholars refer to Chinese historiography and of written sources both contemporary to the
Shang, in the form of bronzes’ inscriptions and ‘Oracle bones’, and later texts. This practice
characterises Chinese archaeology, which highly relies on written sources. However, these can
only be accounted as interpretations, since the contemporary sources do not directly refer to
the bronzes and their motif, and later texts are affected by a hundreds-year gap. This approach,
which usually marks the studies of scholars from China and Taiwan, is deeply embedded in the
Chinese archaeological tradition, which viewed archaeology as a tool of historiography.
Due to the importance of history, the focus on the origins of the taotie in these studies should
not surprise. To achieve the answer, the scholars of this third approach prioritise the use of
literary sources and historical records, as well as of the specific context of the Shang.
Additionally, most of these studies refer exclusively to other Chinese scholars, thus
disregarding the work of Western academics. This practice can be linked to the anti-western
rhetoric that spread in China throughout the twentieth century. Therefore, even though the
Chinese approach avoided the Eurocentric narrative, nevertheless it seems highly entangled in
the ideological rhetoric promoted by the Chinese government that aims to stop the
Westernisation of Chinese society and to save the specificity of this civilisation.
86
In terms of effectiveness, I believe that a mixed method represents the best compromise to
discuss the mystery of the taotie. Indeed, the formalist not only helps not only recognising the
stylistic development but also determining the relative date of the vessels whenever a specific
reference does not occur. At the same time, the iconographical reading fosters the discussion
of the taotie in the context of the Shang religious system, also supported by the importance
given to the geographical, cultural and historical background in Chinese archaeology.
Furthermore, comparison with non-Chinese cultures and their artistic production should be
avoided, in favour of an analysis of cultures contemporary and geographically close to the
Shang. In addition, due to the lack of evidence, every interpretation should be regarded as
such, rather than as a definitive answer. The difficulty in solving the riddle behind Shang’s
bronzes motifs should not prevent us from keep looking for answers, since the missing piece
of the puzzle might be hiding underground, waiting to be found.
87
88
BIBLIOGRAPHY
Allan, Sarah. “Myth and Meaning in Shang Bronze Motifs.” Early China 11/12 (1985-1987): 283-289.
The Shape of the Turtle: Myth, Art, and Cosmos in Early China. New York: State University
of New York Press, 1991.
“Art and Meaning.” In The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes, edited by
Roderick Whitfield, 10-32. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993.
“Erlitou and the Formation of Chinese Civilization: Toward a New Paradigm.” The Journal
of Asian Studies 66, no. 2 (2007): 461-496.
“The Taotie Motif on Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes.” In The Zoomorphic Imagination in
Chinese Art and Culture, edited by Jerome Silbergeld and Eugene Y. Wang, 21-66. Honolulu: University
of Hawai'i Press, 2016.
“Interpreting the Decoration on Early Chinese Bronze Vessels.” In Mirroring China's past:
Emperors, Scholars, and Their Bronzes, edited by Wang, Tao, 38-42. Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago,
Organizer, Host Institution, 2018.
Bagley, Robert W. “The Beginning of the Bronze Age: The Erlitou Culture Period.” In The Great Bronze
Age of China: An Exhibition from the People’s Republic of China, edited by Wen Fong, 67-77. New York
City: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1980.
“The High Yinxu Phase (Anyang Period)”, in The Great Bronze Age of China: An Exhibition
from the People’s Republic of China, edited by Wen Fong, 175-190. New York City: The Metropolitan
Museum of Art, 1980.
“Shang Ritual Bronzes: Casting Technique and Vessel Design.” Archives of Asian Art 43
(1990): 6-20.
“Meaning and Explanation.” In The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual Bronzes,
edited by Roderick Whitfield, 34-55. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993.
“Shang Archaeology.” In The Cambridge History of Ancient China: From the Origins of
Civilization to 221 B.C., edited by Michael Loewe and Edward L. Shaughnessy, 124-231. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, 1999.
“Ornament, Representation, and Imaginary animals in Bronze Age China.” Arts Asiatiques
61 (2006): 17-29.
Bussagli, Mario, Chinese Bronzes, trans. by Pamela Swinglehurst, Milano: Fabbri Editori, 1966, 1987.
89
Campbell, Roderick B. Archaeology of the Chinese Bronze Age: From Erlitou to Anyang. Los Angeles:
Cotsen Institute of Archaeology Press at UCLA, 2014.
“Memory, Power and Death in Chinese History and Prehistory.” In The

Archaeology of Ancestors: Death, Memory and Veneration, edited by Erica Hill and John B. Hageman,
81-101. Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 2014.
Cao, Wei, 曹玮, “Hanzhong chutu Shangdai qingtongqi” 汉中出土商代青铜器, (Shang Bronzes From
Hanzhong), Chengdu: Sichuan Publishing Group, 2006.
Carbone, Iside, personal interview by Enrica Medugno, at the Anthropology Library, British Museum
(London), 28 November 2019.
China in the Frame: Materialising Ideas of China in Italian Museums. Newcastle Upon
Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2015.
Chang, K. C. “Archaeology of Ancient China.” Science 162, no. 3853 (1968): 519-526.
“The Chinese Bronze Age: A Modern Synthesis.” In The Great Bronze Age of China: An
Exhibition from the People’s Republic of China, edited by Wen Fong, 35-50. New York City: The
“The Animal in Shang and Chou Bronze Art.” Harvard Journal of Asiatic Studies 41, no. 2,
(1981): 527-554.
“Archaeology and Chinese Historiography.” World Archaeology 13, no. 2 (1981): 156-169.
Art, Myth, and Ritual. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1983.
Chang, Tan, “Telling Global Stories, one at a Time: The Politics and Poetics of Exhibiting Asian Art.”
World Art 5, n. 2 (2015): 307-330.
Chase, T. W. “Chinese Bronzes: Casting, Finishing, Patination and Corrosion.” In Ancient & Historic
Metals: Conservation and Scientific Research, edited by David A. Scott and Jerry Podany, Brian
B. Considine, 85-182. Los Angeles: Getty Publications, 1994.
Chen, Guangchen. “The Biography of a Ritual Vessel: On Naming and the Dialectics of Authenticity.”
Études Chinoises, La vie des objets en Chine 37, no. 2 (2018): 101-138.
Chen, Xingcan. “Archeological Discoveries in the People’s Republic of China and Their Contribution to
the Understand of Chinese History.” Bulletin of the History of Archaeology 19, no. 2 (2009): 4-13.
90
Child-Johnson, Elizabeth, “Who is That Human at Shimao? China’s Ancient Belief in Metamorphic
Power”, Orientations, 51, n. 4 (2020): 2-13.
Clunas, Craig. Art in China, Oxford. New York: Oxford University Press, 1997.
Éliade, Mircea. “Le problème du chamanisme.” Revue de l’histoire des Religions 131, (1946): 11.
D’Alleva, Anne. “Art’s and Context.” In Methods and Theories of Art History, 46-87. London: Laurence
King Publishing Ltd, 2005.
Feng, Qu. “Eskimo Art Prototypes in the Chinese Neolithic: A Comparison of Okvik/Old Bering Sea and
Liangzhu Ritual Art.” Sibirica 13, no. 3 (2014): 45-78.
“Anthropology and Historiography: A Deconstructive Analysis of K.C. Chang’s Shamanic

Approach in Chinese Archaeology.” Numen 64, no. 5-6 (2017): 497-544.
Fracasso, Riccardo. “Esordi Storici: La Dinastia Shang.” In La Cina, edited by Maurizio Scarpari, 39-76.
Torino: Giulio Einaudi editore, 2013.
Franklin, Ursula Martius. “On Bronze and Other Metals in Early China.” In The Origins of Chinese
Civilization, edited by David N. Keightley, 279-297. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California
Press, 1983.
Gamberi, Valentina. “Decolonising Museums: South-Asian Perspectives.” Journal of the Royal Asiatic
Society 29, no. 2 (2019): 201-218.
Hall, Stuart, introduction to Representation: Cultural and Signifying Practices. London: Sage, 1997.
Harrist, Robert E. Jr., “The Artists as Antiquarian: Li Gonglin and His Study of Early Chinese Art”, Artibus
Asiae, 55, n 3-4 (1995): 237-280.
Harvery, Graham, and Robert Wallis. Introduction to Historical Dictionary of Shamanism, 1-10.
London: Rowman & Littlefield International, 2015.
Hatt, Michael, and Charlotte Klonk. “Formalism: Heinrich Wölfflin and Alois Riegl.” In Art History: A
Critical Introduction to its Methods, 65-95. Manchester: Manchester United Press, 2006/2018.
Hides, Shaun, “Other’s Art: Approaching Non-European Cultures,” in Guide to Art, ed. Shearer West,
109-28, London: Bloomsbury Press, 1996.
91
Hogarth, Brian, Ancient China: From the Neolithic Period to the Han Dynasty, New York: Asian Art
Museum, 1999.
Howells, W.W. “Origins of the Chinese People: Interpretations of the Recent Evidence.” In The Origins
of Chinese Civilization, edited by David N. Keightley, 297-320. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of
California Press, 1983.
Johansson, Perry. “Cross-Cultural Epistemology: How European Sinology Became the Bridge to China’s
Modern Humanities.,” In The Making of the Humanities: Volume III, The Modern Humanities, edited by
Rens Bod, Jaap Maat and Thijs Weststeijn, 449-462. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2014.
Kant, Immanuel. “The Critique of Judgement.” In The Art of Art History: A Critical Anthology, edited by
Donald Preziosi, 62-79. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Keightley, David. The Origins of Chinese Civilization. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California
Press, 1983.
“The Shang: China’s First Historical Dynasty.” In The Cambridge History of Ancient China:
From the Origins of Civilisation to 221 B.C., edited by Michael Loewe, Edward l. Shaughnessy, 323-291.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
“The ‘Science’ of the Ancestors: Divination, Curing, and Bronze-Casting in Late Shang
China”, Asia Major, 14, n. 2 (2001), 143-187.
Kesner, Ladislav. “The Taotie Reconsidered: Meanings and Functions of the Shang Theriomorphic
Imagery.” Artibus Asie 51, n. 1/2 (1991): 29-53.
Lewis-Williams, J. D. and T. A. Dowson. Images of Power: Understanding Bushman Rock Art.

Johannesburg: Southern Book Publishers, 1999 [1989].
Li, Chi. “The Tuan Fang Altar Set Reexamined.” Metropolitan Museum Journal 3 (1970): 51-72.
“Li Chi”, Encyclopaedia Britannica. Accessed on July 14, 2020.

https://www.britannica.com/biography/Li-Chi
Li, Chu Tsing. “The Great Bronze Age of China.” Art Journal 40, no. 1-2 (1980): 390-395.
92
Li, Xueqin. “Liangzhu Culture and the Shang Dynasty Taotie Motif.” In The Problem of Meaning in Early
Chinese Ritual Bronzes, translated by Sarah Allan, edited by Roderick Whitfield, 56-65. London: School
of Oriental and African Studies, 1993.
, “The Xia-Shang-Zhou Chronology Project: Methodology and Results.” Journal of East Asian
Archaeology 4 (2002): 321-333.
Liu, Yang. Cast for Eternity: Ancient Ritual Bronzes from the Shanghai Museum. New Haven and London:
Yale University Press, 2014.
Liu, Yu. “Emperor Qianlong’s Four Catalogues on Bronzes.” In Mirroring China's past: Emperors, Scholars,
and Their Bronzes, edited by Wang, Tao, 140-143. Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago, Organizer, Host
Institution, 2018.
Loehr, Max. “The Bronze Styles of the Anyang Period (1300-1028 B.C.)”, Archives of the Chinese Art
Society of America, 7 (1953): 42-53.
“The Fate of the Ornament in Chinese Art”, Archives of Asian Art, 21 (1967/1968): 8-
19.
Ritual Vessels of Bronze Age China, New York: The Asia Society, 1974.
Lopes, Rui Oliveira. “Securing the Harmony between the High and the Low: Power Animals and Symbols
of Political Authority in Ancient Chinese Jades and Bronzes.” Asian Perspectives 53, no. 2 (2014): 195-
225.
Lu, Tracey Lie-dan. “The Transformation of Academic Culture in Mainland Chinese Archeology.” Asian
Anthropology 1, no. 1 (2002): 117-152.
Lynn, Richard John. “The Reception of European art in China and Chinese art in Europe from the late
sixteenth through the eighteenth century.” International Communication of Chinese Culture 4
(2017): 443–456.
Ma, Chengyuan. “The Splendor of Ancient Chinese Bronzes.” In The Great Bronze Age of China: An
Exhibition from the People’s Republic of China, edited by Wen Fong, 1-19. New York City: The
, “Ritual Bronzes: Epitome of Ancient Chinese Civilisation”, in China 5,000 years:

Innovation and Transformation in the Arts, edited by Howard Rogers, Naomi Richard and Sylvia Moss,
69-74. New York: Guggenheim Museums Publications, 1998.
Madsen, David B, and Chen Fa-Hu, Gao Xing. “Archeology at the margins: Exploring the Late Paleolithic
to Neolithic transition in China’s arid west.” Developments in Quaternary Science 9 (2007): 3-7.
93
Mais, Christos. “Maoism, nationalism, and anti-colonialism.” In The Palgrave Encyclopaedia of
Imperialism and Anti-Imperialism, edited by Immanuel Ness and Zak Cope, 875-81. New York, Palgrave
MacMillan, 2016.
Mei, Jianjun, and Kunlong Chen, Wei Cao. “Scientific examination of Shang-dynasty bronzes from
Hanzhong, Shaanxi Province, China.” Journal of Archaeological Science 36 (2009):1881–1891.
Moreno, Elena, “The Problem in the Interpretation of the Taotie motif on Shang Bronzes”, East Asia
Journal, 1 (2003): 9-15.
Orell, Julia. “The Emergence of East Asian Art History in the 1920s: Karl With (1891-1980) and the
Problem of Gandhara.” In The Making of the Humanities: Volume III, The Modern Humanities, edited by
Rens Bod, Jaap Maat and Thijs Weststeijn, 431-448. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2014.
Pagani, Catherine. “Chinese Material Culture and British Perceptions of China in the mid-nineteenth
Century.” In Colonialism and the Object: Empire, Material Culture and the Museum, edited by Tim
Barringer and Tom Flynn, 28-40. London: Routledge, 1998.
Panofsky, Erwin. “Iconography and Iconology: An Introduction to the Study of Renaissance Art.” In
Studies in Iconology: Humanistic Themes in the Art of the Renaissance, 3-16. New York: Harper & Row,
1939/1972.
Pejčochová, Michaela. “The First Exhibitions and the Origins of Collecting Modern Chinese Art in
Europe.” Bulletin of the National Gallery in Prague 27 (2017): 6-22.
Pesaro, Nicoletta. “Letteratura cinese moderna e contemporanea.” In La Cina, vol. III (Verso la
Modernità), edited by Guido Samarani and Maurizio Scarpari, 693-745. Torino: Einaudi, 2009.
Purtle, Jennifer. “Looking at Viewers: Spectatorship, Chinese Painting, and Art History.” Art History 41
(2018): 988-992.
Rawson, Jessica. “The Shang Dynasty: Bronze decoration.” In Chinese Bronzes: Art and Ritual, 26-32.
London: British Museum Publications Ltd, 1987.
“Late Shang Bronze Design: Meaning and Purpose.” In The Problem of Meaning in Early
Chinese Ritual Bronzes, edited by Roderick Whitfield, 67-95. London: School of Oriental and African
Studies, 1993.
94
“Reviving Ancient Ornament and the Presence of the Past Examples from Shang and
Zhou Bronze Vessels.” In Reinventing the Past: Archaism and Antiquarianism in Chinese Art and Visual
Culture, edited by Wu Hung, 47-76. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2010.
Sabattini, Mario, and Paolo Santangelo, Storia della Cina, Roma-Bari: Laterza, 2010.
Said, Edward, Orientalism, London: Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd, 1980.
Samarani, Guido. La Cina del Novecento: dalla fine dell’Impero a oggi. Torino: Giulio Einaudi editore,
2004.
Shi, Jingsong. “Archeology in China.” Acta Archaeologica 72, no. 2, (2001): 55-59.
Shohat, Ella and Robert Stam. “Narrativizing Visual Culture: Towards a Polycentric Aesthetics.” In The
Visual Culture Reader, edited by Nicholas Mirzoeff, 37-57. New York: Routledge, 2002.
So, Jenny. “Innovation in Ancient Chinese Metalwork.” In China 5,000 years: Innovation and
Transformation in the Arts, edited by Howard Rogers, Naomi Richard and Sylvia Moss, 75-88. New York:
Guggenheim Museums Publications, 1998.
Sullivan, Michael, The Arts of China, Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1999.
Su, Rongyu. “Bronze-casting Technology in the Late Shang Dynasty.” In Mirroring China's past: Emperors,
Scholars, and Their Bronzes, edited by Wang, Tao, 32-37. Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago, Organizer,
Host Institution, 2018.
Thorp, Robert L. and Richard Ellis Vinograd, “The Early Bronze Age: Shang and Western Zhou”, in
Chinese Art and Culture, New York: Harry N. Abrams Inc., 2001.
Thorp, Robert L. “A Primer on the Bronze Caster’s Art.” In Spirit and Ritual: The Morse Collection of
Ancient Chinese Art, edited by Robert L. Thorp and Virginia Bower, 11-38. New York: The Metropolitan
“Shang Cult: Divination and Sacrifice.” In China in the Early Bronze Age: Shang
Civilization, 172-213. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2006.
Treistman, Judith M. “Problems in Contemporary Asian Archeology.” The Journal of Asia Studies 29, no.
2 (1970): 363-371.
95
Von Falkenhausen, Lothar, “Action and Image in Early Chinese Art”, Cahiers d’Extrême-Asie, 17 (2008):
51-91.
Wallis, Robert J. “Art and Shamanism: From Cave Painting to the White Cube.” Religions 10, no. 1 (2019):
54.
Walters, Victoria. “The artist as Shaman: the work of Joseph Beuys and Marcus Coates.” In Between Art
and Anthropology: Contemporary Ethnographic Practice, edited by Schneider Arnd and Wright
Christopher, 35-48. Oxford: Berg, 2010.
Wang, Tao. “A Textual Investigation of the Taotie.” In The Problem of Meaning in Early Chinese Ritual
Bronzes, edited by Roderick Whitfield, 102-118. London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993.
“How to read Ancient Chinese Bronzes.” In Mirroring China's past: Emperors, Scholars,
and Their Bronzes, edited by Wang Tao, 17-31. Chicago: Art Institute of Chicago, Organizer, Host
Institution, 2018.
Wen, Fong. “The Study of Chinese Bronze Age Arts: Methods and Approaches.” in The Great Bronze
Age of China: An Exhibition from the People’s Republic of China, 20-34. New York City: The Metropolitan
Wölfflin, Heinrich. “Principles of Art History.” In The Art of Art History: A Critical Anthology, edited by
Donald Preziosi, 115-126. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1999.
Wong, Harley. “Orientalism Persists in Conversations Around Chinese Contemporary Art.” In

Hyperallergic online, December 12, 2018. Accessed January 31, 2020
https://hyperallergic.com/475446/art-and-china-after-1989-sfmoma/
Wu, Hung. “Western Concepts Have Drastically Shaped the History of Chinese Art. But the Artworks
Have Their Own Stories to Tell.” Artnet.com, April 25, 2019. Accessed on April 25, 2020,
https://news.artnet.com/art-world/wu-hung-mellon-lecture-excerpt-1526068
Xu, Shuqin. “Cultivating national identity with traditional culture: China’s experiences and paradoxes.”
Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education 6306 (2017): 1-14.
96
97

THE MEANING OF THE TAOTIE A Discussion o

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE MEANING OF THE TAOTIE A Discussion o

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

THE MEANING OF THE TAOTIE

A discussion on the theoretical frameworks around the

Thesis Submitted in Fulfilments of the Requirements for the Degree of

Richmond University, the American International University in London

7th August 2020

Words count: 19,368

Signed candidate: Type text here

to overcome the shortcomings of both Western-centric and historiography-based theories. In

BRONZE AGE, CENTRAL PLAINS Northern Song: 960 – 1127

Six dynasties: 220 – 589 PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA (1949 –)

1. Thesis and relevance

astonishing craftsmanship, the scholarship on Chinese Bronzes principally concerns the

sources and a Neolithic ‘shamanism’ in China.

iconographical-oriented scholarship in relation to the shamanic context. The polarity of these

bronzes in Western museums.

between Chinese and Western archaeologists, as well as permitting access to Chinese

archaeological studies and is problematically Western-centric. In order to reinforce my

have already sketched before.

undoubtedly characterised by a certain degree of ‘openness’ and ‘understanding’, nonetheless

no. 2 (2015): 307-330.

the British Museum.

December 12, 2018. Last accessed January 31, 2020, https://hyperallergic.com/475446/art-and-china-after-

both the Western and the ‘native’ perspective.

paper will be divided into an introduction, four chapters and a conclusion.

3. Outline of the Chapters

overall understanding of Shang bronzes in their religious, chronological and geographical

in the context of the Shang system of beliefs and values.

1945) to name one.

European art during the colonial period.

‘shamanism’ to a unified phenomenon among Neolithic and present-day cultures.15

level of decontextualisation occurs. Indeed, the generalisation of ‘shamanism’ and the

discussing Shang bronze in a more detailed manner, can only be acknowledged as

nevertheless, this approach overcomes the problem of the decontextualisation.

THE SHANG AND THE METAL WORK

chronological and geographical context. 20 Undoubtedly, this cataloguing work produced a

topic, the meaning of the decorative motifs still represents a dilemma.

19 Thorp and Ellis Vinograd (2001), 55.

taotie motifs, highlighting the similarities of different decorative styles.

1. The Shang and The Royal Cult

editore, 2013), 39-76.

Figure 2: Example of ‘oracle bones’ with inscription on a turtle shell.

bronze vessels should have been used.

consequently, in denoting authority and power.

and stone objects.35

Metal-production is usually linked to social stratification, professional specialisation and

to be the consequence of the development of metallurgy. Therefore, in the case of Chinese

flourishing of bronze metallurgy in an already stratified society resulted in reinforcing the

particular social order and the power relations within.

3. Ritual Vessels and Where to Find Them

will discuss in the following chapters.41

circumstances were fundamental in the development of bronze casting technology as well as

the use of bronze itself.48

Chengdu: Sichuan Publishing Group, 2006.

contemporary to Shang vessels or earlier.50

5. Taotie: A Formal Analysis

Museum Publications Ltd, 1987), 26-32.

mark the stylistic representation of the taotie (figure 14).

America, 7 (1953): 42-53.

the following chapters.

but is, in fact, deeper when discussing its meaning.

Whitfield, (London: School of Oriental and African Studies, 1993), 10-32.

theories of art history as I will explain in the following chapters.