Anne P. Underhill (ed.), A Companion to Chinese Archaeology.

John Wiley/Blackwell Publishing, 2013, pp 13-34.

"Despoiled of the
. CHAPTER 2 Garments of Her
Civilization: "
Problems and
Progress in
Archaeological
Heritage Management
in China

Robert E. MUROWCHICI(
;m�*
;J" � )\"

Scientific archaeology in China, developed over the past century from its traditional
historiographic and antiquarian roots, has brought to light an extraordinarily rich and
often unexpected cavalcade of new finds, many of which are explored in detail in the
present volume. These outstanding discoveries are fundamentally changing our
understanding of the development of early cultures and the rise of social complexity
in ancient China, and their relationships with other cultures across Asia. However,
this progress is being seriously threatened by an alarming rise in the destruction of
archaeological sites across China. Of course, China is not alone in having a serious
problem with the looting of ancient sites and the theft of antiquities - virtually every
country in the world continues to suffer to valying degrees the loss of irreplaceable
ancient cultural material. Given the importance of new archaeological discoveries in
China, it is essential to understand both the magnitude of the problem there and the
significant efforts being undertaken in China as well as among the international

A Companion to Chinese Archaeology, First Edition. Edited by Anne P. Underhill.

© 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2013 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
14 ROBERT E. MUROWCHICK
community to curtail the losses 111 order to preserve and more fully understand
China's past.
The scale of archaeological looting in China has always been difficult to determine
with any precision, given China's vast size, the remoteness of most sites, and the
secretiveness of the looting and smuggling process. Nonetheless, China's National
Cultural Relics Bureau has estimated that just between 1998 and 2003 more than
220,000 Chinese tombs were broken into and looted, with much of the content
being smuggled out of China for sale on the international market (Beech 2003).
Newspapers and websites are awash with stories of looted Chinese sites and antiqui­
ties. It is unnervingly easy to pull up online news reports of case after case of archaeo­
logical vandalism, some on a very large scale, that feeds the seemingly insatiable
appetite for China's antiquities. In 1986, for example, some 400 people from eight
villages in central Henan collaborated on the pillaging of 500 tombs of the Western
Zhou dynasty (11th-8th centuries BC), and in 1987 it was reported that thousands
of farmers looted a thousand ancient tombs during a 10-day rampage in southern
Jiangxi (Abrams 1987). The heads of the Eighteen Luohan �¥jL (At"hats) from the
Zishou temple �%� in Lingshi �1:l county, Shanxi province, were hacked off their
bodies and then smuggled out to Hong Kong in sacks of carrots in 1993. Hundreds
of Buddhist stone sculptures found at Qingzhou ,!:If}I'i, Shandong IlJ* in 1984 disap­
peared for more than a decade, resurfacing in private foreign collections (Doar 1999).
In a particularly egregious case that demonstrates the increasing scale and violence
of the undertalcing, looters in 1994 in western Hebei 'I6J:1t province used dynamite
to blast away massive stone blocks protecting the entrance to the tomb of Wang
Chuzhi x;\(t][, a high official of the 10dl-century Five Dynasties (Wudai 1i1-t)
period. They proceeded to tunnel dleir way into dle multi-chambered tomb, using
hammers and chisels to remove spectacular painted marble reliefs showing musical
performances, warriors, and other figurative scenes (Levine 2002).
The steady appearance of new and significant bronzes, jades, ceramic vessels, and
tomb statuary in bodl museums and private galleries and collections, most of it com­
pletely laclcing provenance and dlerefore most likely removed illicitly from their
original sites, indicates that the problem has continued to worsen during tlle past
two decades (for a recent example in Shan dong province, see Figure 2.1). As will be
explored below, tllere are a number of interrelated causes underlying this trend,
including China's red-hot economic development since the early 1990s, major infra­
structure projects, and a seemingly insatiable attraction to the collecting of Chinese
antiquities, both internationally and domestically. Efforts to stem tlle destruction of
China's cultural heritage, dating back to tlle early 20tll centmy, have taken on new
urgency over the past decade with the growth not only in the scale of dle problem
but also in its complexity, intelweaving diverse and often contradictory aspects of
nationalism, economics, politics, and social status.
EARLY LOOTING AND EFFORTS TO CURTAIL THE PRACTICE
The destruction of China's cultural heritage is a problem as old as the cultural mate­
rial itself. Qin Shilmangdi *���*, the First Emperor of Qin, for example, was
convinced by his ministers in the late 3rd century BC to actively confiscate and destroy
PROBLElvIS AND PROGRESS IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT IN CHINA 15
Figure 2.1 Archaeologists investigate a recently looted tomb from tlle Eastern Zhou
period (770-22 1 B C ) in Shan dong province. (Photo by Fang Hui, included with
permission. )
- under penalty of deatll - texts and other materials, lest they provide evidence of
pre-Qin rub"ship tl1at ran counter to his court's biddings. Examples of Han dynasty
looting of tombs are numerous in ancient texts, and at many points in China's dynas­
tic histOlY religious wars resulted in the destruction of thousands of temples and
shrines (Murphy 1995: 45). However, there is also a rich 3,000-year tradition of
historiography in China that provided a fertile foundation for tlle scholarly study
of art and antiquities (Rudolph 1963; Chang 1981; Falkenhausen 1993). Through­
out China's history, but perhaps most notably during tlle Song * (AD 960-1279),
Ming SJl (1368-1644), and Qing rJ1f (1644-1911) dynasties, scholars undertook
sophisticated studies of their collections of ancient bronzes and inscriptions (includ­
ing tlle publication of such works as tlle Kaogutu 5l¥iSi?fJ, AD 1092; Bogutu t-fiSi?fJ,
c.1125; and Xi Qjng Gujian ®rJ1fiS�, 1749-1755), to tlY to achieve a broader
understanding of the politics, rulership, ritual, and other aspects of early China than
could be woven solely from the historical and literalY texts available to them. It was
recognized dlat the study of tlle material culture itself could help to clarify the texts,
and in many cases fill in gaps in the historical record. The collecting of material objects
from China's past, particularly those objects and motifs d1at were associated Witll the
perceived "Golden Age" of the Three Dynasties, or Sandai =-1-1;; (the Xia :3[, Shang
�, and Zhou f,!;J dynasties, around the 21st to 3rd centuries BC according to most
scholars in China; see Chapters 14-18 and 23 of tllis volume), also provided a physi­
cal and symbolic connection to China's illustrious histOlY. At least some of these
antiquarian efforts reflected a growing desire to solidify a Chinese cultural identity
in tlle face of real or perceived political and military d1reats posed by non-Chinese
neighbors and competitors, a reaction that is as relevant in dle 21st centmy as it was
a dl0usand years ago, as will be explored below.
With tl1is long histolY of antiquarianism and collecting, the looting of China's art
and antiquities clearly is neither a new nor an imported problem. However, its severity
16 ROBERT E. MUROWCHICK PROBLEMS AND PROGRESS IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT IN CHINA 17

China, and with

was exacerbated during times of growing political instability within
all records of human society, and until a few years ago her principal antiquities were
s in collecting untouched. Knowing the art of plunder from the ages, foreign agents from Europe,
a rapidly increasing interest among foreign individuals and museum
ess of the Qing dynasty government Japan and America have set upon China, and China is being despoiled of the garments
early Chinese art. As the power and effectiven
of her civilization, as other ancient countries have been. Countries of European civiliza·
of domestic unrest,
declined from the mid-19th to tl1e early 20th centmy in the face
corruption, and increasingly powerful foreign commerc ial and military �
interes s, tl1e
tion have plundered successively all older civilizations. Now finally to vandalize and
pillage the last conservatory of art and archaeology in the world, will forever be a peculiar
and tl1e scale of the destrucu on of
number of antiquities and art that disappeared crime, besmirching those who participate in it, and malting the possession of stolen
of looting, such as the
historic sites grew considerably. Individual specific episodes Chinese antiquities an indelible disgrace. (McCormick 1 9 14b: 78-79)
burning and plunder of the Yuanmingyuan IQ] SJlIZ9, or Old Summer
Palace, in Beijing

by the Anglo-French Expedition in 1860, are welilmown and have

long symb lized � The China Monuments Society sought the cooperation of foreign institutions to
past weakness 111 the
one aspect of tl1e problem. These events, illustrating China's outlaw "a class of charlatans and adventurers from all parts of the world who visit
debates about
face of foreign aggression, have recently resurfaced in the current China and commit abuses that owing to exterritorial law calmot be punished
." More broadly,
cultural patrimony and the return of China's "lost national treasures in China, afterward reciting in Western lands their imaginary adventures misrepresent­

though, the widespread political and social chaos in China that foUow �
d the i�'st � ing the Chinese, and throwing discredit upon Western civilization and its representa­
,
Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895), the Boxer Uprising (Yihetuan Yundong 5Uf� 1?II@1)tj, tives in China" (McCormick 1911: 57). In 1914, some 52 American institutions
the collapse of the :Rt!tWJL
or Righteous Harmony Society Movement, 1898-1901), and presented a joint memorial to Chinese president Yuan Shikai asking that the
railways that
Qing dynasty (1911), combined with the rapid expansion of China's Chinese national government "make new legal recognition of China's monuments
ion, led to a
suddenly improved access to remote sites previously safe from exploitat and antiquities, and of all forms of national art of antiquarian and historical value as
of China's
prolonged period of enormous destruction, disappearance, and dispersal national property .. . [and] take national possession of the same and bring them
gical heritage, and of the vast imperial art collections that under national protection for preservation in China for the lasting benefit of the
architectural and archaeolo
had been built up over centuries (Cohen 1992; COim 2000). Chinese people and of mankind generally" (Kunz 1915: 334-335). HeillY Fairfield
en in part
The rampant looting in China in the early 20th centmy was undertak Osborne (1914: 863), president of tl1e American Museum of Natural HistOlY, also
site among many can illus­
for the benefit of Western collectors and museums.One sought assistance from the State Department of the United States to "use such means
Dunhuang �.Hi,
trate the problem: the Tang dynasty Buddhist cave complex at as it may determine to discourage all American citizens from vandalizing in China

located along the ancient trading routes in northwest China's Gansu

i:t* province, and from trafficking in broken and stolen sculptures and other archaeological and art
following its
for example, was fairly continuously exploited for nearly two decades works of historical value belonging to the people of China," and to encourage
along tl1e Silk
description in the late 19th centmy by Western explorers traveling Chinese officials to establish effective means for ensuring such preservation.
and archaeolo gist Sir Aurel Stein acquired some On January 17, 1918, this effort was reinforced at a meeting of the American
Road. In 1907, British explorer
along with paintings and textiles, and numerou s Scenic and Historic Preservation Society and the American Museum of Natural
6,500 early texts from the caves,
a year later, on
additional works were collected by French Sinologist Paul Pelliot History, by the adoption of a joint resolution encouraging the president of tl1e
respective ly.
behalf of the British Museum and French National Libraty, Republic of China to further the plans that had been made to protect Chinese monu­
s, or by teams of
The desu'uction and theft wrought by foreign scholars themselve ments and antiquities from vandals and collectors, and urging that these collections
s, were
local laborers and middlemen working on behalf of tl1em or their institution be safely preserved in a national museum. The resolution also underscored the desire
and from at
often met with abhorrence, protests, and calls to action, both in China that the influence of the members of these noted American museums and historical
the United States and Europe. The China Monumen ts Society, societies "will be used to prevent the despoiling of China by the unauthorized sale
least some quarters in
in New York
organized in 1908-1909 in Beijing, and the Asiatic Institute, founded of ancient works of art" (Andrews 1918: 251).
early organizat ions that sought to rein in However, tl1e looting of major architectural and archaeological sites by or on behalf
in 1913, were but two of a number of
attempting to
foreign vandalism of sites and the flow of antiquities out of China by of Western collectors and museums continued throughout the 1910s and 1920s.
s that were involved,
publicize the problem, shame those institutions and individual Amid the frenzied collecting of Asian art during this period, one prevailing argument
over
and pressure the Chinese government to assert better conu'ol and protection was that China's cultural heritage could be better preserved in the hands of Western
and experienced
threatened sites and antiquities. In the words of American journalist museums than at those sites deemed too remote for proper local supervision, or
as secretary of
China-hand Frederick McCormick (1914a, 1914b), who served located in areas of political turmoil (for an excellent discussion of the preservation
Society and secretalY and treasurer of the Asiatic Institute: ethics of the early 20th centmy in China, see Balachandran 2007). Dozens of well­
the China Monuments
known instances of the dismantling and removal of art for the salce of preservation
and museum-building could be cited, but several American cases can serve to illustrate
This depredation in the field of antiquities, going on to satisfY the Western system, is
peculiarly hideous in its effects, as it is leaving behind in China enormous br�k�n, tl1e severity of the problem. Statuary from the 6th century Buddhist caves of Xiang­
mangled remains of great sculptural, architectural and other art works, and depnv111g tangshan �iliJ'i: ill, in southern Hebei province, began to disappear as early as 1909,
the Chinese of the present and future, of their heritage. China is herself the greatest of and many major pieces of sculpture and wall reliefs were plundered during the
18 ROBERT E. MUROWCH ICK
! Several major pieces that came onto the market through the
subsequent decade.
renowned international dealer C.T. Loo (Lu Qinzhai P'!'f1iO ended up in collections
of the University of Pennsylvania Museum by 1916 (Howard 2001). The same
museum obtained two large horse reliefs, originally part of a set of six panels produced
for the mausoleum complex of Tang emperor Taizong m** in the mid-7th century
at Zhaoling a:g�, Shaanxi �® province. The six panels ,vere removed from the
mausoleum in the early 20th century, with four of them moved to Xi'an ®:t( by
1917, eventually being preserved there in what would later become the Beilin TI¢**
(Forest of Stelae) Museum. The other two panels made their way through the hands
of various warlords, collectors, and dealers, to be housed in the University of Penn­
sylvania by 1918 (Bishop 1918: 268), which completed its purchase of the objects
in 1920 and 1921 (Zhou 2001).
Similar purchases of Chinese antiquities were also being made by most of America's
other major art museums. In 1922, Harvard art historian Langdon Warner com­
plained that the United States had not kept up with its European counterparts in
bringing Asian art to the appreciation of Western audiences. "The British, the French
and the Germans and the Russians," Warner stated, "have so added to our lmowledge
of the history of the human race and incidentally enriched their museums with artistic
monuments brought back from Turkestan that it has become almost a matter of
reproach that America has contributed nothing in that direction" (quoted in Balach­
andran 2007: 3-4). Harvard's Fogg Art Museum undertook its First and Second
China Expeditions in 1924 and 1925 under Warner's direction, focusing in part on
the removal of major statuary and wall paintings from the seemingly inexhaustible
riches at the Dunhuang cave complex. Although no formal regulations outlawing
such practices were yet in place in China and the removal and export of China's
art and artifacts were deemed to be legal, it continued to meet resistance both in
China and among certain foreign institutions.
EARLY LEGISLATIVE EFFORTS
Recognizing the growing severity of the problem, the Chinese government's efforts
to deal with tlle plunder of its sites and its collections had already begun as early as
1912. Following the fall of tlle Qing Dynasty in 1911, attention was focused on the
problem of the ownership and protection of the immense imperial art collections,
which had been housed in many imperial palaces, residences, and ancestral halls
around the country. The establishment of the Gallery of Antiquities rS"tmll*37UJiJT,
sometimes called the Government Museum, in the Forbidden City in Beijing in 1914
brought together some 120,000 imperial treasures under the control of the new
Republican government. National ownership of tllese collections was furtller solidi­
fied in 1925 with tlle addition of nearly 1. 2 million imperial objects in tlle newly
established Palace Musewn (ii5Cs1WtmJljG) (Doar 2005a).
Beginning in tlle early 20th century, antiquarian collecting was paralleled by the
development of scientific archaeology, opening new windows into China's past and
bringing China's heritage to the attention of a broad public audience both inside
and outside of China (for tlle early history of archaeology in China, see Andersson
1934; Goodrich 1957; and Li 1977, among many other excellent summaries).
PROBLEMS AND PROGRESS IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL HEIUTAGE MANAGEMENT IN CHINA 19
Recognition of the scientific value of properly excavated archaeological materials to
understanding China's past brought with it growing concerns about how best to
protect tllat past in tlle face of growing threats through construction, archaeological
looting, and the illicit export of archaeological materials to feed the international
antiquities market. It was during tllis period that emerged an 80-year saga of legisla­
tive initiatives and revisions, still continuing today, to protect China's antiquities in
the face of surging demand, both internationally and, more recently, domestically.
In 1928, tlle Nationalist government supported efforts by lie Society for the
Preservation of Cultural Objects (later called tlle National Commission for the Pres­
ervation of Cultural Objects) to seize certain collections of foreign explorers to
prevent tlleir export, charging that American and European expeditions were stealing
China's treasures, infringing upon China's sovereign rights, and spying against the
government, among otller anti-foreign charges (Roy Chapman Andrews, quoted in
Science News-Letter 1929: 211; Schmalzer 2008: 26). By 1930, in an effort to stem
formally tlle rampant export of antiquities, China established its first Regulations on
the Preservation ofAncient Relics rS"rm1*f¥�, which among other tlungs prohibited
the export of antiquities, tlle sale of antiquities to foreigners, and archaeological
excavations by foreigners. As early as 1932, tlle Clunese CommUJust Party established
in areas it controlled additional regulations protecting ancient artifacts and important
materials related to the Chinese Revolution (Lau 2011: 21). These early efforts,
interrupted by the chaos and destruction of tlle Anti-Japanese War (1937-1945) and
the Chinese civil war (1945-1949), laid down a foundation upon wluch a growing
series of protective legislative efforts would subsequently be built.
HERITAGE PROTECTION LEGISLATION IN THE PEOPLE'S REpUBLIC
Following the establishment of tlle People's Republic in 1949, tlle Chinese govern­
ment overhauled its adnunistration of archaeology and museums. The primary admin­
istrative entity overseeing archaeology and antiquities was the Ministry of Culture's
State Bureau of Cultural Relics/ wluch oversees a network of 31 provincial-level
offices, a publishing house, and journals and newsletters. The Institute of Archaeol­
ogy 5\¥rS"fJf
i J't':JJT
i was established in 1950 witlun the Chinese Academy of Sciences to
oversee archaeological excavation and research (it moved to tlle newly established
Chinese Academy of Social Sciences t±�H��ft in 1977). A nationwide hierarchy
of research centers and administrative units was established at tlle provincial and local
levels. In an effort to increase tlle number of people qualified to work in archaeologi­
cal research and preservation, formal training programs in archaeology, conservation,
and museum studies were established at Peking University and tlle Institute of
Archaeology by 1952, expanding in subsequent years to numerous otller key institu­
tions. The government also established a network of national, provincial, and local
museums for archaeology, art, and lustory, now numbering more tlun 2,200. From
tlleir early years through the 1980s, many of tllese museums served as a means to
provide the public witll material "proof" of the accuracy of tlle Marxist paradigm for
social evolution. During tlle past two decades, however, many of China's archaeology
and Iustory museums at the local, provincial, and national levels have evolved
into truly world-class institutions in terms of their collections, design, and public
 PROBLEMS AND PROGRESS IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT IN CHINA 21
20 ROBERT E. MUROWCHlCK

responsibility for d1e protection of a broad range of cultural, artistic, and scientific
programming. Archaeology is supported very broadly by many parts of the govern­
materials, including ancient and historic sites, temples, grottoes, revolutionary
ment at all levels, and public awareness of and interest in archaeology and history in
. archives, important historical and ethnic handicrafts, and fossils. It prioritized sites
China in part reflects a widespread personal connection among the public toward the
to be protected, detailed d1e responsibilities accorded the various levels of govern­
story that is being told.
ment, and described d1e permit process where construction and development would
With this restructuring, dozens of laws and regulations covering aspects of archae­
have an impact on historic sites. It also strengthened d1e approval process for all
ology and antiquities have been put into place by the State Council (for a detailed
excavation activities, further clarified d1e rules for selling or acquiring cultural relics
discussion of the summary of antiquities legislation that follows, see Zhuang 1989;
Murphy 1994, 1995; Dutra 2004). In 1950, for example, the Provisional Measures in private and in state collections, and prohibited from export "any cultural relics of

Prohibiting the Exportation of Precious and Valuable Art Objects, Pictures, and Books significant historical, artistic, or scientific value, with the exception of d10se to be
Governing the Investiga­ shipped abroad for exhibition wid1 the approval of d1e State Council" (PRC State
(�l.l:J�·�Jtr!J.Ioo.:p.Jt±:l r:::rTgfJ1J'�O and Provisional Measures
Bureau of Cultural Relics 1994: 1-11). Significandy, while objects in private collec­
tion and Excavation of Ancient Cultural Sites, Graves, and Burial Grounds
)ff 1jg1i1J':{!), established that all ancient relics - tions could be purchased by approved institutions, "no other unit or individual may
(�Jt1.tJ�Htl::Ec�·£�;;tlfoJ:m:�1i
engage in the business of purchasing cultural relics." Articles 30 and 31 of the 1982
buried or excavated - belonged to the state, and banned the export of important
law were expanded at d1e Seventh National People's Congress on June 29, 1991.
artifacts, with d1e exception of artifacts approved for state exhibitions abroad. It was
decreed that foreigners would not be allowed to undertake archaeological excavation
The 1982 Law on the PI'otection of Cultul'al Relics was further refined ten years
without d1e permission and invitation of d1e Central People's Government,a process
later with the appearance of its Rules for Implementation, (!ft�A�;:!:tjfIJOOJt4?!J{�iHp
that included confirmation of academic qualifications, a lengthy application and
:{!�nfli:�IBJJlU) promulgated May 5,1992,by d1e State Bureau of Cultural Relics. This
detailed the national-local hierarchy of responsibility for protection of sites, the per­
approval process,and Chinese oversight of the excavation itself. No doubt a reaction
nutting and oversight procedures for archaeological excavations, the status of cultural
to decades of plunder by foreigners, this prohibition would last until significant leg­
Measures of the PRC for the Administration of relics in state and private collections, together with a brief description of the export­
islative changes were enacted in d1e
Foreign-Relate d Archaeological Activities (i:P�A �;:!:tjflJ 00 ��W7'� I1'1=lf£!1J':{!) permitting process, and fines and penalties for contravention of the laws (PRC State
Bureau of Cultural Relics 1994: 19-32).
approved by d1e State Council on December 31,1990,taking effect on February 22,
Anod1er major revision of d1e 1982 Law on the Protection of Cult);tral Relics was
1991. The impact of this revision cannot be overstated: since 1991,dozens of highly
undertaken in October 2002 by the Ninth National People's Congress.3 This 2002
productive Sino-foreign collaborative archaeological projects have been undertaken
law further describes the responsibilities for immovable cultural relics,d1e permit and
in China, providing important opportunities for Western scholars and students to
reporting requirements for archaeological excavations, and the status of antiquities
direcdy take part in archaeological research in China, and for Chinese scholars
in state and private collections. One of its most important changes is in the allowance
to better understand the anthropologically oriented research designs of their Western
of private transactions of cultural relics. Article 50 of the 2002 law stipulates that:
colleagues (Murowchick 1997). Indeed, the results of some of these collaborative
projects are seen in a number of chapters in d1e present volume.
Citizens, legal persons and other organizations, except institutions for the collection
In the early 1950s, new laws also sought to minimize the impact of construction
of culmral relics, may collect cultural relics obtained through the following channels:
and agricultural activities on cultural and historic sites, including Notice on PI'otecting
( 1 ) lawfully inheriting or accepting as gifts; (2) purchasing from cultural relics stores;
Historical and Revolutional'y Relics from Capital Constr);tction (*T1±�*�l&I�� ( 3 ) purchasing from auction enterprises engaged in auction of cultural relics; (4) mutu­
!ft{!fJp)JJ5I:&1it€PJt4o/JS1t�;iF 1953) and Notice on PI'otecting Relics from Agricul­ ally exchanging or transferring in accordance with law the culmral relics lawfully owned
tural Production and Constl'uction (*T1±;&��f=�l&!ft1!�HpJt4o/JS1im�1J 1956). by individual citizens; or ( 5 ) other lawful channels prescribed by the State. Cultural
These regulations were furd1er clarified in Provisional Regulations on the Protection relics, as specified in the preceding paragraph, which are in the collection of citizens,
and Administl'ation ofCultural Relics (Jt4o/J{�iHptgf!1jg1i%d9U 1960),which detailed legal persons and other organizations, except the institutions for the collection of cultural
the scope of protected sites and relics, and laid out d1e hierarchy of administrative
relics, may be circulated according to law. ( PRC Law 2002)
units and the requirements for regular investigation and reporting. A year later, d1e
Circulal' PI'omulgating the First GI'OUP of Key National The law also established official antiquities stores and auction houses through which
State Council approved the
approved antiquities could be sold.
Cultural Protection Units (Jlt9:Jt4o/J1!fJP.$W), identifYing some 180 cultural sites,
artifacts, and monuments for special protection, the number and scope of which While many of China's laws have sought to restrict the export of certain categories

would continue to grow during subsequent decades.
More recendy, protective legislation was strengthened and furd1er clarified in the
comprehensive Law of the People)s Republic of China on the Protection of Cult);tral
Relics (!ft��A�;:!:tjflJgjJt4o/J1:llHP:{!), November 19, 1982. As detailed in its 33 arti­
cles, d1e law stipulated state ownership of "all cultural relics remaining underground
or in d1e inland waters or territorial seas within d1e boundaries of the PRC" and state
of antiquities and other cultural materials,d1e imprecision of certain definitions,rules,
and procedures has resulted in continuing problems in terms of standardization of
enforcement. In 1960, the Reference Standal'ds for the Export Appraisal of Cultural
Relics (Jttm t±:l r:::l �5E��11Ftt{i) represented an early effort at defining restricted
categories. Protected categories included cultural relics possessing a certain level of
historical,scientific,and cultural value produced before 1949, revolutionalY artifacts,
22 ROBERT E, MUROWCHICK
minority relics, and original manuscripts of political significance (Lau 201 l : 22-23),
Beginning in the late 1980s, antiquities in China have been even more systematically
inventoried and classified d1rough a grading system, and d1e resulting "grade" deter­
mines an object's level of legal protection at ilie national or local level, and its eligi­
bility for sale and for export. The Ministry of Culture's Rating Standards f01' Collections
of Cultural Relics4 ()c4m��JE�lH;Fii ) , adopted in April 2001, represents an attempt
to clarifY different earlier grading systems, establishing some 26 categories of objects
(e.g., pottery, bronzes, gold and silver, furniture), Wid1in iliese categories, artifacts
are ranked eid1er as "Precious Cultural Relics" or as "Ordinary Cultural Relics," with
ilie former being subdivided into Grade 1, Grade 2, and Grade 3, in descending
order of cultural or historical significance, as judged by specialist appraisers. Further
clarifications were made in Standards for the Entry-Exit Examination and Ve1'ijication
of Cultural Relics ()cto/Jt±:\tJri¥*�;f;F ii, April 3, 2007).
The potential ambiguities inherent in this grading structure are many, as discussed
in detail in Lau (2011), and many difficulties can result when criminal and civil penal­
ties for breaking ilie laws are often based on the grading of d1e objects in question.
In many cases, the reasoning behind that grading is sometimes unknown to seller
and buyer, and ilie legality of a particular purchase might not be as clear as ilie laws
had intended. In an effort to clarifY ilie grading system to all concerned, ilie Ministry
of Culture is now publishing a 25-volume series (2006-) that presents hundreds of
sample artifacts to illustrate and describe d1e criteria on which the grading is based,
such as the importance of an inscription, provenance, technical sophistication, or
historical value.
INTERNATIONAL COLLABORATION TO CURB ARCHAEOLOGICAL LOOTING
In addition to its numerous domestic statutes relating to the excavation, sale, and
export of cultural property and ilie management of heritage sites, China has been an
increasingly active participant in international cooperative efforts. The recognition of
the inherent social and historical value of cultural heritage sites, as well as of ilie
potential for economic payback d1l'ough heritage-related tourism (boili domestic and
foreign), provides strong incentives for the furilier protection and development of
heritage sites. In 1989, China became a signatory to UNESCO's 1970 Convention
on the Means of Prohibiting and Preventing the Illicit Import) EXP01't) and Transfer of
Ownership ofCult�tral Property, and in 1997 it joined the 1995 UNIDROIT Conven­
tion on Stolen or Illegally Exp01'ted Cultural Objects. Since ratifYing the UNESCO
1972 Convention Concerning the Protection ofthe World Cultu1'al and Natural He1'it­
age in 1985, China has had some 41 cultural and natural heritage sites inscribed as
UNESCO World Heritage Sites, a designation d1at brings wiili it financial and tech­
nical aid and expertise as well as increased international awareness and prestige. In
2002, d1e State Administration of Cultural Heritage (SACH), working with d1e
Chinese and Australian offices of the International Council on Monuments and Sites
and ilie Getty Conservation Institute, established ilie Principles for the Consenation
of Heritage Sites in China (Agnew and Demas 2002), drawing on international
expertise to provide an auilioritative guide for heritage management practices and
policies in China.
PROBLEMS AND PROGRESS IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL HEIUTAGE MANAGEMENT IN CHINA 23
In an effort to curb the illicit trade in its antiquities, China has also sought ilie
direct assistance of individual foreign countries. It has established bilateral agreements
and memoranda of understanding (MOU) on ilie prevention of stealillg, illicit exca­
vation, and illegal trafficking of cultural goods wid1 12 counu'ies (Australia, Chile,
Cyprus, Ethiopia, Greece, India, Italy, Peru, Philippines, Turkey, d1e United States,
and Venezuela). In some cases, collaboration between Chinese, foreign, and inter­
national law enforcement agencies has resulted in the seizure and return of key pieces
that left China illegally. Recent notable successes wid1 the United States have included
the return of a Han dynasty bronze yaoqianshu 1fMjW� ("money u'ee") believed to
have been looted from a tomb in Fengjie �lJ county, Sichuan, d1at sold for $2.5
million at the International Asian Art Fair in New York in late March 1998 (Har­
rington 1998), ilie 2003 return of terracotta figurines looted a year earlier from d1e
tomb of a Western Han princess near Xi'an dut were to be sold at auction in New
York by Soilieby's (Xinhua News Agency 2003; Beech 2003); and ilie seizure in
New York and return in 2001 of one of ilie above-mentioned stolen marble wall
reliefs from the 10ili-century tomb of Wang Chuzhi. More recendy, ilie 27-ton stone
sarcophagus of Tang empress Wu Huifei JEtm�� (AD 699-737), stolen from her tomb
just souili of Xi'an in 2006, surfaced in the collection of an American businessman
who had purchased it in Virginia, and who agreed to return it to China in 2010 (Ma
and Lin 2010).
A recent MOU between China and d1e United States illustrates a proactive, railier
ilian reactive, example of international collaboration, as well as some of d1e difficulties
involved in such efforts, In the United States, the 1983 Convention on Cultural
Prope1'ty Implementation Act (CPIA) is ilie legislative mechanism ilirough which ilie
US put into practice ilie provisions laid out in ilie 1970 UNESCO Convention on the
Means ofProhibiting and P1'eventing the Illicit Import) Export and Transfer of OHmer­
ship of C�tltural Prope1'ty, one of ilie first truly international efforts to taclde ilie
looting problem. The CPIA stipulates a process by which other 1970 UNESCO
signatory counu'ies dut are losing significant archaeological materials can request the
United States to impose import restrictions on specified cultural materials unless
it can be proved that iliey were legally exported from d1eir counUy of origin. CPIA
also provides for ilie seizure and return of stolen cultural property. The source
counuy requesting assistance must demonstrate a certain level of severity of ilie
problem and iliat its own efforts to deal wid1 it have been unsuccessful. The imple­
mentation of CPIA is overseen by ilie Cultural Property AdvisOlY Committee (CPAC),
consisting of 11 private American citizens, appointed by the president, who represent
ilie interests of archaeology/anthropology, ilie international art u'ade, museums,
and d1e general public. CPAC reviews each request, soliciting input from interested
parties, and provides a recommendation to d1e US State Department. 5
Since the US had long been one of d1e world's major markets for Chinese antiqui­
ties, d1e Chinese government availed itself of the CPIA process in 2004, submitting
a request to ban ilie import into the United States of a velY broad range of cultural
objects of metal, ceramic, stone, wood, textile, and lacquer made before 1911
(Request of d1e PRC 2004).
Over d1e next several years, deliberations, hearings, and a contentious debate
ensued as ilie CPAC heard from the various interest groups that supported or
opposed the proposed embargo. Archaeologists, aliliough walY of ilie sweeping
24 ROBERT E. MUROWCHICK
breadth of the original Chinese proposal, were generally supportive of some form of
embargo as a first step toward reducing the flow of antiquities (at least to the US)
that was helping to drive the looting of sites in China.
Opposing the proposal, art dealers complained that they would be left out of a
lucrative market in which their colleagues in most other countries - and in China -
could still engage, and collectors railed at government interference in the art trade
(for some specific arguments,see Fitz Gibbon et al. 2005; Hawkins and Fitz Gibbon
2005; Kaufman 2005; Kennedy 2005a, 2005b; Kahn 2006), complaining that the
United States was being asked to protect China's heritage while in their opinion
China was not doing all that it could to enforce its own laws.
Art museums also opposed the proposed import embargo, complaining that it
would hinder their ability to build up their collections and develop educational pro­
grams, while non-US museums would be under no such constraints. Interestingly,
this is the same complaint that was raised by museums a century earlier, in response
to the Asiatic Institute's efforts to curtail the destruction and mutilation of historic
sites in China "for the sake of such fragments as could be carried away and sold."
The Asiatic Institute had asked the American Association of Museums to join others
to take measures to stop these acts of vandalism and theft, and also to sign a pledge
that they would not take advantage of these acts by talting into their museums
objects that resulted from the plunder. In protest, Benjamin Ives Gilman, secretary
of Boston's Museum of Fine Arts and president of the American Association of
Museums, stated:
It does not seem practicable at this time for individual museums to enter into any such
agreement. One museum might refuse to buy any further objects of that kind from
China, and all the rest of the museums might continue to do so . The result would be
that the spoliation and destruction would go on and the one museum would be left out
of the accumulations . (Rea 1 9 1 4 : 22-2 3 )
After much debate, expert testimony, public and private discussions, and lobbying,
a significantly modified version of China's original request was finally approved,
and tlle United States entered into an MOU with China on January 14,2009.This
agreement put into place import restrictions covering a range of Chinese archaeologi­
cal and other cultural materials from the Paleolithic period through the end of the
Tang m dynasty (AD 907), as well as monumental sculpture and wall art at least 250
years old (US State Department 2009), to be enforced by US Customs. Exceptions
would be made if evidence were to prove an object'S lawful export from China, or
prove its export from China ten or more years prior to its date of entry into the US.
In addition to placing a ban on illegally exported antiquities,the MOU also obligates
both sides to establish closer collaboration in the promotion of international cultural
and scientific exchanges utilizing archaeological materials, and to facilitate long-term
loans of Chinese archaeological objects to American museums. As this revised agree­
ment covers the archaeological cultures most seriously affected by the looting problem
while not extending so far as to include most of tlle materials covered in the trade
of more recent "antiques," many in tlle archaeological community view tlle agree­
ment with general satisfaction (Kaufman 2009; Kennedy 2009),recognizing,however,
tllat it is only one step in addressing what is a very complicated international problem.
PROBLEMS AND PROGRESS IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT IN CHINA
25
Otller forms of international collaboration are also underway.During 2009 and
2010,the Paris and Beijing offices of the International Council of Museums (ICOM)
. organized an international team of art historians,archaeologists,and Chinese cultural
heritage administrators to prepare tlle Red List of Chinese Cultural Objects at Risk.
With funding support from tlle US State Department and otller international agen­
cies, the Red List program is an ICOM initiative to publish and widely distribute
booldets for each country or region in the world tlut has a serious problem with
archaeological looting. The Red Lists serve as a tool to illustrate and describe the
most commonly looted types of objects that are prohibited for export and sale, pro­
vides relevant national and international legislation under which the objects are
protected, and gives contact information for agencies in that country that investigate
the illicit antiquities trade.To date,Red Lists have been completed for Africa,Central
America, Iraq, Afghanistan, Colombia, Peru, and Cambodia. The China Red List,
published in Chinese as Zhongg�to Binwei Wenwu Hongse Mulu ( � g) �J!:fl2;}Cltll �1 �
§ 3'F: ) , and in English,6 French, and German, was presented with great fanfare at the
Shanghai World Expo and triennial ICOM world conference in November 2010
(Zhang 2010),and is being distributed worldwide to customs and other law enforce­
ment agencies, tourism offices,museums,dealers,professional societies, and schools,
to publicize the endangered nature of China's antiquities.
OTHER THREATS TO CHINA'S HERITAGE
While the international antiquities market in the past has been the major driver of
the trade in Chinese antiquities and in the looting of sites to provide those antiqui­
ties, during the past two decades China's burgeoning economy has driven large- scale
construction and infrastructure development projects that present a major new threat
to the protection of China's heritage, particularly in and around its cities. China's
State Administration of Cultural Heritage is currently overseeing a national survey of
cultural heritage sites across China, a task attempted previously in 1956 (recording
some eight thousand sites) and in the early 1980s (recording more than 100,000
sites,many of which are included in the multi-volume Atlas ofChina)s Cultural Relics
( � g) :)(4mtili OO � ) , published by SACH since 1989. Approximately 775,000 sites
have been examined so far in the present survey, undertaken at a reported cost of
some one billion yuan, or about $150 million. One surprising result of this compre­
hensive survey has been the revelation of the scale of the recent damage to cultural
sites: Dr Shan Jixiang Jf!.'*fl�, former director of SACH, has noted with alarm that
nearly 31,000 sites recorded in the 1982 survey have already disappeared due to
large-scale construction (Branigan 2009).
Beijing can be taken as one example to illustrate the problem, although the same
situation is occurring in dozens - and even hundreds - of other Chinese cities.
Destruction wrought in the early 1950s by efforts to modernize Beijing and facilitate
road construction resulted in the razing of nearly all of Beijing's magnificent ancient
brick-faced rammed-earth city walls and gates, as well as vast neighborhoods of tra­
ditional hutong tJl II'U residential streets and alleys, siheyuan jZgiS-ll5t courtyard houses,
Ming and Qing dynasty princely mansions, and some two thousand temples (Yang
2004; Jacobs 2010). More recently, increased market pressures for urban housing

26 ROBERT E. M U ROWCHICK
and commercial real estate, as well as the multibillion-dollar construction projects for
training facilities, stadiums, and housing related to the 2008 Summer Olympics,
dramatically accelerated the disappearance of many traditional cultural features that
had long defined the city. SACH's Shan Jixiang has recently lamented the ravenous
rate at which traditional architecture and historic sites are being destroyed in Beijing
and elsewhere in the face of tllis new development, witll some 1,100 acres of tradi­
tional architecture being demolished just since 1 990 (Branigan 2010). In an effort
to try to protect what is left by increasing public awareness and participation in pres­
ervation efforts, a number of nongovernmental preservation societies have emerged
in Beijing, including Friends of Old Beijing, launched in 2006 by the Beijing Cultural
Heritage Protection Center ( � t*)(1tJ!r=f�HfH:p JL\ ) ? Other major construction
projects in China have also obliterated or damaged archaeological and historic sites
on a grand scale. The massive Three Gorges Dam Project on tlle centTal Yangzi river
has had a dramatic impact along a 600 km stretch between Chongqing and western
Hubei province. Designed to produce hydroelectric power, improve river navigation,
and prevent disastrous floods along the densely populated central and lower Yangzi,
this highly controversial dam resulted in the creation of a reservoir upstream from
the dam that has submerged some 245 square miles (635 sq km), with a reservoir
level some 1 1 0 m higher than tlle original river level, requiring the relocation of 1 . 3
million local residents who had lived in cities and towns along tlle river (Dai 1 998;
Chetham 2002). Teams of Chinese archaeologists brought in from all over the
country undertook major archaeological surveys and salvage excavations in the huge
affected area prior to construction, and several historic structures were moved and
rebuilt on higher ground. The results of tllese excavation and protection projects
have been published in dozens of volumes (e.g., Hubei and Hubei 2003, among
many others). However, in spite of these considerable efforts, many archaeological
sites, bOtll 1mown and not yet discovered, now lie under water (Childs-Johnson and
Sullivan 1996; Doar 2005b). Other projects on a similarly massive scale, from dozens
of new high-speed bullet train lines and expressways to the South-to-North Water
Diversion Project (WIT7Jdti)aJItl£ ) (Hubei 2007; Wong 2011), present new chal­
lenges as China finds a way to balance its economic and development needs with its
growing recognition of the national and international importance of protecting
its cultural heritage for the future.
In addition to infrastructure development, China's surging economic engine during
tlle past two decades has brought new wealtll to China's upper and middle classes.
Many among China's nouveau 1'iche are now collecting antiquities for a variety of
reasons - as art, as an investment, and as an indicator of social status and pride in China's
past. This is a huge and potent new force that has dramatically increased domestic
demand, driving up prices as well as profitability for those who supply the antiquities.
It has been reported that in 2006 there were some 70 million antique collectors in
China (Zhonghua Qiangjiu 2006), with estimates of 90 million by 201 0. The immense
popularity of magazines such as Shoucangjia (Collecto1', 4:9:Jfit�<:), guidebooks for
appraising and pricing antiquities, and international auction catalogues (which can now
be found in even the most remote rural enclaves) underscores the scale of new interest
in China's antiquities and awareness of their soaring value in tlle market.
More than fifty Chinese television programs, tlle first of which appeared in 200 1 ,
provide expert autllentication and valuation o f antiquities brought t o the studio by
PROBLEMS AND PROGRESS IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT IN CHINA 27
the audience members (these shows are comparable to the Antiques Roadshow in the
United States and Britain). The most popular Chinese program, Xun Bao,s �'i:,
. claims that 27 million viewers watch each weeldy episode (The Independent 2010).
Another popular show adds considerable drama and publicizes the scourge of fakes
in tlle market: on the weeldy Tianxia Shoucang ( World Collector, XT4:9:Jfit), an audi­
ence member provides an object for appraisal by a bank of experts before a large
studio audience anxious for action. The experts weigh in, discussing the merits of
the piece and theiT opinion of its authenticity and value. If tlle experts deem it to be
falee, a large golden hubaochui ? 'i:M ("mallet to protect the treasures"), is brought
out from behind a gauze curtain by a hostess - to great anticipation by the audience !
- and tlle object is immediately smashed to pieces by the host, actor Wang Gang
£IXJIJ (well 1mown for his many TV drama roles as a corrupt Qing dynasty official).
The frenzy to buy China's past occasionally reaches absurd levels. In July 20 l l , a
coal tycoon from Shanxi was among tourists visiting the tomb of Qing emperor
Kangxi �J¥� (r.1661-1 722) in Hebei province. Told by the staff at the site tlut tlle
tomb was closed for conservation, the man became irate and offered to buy the site
on the spot for 100 million yuan ($ 1 5.4 million). When the guide told him this was
impossible, tlle man reportedly threw a stack of 10,000 yuan notes at him in anger
(Want China Times 2011).
The incredible surge in tlle domestic collecting of antiquities has been further
facilitated by the rise of auction houses in China since 1991. Those specializing in
fine art and antiquities include China Guardian Auctions Company ( r:p 00 :m:i,m OO �.iF
1B ����0 PJ ) , established in 1993 and headed up by Ms Wang Yannan £JliWIT
(daughter of former Chinese premier Zhao Ziyang iM.� �B ) , and Beijing Hanhai
Auction Company ( � t*�1i!t1B����0 PJ ) , as well as Shanghai Guotai Auction
Company ( ...t 1i!t 00 �jHB�1'J����1:I:0PJ ), Shanghai International Commodity
Auction Company (...t ¥fjJ 00 �.iF fllf &b 1B �� ��0 PJ ), and Shanghai New Century Auction
( ...t 1i!tJfJTttjjc 1B�1'J� ��0PJ ) , among others. Annual sales are staggering, with
records being set each year: in 2009, for example, China Guardian reported sales of
$397 million for all categories of artwork, a 50 percent increase over 2008 (Spaulding
2010).
The collecting of antiquities has increasingly taken on political and nationalistic
overtones. As the debate continues concerning tlle role of archaeologists or antiqui­
ties collectors in the preservation of China's past, a new focus has emerged in China
that underscores the powerful symbolic value that artifacts can have in defining a
nation or culture and its place in tlle world power structure. As has been noted since
at least the mid-19th century, the loss of China's "national treasures" to rich and
powerful foreign collectors and museums has long symbolized its humiliation at tlle
hands of foreigners and its inability to protect its own culture. This sensitivity is
apparent in many of China's antiquities laws tlut specifically forbade selling cultural
relics to foreigners. As 2 1 st-century China rises in economic, military, and political
stature, an increasingly vehement campaign has evolved over tlle past two decades to
try to recover what many in China consider stolen national treasures in foreign
collections.
Lilee other counu'ies (most notably, Italy and Egypt) that are actively seeking out
"lost treasures" in foreign museums or private collections and then undertaking
efforts to get them returned, China's cultural heritage institutions as 'Nell as private
28 ROBERT E. MUROWCHICK
foundations (such as the China Foundation for the Development of Folldore Culture,
r:p �U4})({tjtM��4}) are currently compiling data about who holds what. One
official Chinese delegation made a two-week tour of American museums in the fall
of 2009, for example, to survey objects tllat might originally have come from China's
imperial collections (Jacobs 2009).When "lost" treasures on the market are identified
but negotiations to get them returned fail, it is increasingly common for Chinese
collectors or corporations to purchase the objects and tllen return them to China
(Meyer and Pappas 2000). In his interesting assessment of this trend, archaeologist
Magnus Fiskesjo (20 1 0: 225) calls these buyers "patriotic collectors" - those who
buy back China's antiquities that have been "lost abroad" to demonstrate their patri­
otism and loyalty to the current Chinese state.
The increasing politicization of collecting and calls for repatriation for treasures
talcen from China can be amply illustrated by the ongoing sharp debate surrounding
objects looted from the Yuanmingyuan IFiI S.J3IZ9, or Old Summer Palace, some 1 50
years ago that have been offered on the international auction market during the last
decade. The Yuanmingyuan palace and grounds in Beijing were built and expanded
by a succession of 1 8th-centmy Chinese emperors, particularly Emperor Qianlong
ljit�i ( 1 736-1 795), about five miles northwest of the Forbidden City, as least partially
based on designs by the Italian Jesuit artist Giuseppe Castiglione. In late September
1 860, during the Second Opium War, English and French soldiers who had sought
negotiations for a truce with the Chinese were instead captured, tortured, and exe­
cuted, at least some of which occurred in the Yuanmingyuan palace. In response, tile
B ritish High Commissioner to China, Lord Elgin, ordered that the Summer Palace
be looted and then burned, a task undertaken by thousands of soldiers. "I came to
the conclusion," Elgin would report in his account of the war:
that the destruction of the Yuen-Ming-Yuen was the least objectionable of the several
courses open to me . . . I had reason, moreover, to believe that it was an act which was
calculated to produce a greater effect on China, and on the Emperor, than persons who
look on from a distance might suppose. It was the Emperor's favourite residence, and
its destruction could not fail to be a blow to his pride as well as to his feelings . . . . (The
Times 1 860: 5 )
Among the tens of thousands o f bronze, gold, silver, enamel, jade, and ceramic
objects looted that day were 12 large bronze zodiac animal heads that had adorned
Castiglione's Haiyantang clepsydra �.ij�1it, or water clock fountain.These heads were
dispersed in the chaos and aftermath of tile looting, their locations mostly forgotten
during the ensuing centmy. In the spring of 2000, a number of looted objects from
the Yuanmingyuan resurfaced in major auctions in Hong Kong by Christie's and
Sotlleby's of imperial objects claimed to have come from the Summer Palace. Among
the most contentious objects in tllese auctions were tllree of the bronze zodiac heads
from tlle Haiyantang fountain, which had sold uneventfully a decade earlier in New
York and London but now incited vehement protests and nationalistic passions on
Chinese soil in Hong Kong.
Unable to stop tlleir sale, tlle Chinese government instead became directly
involved in their purchase through tile China Poly Group, or Baoli r:p ffiI {*ifU � � 0 P1 ,9
until 1 999 the commercial arm of tlle People's Liberation Army. Headed up by He
Ping {i1J:>f, the son-in-law of Deng Xiaoping xrS/J\:>f (the most powerful leader in
PROBLEMS AND PROGRESS IN ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT IN CHINA
29
post-Mao Zedong China from the 1 970s tllrough the 1 990s), Baoli was founded
in 1 984 and became a major international suppiier of surplus arms and other mili­
tary hardware. More recently, it has become one of China's most powerful real­
estate developers in Beijing and other cities. Its B eijing office complex, hotel, and
performance hall includes tlle lavish Baoli Art Museum d*ifUZ:;*i:f.4mig ) , which
focuses on the collection and display of ancient Chinese bronzes and early B uddhist
statuary acquired on tlle international market as an effort to "repatriate" national
treas ures.
At the contentious auction of Yuanmingyuan treasures in Hong Kong in 2000,
Baoli ended up successfully bidding on the bronze ox, tiger, and monkey heads,
paying a total of nearly $4 million. Two additional Yuanmingyuan bronze zodiac
heads came onto the market in 2003 and 2007 and were purchased by Macao
casino magnate Stanley Ho (He Hongshen {i1J��), who stated "Witll tllis move,
I hope to encourage more people to take part in preserving Chinese artifacts and
to promote patriotism and nationalism . . . The price is a bit high . .. but the relic
is now returned to its owner. I'm giving it back to tlle cm.mtlY, so it's OK" (Lee
2007). Two additional heads, most recently in the collection of tlle late designer
Yves Saint-Laurent, came up for auction at Christie's on February 25, 2009, a sale
tllat was vehemently protested by the Chinese government. The sale was derailed
when the winning bidder, a Chinese man with ties to tlle China National Treasures
Fund, refused to pay.
The B aoli's bronze heads are nmv the focal point of a Yuanmingyuan exhibition
at the Baoli Museum in Beijing that highlights the history of foreign looting in
China and the importance of repatriating tlle country's lost treasures. The exhibit
on the missing bronze heads from tlle Yuanmingyuan - most of that site has been
left in its looted state as a constant reminder of the devastation China has suffered
at tlle hands of foreign armies - has effectively fanned nationalistic outrage among
Chinese viewers, many of whom visit tlle museum's gift shop to purchase butane
torches attached to a cardboard poster showing tlle Yuanmingyuan in flames (per­
sonal visit, Feb. 2010).
CONCLUSIONS
Chinese archaeology has made incredible strides over the
past centmy, requiring that
we constantly reassess our understanding of tlle develop
ment of early cultures, tlleir
relationships with tlleir neighbors, and the connections
between past and present.
The astonishing late Neolithic burials of the Liangzh
u �m culture (see Chapter 28)
in the lower Yangzi region, the magnificence of the
bronzes and lacquers from the
Warring States era (475-221 BC) tomb of Marquis Yi
of Zeng � 1�z:, in Hubei
province, and the startling bronze heads from Sanxing
dui = JIl.:J.t (see Chapter 8)
near Chengdu JJ.l(;t�, Sichuan, are but the tip of the iceberg
in reminding us of how
much we still do not know about China's past.The
archaeological and historical
heritage of China today, however, is facing many threats,
most of which are not new,
but are growing on a scale not previously seen. Econom
ic development is outpacing
China's ability to legislate and carry out protective measure
s for cultural sites, bOtll
tllose that are known, and those that have not yet
been discovered. Escalating interest

30 ROBERT E. MUROWCHICK
.
in collecting Chinese antiquities and antiques, both internationally and, increasingly,
within China itself, are creating a self-feeding system whereby surging demand creates
higher prices which spurs more looting to supply even more demand. Current efforts
at repatriation, fanned by potentially explosive nationalistic rhetoric, place more
importance on the physical possession of objects while doing little to solve the
problem of site destruction - and tlle irreparable loss of archaeological information
- that brought those objects into tlle market in the first place.
Protective legislation put in place over tlle past century has produced some success,
but in many cases there is insufficient enforcement of tlle laws, or existing enforce­
ment efforts have been compromised by corruption brought on by tlle phenomenal
amounts of money now involved in tlle trade. New international agreements continue
to tJ.1' to deal witll issues of protection, export, and ownership, and tlle expansion at
Chinese and foreign universities of training programs in archaeological heritage man­
agement promises to increase tlle ranks of persOlUlel qualified to address tllese issues
in the future. Archaeologists tllemselves - some of whom now serve as appraisers for
museums and collectors - must get more personally involved in combating the
destJ.·uction in tlle field, in the marketplace, and in legislative and enforcement efforts.
More broadly, we must hope that tlle excitement of new archaeological finds and
new educational outreach efforts will inspire a much larger public audience to rec­
ognize and appreciate tlle importance of China's past, an.d of their participation in
its protection and preservation. Unless tlle relentless destruction of archaeological
sites and rampant looting of irreplaceable antiquities is dealt Witll soon on the local,
national, and international level, the prospects of China's archaeological heritage in
the 21st century and beyond will continue to be hindered by tllOse same forces of
vandalism and theft described by Frederick McCormick and his concerned colleagues
more tllan a centul1' ago.
NOTES
of
1 The Xiangtangshan Caves Project is a collaborative multi-year project of the University
Gallery, and others.
Chicago, Peking University, the University of Pennsylvania, the Freer
See the project website: http:// xts.uchica go.edu/, accessed Sep. 2 1 , 2 0 1 2 .
2 Zhongyang Wenhuabu Wenwuju ( r:p :!:R:)C1.t3t�)C!Jm�), later to be named Guojia
Wemvuju
ation for Cultural Heritage,
( �*)c!Jm� ), usually translated today as the State Administr
or SACH.
of the
3 Law of the People's Republic of China on Protection of Cululral Relics (Ol:der
2002 . At http://en glish.gov. cn/laws/2 00 5 - 1 0/09/
President No. 76), October 28,
contenC75322 .htm, accessed Nov. 1 3, 20 1 2 .
4 Wenwu Zangpin Dingji Biaozhun , at www.gov.cn/banshi/2005 -08/2 1 /contenC25093.
ht111, accessed Sep. 2 1 , 2 0 1 2 .
erit­
5 Details of the CPlA and CPAC can be found online at http://exchanges.st ate.gov/h
tee.html, accessed Sep. 24, 2 0 1 2 .
age/culprop/commit
Nov. 1 3,
6 At www.poly .com .cn/en/tabid/426/language/zh-CN/D efault.aspx , accessed
2012.
7 Online at www. bjchp.org/, accessed Nov. 1 3, 2 0 1 2 .
8 "Searching for Treasure"; see http:// cctv.cntv. cn/lm/xunbao/index.shtml.
9 Zhongguo Baoli Jituan Gongsi, at www.poly.com.cn/en/tabid/426/language/zh-CN/
Default.aspx, accessed Nov. 1 3 , 20 1 2 .
PROB LEMS AND PROGRESS I N ARCHAEOLOGICAL HEIUTAGE MANAGEMENT I N CHINA 31
REFERENCES
Abrams, Jim. 1987. Archaeological Treas�wes Often Stolen in China. Associated Press newswire,
Sept. 6, 1 987.
Agnew, Neville, and Martha Demas. 2002. Principles fOI' the ConserlJation of Hel'itage Sites in
China. Los Angeles: Getty Conservation Institute.
Andersson, Johan Gunnar. 1934. Childl'en ofthe Yellow Eal'th. Cambridge: MIT Press (reprint
1 973).
Andrews, Roy Chapman. 1 9 1 8 . China's Ancient Monuments. A mel'ican Muse�tm J()�wnal
1 8(4): 2 5 1 -262.
Balachandran, Sanchita. 2007. Object Lessons: The Politics of Preservation and Museum
Building in western China in the Early Twentieth Century. lntemationalJoul'nal ofC�tlt�t1'al
Property 14: 1-32 .
Beech, Hannah, ed. 2003. Stealing Beauty: Inside the Illicit Art Trade that Is Wrecking Asia's
Cultural Heritage . Time Magazine, Oct. 20 (Asia edition ), Oct. 27 (US edition).
Bishop, Carl Whiting. 1 9 1 8 . The Horses of T'ang T'ai-tsung. Muse�tm Joumal, University of
Pennsylvania 9: 244-272.
Branigan, Tania. 2009. China Loses Thousands of Historic Sites. The Guardian, Dec. 14,
2009. At www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/dec/14/china-historic-sites-survey, accessed
Sep. 2 1 , 2 0 1 2
- 2 0 1 0 . China Heritage Chief Says Building Boom i s Destroying Country's Heritage. The
G�tal'dian, Aug. 4, 2 0 1 0 . At Ww\v .guardian.co. uk/world/20 1 0/aug/04/china-culture_
cities-heritage, accessed Sep. 20, 2 0 1 2 .
Chang, Kwang-chih. 1 98 1 . Archaeology and Chinese Historiography. World Archaeology 1 3 :
1 56-1 69 .
Chetham, Deirdre. 2002. Before the Deluge: The Vanishing World ofthe Yangtze)s Three Gorges.
New York: Pal grave Macmillan.
Childs-Johnson, Elizabeth, and Lawrence R. Sullivan. 1 996. The Three Gorges Dam and the
Fate of China's Southern Heritage. Orientations 27(7): 5 5-6 1 .
Cohen, Warren 1 . 1 992 . East Asian A I"t and A merican Culture: A Study in Intemational
Relations. New York: Columbia University Press.
Conn, Steven. 2000. Where is East? Asian Objects in American Museums, from Nathan Dunn
to Charles Freer. Wintel'th�tl' POI,tfolio 3 5 : 1 57-1 73 .
Dai, Qing. 1998. The R ivel' Dmgon has Come! Armonk, NY: M , E . Sharpe,
Doar, Bruce. 1 999. Off With Their Heads: The Antiquities Market is Destroying China's
Buddhist StaUlary. Archaeology, Oct. 28, 1 999, At www.archaeology.org/online/feaulres/
arhats/, accessed Nov. 1 3, 2 0 1 2 .
-2005a. The Transition From Palace to Museum: The Palace Museum's PrehistOlY and Repub­
lican Years . China Heritage Newslettel' 4. At www.chinaheritagequarterly.org/features.php?
searchterm=004_palacemuseumprehistOly.inc&issue=004, accessed Sep. 20, 2 0 1 2 .
-2005b, Taming the Floodwaters: The High Heritage Price o f Massive Hydraulic Projects.
China Heritage Newsletter 1 : 1-7.
Dutra, Michael L. 2004. Sir, How Much Is That Ming Vase in the Window? : Protecting
Cultural Relics in the People's Republic of China. Asian-Pacific Law and Policy Jo�trnaI 5 :
62-1 00.
Falkenhausen, Lothar von. 1 99 3 . On the Historiographical Orientation of Chinese Archaeol­
ogy. Antiquity 67: 839-849.
Fiskesjo, Magnus. 20 1 0. Politics of Cultural Heritage. In Reclaiming Chinese Society: The New
Social Activism, ed. Youtien Hsing and Ching Kwan Lee: 225-245 . London and New York:
Routledge.
Fitz Gibbon, Kate, James Cuno, and Daniel Shapiro. 200 5 . Protection or Restriction: Amer­
ica's Role in Safeguarding China's Cultural Property. Orientations 36: 70-82.
32 ROBERT E. MUROWCHICK
Goodrich, L. Carrington. 1 957. Archaeology in China: The First Decades. Jo�t1'nal of Asian '
Studies 1 7( 1 ) : 5-1 5 .
Harrington, Spencer P.M. 1 99 8 . Plundering the Three Gorges. Archaeology, May 1 4 . At www.
archaeology.org/online/news/china.html, accessed Sep. 20, 2 0 1 2 .
Hawkins, Ashton, and Kate Fitz Gibbon. 200 5 . In the Fray: This Property Claim Should Be
Condemned. Wall Street Jo�t1'nal, Mar. 29: D6.
Howard, Angela F . 200 1 . Reconstructing the Original Location of a Group of Sculpmres in
the University of Pennsylvania Museum. Orientations 32(2): 32-39.
Hubei and Hubei, eds [ Y8!l�ti!'r )C!Jm$�'lfr.lfLIi3.l , Y8!l�t1�r=iIJ�I�1i!� I�JiiJ � ] . 2003. 2003
=iIJ�)c!Jm1,'iljp.!=j���1iJf ��*1i)f"�'j"4l:rt;)C� ( Proceedings of the 2003 Conference on
the C�tlt�t1'al Relics Protection and Archaeological Research in the Three G01;ges) . Beijing:
Kexue.
Hubei, ed. [ Y8!l�ti!'J')c!JmfiiJ � ] . 2007. Y8!l�ti!'J'1tI7.k�ti,"JI�1i!:m:� ��£rJ\l ( Important Archaeo­
logical Discoveries hom the South to North Wate1' Diversion P1'oJect in Hubei). Beijing:
Wenwu.
The Independent. 2 0 1 0 . China's Antique Lovers Turn to TV for Education. The Independent,
Apr. 1 . At vvww . independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/chinarsquos-antique-lovers-turn­
to-tv-for-education- 1 932946.html, accessed Sep. 2 1 , 20 1 2 .
Jacobs, Andrew. 2009. Uneasy Engagement: China Hunts for Art Treasures i n US Museums.
NeJV York Times, Dec. 1 7 .
- 2 0 1 0 . Bulldozers Meet Historic Chinese Neighborhood. NeJV Y01'k Times, Ju.!. 20.
Kal1l1, Jeremy. 2006. Chinese Quandary: Art or Plunder? New Yode Times, Oct. 1 8 .
Kaufman, Jason Edward. 2005. US Considers Chinese Request for Import Restrictions. A rt
NeJVspaper, Jan. 2 .
-2009 . U S Cracks Down o n Chinese Antiquities. Sweeping Regulations Cover Almost All
Pieces up to the End of the Tang Dynasty. A,·t Newspaper, Jan. 2.
Kennedy, Randy. 2005a. China's Request for Art-Import Ban Stirs Debate. New Y01'/e Times,
Apr. 1 : 3 1 .
-2005b. US Considers Limiting Imports of Chinese Art. International Herald Tribune, Apr.
2: 1 .
-2009. Pact on Chinese Treasures Wins Praise. New York Times, Jan. 1 7 : C 1 .
Kunz, George. 1 9 1 5 . I n China - a Memorial Against Vandalism. Twentieth Annual Report
of the American Scenic and Historic Preservation Society. Documents of the Assembly of the
State of New Y01'/e 2 1 (6 5 ) : 3 3 1-3 3 5 .
Lau, Timothy. 2 0 1 1 . The Grading o f Culmral Relics in Chinese Law. International Journal
of Cult�tral hope1'ty 1 8 : 1 -3 5 .
Lee, Min. 2007. Stanley Ho Pays $8.9 Mil. for Horse Head Stolen b y French. Associated
Press story, Sept. 2 1 . At http://goldsea.com/Asiagate/709/2 1 horse .html, accessed Sep.
2 1 , 20 1 2 .
Levine, Jane A. 2002. Returning Stolen Cultural Property: Tomb o f Wang Chuzi Marble Wall
Relief. Cult�t1'al Resource Management 25(2): 1 7-1 8 .
Li, Chi * m= . 1 977. Anyang. Seattle: University o f Washington Press.
Ma, Lie, and Lin, Shujuan. 2 0 1 0 . Tang Dynasty Sarcophagus Brought Back Home. China
Daily, Jun. 1 8 , 2 0 1 0 . At www .chinadaily.com.cn/china/2 0 1 0-06/1 8/contenc9986469.
htm, accessed Sep. 2 1 , 2 0 1 2 .
McCormick, Frederick. 1 9 1 1 . Vandalism i n China. Bulletin of the A me1"ican Geog1'aphical
Society 43: 56-57.
- 1 9 1 4a. Vandals in China. Western Collectors Continue to Plunder Her Art Objects. New
YOdl Times, Jul. 7, 1 9 14.
- 1 914b. The Desecration of Chinese Monuments. Journal of the A me1'ican Asiatic Associa­
tion 1 4( 3 ) : 78-80.
Meyer, Mahlon, and Leslie Pappas. 2000. Relics of Pride: The Chinese Want Their Heritage
Back Now. If Threats Fail, They Try Cash. NeWSllJeell International, May 1 5 .
PROBLEMS AND PROGRESS I N ARCHAEOLOGICAL HERITAGE MANAGEMENT I N CHINA 33
Ministly of Culture. 2006-. )C¥J.JiJl�"'I1JEm.f.iFl'i OO {1ti ( Illustmted Ran/ling Standardsfor Imp01'­
tant Chtnese Cultural Relics) . Beijing: Wenwu.
Murowchick, Robert E. 1 997. The State of Sino-Foreign Collaborative Archaeology in China.
01'ientations 1 8( 6 ) : 28-3 3 .
Murphy, J. David. 1 994. A n Al1l10tated Chronological Index o f People's Republic o f China
Statutory and Other Materials Relating to Cultural Property. International Journal of Cul­
tU1'al Prope1'ty 3( 1 ) : 1 59-167.
- 1 995 .. Plunder a n d PresenJation: Cultural Property LaJV a n d Practice in the People's Republic
of Chtna. Hong Kong: Oxford University Press.
Osborne, Hel1lY Fairfield . 1 9 14. Preservation of the National Monuments of China. Science,
n.s. 39( 1 0 1 5 ) : 863-864.
PRC Law. 2002 . Law of the PeopleJs Republic of China on Protection of Cultural Relics (Order
of the Pwident No. 76), Oct. 2 8 . At http://english.gov.cn/laws/2005 - 1 0/09/
content_75 322 .htm, accessed Sep. 2 1 , 2 0 1 2 .
PRC State Bureau o f Cultural Relics. 1 994. The Laws of the PeopleJs Republic of China on the
P1'otecttOn of Cultural Relics. Beijing: Forbidden City Publishing House.
Rea, Paul M . , ed. 1 9 1 4 . Records of tlle Ninth Al1l1ual Meeting held in Milwaukee and
Chicago, Proceedings of the American Association of M�tseums, Vol. 8, May 1 9-2 1 . Charles­
ton, Sc.
Request of the PRC. 2004. Public Summary Request of the People's Republic of China to
the Government of the United States of Alllerica under Al·ticle 9 of the 1 970 UNESCO
Convention. At http://exchanges.state.gov/heritage/culprop/chfact.html, accessed Nov.
1 3, 20 1 2 .
Rudolph, Richard C. 1 9 6 3 . PreliminalY Notes o n Sung Archaeology. Journal ofAsian Studies
22(2 ): 1 69-1 77.
SACH. 1 989. 9=t ® )C!jo/J ±tl!. OO � (Atlas ofChinaJs Cult�t1'al Relics) . Beijing: State Administt'ation
for Cultural Heritage.
Schmalzer, Sigrid. 2008 . The PeopleJs Pelling Man: Popular Science and Human Identity in
TllJentteth Century China. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Science News-Letter. 1 929. Chinese Society Stops Exploration. Science NCJvs-Lette1' 1 6(443 ):
211. '
Spaulding, David. 2 0 1 0 . Beijing Auction House Has Record Year. A R Tlnfo (international
edmon), Feb. 1 2 . At www.artinfo.com/news/stOly/33900/beijing-auction-house -has_
record-year, accessed Sep. 2 1 , 20 1 2 .
The Times. 1 860. The Peace Witll China. The Times ( London), Dec. 29: 5 .
US State Department. 2009. US Dept. o f Homeland Security, US Customs and Border Pro­
tection, and Department of the TreaslllY. Import Restrictions Imposed on Certain Al'chaeo­
logical Material from China. Fede1'al Register 74( 1 1 ): 2838-2843 .
Want China Times. 2 0 1 1 . Tycoon Furious After Offer To Buy Emperor's Tomb Rejected.
Staff Report, Jul. 20. At www.wantchinatime s.com/news-subclass -cnt.aspx?id=20 1 1 07200
00030&cid=1 1 03 , accessed Sep. 2 1 , 2 0 1 2 .
Wong, Edward. 201 1 . Plan for China's Water Crisis Spurs Concern. New Yorle Times,
Jun. 1 .
Xinhua News Agency. 2003. US Returns Smuggled Terracotta Figures to China. News
Guangdong. At www.newsgd.com/culture/life/200306 1 800 1 2 .htm accessed Sep. 2 1
"
2012.
Yang, Tao fmtt.f. 2004. Morphological Transformation of the Old City of Beijing after 1 949.
Paper presented at the 3rd Great Asian StI'eets Symposium: A Public Forum of Urban
Design. Street Urban Space and Representation, Singapore, 2004. At http://discovery.ucl .
ac.uk/4 1 14/, accessed Sep. 2 1 , 2 0 1 2 .
Zhang, Kun . 2 0 1 0 . Red Flag Is Raised Over Endangered Alltiquities. China Daily Nov. 1 0 .
Zhongl�ua Q�angjiu [ 9=t �ffrJj(jaflE�¥Ii1'�)C !Jm 1f :rm�:� n 2006. ®'i:I�1i!m = lji: B i�- 'i:Z71&
12 f-J 1JJJ§h: The National Treasures Project's Third Trip to Japan in Search Of Treasures
34 ROBERT E. MUROWCHI C K

Starts in Early December. JffE I§ -Z:: # IXXl , Oct. 27, 2006. At w'Nw .artron.net/show_news . .
php?newid=55, accessed Sep. 2 1 , 2 0 1 2 .
Zhou, Xiuqin }1'ij 3% � . 200 1 . Emperor Taizong and His Six Horses. 01'ientations 32( 2 ) :
40-46. The Northeast
Zhuang, Min. 1 9 8 9 . The Administration of China's Archaeological Heritage. In Al'chaeological
Hel"itage Management in the Modem Wo1'ld, ed. Henry Cleere : 1 02-1 0 8 . London: Unwin
Hyman.
 This edition first published 2013
© 2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

Blackwell Publishing was acquired by John Wiley & Sons in February 2007. Blackwell's publishing
program has been merged with Wiley's global Scientific, Technical, and Medical business to form
Wiley-Blackwell.

Reg istered Office

John Wiley & Sons Ltd, The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, P019 8SQ, U K

Editot'ial Offices
350 Main Street, Malden, MA 02148-5020, USA
9600 Garsington Road, Oxford, OX4 2DQ, UK
The Atrium, Southern Gate, Chichester, West Sussex, P019 8SQ, U K

For details of our global editorial offices, for customer services, and for information about how to apply
for permission to reuse the copyright material in this book please see our website at www.wiley.com/
wiley-blackwell.

A Companion
The right of Anne P. Underhill to be identified as the author of the editorial material in this work has
been asserted in accordance with the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system , or

to Chinese
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise, except as permitted by the UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988, without the prior
permission of the publisher.

Archaeology
Wiley also publishes its books in a variety of electronic formats. Some content that appears in print may
not be available in electronic books.

Designations used by companies to distinguish their products are often claimed as trademarks. All brand
names and product names used in this book are trade names, service marks, trademarks or registered
trademarks of their respective owners. The publisher is not associated with any product or vendor

Edited by mentioned in this book. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information
in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold on the understanding that the publisher is not

Anne P . Underhill engaged in rendering professional services. If professional advice or other expert assistance is required,
the services of a competent professional should be sought.

Library of Cong ress Catalog ing -in-Pttblication Data

A companion to Chinese archaeology / edited by Anne P. Underhill.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-4443 -3529-3 ( cloth)
1. China - Antiquities. 2. Excavations (Archaeology) - China. 3 . Antiquities, Prehistoric -
China. I. Underhill, Anne P .
DS715.C557 2013
931-dc23
2012036668

A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library.

Cover images: Top: Ceramic ding tripod excavated from pit H31 at Liangchengzhen, Rizhao city
district, Shandong, China (photo by Anne P. Underhill). Center: Excavation in progress at the
Longshan period settlement of Liangchengzhen in 2001 (photo by Anne P. Underhill). Bottom: Type
Al slate point from trench T007 at Liangchengzhen (photo by Geoffrey Cunnar).
Cover design by Richard Boxall Design Associates.

Set in 10/12.5 pt Galliard by Toppan Best-set Premedia Limited

�WI LEY- BLACKWELL Printed and bound in Singapore by Markono Print Media Pte Ltd

A John Wiley &. Sons, Ltd., Publication

2013