The Rise of Trans-Eurasian Exchange : Re-visiting the Correlation Between Movement of Chinese Millet and Painted Pottery Before the 2nd Millennium B.C.

This book has re-visited two distinctive patterns, namely pottery and millet, the movement of both of which conflict with conventional narratives concerning prehistoric trans-Eurasian exchange. The significance of this lies beyond the simple matter of chronology, but rests on the relationship between the movement of agricultural resources and of other items of material culture. Studies on early west–east interaction have attracted researchers from various disciplines, such as archaeology, history, Asian studies, art history, etc. Pursuing an archaeological approach, the book re-examines two of the earliest evidences of trans-Eurasian cultural exchange. The book is intended for researchers who are interested in prehistory, archaeobotany, pottery studies and comparative studies of early civilizations. Preface Acknowledgements and Dedication Contents 1 Introduction 1.1 Pattern of Pottery Similarity and Andersson’s Hypothesis 1.2 Pattern of Crop Movement 1.3 Top-Down/Bottom Up Debate 1.4 Research Question 1.5 Methodology 1.5.1 Re-examining Pottery Similarity and Pottery Chronology: A Comparative Study of Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture, Anau-Namazga Culture and Yangshao Culture 1.5.2 Re-accessing Identification and Chronology of Millet in Europe 1.6 Outline of the Dissertation References 2 Development of Discourse 2.1 Hyper-Diffusionism 2.2 Eurocentrism and Its Reflections in China 2.3 Unfolding Andersson’s Hypothesis 2.3.1 Western Perspective 2.3.2 Chinese Perspective 2.3.3 Perspective In-Between the West and the East References 3 Comparative Study of Yangshao, Cucuteni-Tripolye and Anau-Namazga Culture 3.1 Introduction 3.2 Yangshao Culture Review 3.2.1 Landscape and Main Sites 3.2.2 History of Discovery and Excavation 3.2.3 Approach to Pottery Typology, Stratigraphic Sequence and Phase 3.2.4 Description of Dwelling Structure and Burials 3.2.5 Overview of Archaeobotanical Records 3.2.6 Pottery Typology and Figurines 3.2.7 Pottery Technology 3.3 Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture Review 3.3.1 Landscape and Main Sites 3.3.2 History of Discovery and Excavation 3.3.3 Approach to Pottery Typology, Stratigraphic Sequence and Phase 3.3.4 Calibration by Subsequent C14 Dating 3.3.5 Description of Settlements and Burials 3.3.6 Overview of Archaeobotanical Records 3.3.7 Pottery Typology and Figurines 3.3.8 Pottery Technology 3.4 Anau-Namazga Culture Review 3.4.1 Landscape and Main Sites 3.4.2 History of Discovery and Excavation 3.4.3 Approach to Pottery Typology, Stratigraphic Sequence and Phase 3.4.4 Calibration by Subsequent C14 Dating 3.4.5 Descriptions of Settlement and Burials 3.4.6 Overview of Archaeobotanical Records 3.4.7 Pottery Typology and Figurines 3.4.8 Pottery Technology 3.5 A Comparative Study of Cucuteni-Tripolye Culture, Anau-Namazga Culture and Yangshao Culture 3.5.1 Chronological Comparison and Radiocarbon Calibrating 3.5.2 History of Discovery and Excavation 3.5.3 Dwellings 3.5.4 Burials 3.5.5 Overview of Archaeobotanical Records 3.5.6 Figurines 3.5.7 Pottery Assemblage 3.5.8 Pottery Technology 3.5.9 Measurement of Pottery Similarity: Taking Pre-columbia Southwest American Pottery as an Outliner 3.5.10 Conclusion References 4 Examination of Pre-2000 BC Millet Evidence Found in Europe 4.1 Re-examination of Pre-2000 BC Charred Millet Findings in Europe 4.1.1 The Database of Pre-2000 BC Charred Millet Findings Within the Context of Pottery in Europe 4.1.2 Identification and AMS Radiocarbon Dating of Charred Millet Grains from Baia-În Muchie Site 4.2 Re-examination of Early Millet Impressions in Europe 4.2.1 History of Grain Impressions Identification 4.2.2 Identification of Panicum miliaceum as a Living Plant, Charred Grain and Impression 4.2.3 Variation of Impression-Casting Methods 4.2.4 Taxonomic Identification Criteria of Millet Impressions: Results from a Simulation Exercise 4.2.5 Review of Early Millet Impressions Records in Europe 4.3 A Case Study of Millet Impressions from Usatovo Culture (3500–2900 BC) 4.3.1 Methodology 4.3.2 Results of Optical Microscopy Examination 4.3.3 Results of SEM Examination of Plasticine Casts of Millet Impressions References 5 Discussion 5.1 How Robust Is the Pattern of Pottery Similarity? 5.1.1 Measurement of Typological and Technological Similarity of Pottery 5.1.2 Painted Potteries Are Locally Sourced: Movement of Physical Goods/Intangible Ideas 5.1.3 Robustness of Pottery Dating and Chronological Compatibility/Incompatibility 5.2 How Robust Are the Early Millet Findings in Europe? 5.2.1 Millet Identification Criteria Re-evaluated 5.2.2 Early Chronology of Millet in Europe Re-examined 5.3 Are the Two Patterns of Pottery and Millet Resonant Across Time and Space: Some Implications References 6 Conclusion, Implications and Future Research 6.1 Conclusion and Implications 6.2 Future Research Appendix A A.1 China Pictorial Magazine (1982, Issue 9, in Romanian Language) with an Introduction of Yangshao Painted Pottery A.2 Romania Pictorial Magazine (1984, Issue 5–6, in Chinese Language) with a Comparative Study of Yangshao Culture and Cucuteni-Tripoye Culture