Abstract
The Neolithic era is the period in the history of mankind that embraces the years from the sixth millennium till the year 1300 B. C. In the history of China, the Neolithic era presents special interests due to the variety of periods it includes and the range of cultures it presents to the world. The middle and late Neolithic periods are of special significance for study as far as the merge of the two periods marked the transition of the Northern Chinese society from the equal community of gatherers and hunters to the stratified phenomenon characterized by social inequality, agricultural progress, and technological advances. The major cultures that developed during the middle and late Neolithic periods made considerable contributions to the agricultural, social, economic, and cultural life of the Northern part of China. The analysis of the historical research data and the information retrieved with the help of archeological research allows tracing the development and comparing the main features of the middle and late Neolithic periods in Northern China.
Introduction
The history of China is an interesting subject of study as the whole variety of developmental periods, historical trends, social, economical, and religious events characterizes its progress. The scholars refer to the period between the sixth millennium and the year 1300 B. C. as the Neolithic era (Lee et al. 2007), and in the Chinese history this period plays a rather significant role. Traditionally divided into three main stages, i. e. the early, middle, and late Neolithic periods (Lee et al. 2007), the Neolithic era presents a wide range of examples of the agricultural, social, economic, and cultural aspects of life in China. Archeology provides the richest base of materials that serve as evidence for the scholarly research of the development of the Chinese nation in the Neolithic era. The current research paper focuses on the comparative analysis of the agricultural, social, economic, and cultural aspects of the history of the Northern Chinese during the middle and late stages of the Neolithic era (Barton et al. 2009). The major goal of this paper is to consider the middle and late Neolithic times in the Northern China and examine the similar and different points observed between the two periods.
Agriculture and Domesticates
According to Lee et al. (2007: 1087), agricultural remains present the richest material for archeologists to judge about the levels of the societal development of various cultures that existed and disappeared in Northern China during the middle and late Neolithic period. These agricultural remains include the samples of plants observed at the archeological sites in the Northern China as well as the tools and instruments that the people of that period used to cultivate their crops and domesticate some of the animals during the middle Neolithic period, defined by Reuterdahl (2007) as the period between 5000 – 3000 B. C., and the later Neolithic period, i. e. the time between 3000 and 2000 B. C (Reuterdahl, 2007). As far as there are over 3,000 Neolithic sites for archeological work currently observed in the Northern China (Reuterdahl, 2007), the information that agricultural pieces present is actually rich and very useful; it includes the plant samples, human and animal bones, pottery samples, and labor instruments used either in middle or late Neolithic period.
Thus, in the middle Neolithic period the major plant species cultivated in the Northern China included “foxtail millet, broomcorn millet, and possibly hemp (Cannabis sativa) and canola (rapeseed, Brassica rapa)” (Lee et al. 2007: 1087 [emphasis by the authors]). According to Lee et al. (2007: 1091), the Norther China of the period cultivated rice phytoliths and soybeans. According to Barton et al. (2009: 5524), such a wide variety of crops cultivated and the sites where archeologists observed those samples allows assuming that agricultural development experienced regional shift during the period of middle Neolithic. Concerning animals’ domestication, Yang (2004: 44) argues that the middle Neolithic period was the initial stage of this process. Further on, Reuterdahl (2007) argues that pigs and cattle were the two major species of animals domesticated first by the Chinese in the middle Neolithic period; after this, the people of the middle Neolithic domesticated the dog, the fowl, and the goat (Zhimin, 1988: 757).
The late Neolithic period brought certain changes to the agricultural picture of the Northern China as together with the continuing domination of the foxtail millet among the cultivated crops, as Lee et al. (2007: 1091), the broomcorn millet regained its density after the relative reduction in its cultivation rates observed in the middle Neolithic period. As well, the continuing development of rice and rice phytoliths accompanied by the increase in crops cultivation rates marked the beginning of the more active process of pig, cattle, goat, and dog domestication (Lee et al. 2007: 1091; Barton et al., 2009: 5524). Thus, it is possible to conclude that the main similarity of the middle and late Neolithic periods in respect of agriculture is the cultivation of the same plant species and domestication of the same animals. The main difference, however, is the density of the processes and their effect of other aspects of life, as in the late Neolithic period the deeper development of agriculture marked the increase in Northern China’s population and the shift in living conditions connected with it.
Social System
The picture of social life in Northern China changed substantially between the middle and late Neolithic periods according to the arguments by scholars like Underhill (2002: 47) and Zhimin (1988: 757). These scholars refer to the shift of the periods in the Neolithic era as to the great break point that marked the development of the phenomena of social inequality and social stratification based on the grounds of “increasing populations and greater stress on subsistence resources such as land” (Underhill, 2002: 47). As well, Underhill (2002: 47) and Zhimin (1988: 757) connect the shift towards social inequality with the appearance of people able of craft, or skilled, work and the development of the so called “regional center” (Underhill, 2002: 47), especially in the Yellow River Valley and Huanghe Basin. Therefore, archeological evidence to support the comparative analysis of the social life in the Northern China between the middle and late Neolithic periods include the analyses of samples excavated from sites where the settlements were formerly situated, as well as the burials observed around those settlements.
Thus, Underhill (2002) considers the excavated pieces of the food culture of the Northern Chinese settlements as one of the major markers of social inequality observed between the middle and the late Neolithic periods. According to Underhill (2002: 48 – 49), food culture was one of the basic elements of the people’s lives in the middle Neolithic period, and when the social stratification appeared as the sign of the Northern Chinese society’s transition to the late Neolithic, this culture determined the boundary between the high and low classes of the community in the form of presented pieces of food consumption that only the rich people might afford. Accordingly, the archeological works at the sites like for example Banpo allowed scholars to excavate the samples of the food and feasting attributes used in the Northern China. The fact that these samples were found only in several households allowed scholars to assume the existence of social stratification in the later Neolithic period, while in the middle Neolithic there were no signs of such stratification (Underhill, 2002: 49 – 50).
According to Zhimin (1988), the analysis of burials that were traditionally situated in the middle and late Neolithic Northern China around the emerging agricultural and craft’s settlements might also be a powerful tool in analyzing the social inequality in the area. Although Zhimin (1988: 758) notices the relative reasonability of such conclusions, he points out that the character of burials, their furnishing, craftsmanship, and conditions might evidence the wellbeing and the traditional social status the buried person had in the community. Giving examples, Zhimin (1988: 758) lists Yangshao, Dawenkou, and Qijia as the burials that display sings of either matriarchy or patriarchy in the culture and allow assuming that the development of social inequality started namely on the merge of the middle and late Neolithic periods in Northern China.
Economic System
The economic system of Northern China in the period of the middle and late Neolithic also experienced changes, and therefore between the two periods there are certain similarities and differences. According to Lee et al. (2007: 1087), the main drivers of the changes discussed included the comprehensive development of primitive technology of processing agricultural goods.
Underhill (2002: 48 – 49) accounts for the craft creation as the major factor that conditioned the economic growth and the already discussed social stratification that became the result of the growth of wellbeing of some groups of people, mainly those possessing the means of production. Further on, Barton et al. (2009: 5526) consider occupation rates for soil areas as one of the leading economic factors. Finally, Zhimin (1988: 757) sees population growth and settlement density as another economy-conditioning factor.
In more detail, Lee et al. (2007: 1087) points out that in the middle, as well as early, Neolithic period people collected crops and other agricultural species by hands, while in the late Neolithic period the first tool, mainly produced of stone, came into active usage. Underhill (2002: 48 – 49) bases her argument on the data of archeological excavations that revealed the profound technology development in the sphere of craft creation, and the spectral analyses allowed relating these advances to the late Neolithic period, thus signaling the main difference between this period and the middle Neolithic when manual work was used.
The above considered factors of technological advancement and population growth conditioned the increase in soil occupation rates reported by Barton et al. (2009: 5526) on the basis of archeological analyses:
As shown in Figure 1, the points marked with numerals from 1 to 5 reflect the basic stages of the middle and late Neolithic periods’ development in respect of economic changes. Points 1, 3, and 5 reflect the lowest occupation rates and levels of animals’ domestication at the periods when the Northern Chinese sites were massively abandoned by people. Point 2 is the reflection of the densest population observed in the middle Neolithic period when manual work was used in agriculture. Point 4 marks the peak of the technology development in agriculture and the respective economic progress observed in Northern China in the late Neolithic period (Barton et al., 2009: 5526). Accordingly, the above discussion allows assuming serious differences observed in Northern China in the middle and late Neolithic periods compared.
Cultures Observed
Finally, the major element of the comparative analysis of the middle and late Neolithic periods in Northern China is the consideration of the basic cultures that scholars like Barton et al. (2009), Hirst (2009), Lee et al. (2007), Liu (2004), and Zhang Pei (2004) single out. Thus, the major cultures that represent the middle Neolithic period include the Dadiwan culture (6000 – 5400 B. C.), the Yangshao culture that developed between 5000 and 2800 B. C., and the Dawenkou culture (4300–2600 B. C.). The main culture to represent the late Neolithic period in the Northern China is the Longshan culture (2500 – 1600 B. C.). All the above distinctions and similarities between the middle and late Neolithic periods, i. e. agriculture, social, and economic life, derive first of all from these cultures and, at the same time, are the factors that distinguish these cultures and Neolithic periods as such.
Thus, the middle Neolithic cultures, Dadiwan, Yangshao, and Dawenkou, according to Lee et al. (2007), can be characterized by the low levels of population density, again low levels of soil occupation. The major crops and plants cultivated during these cultures’ existence included millets, hemp, and rice (Lee et al., 2007: 1091). It is also important to notice that Dadiwan, according to Zhang Pei (2004), served as the starting point for animals’ domestication, while Yangshao displayed the signs of certain decline especially in respect of agriculture and respectively in economic development (Underhill & Habu, 2006). However, Dawenkou cultures brought better social structuring and introduced stratification of the community according to the wellbeing levels (Zhimin, 1988). Nevertheless, the main features of the middle Neolithic cultures include the start of agriculture and domestication accompanied by the low levels of technological development and lack of social inequality.
At the same time, the Longshan culture as the major representation of the late Neolithic culture in Northern China can be characterized by the drastic growth of the social wellbeing and the region’s economy. Conditioned by the population growth and settlement density the Longshan culture, according to the ideas by Lee et al. (2007), had dual effect upon the social and cultural life of the Northern China. On the one hand, the region received a powerful impact towards the industrial and agricultural development. On the other hand, the Longshan culture introduced the phenomenon of social stratification as the result of the emergence of the groups of people who displayed high working skills and those possessing the means of material production (Underhill & Habu, 2006; Zhimin, 1988; Zhongpei, 2004).
Concluding Remarks
The above discussion of the similarities and differences observed between the middle and late Neolithic periods in Northern China allows making the following concluding remarks. First of all, scholars agree that the data retrieved through the archeological procedures possess the greatest potential for the widening of the scientific knowledge of the Neolithic era in China. Second, agricultural development of every single period in the Neolithic era evidences considerably about all other spheres of social and cultural life of the particular region in a particular period of time.
Third, middle and late Neolithic periods in Northern China are characterized by both similar and different points. Fourth, the main similarity observed between the middle and late Neolithic periods in the North of China is the comprehensive agricultural and craft development, animal domestication, and modification of the social structure. Finally, the main difference between the middle and the late Neolithic periods lies in the level of technological development that was much higher during the later period and in the emergence of the social inequality and wellbeing-based stratification of the community. The general conclusion of the above discussion is that the middle and late Neolithic periods in Northern China present the common picture of social development when technological progress and social stratification become the results of the increased wellbeing and diversification of labor.
References Cited
Barton, Loukas et al. 2009 Agricultural origins and the isotopic identity of domestication in northern China. The National Academy of Sciences of the USA, PNAS 106(14): 5523 – 5528.
Hirst, Kris K. 2009 Dadiwan (China). Web.
Lee, Gyoung-Ah et al. 2007 Plants and people from the Early Neolithic to Shang periods in North China. The National Academy of Sciences of the USA, PNAS 104(3): 1087 – 1092.
Liu, Li. 2004 The Chinese neolithic : trajectories to early states. Cambridge, UK ; New York : Cambridge University Press.
Reuterdahl, Magnus. 2007 To Neolithic China and back! The Yangshao project. Web.
Underhill, Anne P. 2002 Craft production and social change in northern China. Springer.
Underhill, Anne P. & Habu, Janko. 2006 Early Communities in East Asia: Economic and Sociopolitical Organization at the Local and Regional Levels. Archaeology of Asia. Great Britain.
Yang, Xiaoneng. 2004 Essay 16, Dadiwan Site at Qin’an, Gansu Province. In Chinese Archaeology in the Twentieth Century: New Perspectives on China’s Past, Volume 2, edited by Yang, Xiaoneng, pp. 44 – 46. Yale University Press, New Haven.
Zhimin, An. 1988 Archaeological Research on Neolithic China. Current Anthropology, 29(5): 753 – 759.
Zhongpei, Zhang. 2004 The formation of ancient civilization in China. In Chinese Archaeology in the Twentieth Century: New Perspectives on China’s Past, Volume 1, edited by Yang, Xiaoneng, pp. 77 – 97. Yale University Press, New Haven.