We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 02 September 2019
This article provides a contextual analysis of an enigmatic object—dubbed the “Confucius Dressing Mirror” (Kongzi yijing 孔子衣鏡)—recently unearthed from the tomb of Liu He 劉賀 (Marquis of Haihun 海昏侯, d. 59 BCE) in 2015. I raise questions about the prevailing identification of this object as a “dressing mirror” and a “lived object,” used by Liu He for moral self-cultivation or political self-preservation in his volatile life as the deposed ninth emperor of Han. Instead, I treat the object as an assemblage and analyze its complete material composition and physical placement in Liu He's tomb in the broader context of funerary material culture and burial practice in early imperial China. I propose that the entombed object can be considered as a composite talisman to protect the deceased against baleful and harmful influences in the tomb and in his afterlife. Methodologically, this article stresses the importance of contextual analysis in shedding light on the traditional conceptual categories such as “lived object” (shengqi 生器) and “funerary objects” (mingqi 明器) in actual funerary ritual processes.
1 The Haihunhou archaeological site and the excavation of the main tomb of Liu He 劉賀 (d. 59 BCE) have become a model case for public archaeology in China. In the case of this particular find, both CCTV News and China News reported with photographs taken at the time of retrieval through their on-site reporting team. See http://m.news.cntv.cn/2015/11/14/ARTI1447477286450264.shtml; www.chinanews.com/cul/2015/11-14/7623478.shtml (both accessed January 30, 2019).
2 For instance, as early as December 23, 2015, Wang Chuning 王楚寧 published an online article titled “Haihunhou mu Kongzi pingfeng qianshi” 海昏侯墓孔子屏風淺釋, focusing on the deciphering of Confucius’ biographical inscriptions based on media reports and photographs of the inscription. See www.gwz.fudan.edu.cn/Web/Show/2694 (accessed January 30, 2019).
3 Wang Renxiang, who goes by his blog ID 3N3N, also included many detailed photographs of the then-available pieces and fragments of the “Confucius Dressing Mirror.” See http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_5628628a0102wzkj.html (accessed January 30, 2019).
4 I thank one of the anonymous reviewers for pointing out the semantic range of the meaning of yi 衣. As a verb, the most fitting meaning here is “to cover.” A similar verbal usage of yi can be seen in the “Dudi” 度地 chapter of the Guanzi 管子, “During heavy rains those parts of the dikes and embankments that can be covered [with more soil or some other protective layer] should be so covered” 大雨, 隄防可衣者衣之, see Guanzi jiaozhu 管子校注 (Beijing: Zhonghua, 2004), 1068. The English translation is modified after Rickett, W. Allyn, Guanzi: Political, Economic, and Philosophical Essays from Early China, Volume 2: Chapters XII, 35–XXIV, 86 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1998), 253Google Scholar. In the following, I will use the term “Confucius Dressing Mirror” when referring to the published reports and existing scholarship on the object, but “covered mirror” when expressing my interpretation and translation of yijing. For the sake of space and in situations where there is no danger of ambiguity, I will simply refer to this object as the “Mirror.”
5 See Jiangxisheng wenwu kaogu yanjiusuo 江西省文物考古研究所, Nanchangshi bowuguan 南昌市博物館, and Nanchangshi Xinjianqu bowuguan 南昌市新建區博物館, “Nanchangshi Xihan Haihunhou mu” 南昌市西漢海昏侯墓, Kaogu 考古 2016.7, 55.
6 See wenwu kaogu yanjiusuo, Jiangxisheng, “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing” 海昏侯劉賀墓出土孔子衣鏡, Nanfang wenwu 南方文物 2016.3, 61–70, 50Google Scholar. It was given an item number (M1:1415) and termed “Lacquered Dressing Mirror” (qi yijing 漆衣鏡) in an overview article on the lacquer wares from the Haihunhou Tomb; see “Jiangxi Nanchang Xihan Haihunhou Liu He mu tuchu qimuqi” 江西南昌西漢海昏侯劉賀墓出土漆木器, Wenwu 文物 2018.11, 48–50, plate 38.
7 The excavation of the Haihunhou Mausoleum was one of the “Ten Great Discoveries” of 2015. This is an official contest sponsored by the Chinese National Bureau of Cultural Relics and an increasingly publicized event that aims to promote the public interests and awareness of Chinese archaeology and cultural heritage. The results of the contest, including the winners of the most prestigious first ten spots, are published annually. See 2015 Zhongguo zhongyao kaogu faxian 2015 中國重要考古發現 (Beijing: Wenwu, 2016).
8 Gosden, Chris and Marshall, Yvonne, “The Cultural Biography of Objects,” World Archaeology 31.2 (1999), 169CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
9 Gosden and Marshall, “The Cultural Biography of Objects,” 169.
10 Hanshu 漢書 (Beijing: Zhonghua shuju, 1962), 14.420.
11 Examples see Wang Chuning, “Haihunhou mu ‘Kongzi lijing’ (Kongzi pingfeng) zaishi” 海昏侯墓 “孔子立鏡”(孔子屏風)再釋, www.gwz.fudan.edu.cn/Web/Show/2782 (published on April 25, 2016, accessed July 4, 2018); Hong, Shao 邵鴻, “Haihunhou mu Kongzi pingfeng shitan” 海昏侯墓孔子屏風試探, Jiangxi shifan daxue xuebao 江西師範大學學報 49.5 (2016), 16–23Google Scholar.
12 See Wu Hung's usage of “lived object” (shengqi 生器, a term originated in the Xunzi 荀子) in Chinese funerary art in Art of the Yellow Springs: Understanding Chinese Tombs (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i, 2010), 163–72. For an overview of the development of shengqi as a concept and practice, see Hung, Wu, “‘Shengqi’ de gainian yu shijian” 生器的概念與實踐, Wenwu 2010.1, 87–96Google Scholar.
13 See “Table of the Regional Kings” 諸侯王表, in Hanshu 14.420.
14 Wang Zijin 王子今 interpreted the place name of Liu He's title, “Haihun,” as “Huihun” 晦昏, “dark and muddled,” an implicit condemnation of Liu He's immoral character and inappropriate behaviors. See Zijin, Wang, “‘Haihun’ mingyi kao” “海昏”名義考, Zhongguoshi yanjiu dongtai 中國史研究動態 2016.2, 49–53Google Scholar.
15 For the details of the events and accounts around Liu He's ascendance to the throne and his deposition, see “The Biographies of the Five Sons of Emperor Wu” 武五子傳, Hanshu 63.2764–2770. Also see Deyong, Xin 辛德勇, Haihunhou Liu He 海昏侯劉賀 (Shanghai: Shenghuo, Dushu, Xinzhi Sanlian shudian, 2016)Google Scholar.
16 Hanshu 14.420.
17 “Nanchangshi Xihan Haihunhou mu,” 45–48.
18 “Nanchangshi Xihan Haihunhou mu,” 58. For the extraordinary find of gold in this tomb, see Rui, Liu 劉瑞, “Haihunhou Liu He muzhong duo huangjing de yuanyin tanxi” 海昏侯劉賀墓中多黃金的原因探析, Tangdu xuekan 唐都學刊, 32.3 (2016), 5–9Google Scholar.
19 In addition to the preliminary site report, for major artifacts from the Haihunhou Tomb, see the exhibition catalogue, Wuse xuanyao: Nanchang Handai Haihunhouguo kaogu chengguozhan 五色炫耀—南昌漢代海昏侯國考古成果展 (Nanchang: Jiangxi renmin, 2016). Wenwu 2018.11 is a special issue entirely devoted to the major categories of entombed finds in the Haihunhou burial. The excavators and collaborating researchers published their preliminary reports and studies of the entombed bronzes, jades, lacquer wares, a large number of bamboo manuscripts of Confucian classical texts, and wooden boards of the administrative documents of the Marquisate of Haihun.
20 See Nanchang Handai Haihunhou guo 南昌漢代海昏侯國 (Hanchang: Jiangxi huabao, 2016), 48.
21 See “Nanchangshi Xihan Haihunhou mu,” 47–48. For the structure of Liu He's mausoleum and the Han system of mausoleums for the imperial families, also see Rui, Liu 劉瑞, “Haihunhou Liu He mu muyuan zhidu chutan” 海昏侯劉賀墓墓園制度初探, Nanfang wenwu 2016.3, 51–56Google Scholar.
22 See Zhongli, Zhang 張仲立 and Huizhong, Liu 劉慧中, “Haihunhou Liu He mu yuzhi jilun” 海昏侯劉賀墓逾制幾論, Nanfang wenwu 2016.3, 57–60Google Scholar.
23 This total count was as of April 2016, see “Nanchang shi Xihan Haihunhou mu,” 51. But as the indoor excavations are still ongoing, the final count is likely to increase.
24 Nanchang Handai Haihunhou guo, 88.
25 See Jun, Yang 楊軍, Chuning, Wang, and Changqing, Xu 徐長青, “Xihan Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu ‘Lunyu zhidao’ jian chutan” 西漢海昏侯劉賀墓出土《論語·知道》簡初探, Wenwu 2016.12, 72–75, 92Google Scholar.
26 For an overview of the entombed writings, see “Jiangxi Nanchang Xihan Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu jiandu” 江西南昌西漢海昏侯劉賀墓出土簡牘, Wenwu 2018.11, 87–96.
27 “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 61. For bronzes found in Liu He's tomb, see “Jiangxi Nanchang Xihan Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu tongqi” 江西南昌西漢海昏侯劉賀墓出土銅器, Wenwu 2018.11, 4–26.
28 There is a lacquered box containing gold disks found underneath what would be the bottom part of the “Mirror,” See “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 61.
29 For an analysis from the perspective of Han painting tradition, see Ming, Chen 陳明, “Cong Haihunhou mu Kongzi huaxiang kan Handai mushi huihua” 從海昏侯墓孔子畫像看漢代墓室繪畫, Zhongguo meishu 中國美術 2016.4, 50–53Google Scholar. For studies focusing on the biographical texts, see Shao Hong, “Haihunhou mu Kongzi pingfeng shitan,” 16–23; Wang Chuning, “Haihunhou mu ‘Kongzi lijing’ (Kongzi pingfeng) zaishi.”
30 “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 69–70.
31 Shao Hong, “Haihunhou mu Kongzi pingfeng shitan,” 22–23.
32 Wang Chuning, “Haihunhou mu ‘Kongzi lijing’ (Kongzi pingfeng) zaishi,” 23–24.
33 “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 64.
34 An earthquake was recorded in this region in 318 CE, which may have shifted the burial and had an impact on the placement of buried goods inside the burial structure. The crushing weight of the refilled earth on top of the burial structure may also have contributed to the damage to the burial structure and the coffins, as well as to many entombed objects. Without further examination, especially a microscopic analysis of the broken pieces of the “Mirror,” its original deposition condition remains uncertain; a more precise understanding would no doubt provide further evidence of the nature of this object and its assumed function(s) in the burial and in the afterlife of Liu He. As will be detailed later, the manner in which this object was placed in the tomb would also have an effect on how the different sets of images were intended to or could be viewed, and on their potential association with the cosmic order of the four directions and the physical and directional relation to the deceased Liu He lying in the east chamber. Although this line of inquiry must await future examination, it is important to note the significance of such considerations.
35 Of the Mawangdui screens, the better preserved is that from Lady Xinzhui's tomb (M1:447, the screen panel measures (H)58 x (W)72 cm and the height, including the stand, is 62 cm), see bowuguan, Hunansheng 湖南省博物館 and yanjiusuo, Zhongguo kexueyuan kaogu 中國科學院考古研究所, Changsha Mawangdui yihao Hanmu 長沙馬王堆一號漢墓 (Beijing: Wenwu, 1973), 93–94, 96Google Scholar, plate 192; the one from M3 (M3:170), presumably a son of Lady Xinzhui and Marquis of Dai (Li Cang), measures (H)60.5 x (W)90.5 cm for the screen panel and the stand measures (H)10 x (L)18.8 cm. The screen is identified in the tomb inventory (slip 274) as “wooden five-color painted screen” 木五蔡(彩)畫并(屏)風, see bowuguan, Hunansheng and yanjiusuo, Hunansheng wenwu kaogu 湖南省文物考古研究所, Changsha Mawangdui er san hao Hanmu 長沙馬王堆二、三號漢墓 (Beijing: Wenwu, 2004), 157Google Scholar, color plate 35. Wu Hung interpreted the Mawangdui M1 screen as part of the symbolism of what he calls “the spirit seat,” representing the soul of the deceased in the tomb. See his discussion in “Enlivening the Soul in Chinese Tombs,” RES: Anthropology and Aesthetics, no. 55/56 (2009), 21–41; Art of the Yellow Springs, 63–84.
36 It should be noted that the Nanyue tomb is a horizontal construction made of stones, which is significantly different, both structurally and materially, from the Haihunhou tomb, which is a vertical earthen shaft tomb. Variations in structural construction, internal spatial differentiation of burial space, and construction materials have long been recognized as important correlates to the changes in afterlife concepts and burial practices. Wu Hung has written extensively on these subjects, see Hung, Wu, “From Temple to Tomb: Ancient Chinese Art and Religion in Transition,” Early China 13 (1988), 78–115CrossRefGoogle Scholar; “Temple, Place, and Tomb,” in Monumentality in Early Chinese Art and Architecture (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1995), 77–142; The Art of the Yellow Springs: Understanding Chinese Tombs (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2010). Two Chinese works contain comprehensive surveys and archaeological data pertaining to these changes, see Xiaofen, Huang 黃曉芬, Hanmu de kaoguxue yanjiu 漢墓的考古學研究 (Changsha: Yuelu shushe, 2003)Google Scholar and Zhendong, Liu 劉振東, Mingjie de zhixue: Zhongguo gudai muzang zhidu gailun 冥界的秩序: 中國古代墓葬制度概論 (Beijing: Wenwu, 2015)Google Scholar. For a convenient summary of the changes in burial space in English, see Guolong, Lai, “The Transformation of Burial Space,” in Excavating the Afterlife: The Archaeology of Early Chinese Religion (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2015), 55–97Google Scholar. The Nanyue large-scale screen was found already disassembled in four piles in the main burial chamber in front of the entrance into the eastern side room, a location fitting a standing and functional screen. See Guangzhoushi wenwu guanli weiyuanhui 廣州市文物管理委員會, Zhongguo shekeyuan kaogu yanjiusuo 中國社科院考古研究所, and bowuguan, Guangdongsheng 廣東省博物館, Han Nanyue wang mu 漢南越王墓 (Beijing: Wenwu, 1991), 117, 320–24, 433Google Scholar. For the wooden screen components, see 214–15, plate 215, and the restoration of the screen in Appendix 11.
37 “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 61–62.
38 The possibility of the Haihunhou tomb being looted, as was common for tombs of this scale, can be ruled out because the contents of the burial were intact when archaeologists opened the tomb. There were attempts at looting, but they were interrupted when reported to the authorities. Although the looters did succeed in penetrating into the wooden outer burial chamber, they did not get into the chamber. For details surrounding the looting attempts and the damages before the archaeological excavation, see Nanchang Handai Haihunhou guo, 44–47.
39 See “Jiangxi Nanchang Xihan Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu tongqi,” 22. The measurement of the bronze panel (M1:1415-1) in this 2018 publication is slightly longer at (L)72 x (W)46 cm.
40 “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 62.
41 Due to the long conservation process required for the wooden frame and lacquer-painted panels, the reconstruction published in “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing” is only preliminary. I visited the Haihunhou site in October 2017, but, unfortunately, because the organic parts of the “Mirror” have been transferred to the specialized conservation center for lacquer wares, I did not have a chance to examine them personally. However, personal communications with the excavators on site did reveal some reservations about the current identification as a “dressing mirror” and the published reconstruction.
42 There are numerous collections and catalogues of smaller hand-held bronze mirrors, as well as a large body of secondary literature, especially on those with inscriptions. For a recent collection of inscribed hand-held mirrors from Han times, see Huaigang, Wang 王懷剛, Hanjing mingwen tuji 漢鏡銘文圖集 (Shanghai: Zhongxi shuju, 2016)Google Scholar. Okamura Hidenori 岡村秀典 and his research team on ancient Chinese mirrors (Han to Western Jin) have published extensively on inscribed hand-held bronze mirrors including new transcriptions, translations into Japanese, and studies on the chronology and typology based on inscriptions and stylistic features. Most of the publications by Okamura (research articles) and his team (collected annotations and Japanese translations) are in Tōhō gakuhō 東方學報 (Journal of Oriental Studies) published by Kyoto University and can be conveniently accessed online (https://repository.kulib.kyoto-u.ac.jp/dspace/handle/2433/66100?locale=en). To save space, I will list here only the issue, year, and page numbers: no. 84 (2009), 1–54, 139–209; no. 85 (2010), 732–762; no. 86 (2011), 1–90, 201–289, 291–333; no. 88 (2013), 534–463. English studies of hand-held mirrors from early China include Brashier, K. E., “Longevity like Metal and Stone: the Role of the Mirror in Han Burials,” T'oung Pao 81 (1995), 201–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar and Tseng, Lillian Lan-ying, “Representation and Appropriation: Rethinking the TLV Mirror in Han China,” Early China 29 (2004), 163–215CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For a recent excellent relational study on the wide spread and use of the portable mirrors in the Han, see Guo Yanlong, “Affordable Luxury: The Entanglements of Metal Mirrors in the Han Empire (202 BCE–220 CE),” (PhD diss., University of British Columbia, 2016), especially 86–102 for the buried disk-shaped bronze mirrors. With regard to the metaphorical, symbolic, moral, and magical functions of mirror in the transmitted classical texts prior to the Six Dynasties, see Kazuchika, Komai 駒井和愛, Chūgoku kokyō no kenkyū 中國古鏡の硏究 (Tokyo: Iwanami Shoten, 1953), 7–13Google Scholar.
43 Five external burial pits affiliated with the Qi king's burial were excavated between 1978 and 1980. It is interesting to note that this large rectangular mirror (5:19) was discovered together with those dubbed “daily objects,” including four regular-sized round bronze mirrors (in lacquer painted wooden boxes), two bronze incense burners, two 18-faceted bronze dice, and 22 bone sticks and fragments on a ledge in the same pit (no. 5); the rest of the buried contents are all weapons. See Shandongsheng Zibo bowuguan 山東省淄博博物館, “Xihan Qiwangmu suizang qiwukeng” 西漢齊王墓隨葬器物坑, Kaogu xuebao 考古學報 1985.2, 223–66, plates 13–20.
44 “Xihan Qiwangmu suizang qiwukeng,” 242, figure 16.2, color plate 13.1.
45 “Nanchang shi Xihan Haihunhou mu,” 55, 57.
46 Xijing zaji, in Siku quanshu 四庫全書, vol. 1035 (Shanghai: Shanghai guji, 1987), 3.13. For later ritual usage of mirrors, especially in Daoist rituals, see Huang, Shih-Shan Suan, Picturing the True Form: Daoist Visual Culture in Traditional China (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Asian Center, 2012)Google Scholar.
47 Quoted from Extended Reflection 申鑒, collected in Qunshu zhiyao 群書治要, Sibucongkan edition, 46.6a.
48 “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 62.
49 “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 62–63, 64. I will discuss the “Dressing Mirror Rhapsody” below.
50 For the development of the pictorial representations of the Queen Mother of the West and her counterpart, King Father of the East, especially with regard to these two images on the Haihunhou “mirror,” see Ziliang, Liu 劉子亮, Jun, Yang, and Changqing, Xu, “Handai Dongwanggong chuanshuo yu tuxiang xintan: yi Xihan Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu ‘Kongzi yijing'wei xiansuo” 漢代東王公傳說與圖像新探—以西漢海昏侯劉賀墓出土“孔子衣鏡”為線索, Wenwu 2018.11, 81–86Google Scholar.
51 Although there is no question that the smaller hand-held mirrors were common personal items in Han times, almost all the excavated specimens are from tombs. There have not yet been statistically viable and systematic examinations and studies to shed light on whether the mirrors from mortuary contexts were materially (for example, the alloy composition) and technically different from those known from non-mortuary contexts.
52 Lian Chunhai 練春海 has discussed a few examples of hand-held bronze mirrors with talismanic inscriptions including references to the Queen Mother of the West and the King Father of the East found in tombs dated to Eastern Han to Six Dynasties. See Chunhai, Lian, “Tongjing gongyong” 銅鏡功用, in Qiwu tuxiang yu Handai xinyang 器物圖像與漢代信仰 (Beijing: Sanlian shudian, 2014), 121–22Google Scholar.
53 The images and the texts of Confucius and his disciples have received much more scholarly attention, and their iconographic and textual details are not the focus of this article. For the detailed description and a full transcription, see “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 63–67.
54 For a detailed discussion of the textual variants and differences between the biographies on the “mirror” and their Shiji counterparts, see Wang Chuning, “Haihunhou mu ‘Kongzi lijing’ (Kongzi pingfeng) zaishi,” 2–19.
55 “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 64.
56 For a thorough examination of Confucian images closely related to moral didactics and persuasion in narrative illustrations on a variety of media, see Murray, Julia K., Mirror of Morality: Chinese Narrative Illustration and Confucian Ideology (Honolulu: University of Hawai‘i Press, 2007)Google Scholar.
57 Wang, “Haihunhou mu ‘Kongzi lijing’ (Kongzi pingfeng) zaishi,” 23–24.
58 This information is not yet published, but Yang Jun, the leading excavator of the Haihunhou Mausoleum, from Jiangxi Provincial Institute of Archaeology, mentioned it in the Tang Special Annual lecture in Archaeology, “The Excavation of the Haihunhou Tomb,” on April 1, 2017 at Columbia University, New York. I thank Yang Jun for the informative and constructive communications regarding these unpublished materials.
59 The transcription of the text is based on the published version and the photograph of the fragment (Figure 11) in “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 64 (□ indicating one illegible graph), with my modifications (supplemented and added graphs marked by [] and <>). For the convenience of the analysis, I divide the inscription into five sections marked by (1)–(5) in the English translation.
60 The directions in this line and the following—right, left, above, and below—are from the perspective of the mirror, which is framed in the middle, not from that of the viewers. From the viewer's perspective, the placement of the tiger and the dragon on the left and right beam respectively conforms to their conventional association with the west (left) and the east (right) respectively in the Han cosmology.
61 Upon a closer look at the published photograph of the text (“Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 64), there seems to be a faded double mark (=) after kong 孔 (more visible) and zi 子(less clear) respectively, indicating that the two graphs for Kongzi (Confucius) should be repeated in the next line. For this reason, Kongzi was added to be the subject of the next line, which the editors of this “Rhapsody” left as two blanks. I thank one of the anonymous reviewers who pointed out the double mark after kong.
62 The regular meter of the rhymed text and the physical space after shang suggests there is one more graph, but if there was one, it is no longer visible.
63 The editors left the beginning of this couplet as blanks because of the damage on the fragment, see “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 64. Wang Renxiang supplemented the illegible characters based on Han stock auspicious phrases on his public blog Qiwu 器唔, and I adopt these here. For a report on Wang Renxiang's new reading, see www.kaogu.cn/cn/xccz/20170222/57190.html (published online February 22, 2017, accessed March 11, 2019).
64 See Barbieri-Low's discussion of “marketing techniques” of the Han artisans, in Barbieri-Low, Anthony J., Artisans in Early Imperial China (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2007), 138–52Google Scholar.
65 Barbieri-Low, Artisans in Early Imperial China, 146–47.
66 Barbieri-Low, Artisans in Early Imperial China, 147.
67 Barbieri-Low, Artisans in Early Imperial China, 148.
68 For a selection of studies on the concept and practice of mingqi in pre-imperial and early imperial China, see HMaspero, enri (1883–1945), “Le mot ming 明,” Journal Asiatique 223 (1933), 249–97Google Scholar; Liu, Cary Y., “The Concept of ‘Brilliant Artifacts’ in Han-Dynasty Burial Objects and Funerary Architecture: Embodying the Harmony of the Sun and the Moon,” in Recarving China's Past: Art, Archaeology, and Architecture of the “Wu Family Shrines” (Princeton: Princeton University Art Museum, 2005), 205–21Google Scholar; Hung, Wu, “‘Mingqi' de lilun he shijian: Zhanguo shiqi liyi meishu zhong de guannianhua qingxiang” “明器”的理論和實踐: 戰國時期禮儀美術中的觀念化傾向, Wenwu 2006.6, 72–81Google Scholar; Wu Hung, “Spirit Articles,” in The Art of the Yellow Springs, 87–98. For related issues on the concept of the soul and the question of the consciousness of the dead, see Brashier, K. E., “Han Thanatology and the Division of ‘Souls’,” Early China 21 (1996), 125–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Goldin, Paul, “The Consciousness of the Dead as a Philosophical Problem in Ancient China,” in The Good Life and Conceptions of Life in Early China and Greek Antiquity, edited by King, R.A.H. (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2015), 59–92Google Scholar.
69 The excavators actually surveyed the image of Confucius in Han tomb murals in their analysis, see “Haihunhou Liu He mu chutu Kongzi yijing,” 67–68.
