BOOK REVIEWS

Copper and Bronze Metallurgy in Late Prehistoric Xinjiang: Its Cultural Context andRelationship with Neighboring Regions. Jianjun Mei. BAR International Series 865.Oxford: Archaeopress. 2000. 187 pp, 31 tables, 12 maps, 155 figures, bibliogra­phy, £30.00. ISBN 1-84171-068-7.

Reviewed by Vincent C. Pigott, Institute ofArchaeology,University College, London

The excavation by Chinese archaeologistsof naturally mummified Caucasoid indivi­duals dating as early as the second millen­nium B.C. in the Tarim Basin in Xinjiang,China's westernmost province, are of un­questionable import in discussions of themovements of people across Eurasia in laterprehistory. The cemeteries in which theTarim mummies were found mark whatis currently the easternmost presence ofancient Europoid peoples, representativesof the Eurasian steppe culture (see Barber1999; Mair 1998; Mair and Mallory 2000).Metal artifacts in copper and its alloys standamong the most important possible archae­ological markers of these wide-rangingmovements. Jianjun Mei, in this publica­tion of his doctoral thesis at the Universityof Cambridge, has opened the door on awealth of hitherto uncirculated archaeo­logical data both on the archaeology ofXinjiang province and on the coming ofcopperjbronze to this geographically andculturally pivotal region of desert and oases.

Mei seeks answers to four research ques­tions: (1) when, where, and how copperand its alloys began to be used, (2) whatmetallurgical technologies were employed,(3) what the cultural context was for thebeginning and early use of metals, and (4)what cultural connections and technologi-

cal interaction existed between Xinjiangand its neighboring regions during theBronze (c. 2000-1000 B.C.) and Iron Ages(c. 1000-300 B.C.). His overarching goalis to furnish an enhanced understandingof the archaeological and cultural contextsof late prehistoric Xinjiang, while at thesame time offering a new perspective onhow metallurgy spread into the province,and how this technology may have reachedeastwards into the Chinese heartland.

In his introductory chapter Mei reviewsboth the background of the developmentof archaeology and the foci of pertinentprior research in Xinjiang. Crucial here isthe role of external cultural influences inthe development of settlement occupation.Moreover, it is clear from Mei's discussionsthat the current wave of archaeological re­search, much of it from Eurasia during the1990s, has altered traditional thinking (evenamong the Chinese) about the develop­ment of Chinese civilization as an exclu­sively indigenous process, especially wheremetallurgy is concerned. This theme under­pins discussion throughout the volume.

Mei divides the remainder of his publi­cation into three major components. Inthe first component (Chapters 2 and 3) hereviews the archaeological evidence for atleast fourteen Bronze Age cultures and a

Asian Pcrspclti.,l's, Vol. 41, No.1 © 2002 by Universicy ofHawai'j Press.

168 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES 41 (2) . FALL 2001

similar number of Iron Age cultures fromthe various regions of Xinjiang (Chapter 2).He undertakes next a substantive typol­ogical investigation of six major categoriesof metal artifacts from these periods, e.g.,implements, weapons, harness and chariotfittings, vessels, toilet articles, and orna­ments (Chapter 3).

The second component (Chapters 4 and5) consists of a review of previous analyticalresearch on Xinjiang metal finds as wellas an analytical program focused on metalsamples supplied to him by local archae­ologists. Chapter 4 presents the results fromthe battery of analyses he performed to ob­serve microstructure and determine com­position of 58 metal samples with a goal ofcomparing the technologies of the variouscultural groups he has identified. In Chap­ter 5 his investigation becomes site specificand focuses on the important finds fromthe mining and smelting site of Nulasai inNileke which, on current evidence, appearsto date to the first millennium B.C., butmay well be earlier. This site, with its un­common finds of mines and associated pro­duction debris, is one of but a handful ofsuch documented sites currently knownacross Eurasia.

In his final component (Chapters 6 and7), Mei turns to a synthetic overview ofcultural interrelationships between Xin­jiang and regions to the east, west, andnorth. He concludes with a discussion ofthe development of copper and bronzemetallurgy in the region. Significant newarchaeological data, much of it from Chi­nese sources, is presented in this volume, inparticular that concerned with widespreadcontact between Xinjiang and neighboringregions. The initial occurrence of artifactsin copper (at Gumugou) and tin-bronze (atTianshanbeilu) in Xinjiang takes place inthe early centuries of the second millen­nium B.C.

Turning to the Iron Age, this period ismarked by major changes including notonly the coming of iron, but also theincreasing use of gold and silver, and thepractice of horse nomadism. However, asindicated by the unique evidence fromNulasi, copper mining and smelting con­tinued unabated. Bronze artifacts, including

socketed dagger-axes, and handled mirrorsas well as items in precious metals, silk, andlacquer strongly suggest that Central Asiawas linked by trade routes through Xin­jiang with northwest China, i.e., the Gansucorridor. It is in Gansu that some of Chi­na's earliest copper-base artifacts have beenexcavated (see Linduff et al. 2000).

In Mei's detailed discussions of the ty­pology of copper-base artifacts, there arerepeated references to the similarities ap­parent between artifacts excavated in Xin­jiang and those of known Andronovo typefrom neighboring Eurasian locales. Thesecategories include shaft-hole axes, sickles,flanged adzes, and socketed celts. Throughthese artifact and site-specific discussions,Mei offers persuasive evidence for the im­pact of Eurasian steppe culture on Xin­jiang. Nor can we ignore indications,though currently based on less substantiveevidence, of contact between Xinjiang andbronze-using cultures to the east.

Mei, who is trained in metallurgy as wellas archaeology, conducted his own labora­tory analyses. They give us the first glimpseof the levels of sophistication attained inthe metalworker's craft as well as the mul­tiple, alloying traditions being employed.Copper and tin-bronze artifacts are presentin Xinjiang from the early second mil­lennium B.C. while, interestingly, arsenicalcopper doesn't seem to appear until thelater centuries of this period. In the earlyfirst millennium B.C. artifacts in copper ap­pear with more frequency due to what Meisuggests is the exploitation of local copperdeposits near Urumchi. Thus, when com­pared to western Asia, copper and its alloysappear relatively late in Xinjiang and ap­parently not in the more time-honoredsequence of copper, then arsenical copperfollowed by bronze as seen in the NearEast, Central Asia, and Eurasia. The some­what jumbled Xinjiang sequence, in Mei'sestimation, reflects the introduction of tinbronze and perhaps even arsenical copperartifacts and/or metallurgy from outside theregion followed by attempts to producemetal locally. On the more technical side,Mei argues that the presence of sulfideinclusions in the microstructure of artifactsfrom the Tacheng region suggests that

BOOK REVIEWS

copper sulfide ores were being smelted.He adopts the traditional 'matte' smeltingmodel involving the roasting of sulfide oresprior to smelting to explain the productionof the Nulasi ingots. In future research hemight also consider the possibility of theco-smelting of sulfide and oxidic oresdirectly to copper in a one-step produc­tion process without roasting. Research byWilliam Rostoker and colleagues (1989;Rostaker and Dvorak 1991) and that byHeather Lechtman and Sabine Klein (1999)has introduced co-smelting as a highly fea­sible alternative to the matte process andone which can yield arsenical copper.

When Mei turns his attention to eastof Xinjiang, and to Bronze Age culturalcontact with the Gansu-Qinghai region, hesees not only an influx of painted potteryinto Xinjiang from this region, but alsolooks at the presently modest evidence forthe spread of copperjbronze metallurgyinto Gansu-Qinghai from external sources.One potential source is the possible in­teraction between the Machang (Gansu­Qinghai) and Afanasievo (southern Siberia)cultures in eastern Xinjiang. Arsenical cop­per appears late in both regions, but it isnot clear if it has any direct links to CentralAsian-Eurasian traditions.

Iron appears c. 1000 B.C. in Xinjiang,but the tradition of copperjbronze metal­lurgy continues with new forms beingintroduced during the Iron Age. It is fromthis period that the one major documentedproduction site (Nulasai) comes with itsrare find of smelting remains including fiveplano-convex ingots (an unusual copper­arsenic-lead alloy). Mei suggests that thehigh arsenic content may have been anintentional addition and not the result ofsmelting arsenical copper ores.

It would be of particular interest if, assuggested by scholars, Nulasai was a sitewhich lay within the Saka people's sphereof influence, but on current evidence this isa difficult attribution to make. The Sakamay have been responsible for the produc­tion of a certain cauldron type, which Meiidentifies and, given that all Xinjiang caul­drons are made with Chinese-style piecemolds, this technology may have spreadfrom China through the Mongolian steppe

and into northern Xinjiang. Increasingcontact with the Chinese heartland wasoccurring in the late first millennium B.C.

as marked by the presence of silk, lacquer,and mirrors. Cast iron and its technologyreaches Xinjiang from the central plains ofChina at this time as well, brought perhapsby the Saka.

What Jianjun Mei has achieved in thisvolume is a unique synthesis, from a varietyof mostly new sources, of the critical infor­mation concerning copper-base metals andmetallurgy in Xinjiang from the point ofinitial appearance shortly after c. 2000 B.C.

down into the Iron Age. But this volumeis much more than a study in a singletechnology, it is a harbinger of continuingrevelations concerning the complex laterprehistory of Eurasia. Mei's research con­cretizes the crucial role played by Xinjiangin the transmission of cultural and tech­nological traditions both East and West.He states rather decisively that "one thingappears quite clear: Andronovo expansionplayed a vital role in the transmission ofcopper and bronze technologies in Eurasiaduring the second millennium B.C." (p.74). Furthermore, Mei's study does noth­ing to dispel the suggestion that this rapidcultural expansion may well have had aninfluential role in introducing metal andperhaps metallurgical technology into north­west China and ultimately to the Chinesecivilization of the central plains.

In the Foreword, Colin Renfrew, Mei'sacademic advisor at Cambridge, praises thisvolume as a "pioneering work," "the firstcoherent study of later prehistory in thisregion," and the "first in any language" todetail the region's metallurgical evidence.Moreover, this newly opened window onwhat was transpiring technologically inXinjiang, a geographical and cultural "shat­ter zone" between East and West, is crucialto understanding issues of fundamentalinterest to that substantial archaeologicalcommunity whose interests lie in the AsianOld World.

This volume is readable, rich in informa­tion and has numerous tables, maps, andfigures. If it is read in concert with severalrecent studies of Asian metallurgy, e.g.,Linduff et al. (2000) on China, Chernykh

170 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES 41 (2) . FALL 2001

(1991) on Eurasia, Pigott (1999) on South­west Asia, Agrawal (2000) on South Asia,and Higham (1996) on Southeast Asia andthe relevant papers in Mair (1998), a farclearer understanding of the developmentand spread of metallurgy across the vastgeographical expanse that is Asia can nowbe achieved. Its title understates somewhatthe wealth of archaeological information itcontains as this volume is more than a studyof metals and metallurgy-it is an insightfulview of technology in cultural and histori­cal context-one which will certainly bewidely read.

REFERENCES CITED

AGRAWAL, D. P.2000 Ancient Metal Technology and the Ar­

chaeology cif South Asia. Delhi: Mun­shiram Manhorilal Press.

BARBER, ELIZABETH WAYLAND1999 The Mummies of Urumchi. London:

Macmillan Publishers Ltd.

CHERNYKH, EVGENY1991 Ancient Metallurgy in the USSR: The

Early Metal Age. Cambridge, UK:Cambridge University Press.

HIGHAM, CHARLES1996 The Bronze Age ofSoutheast Asia. Cam­

bridge, UK: Cambridge UniversityPress.

LECHTMAN, HEATHER, AND SABINE KLEIN1999 The production of copper-arsenic

alloys (arsenic bronze) by cosmelting:Modern experiment, ancient prac­tice. Journal of Archaeological Science26: 497-526.

LINDUFF, KATHERYN M., HAN RUBIN, AND SUNSHUYUN

2000 The Beginnings of Metallurgy in China.Lampeter: The Edwin Mellen Press,Ltd.

MAIR, VICTOR H.1998 The Bronze and Early Iron Age Peoples

of Eastern Central Asia. 2 vols. Wash­ington, D.C.: Institute for the Studyof Man, and Philadelphia: Universityof Pennsylvania Museum.

MAIR, VICTOR, AND J. P. MALLORY2000 The Tarim Mummies. London: Thames

and Hudson.

PIGOTT, VINCENT c., ed.1999 The Archaeometallurgy of the Asian Old

World. MASCA Research Papers inScience and Archaeology No. 16.Philadelphia: The University Mu­seum, University of Pennsylvania.

ROSTOKER, WILLIAM, AND JAMES R. DVORAK1991 Some experiments with co-smelting

to copper alloy. Archeomaterials 5 (1) :5-20.

ROSTOKER, WILLIAM, VINCENT C. PIGOTT, ANDJAMES R. DVORAK

1989 Direct reduction to copper metalby oxide/sulfide mineral interaction.Archeomaterials 3 :69-87.

The Mons. A Civilization oj Southeast Asia. Emmanuel Guillon. Bangkok: TheSiam Society, 1999. 349 pp. ISBN 974-8298-44-2.

Reviewed by Tilman Frasch, South Asia Institute, Heidelberg University

It does not seem to be too far from truthto state that the Mons have received rela­tively little scholarly attention so far, ifcompared to other Southeast Asian peo­ples. For whatever reason that this maybe, the present study of the French philol­ogist Emmanuel Guillon represents the firstlarge-scale attempt to make good for this

gap by writing the history of the Mons.In fact, both the author's reputation as aleading scholar of Mon language, and theformat of the book (349 pages, foolscapsize, with many colored illustrations) sug­gest that we have a reference work in hand.

The book consists of two parts. In thefirst part, Guillon approaches the phenom-

Asiml Perspectives, Vol. 41, No.1 © 2002 by University ofHawai'j Press.

BOOK REVIEWS 171

enon "Mon" by describing the componentsthat shape their identity: language andscript, ethnicity and belief system. The sec­ond part, entitled "A long history," coversthe period from the formation of the firstpolities in the third millennium B.C. to thepresent, including the first blossoming ofMon culture in central Thailand (the king­dom of Dvaravati), the "classical Mon pe­riod" during the Pagan times, and the Monstates of Lower Burma between 1281 and1754; not to forget the Mon renaissancein seventeenth-century northern Thailand.Five appendices provide additional infor­mation on palaeography, chronology, ashort history of Mon studies, and two glos­saries on Buddhist texts and Mon words.The author has used a wide range of writ­ten texts including Mon historiographiesand inscriptions, the oldest of which dateback to the sixth century A.D.

The great expectations that are roused bythe outer appearance of the book are how­ever hardly met with by its contents. Basi­cally, the book has three major weaknesses.First, it is, by and large, a compilation ofdates and facts on Mon language, art, andculture without any theoretical reflectionor methodological concept. This is cer­tainly not enough for a study that under­takes to provide a general history of theMon people.

Second, the book is quite outdated. Theoriginal French version of the manuscriptwas finalized in 1969, but apart from thosefew areas which were among Guillon'smain research interest (i.e., Mon epigraphyand language), it has hardly been updatedsince. On page 170, for example, it is statedthat the Buddha reached parinirvana in theyear 543 according to the tradition of thesouthern Buddhists, in contrast to Sanskritsources which put it between the years 478and 486 B.C., a statement that completelyignores the relevant writings of Bechert onthis topic (apart from being wrong insofaras the 486 era was a creation of Indologistswho tried to reconcile the 544 era with thedate of the Indian king Ashoka). Or look atwhat is said about the kingdom Pagan, theearly phase of which is earmarked nothingless than the "classical age" of the Mons.

Research on early Burma published after1980 is completely ignored; even thoughstudies by Michael Aung-Thwin, JaniceStargardt, and the present reviewer have,each one in his (or her) own way, con­tributed to a balanced view of the Pyus andMons and their respective influence uponPagan, by making thorough use of theavailable epigraphical, historiographical, andarchaeological data. Instead, Guillon main­ly quotes from Luce who-with full re­spect to his pioneering research on earlyBurma-seems to have overestimated thecontribution of the Mons to the Pagankingdom. Quite paradoxically, Luce istreated critically only on occasions when itappears to be unnecessary or even wrong.Thus, Sudhammapura is translated as "GreatAssembly Hall of the Gods of the Heavenof the Thirty-three" (p. 104) against Luce'sversion "City of the Good Law" merelybecause of the long a. If the lengtheningof vowels had indeed to be taken that ser­iously, a good number of ministers in Paganwould have been female, as their namesend with long a (Satya, Asankhya, etc.).Obviously, the long vowel is euphonic,and Thaton/Sudhammapura can still beconsidered as the "City of the Good Law."

Third, the author displays a noteable lackof language skills whenever he venturesinto languages other than Mon. This refersmostly to Sanskrit/Pali and Burmese. Togive a few examples: the suffix "-dev!" inroyal titles is always translated as "divinity"instead of "queen," which is very commonin Sanskrit and Pali. A complete perturba­tion occurs on page 32 where ci1khi andcariy are described as "two kinds of scribes."The Burmese word cakhi indeed denotesthe position of a scribe or clerk, but cariy(lit. ca "letter" and riy "to write") usuallyoccurs in formulas such as ci1 riy so sa ka "hewho wrote these letters." It is a mere de­scription and has nothing to do with theoffice or position of a scribe. In the foot­note, moreover, cakhi is linked to Pali sak­khi ("witness"), which also occurs in earlyBurmese inscriptions, but as saksiy, whichis a direct derivation from Sanskrit, saksin.Equally untenable is the derivation of theBurmese word mim ("king, ruler") from

ASIAN PERSPECTIVES

Mon smin (p. 160). This misinterpretationis obviously based on the pronunciation ofman as "min." While man is a pure Burmeseword again, smin seems to be related toSanskrit samin ("lord, master"). Similarly,the remarks on Burmese epigraphy andhistoriography (p. 96) cannot be substan­tiated at all. This list could be continued fora while, and moreover become extendedby a list of typing errors such as arafifiasi in­stead of arafifiavasi, the forest monks (p. 79and passim), and in the glossary of Monwords in Appendix A.

Finally, it has to be noted that the bookwas arranged in a rather thoughtless way:expressions such as "I shall come back tothis point," "more about this later," "I shallhave to say more about this," and even theannouncement to tackle a certain problemin a separate monograph (p. 164) occur onseveral occasions-it may be 30 or more­and run like an unbroken thread throughthe text. The question that immediately

41 (2) • FALL 2001

emerges after reading the book is for whatreason or what purpose it may have beenpublished. Full of mistakes, outdated, andbarely original as it is, it can hardly be con­sidered as a standard work on a "SoutheastAsian civilization," as stated in the title.Nor can we regard it as a political mani­festo, as the relevance of Mons for themodern states is not discussed, be it theircontribution to the early Thai states ortheir situation in modern Burma. The an­noyance about a book that is expensivelymade but faulty, poorly written (and trans­lated?), and unnecessary at the time, soongives way to the simple insight that thehistory of the Mons remains to be written.Or, in Guillon's words: More about thislater.

Editor's note: A German language ver­sion of this review was published in Peri­plus: Jahrbuch fur aussereuropaische Geschichte,volume 10,2000, pp. 219-221.

Land of Iron. The Historical Archaeology of Luwu and the Cenrana Valley. DavidBulbeck and Ian Caldwell. 2000. Hull: Centre for South-East Asian Studies,University of Hull. 141 pp, 7 figures, 8 maps, 9 tables. ISBN 0-903122-08-1.

Reviewed by Ian C. Glover, Institute ofArchaeology,University College, London

The authors describe this as the second,but still preliminary, report on the jointAustralian-British-Indonesian OXIS proj­ect on the Origin of Complex Society inSouth Sulawesi, and it includes short re­ports on 29 excavated sites, and 56 siteswhich were surveyed in the ancient king­dom of Luwu at the head of the Gulf ofBone, Sulawesi, in central Indonesia.

The slim volume contains five sections:(1) A historical account of the kingdom ofLuwu based on oral traditions, especiallythe epic 'La Galigo' cycle, and the histori­cal lontara texts for which South Sulawesiis justifiably famous; (2) A summary of thefield research program in different parts ofancient Luwu; (3) An interpretation of the

research findings in the light of the his­torical traditions with suggestions for a newchronology based on radiocarbon dates andan analysis of the imported, largely Chineseceramics found at many of the sites; (4)Four appendixes listing the ceramic findsand forty-two new radiocarbon dates; and(5) A six-page bibliography, useful in itsown right since the abundant literature onthe cultures and history of South Sulawesiis not always easy to track down as it occursin Dutch, Indonesian, French, English, andGerman, not to mention sixteenth- andseventeenth-century descriptions in Portu­guese.

The volume is perhaps best read III

company with the book, The Bugis, by

Asia1l Perspectives, Vol. 41, No.1 © 2002 by University ofHawai'i Press.

BOOK REVIEWS 173

the French anthropologist Christian Pelras(1996) on which in some ways it is acommentary. Pelras advanced a proposi­tion, developed on the basis of a reading ofthe lontara and analyses of the La Galigoepic cycle by many people including him­self and Ian Caldwell, that Luwu was theearliest of the historical Bugis kingdomsand its court, from the fifteenth century,was the source of much of Bugis elite cul­ture and traditions. Luwu and its succes­sors were essentially agrarian kingdoms inwhich external trade was important but notthe main source of the wealth and powerof the rulers. In contrast, the La Galigocycle tells of an earlier society-perhapsbetween the twelfth and fourteenth cen­tury A.D.-with divinely descended rulerscentered in the northern part of what isnow southwestern Sulawesi, in which thepolitical economy depended on maritimetrade with other parts of the Indonesianarchipelago. The La Galigo society cameto an end in the early fourteenth centuryand after a period of anarchy, the 'Age ofChaos' mentioned in later Bugis chronicles,a number of new, sago and rice-basedagrarian kingdoms arose, of which Luwuwas the first and for long predominant.

In the aXIS project Bulbeck and Cald­well are attempting to test this reconstruc­tion through excavating and dating ancientsettlement sites in and around Luwu-anambitious attempt and perhaps the first sus­tained such piece of research in SoutheastAsia aiming to integrate historical and ar­chaeological data within a closely definedregion. Additionally, they have examinedcoastal-hinterland relationships around theGulf of Bone within the framework ofBronson's well-known (1977) model. Tothis end they set out (pp. 14-15) a numberof hypotheses, which can be summarizedthus:

1. That the Bugis kingdom of Luwu wasfounded at Malangkene by the fourteenthcentury A.D. on the basis of earlier, but notperhaps Bugis occupation of the region.

2. That the presence of high-grade ironore, rich soils, and dammar (fossil resin) de­posits in the region were sufficient to en­sure the prosperity of the kingdom.

3. That another, more southerly king­dom of Cina located near the mouth of theCenrana River was either a trade-based oragrarian kingdom (or both?), later absorbedfor some time by Luwu.

Fieldwork was started in 1992 with anextended survey and trek across Sulawesiby Caldwell when he recognized many ar­chaeological sites, which were identified bylocal informants with places known in thelontara or from oral traditions. Further sur­veys between 1994 and 1997 were fol­lowed by an excavation season in 1998, thescope of which was curtailed by unusuallybad weather.

Excavation consisted essentially of small,1-m-sq test pits, sometimes enlarged to 2­by-1 m, and sometimes several to a singlesite. Deposits were sieved and soil samplesretained for more careful examination, andcharcoal samples were taken where avail­able. It could be argued that many smallpits-the 'telephone box' strategy-arequite inadequate to give a reasonable sam­ple of surviving remains at heterogeneousliving sites. This is probably true, but theabundance of local and imported ceramicstogether with some iron, bronze, and goldartifacts and ornaments, iron slag, chertflakes, glass and stone beads, has enabledthe authors to develop rough chronologiesfor most sites using radiocarbon dates andceramic histograms based on the frequency,layer by layer, of identifiable and dateableimported sherds.

Drawing on the wealth of archaeologicalmaterial, the authors feel able to commenton, and sometimes modify earlier historicalreconstructions of South Sulawesi.

First they suggest that as an ethnic andlinguistic group the Bugis are relatively latearrivals, not earlier than A.D. 1300 in theregion north of the Gulf of Bone. Furtherthey find no archaeological evidence forthe fourteenth-century 'Age of Chaos,'which figures in Bugis oral traditions, butquite the opposite; that the period saw anincrease of overseas trade and the rise ofpowerful kingdoms of which Luwu wasone of many, but not the earliest. One re­markable finding was of buried brick struc­tures at Malangkhe, which seem once (now

174 ASIAN PERSPECTIVES FALL 2001

looted) to have been associated with Maja­pahit-Javanese-style gold arm bands, brace­lets, earrings, and eye covers, and a greatvariety of ceramics. It is quite possible thatthis was a classic Javanese religious andburial site of the fourteenth century; andif so, it is the first to be recognized inSulawesi.

There are many other points of interestin this brief, but information-packed re­port, which is surely a model "preliminarypublication," lacking only in photographsof the archaeological sites and material.Looking for something to criticize I foundthat it was often quite difficult to find earlysites and geographical features mentioned

in the text related to the maps, whichthemselves are clear enough. Some pointersin the text would have helped here.

REFERENCES CITED

BRONSON, B.

1977 Exchange at the upstream and down­stream ends: notes towards a func­tional model of the coastal state inSoutheast Asia, in Economic Exchangeand Social Interaction in Southeast Asia,ed. K. 1. Hutterer. Ann Arbor: Uni­versity of Michigan.

PELRAS, C.1996 The Bugis. Oxford: Blackwell.

Prambanan: Sculpture and Dance in Ancient Java. A Study in Dance Iconography.Alessandra Iyer. Bangkok: White Lotus Press, 1998. xii, 211 pp. ISBN 974-8434­12-5.

Reviewed by Astri Wright, Department ofHistory in Art, Universityif Victoria, British Columbia, Canada

Alessandra Iyer's Prambanan: Sculpture andDance brings together under one cover ela­borations on several of the author's articleson dance in Java published in academicjournals since the mid-1990s. This small,compact, and attractively packaged bookorganizes the results of Iyer's doctoral andpost-doctoral research on the history, ico­nography, and practice of dance in Javainto a consecutive narrative. Drawing on acombination of South and Southeast Asianart history, dance history, and recent theoryin dance studies in general, Iyer presentsher material here to a broader public, withinterests (both academic and applied) indance research, anthropology, and art his­tory in Southeast Asia and beyond.

In just over 160 pages, divided intoPart 1 and 2, Iyer offers the following.Part 1 includes an introductory chapterof disciplinary reflections and theoretical­methodological navigations; a second chap-

ter describing the Prambanan temple com­plex, its main temple Chandi Shiva with itsRamayana and dance reliefs, interspersedwith reliefs of deities and auspicious sym­bols, and a discussion of the history ofrestorations; a third chapter discussing thedance reliefs and their dance iconographyin greater detail, giving a more detailedintroduction to the Indian Natyasastra'skarana dance sequences as tentatively re­stored by Indian scholars; a fourth chapterdiscussing the Natyasastra's (sanskrit dancetreatise) possible presence in ancient Java,textually or dance-practice-wise, and a shortfifth chapter with concluding remarks.

This text, interspersed with photographicand line-drawn images, is followed by Part2, which begins with a sixth chapter thatis really a catalog of the 62 dance reliefs.These are located on the outside of theChandi Shiva balustrade (on the inside ofwhich is carved the Ramayana series of

Asia" Perspectives, Vol. 41, No.1 © 2002 by University of Hawai'j Press.

BOOK REVIEWS 175

reliefs). In this section, Iyer gives us relief­by-relief photographs and descriptions,each matched up with its correspondingkarana number and line-drawing takenfrom Subrahmanyam's 1978 reconstructionof the Natyasastra's sections on karana. Thisis followed by an Appendix in which Iyer'sanalysis is summarized in note form inparallel columns; footnotes to the text; aglossary of dance terminology; and thebibliography.

Iyer's analysis begins with the riddlenoted by nearly everyone who has writtenabout the Prambanan over the last sixtyyears: what might have been the sources ofinspiration and practice depicted in the re­lief series of dancers and musicians on theouter balustrade of Chandi Shiva (Shivatemple), most of them suggesting the difli­cult-to-substantiate relationship betweenthe Natyasastra (an ancient Indian body ofteachings about dance techniques, posturesand iconography put· into writing sometime between the first century B.C.E. andthe fourth century C.E.). Iyer dismisses ear­lier scholars' positings of this very connec­tion as intuitive but unsubstantiated byquantifiable analysis (p. 99), even whilenoting that Suhamir, in his 1948 report onthe completed Dutch-initiated restorationsof the Prambanan, knew enough about thisIndian dance tradition to identify the reliefsas depicting angahara, sequences involvingmore than one karana (p. 13).

Then, through an intermittently acro­batic analysis that rests on a painstakingadaptation of Indian dance scholar PadmaSubrahmanyan's reorganization of the Nat­yasastra to the reliefs in Java, Iyer concludesthat these Chandi Shiva reliefs (their origi­nal sequence also no longer identifiable),can "unerringly be identified as sculpturesshowing karana, the units of dance move­ment described in the Sanskrit text ondance and drama known from India asNatyasastra" (p. 11).

In her introduction, Iyer writes how,upon undertaking her research, she realizedthat she was "studying an obsolete non­Western dance form which, if at all, hadonly elicited interest in past times in termsof finding out whether it was an indication

of the presence of Indian dance styles inancient Java rather than for its own intrinsicvalue" (p. 7). While this seems a somewhatreductionist view of (among others cited)Claire Holt's varied and pioneering inter­disciplinary contribution to dance studies,Iyer then proceeds to discuss what to thisreader still remains unresolved in her ownbook: the theoretical-methodological de­bate around "Indianization" versus a modelof local assimilation of foreign (includingIndian) influences. (Iyer's footnotes here,as throughout, give a good orientation tonewcomers to the field on the differentstages in these debates.)

While Iyer distances herself from the'Indianization' view of Southeast Asia aspassive recipient to Indian influences instatecraft and cultural forms (and no stu­dent-scholar in this age of post-colonialanalysis could fail to make such a gesture),she also critiques the "localisation of Indianinfluence" view as too passive and polar­ized a model. Good, so far as the theoryis concerned. But what happens in the restof her analysis, as it rests on her choicesof methodology? Iyer's discussion is basedalmost entirely on recent results of the lastthirty years of Indian dance scholarship(and in particular that of the author'sown Indian mentor, Padma Subrahmanyan,with whom she traveled to Prambanan in1994). Leaning on Subrahmanyan's pub­lications of the late 1970s, Iyer creates acloser marriage between ancient Indiandance traditions and Javanese sculpturalreliefs than this branch of scholarship hasever encountered before. At the same time,she also presents data that allow the readerto study the full series of dance reliefs andto compare these with the line drawingsof Indian reconstructions of that tradition.Hence, while Iyer's book offers new in­traregionally comparative possibilities, heranalysis maintains the old India-Java axis,demonstrating mainly a one-way flow ofinfluence. The one possibility she cites asperhaps pointing to influence flowing theother way, is not developed and remainsairily hypothetical (see below).

Within Indonesian dance studies, mostof the early writers on dance in Indonesia

ASIAN PERSPECTIVES

focused on dance in Bali. Claire Holt wasamong the first to study dance in Java andIndonesia and to investigate sociohistori­cal dimensions that link indigenous andimported traditions, and sculpture, dance,and aesthetics. While Holt has a fairlylengthy discussion of the reliefs of dancersand dance-scenes at the Borobudur (1967),she does not touch on the Prambanandance reliefs in detail. This textual focusis illustrated by the inclusion of only threephotographs of dance reliefs from the Pram­banan: a reproduction of a dance scene of awoman performing a sword dance in acourt scene, as part of the Ramayana series(Holt 1967, pI. 102, p. 120), a second pho­tograph showing a drummer dancing withtwo other dancers (frontispiece), and athird photograph from the outer balus­trade's dance reliefs (Holt 1967, pI. 41,p. 57). These last two reproductions showthe reliefs numbered by Iyer as P6 and P55,respectively (Iyer, pp. 111, 159). However,one of the two publications has reversedthe reproductions of these reliefs-andthe existence of the Holt reproductions isstrangely not mentioned in Iyer (the fron­tispiece photograph in Holt belonged tothe Dinas Purbakala, the Indonesian Ar­chaeological Service; the one on page 57was photographed by Holt herself). Fur­thermore, this comparison higWights howpoor the quality of the black and whitereproductions of Iyer's own photographs ofthe dance reliefs are, perhaps a signal toWhite Lotus to improve their reproductiontechnology.

Another issue, which relates both to theauthor and the editors at White LotusPress, is the occasionally confusing organi­zation of the book. The most blatant ex­ample is in Chapter 3. While the text isorganized into subsections, numbered 3.1to 3.5, a ten-page section of the line draw­ings of dancers illustrating different karana(taken from Subrahmanyan's publications,pp. 73-82) are also numbered with thesame numbering system (starting with Fig­ure 3.1). This is done without there beingany apparent correspondence between textand image bearing matching numbers, and

41 (2) . FALL 2001

there are no references to individual draw­ings in the text.

This confusion is due to a major editingand layout oversight. After much cross­checking, the drawings are, in fact, revealedto be illustrations of the karana discussedin text section 3.4.1 (Karana descriptions);however, the existence of the line drawingsthat follow twenty pages later is not sig­naled in the written text. Furthermore, thesmall 'catalog' of line drawings have nosubheading of their own either in thetable of contents or on the page wherethey begin. Finally, the drawings are alsonumbered according to a second system,according to their karana number, all ofwhich makes for a disorganized reading ex­perience.

Since dance studies of non-Westerntraditions constitute the lesser part of thatliterature, historiographically Iyer's bookrepresents a welcome contribution to asmall field. Through her detailed studiesand analysis, Iyer is able to tie the ChandiShiva dance reliefs more closely to the In­dian sanskritic text tradition than anyonehas before and perhaps this reflects moreclosely a historical reality than what wehave known in this subject area und now.

However, this analysis has been donewithout the author adding any perspectivesfrom what one might expect to be an ab­solutely necessary component in her re­search-reconstructions (in texts, image, orcontemporary choreography) of indigenous(here, Javanese) dance traditions and ico­nography. Similarly, it is stated clearly thatthe Glossary of dance terminology (pp.193-198) includes only those Sanskrit danceterms in the Natyasastra that Iyer has iden­tified as relevant to the Prambanan dancereliefs. Rather than an informed challengefrom a dance historian, the following is asincere question from someone rooted inan interdisciplinarily informed, culture­specific art history: Is there, then, no Java­nese dance terminology, as distinct fromthose in Sanskrit, used in Java in historicaltexts or even today (which are linguisticallyarchaic) to describe any movements identi­fiable in the reliefs?

BOOK REVIEWS 177

Perhaps the latter kind of material doesnot exist. But any sense of a social historyof dance in Java is missing. Hence, I cannothelp but wonder how Iyer's study wouldhave differed had she traveled to Pramba­nan with other mentors at other times,mentors from Java, Bali, perhaps Cambodiaand Thailand, perhaps even from parts ofthe Oceanic world. I cannot help wonderwhat her conclusions would have been hadshe undertaken comparative local studiesof tribal-primal dance forms, as far as theystill exist, alongside the studies of the moreobviously 'internationalized court cultures'dance traditions. The fact that many karanaimitate animal movements or are inspiredby elements of nature (p. 89) would seemto point to a link, at a deep historical (in­deed, archaeological) stratum, between aprimal way of thought and ritual and thehigh-Sanskrit brahmin literary culture thatproduced the written versions of the Nat­yasastra and other classic texts. Mter read­ing this book, I cannot help wonder athow text-based many historians, includingart historians (which might or might notinclude dance historians), still are.

Adding first-person experience of cul­turally relevant kinetic movement to theart historical study of sculpture and space,urban and rural, interior and exterior,would greatly enrich insights into writingsabout a culture like Java's where bothdance and an appealing personal body­language for both men and women is socentral. The way the discipline of art his­tory is currently constructed and practiced,however, dance history, dance icono­graphy, and movement analysis occupies nomore than a tangential relationship to it.Indeed, it would appear that dance historystands on its own methodological feet asmuch as does the history of music, theatre,literature, and other areas of human en­deavor that together constitute the arts ofhumanity but are generally not includedunder the rubric of fine arts. In the sameway that music needs the aural text to dis­play its data, I would argue that this bookneeds a video of dancers offering variouspossible interpretations of karana to accom-

pany it. The drawings on pages 73-82 doprovide a lively and communicative breakfrom the static nature of print text. SinceIyer has been experimenting with digitalvideo-imaging, perhaps this is a next stagein her research.

While Iyer claims dance history as abranch of art history, she herself displayslimited art historical tools at times, such aswhen interpreting the famous early four­teenth-century statue of King Krtanagara asa fusion of Siwa and Buddha (p. 69) whenit is well established as a hari-hara (Siwa andVishnu) image and simultaneously an ard­hanarisvara (Lord who is Half Man HalfWoman) image. In addition, when chal­lenging the old theory that the three struc­tures facing the three Prambanan templesonce housed the vahana (vehicles) of eachtemple's main deity, Iyer cites the find of'a solar disk' opposite the Vishnu templeas more likely evidence of Surya than ofVishnu. Here, she (and the unnamed staffmember at the Prambanan Archaeologicaloffice she cites) misses the fairly basic pointthat a circular disk (a weapon) looks verysimilar (and at times identical) to the sym­bol of the sun, and such a disk is one ofVishnu's mam iconographic attributes.Vishnu is classified a deity of solar lineage,and as such complements his theologicalrival Shiva who is of lunar lineage andpowers.

This is not to say that dance would notbe a major part of a culturally contextual­ized Indonesian art history more free ofEuropean biases and outmoded disciplinarylimitations than it is today (or that a solidknowledge of sculptural-mythological ico­nography shouldn't be part of a dancescholar's tools). Holt's Art in Indonesia:Continuities and Change (Ithaca, NY: Cor­nell University Press, 1967), divided intothree parts (The Heritage, Living Tradi­tions, and Modern Art, followed by richappendixes of translations of inscriptions,scenes from epics and shadow puppet plays)still stands out as a pioneering (even pre­scient) work of post-colonial art historythat has not been matched or recognizedfor its contribution to theories and meth-

ASIAN PERSPECTIVES

odologies developed (and still developing)three-and-a-half decades after its publica­tion. Among national or regional historiesof art and cultural expression within South­east Asia, Holt's remains a lone monumentto a culturally embedded, multimedia andmultivocal art history.

Like Iyer, Holt was trained as a dancerand knew the various aesthetics of differentIndonesian (and other Asian and European)dance traditions through her body. How­ever, most of us in Southeast Asian art his­tory have not been able to include morethan a smattering of dance studies (if any)in our training, which makes the work byAlessandra Iyer, and her colleagues FeliciaFreeland-Hughes and Clara Brakel all themore valuable.

To me, the two most interesting hy­potheses offered by Iyer are the following:(1) the possible presence of Shiva, Lord ofDance, on the Chandi Shiva and (2) thelinking of all the individual karana into aspecific tandava (dance associated withShiva). While Holt writes that no image ofShiva himself as Lord of the Dance appearsat Prambanan or at any other of Java'ssanctuaries (Holt 1967: 61), Iyer posits thatsome of the groups of three dancers maydepict the Lord Shiva himself. Whileestablishing the many variations in Shivaiconography from Indian to Cambodianand Cham art and how definite Shiva attri­butes may have gone missing, Iyer does notin the end point to any specific reliefs ascandidates for Lord of the Dance status.This would be an interesting line of analysisto continue. Combining close scrutiny ofthe dance reliefs by eyes very familiar withShiva representations throughout Southand Southeast Asia (to me, based on thepoor reproductions, reliefs P27, p. 132 andP31, p. 136 stand out as strong candidatesfor Shiva status here) with the idea thatJavanese sculptors may have worked locallyfrom imported workbooks with drawingsof images not entirely familiar to them, one

41 (2) . FALL 2001

could arrive at a meaningful hypothesis ofone likely scenario.

The other interesting hypothesis of Iyer'sto follow up on is the fact that, if the dancereliefs indeed are dated to around the samedate as the construction of the temple, theyare one to two hundred years older thanthe earliest representations of a karana seriesfound in India today, the earliest knownseries being at the Chola Brhadisvara tem­ple in Tanjore (Iyer, p. 37). Iyer posits that,while neither the idea of karana nor theNatyasastra text originated in Java, perhapsthe idea of carving a series of karana as partof a temple's sculptural program may haveoriginated in Java and been transmittedback to India, and as such, constitute a caseof cultural recycling-or the flow of influ­ence going the other way.

However, before research like what Iyeroutlines above can be taken any further, awell-overdue translation seems an absolutenecessity. In Chapter 4, Iyer points outthat a balanced analysis of the dance reliefscarved at Chandi Shiva or elsewhere inclassical Java is not possible until the OldJavanese text Nawanatya (late thirteenth­fourteenth centuries), is fully translated andanalyzed. The fragments of the Nawanatyatranslated by Pigeaud in an appendix in his1963 translation and study of the NagaraKertagama, include terms also found in theNatyasastra. Iyer points out that this sug­gests prior knowledge of the Natyasastra inJava (p. 92). It would seem clear, however,that the Javanese text would have to beread for all of its references, not only for allof its potential narratives of recycling butalso for possible information of local in­vention, whether more hybrid or less so.

These, then, are some of the studies wecan hope for in the next round of scholar­ship pertaining to dance and cultural trans­mission in historical Java, and towardwhich Iyer's present book provides a step­ping stone.