Chinese Archaeology Goes Abroad

Abstract

From the mountains of Central Asia to the jungles of Mesoamerica, Chinese archaeologists are now conducting fieldwork around the world. China’s increasing involvement in world archaeology is a positive development for both heritage management and archaeological research. However, this new trend of joint Sino-foreign archaeological fieldwork is also situated within a larger political context. In this article, we examine how Chinese archaeological missions abroad help China achieve its geostrategic objectives. We present two case studies, one along the Swahili Coast in Kenya and another along the ancient Silk Road in Uzbekistan, to support our argument that Chinese involvement in archaeological projects in foreign countries often neatly dovetails with China’s foreign policy initiatives, which aim to build stronger economic and cultural ties with countries that host expanding Chinese markets. In sum, Chinese archaeology’s rapid internationalization is oriented towards growing China’s soft power and will likely play an even larger role in shaping global archaeological practice in the future.

Résumé

Des montagnes de l’Asie centrale aux jungles de la Méso-Amérique, les archéologues chinois conduisent actuellement des travaux de terrain à travers le monde. L’implication croissante de la Chine dans l’archéologie mondiale est un développement positif tant pour la gestion du patrimoine que pour la recherche archéologique. Cependant, cette tendance nouvelle des travaux archéologiques sino-étrangers de terrain s’inscrit également dans un contexte politique plus vaste. Nous examinons dans cet article comment les missions archéologiques chinoises à l’étranger ont permis à la Chine d’atteindre ses objectifs géostratégiques. Nous présentons deux études de cas, l’un le long de la Côte Swahili au Kenya et l’autre le long de l’ancienne Route de la Soie en Ouzbékistan, à l’appui de notre argument que la participation chinoise à des projets archéologiques dans des pays étrangers s’aligne bien souvent parfaitement sur les initiatives de la Chine en matière de politique étrangère, visant à tisser des liens économiques et culturels plus étroits avec les pays accueillant les marchés chinois en pleine expansion. En bref, l’internationalisation rapide de l’archéologie chinoise est axée sur la croissance du soft power de la Chine et devrait probablement jouer un rôle encore accru pour façonner la pratique mondiale de l’archéologie à l’avenir.

Resumen

Desde las montañas de Asia Central hasta las selvas de Mesoamérica, los arqueólogos chinos ahora realizan trabajos de campo en todo el mundo. La creciente participación de China en la arqueología mundial es un desarrollo positivo tanto para la gestión del patrimonio como para la investigación arqueológica. Sin embargo, esta nueva tendencia de trabajo de campo arqueológico conjunto sino-extranjero también se sitúa dentro de un contexto político más amplio. En este artículo, examinamos cómo las misiones arqueológicas chinas en el extranjero ayudan a China a alcanzar sus objetivos geoestratégicos. Presentamos dos estudios de caso, uno a lo largo de la costa Swahili en Kenia y otro a lo largo de la antigua Ruta de la Seda en Uzbekistán, para respaldar nuestro argumento de que la participación china en proyectos arqueológicos en los países extranjeros a menudo encaja perfectamente con las iniciativas de política exterior de China, cuyo objetivo es construir más fuertes lazos económicos y culturales con países que albergan mercados chinos en expansión. En resumen, la rápida internacionalización de la arqueología china está orientada al crecimiento del poder blando de China y probablemente desempeñará un papel aún más importante en la configuración de la práctica arqueológica global en el futuro.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3

Source: Chinese Academy of Social Sciences Central Asian Archaeology Research Unit

Figure 4

Source: Yu Ding

References

  1. Arnold, B. (1992). The past as propaganda: How Hilter’s archaeologists distorted European prehistory to justify racist and territorial goals. Archaeology,45(4), 30–37.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Bao, S. G., Wang, H., & 包曙光, 王赫. (2016). Eluosi Wusiji-Yiwannuofukahekou yizhi俄罗斯乌斯季·伊万诺夫卡河口遗址 (The Wusiji-Yiwannuofuka River Mouth Site). Dazhong Kaogu 大众考古 (Public Archaeology),9, 14–15.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Bita, C. (2015). Historical period stone anchors from Mombasa, Kenya: Evidence of overseas maritime trade contacts with Asia and Middle East. International Journal of Environment and Geoinformatics,2(3), 15–26.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Bollo, S., & Zhang, Y. (2017). Policy and impact of public museums in China: Exploring new trends and challenges. Museum International,69(3–4), 26–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Boytner, R., Dodd, L. S., & Parker, B. J. (Eds.). (2010). Controlling the past, owning the future: The political uses of archaeology in the middle east. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Brunson, K. (2017). Translation in archaeology. Anthropology News,58(2), 219–225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Cai, P. (2017). Understanding China’s belt and road initiative. Sydney: Lowy Institute.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Chang, K. C. (1981). Archaeology and Chinese historiography. World Archaeology,13(2), 156–169.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chen, L. 陈璐. (2018). Wenwu Baohu Yuanwai Gongcheng Cheng Wenhua Waijiao Xinliangdian 文物保护援外工程成文化外交新亮点 (Cultural Relics Protection Outside our Borders is a New Highlight of Cultural Diplomacy). Zhongguo Wenhuabao 中国文化报 (China Culture Daily), Feburary 14.

  10. Chen, Y. Z., Song, G. D., Sarenbilige, & Cheng, P. F. 陈永志, 宋国栋, 萨仁毕力格, 程鹏飞. (2015). Zhongmeng Kaogu Hezuo Shizhounian Huigu yu Zhanwang中蒙考古合作十周年回顾与展望 (Review and Prospect on the 10th Anniversary of Sino-Mongolian Archaeological Cooperation). Caoyuan Wenwu 草原文物 (Steppe Cultural Relics), 2, 1–7.

  11. China Institute of Cultural Relics, & Institute of Archaeology CASS. 中国文物研究所, 中国社会科学院考古所. (2003). Wuge Yiji Zhousa Shenmiao Kaogu Baogao吴哥遗迹周萨神庙考古报告 (Excavation report on the Chau Say Temple in Angkor Thom). Kaogu Xuebao 考古学报 (Archaeological Reports), 3, 427–458.

  12. Chinese Academy of Cultural Heritage, Team sponsored by the Chinese government for the preservation of ancient architectural remains at Angkor, Bureau for the preservation of ancient architecture and development management in Angkor of Cambodia, Royal University of Fine Arts. 中国文化遗产研究院, 中国政府援助吴哥古迹保护工作队, 柬埔寨吴哥古迹保护与发展管理局, 柬埔寨金边皇家艺术大学 (2015). Jianpuzhai Wuge Guji Chajiaosi kaogu baogao 柬埔寨吴哥古迹茶胶寺考古报告 (Report on Archaeological Excavation of Ta Keo in Angkor Wat, Cambodia). Beijing: Wenwu Chubanshe.

  13. Chinese Academy of Cultural Heritage. 中国文化遗产研究院. (2018). Wuge Guji Baohu yu Kaogu Yanjiu de Huigu he Sikao吴哥古迹保护与考古研究的回顾和思考 (Review and Reflection on the Conservation and Archaeological Research of Ancient Remains in Angkor Wat). Zhongguo Wenhua Yichan 中国文化遗产 (Chinese Cultural Heritage), 2, 64–73.

  14. Copan Team of the Institute of Archaeology at the Chinese Academy of Science. 中国社会科学院考古研究所科潘工作队. (2017). Hongdulasi Kepan Yizhi 8N-11 Hao Guizu Juzhi Beice Wanqi Jianzhu 洪都拉斯科潘遗址 8 N-11号贵族居址北侧晚期建筑 (Hondouras Copan Ruins 8N-11 Noble Residence North Side Late Building). Kaogu 考古 (Archaeology), 9, 39–57.

  15. Dazhong Kaogu. 大众考古. (2018). Zhongguo Kaogu Zouchuqu Xiangmu Gailan 中国考古走出去’项目概览 (An Overview of Projects Associated with the “going out” of Chinese Archaeology). Dazhong Kaogu 大众考古 (Public Archaeology), 1, 74–79.

  16. Ding, Y. 丁雨. (2014). Kenniya Binhaisheng Malindi Laocheng Yizhi de Chubu Yanjiu肯尼亚滨海省马林迪老城遗址的初步研究 (Preliminary Study on the Old City Site in Malindi, Coastal Province, Kenya). Nanfang Wenwu 南方文物 (Southern Relics), 4, 130–138.

  17. Ding, Y. 丁雨. (2016). Zheng He de Chuandui Daoguo Dongfei ma? 郑和的船队到过东非吗? (Has Zheng He’s fleet ever been to Eastern Africa?). Pengpai Xinwen 澎湃新闻 (The Paper), September 13. https://www.thepaper.cn/newsDetail_forward_1511142.

  18. Du, S. R. 杜尚儒. (2016). Wang Jianxin—Tianbu Silu Kaogu Kongbai de Zhongguoren 王建新 填补丝路考古空白的中国人 (Jianxin Wang—The Chinese who Fills Gaps in Silk Road Research). Xin Xibu 新西部 (New Western Areas), 8, 69–72.

  19. Fahey, B. (2004). Mayan: A Sino-Tibetan language? Sino-Platonic Papers,130, 1–61.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Falkenhausen, L. (1993). On the historiographical orientation of Chinese archaeology. Antiquity,67(257), 839–849.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Feng, E. X., & Alkin, (2007). Eluosi Teluoyiciji Mudi 2004 nian fajue de shuohuo (The Gains of Troysky graveyard’s excavation of Russia in 2004). Bianjiang Kaogu Yanjiu 边疆考古研究 (Research in Frontier Archaeology),5, 211–214.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Ferdinand, P. (2016). Westward ho—The China dream and “one belt, one road”: Chinese foreign policy under Xi Jinping. International Affairs,92(4), 941–957.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Fiskesjö, M. (2010). Politics of cultural heritage. In Y. T. Hsing & C. Lee (Eds.), Reclaiming Chinese society (pp. 225–245). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Fleisher, J., Lane, P., LaViolette, A., Horton, M., Pollard, E., Morales, E. Q., et al. (2015). When did the Swahili become maritime? American Anthropologist,117(1), 100–115.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Frachetti, M. D. (2012). Multiregional emergence of mobile pastoralism and nonuniform institutional complexity across Eurasia. Current Anthropology,53(1), 2–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Gao, Q. (2016). Challenges in archaeological tourism in China. International Journal of Historical Archaeology,20(2), 422–436.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Gardner, H. (2016). China Strives to Become Leader in World of Archeology. USA Today, July 19. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2016/07/19/china-leader-world-archeology/86679930.

  28. Han, H. 韩宏. (2018). Lishi 16 Nian, Woguo Kaogu Xuejia Zhaodaole Dayuezhi Wenhua Yicun, Chenggong Jiejue Shijiexing Xueshu Nanti历时十六年,我国考古学家找到了大月氏文化遗存,成功解决世界性学术难题 (After 16 Years of Search, Archaeologists from our Country have Discovered the Remains of the Dayuezhi Culture, Successfully Solved a World Academic Problem).” Wenhuibao 文汇报 (Wen Wei Po), February 5.

  29. He, B. G. (2018). The domestic politics of the Belt and Road Initiative and its implications. Journal of Contemporary China,28(116), 180–195.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Luoyang Municipal Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, & the Department of Archaeology at Ulaanbaatar University. 河南省文物考古研究院, 洛阳市文物考古研究院, 乌兰巴托大学考古学系. 2018. Mengguguo Houhangaisheng Gaolemaodu 2 hao mudi M189 peizangmu fajue jianbao蒙古国后杭爱省高勒毛都2号墓地M189陪葬墓发掘简报(The excavation of the satellite tomb M189 in Gol Mod Cemetery No. 2 in Arkhangai Province, Mongolia). Huaxia Kaogu 华夏考古 (Huaxia Archaeology), 2, 34–44.

  31. Hou, W. D., & 侯卫东. (2016). Cong Zhousa Shenmiao dao Chajiaosi-Zhongguo canyu Wuge Guji baohu jishi从周萨神庙到茶胶寺 - 中国参与吴哥古迹研究与保护纪实 (From Chau Say Tevoda to Ta Keo: Conservation and Restoration of the Angkor Monuments). Jianzhu Yichan 建筑遗产 (Architectural Heritage),1, 100–109.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Huan, X. H. 宦小淮. (2018). ‘Heishihao’ chenchuan shifa nali “黑石号”沉船始发哪里? (Where did the shipwreck of Blackstone hail from). Chengdu Shangbao 成都商报 (Chengdu Economic Daily), December 21. http://e.chengdu.cn/html/2018-12/21/content_640254.htm.

  33. Institute of the Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Jilin Province and Institute of History, Archaeology and Ethnography of the Peoples of the Far-East, & Fart-Eastern Branch of Russian Academy of Sciences. 吉林省文物考古研究所, 俄罗斯科学院远东分院远东民族历史·考古·民族研究所. (2016). 2011 Nian Eluosi Binhai Bianjiangqu Kalasijinuo Chengzhi Kaogu Kantan Baogao 2011 年俄罗斯滨海边疆区克拉斯基诺城址考古勘探报告 (Report on the Ancient Kraskino City in Russia’s Primorsky Region, 2011). Beifang Wenwu 北方文物 (Northern Relics), 2, 29–34.

  34. Ji, L. Y. 冀洛源. (2017). 2014 Nian Yindu Kalalabang Liangchu Chutu Zhongguo Wenwu Yizhi de Diaocha yu Shouhuo 二〇一四年印度喀拉拉邦两处出土中国文物遗址的调查与收获 (2014 Survey of Two Chinese Artifacts Containing Sites in Kerala, India). Zijincheng 紫禁城 (Forbidden City),5, 68–75.

  35. Joint Sino-Saudi Archaeological Team. (2018). Zhongsha hezuo zai Honghai zhibin kaizhan gangkou kaogu中沙合作在红海之滨开展港口考古 (China and Saudi-Arabia formed a joint Archaeological Team to Excavate a Port on the Red Sea Coast). Zhongguo Wenwubao中国文物报 (Reports of Chinese Cultural Relics), May 18.

  36. Kerr, D. (2015a). Civil Society and China’s Governance Dilemmas in the Era of National Rejuvenation. In David Kerr (Ed.), China’s Many Dreams: Comparative perspectives on China’s search for national rejuvenation (pp. 35–64). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Kerr, D. (2015b). Introduction: China’s many dreams. In David Kerr (Ed.), China’s many dreams: Comparative perspectives on China’s search for national rejuvenation (pp. 1–10). London: Palgrave Macmillan.

  38. Kohl, P. (1998). Nationalism and archaeology: On the constructions of nations and the reconstructions of the remote past. Annual Review of Anthropology,27(1), 223–246.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Kohl, P., & Fawcett, C. (Eds.). (1995). Nationalism, politics, and the practice of archaeology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Kristof, N. (1999). 1492: The Prequel. New York Times, June 6. http://www.nytimes.com/1999/06/06/magazine/1492-the-prequel.html.

  41. Kusimba, C. M. (2019). Ancient connections between China and East Africa. In C. M. Kusimba, T. Q. Zhu, & P. W. Kuira (Eds.), China and East Africa: Ancient ties, contemporary flows. Lanham: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Kusimba, C. M. & Walz, J. R. (2018). When Did the Swahili Become Maritime?: A Reply to Fleisher et al. (2015), and to the Resurgence of Maritime Myopia in the Archaeology of the East African Coast. American Anthropologist, 120(3), 429–443.

  43. Lane, P., Kleinitz, C., & Gao, Y. L. (2017). Global frictions, archaeological heritage, and Chinese construction in Africa. In T. Hodos, A. Geurds, P. Lane, I. Lilley, M. Pitts, G. Shelach, M. Stark, & M. J. Versluys (Eds.), The Routledge handbook of archaeology and globalization (pp. 139–156). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Lee, Y. K. (2002). Building the chronology of early Chinese history. Asian Perspectives,41(1), 15–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Li, J., Fang, H., & Underhill, A. P. (2016). The history of perception and protection of cultural heritage in China. In A. Underhill & L. C. Salazar (Eds.), Finding solutions for protecting and sharing archaeological heritage resources (pp. 1–16). New York: Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Li, R. X., & Wang, T. J. 李瑞雪, 王铁军. (2017). Kaogu Faxian Heilongjiang Liuyu Sanchu Teshu Yiji 考古发现黑龙江流域三处特殊遗迹 (Three Unique Archaeological Features Discovered in the Heilongjiang River Basin). Xinwanbao 新晚报 (New Evening Reports), August 3. http://www.kaogu.cn/cn/xccz/20170803/59132.html.

  47. Li, Z. Y., & 李占扬. (2018). Kenniya Jimenjishi yizhi kaogu fajue肯尼亚吉门基石遗址考古发掘 (Archaeological excavation of the Kimengich site in Kenya). Dazhong Kaogu 大众考古 (Public Archaeology),1, 21–32.

  48. Lishixueyuan. 历史学院. (2018). Bajisitan kaogu jianxun巴基斯坦考古简讯 (Pakistan Archaeological Newsletter). Nanjing Daxue Lishi Xueyuan 南京大学历史学院 (College of History, Nanjing University), Nov. 9.

  49. Lu, T. L. D. (2013). Museums in China: Power, politics and identities. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Luke, C., & Kersel, M. (2013). US cultural diplomacy and archaeology: Soft power, hard heritage. Abingdon: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  51. Meggers, B. J. (2005). The origins of Olmec civilization. Science,309(5734), 556.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. Mo, L. H., & 莫林恒. (2016). Foguo Xunzong: Mengjialaguo Piheluopuer Fojiao Yizhi Fajue Sanji孟加拉国毗诃罗普尔佛教遗址发掘记 (Searching for Traces in a Buddist Country: Notes on the Excavation of the Buddhist Vikrampura in Bangladesh). Dazhong Kaogu 大众考古 (Public Archaeology),3, 69–79.

  53. Murowchick, R. E. (2013). “Despoiled of the garments of her civilization:” Problems and progress in archaeological heritage management in China. In Anne Underhill (Ed.), A companion to Chinese archaeology (pp. 13–34). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Nobis, A. (2018). The Chinese New Silk Road utopia and its archaeology. Globalizations,15(5), 722–731.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  55. Pollard, E., Bates, R., Ichumbaki, E. B., & Bita, C. (2016). Shipwreck evidence from Kilwa, Tanzania. International Journal of Nautical Archaeology,45(2), 352–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Prendergast, M. E., & Sawchuck, E. (2018). Boots on the ground in Africa’s ancient DNA ‘revolution’: Archaeological perspectives on ethics and best practices. Antiquity,92(363), 803–815.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Qin, D. S., & Ding, Y. 秦大树, 丁雨. (2015). Kenniya Binhaisheng Manbuluyi Yizhi de Daogu Fajue yu Zhuyao Shuohuo肯尼亚滨海省曼布鲁伊遗址的考古发掘与主要收获 (Archeological Excavations and Major Harvests at the Manrui Ruins, Coronation Island, Kenya). Zhongguo Feizhou Yanjiu Pinglun 中国非洲研究评论 (Sino-African Research and Debate), 4, 253–271.

  58. Qin, D. S., & Ding, Y. (2018). Mambrui and Malindi. In Adria LaViolette & Stephanie Wynne-Jones (Eds.), The Swahili world (pp. 205–213). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  59. Qin, D. S., Ding, Y., & Liu, W. 秦大树, 丁雨, 刘未. (2013). 2012 Niandu Zhongguo he Keniya Lushang Hezuo Kaogu Xiangmu qude Jieduanxing Chengguo 2012年度中国和肯尼亚陆上合作考古项目取得阶段性成果 (The 2012 Sino-Kenya Joint Terrestrial Archaeology has Achieved Interim Results). Zhongguo Wenwubao 中国文物报 (China Cultural Relics News), April 26.

  60. Qu, T., & Tong, F. 屈婷, 童芳. (2018). Qu Aiji: Zhongguo kaogu xuezhe ‘chuanyue’ gengduo de gulao wenming去埃及:中国考古学者“穿越”更多的古老文明 (Go to Egypt: Chinese archaeologists’time-travel’ more ancient civilizations). Xinhuawang 新华网 (Xinhuanet), November 23, http://www.xinhuanet.com/politics/2018-11/23/c_1123760527.htm.

  61. Shaanxi Archaeological Research Institute, & Issyk-Kul State Historical and Cultural Museum. 陕西省考古研究院, 哈萨克斯坦伊塞克国家历史文化博物馆. (2017). Lahate gucheng yizhi diaocha yu shijue 拉哈特古城遗址调查与试掘 (Archaeological survey and test excavation of the Lahate ancient city remains). Kaogu yu Wenwu 考古与文物 (Archaeology and Relics), 6, 121–122.

  62. Shao, X. X., & 邵欣欣., (2010). 中华文明与古代中美洲文明关系研究回顾及评价 (Overview and evaluation of studies on the relationship between Chinese civilization and ancient civilizations of Mesoamerica). Shoudu Bowuguan Congkan 首都博物馆丛刊 (Capital Museum Series),24, 111–118.

  63. Sichuan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Shaanxi Archaeological Research Institute, & Vietnam National Museum of History. 四川省文物考古研究院 陕西省考古研究院 越南国家历史博物馆. (2016). Yuenan YiliFengyuan Wenhua Yicun Fajue Baogao 越南义立冯原文化遗存发掘报告 (Yili in VietnamReport on the Excavation of a Fengyuan Cultural Site). Beijing: Wenwu Chubanshe.

  64. Smith, O. (2018). The Unstoppable Rise of the Chinese Traveler—Where are they going and what does it mean for overtourism? The Telegraph, April 11. https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/comment/rise-of-the-chinese-tourist/.

  65. Spengler, R., Frachetti, M., Doumani, P., Rouse, L., Cerasetti, B., Bullion, E., & Mar'yashev, A. (2014). Early agriculture and crop transmission among Bronze Age mobile pastoralists of Central Eurasia. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 281(1783), 20133382.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  66. Summers, T. (2016). “New Silk Roads”: Sub-national regions and networks of global political economy. Third World Quarterly,37(9), 1628–1643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Toops, S. (2016). Reflections on China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Area Development and Policy,1(3), 352–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. Underwater Archaeology Research Centre at the National Museum of China & Department of Coastal Archaeology at the National Museums of Kenya. 中国国家博物馆水下考古研究中心, 肯尼亚国立博物馆沿海考古部. (2012). 2010 Niandu Zhongken Hezuo Kenniya Yanhai Shuixia Kaogu Diaocha Zhuyao Shouhuo 2010 年度中肯合作肯尼亚沿海水下考古调查主要收获 (Major Discoveries of Sino-Kenyan Cooperative Underwater Archaeological Survey in Coastal Areas of Kenya in 2010). Zhongguo Guojia Bowuguan Guankan 中国国家博物馆馆刊 (Journal of National Museum of China), 8, 88–99.

  69. van der Line, S. J., van den Dries, M. H., Schlanger, N., & Slapendel, Corijanne. (2012). European Archaeology Abroad: Global settings, comparative perspectives. In S. J. van der Line, M. H. van den Dries, N. Schlanger, & C. Slapendel (Eds.), European Archaeology Abroad: Global settings, comparative perspectives (pp. 21–32). Leiden: Sidestone Press.

    Google Scholar 

  70. Wang, K. H. (2014). Mayan exhibition shows ‘similarities’ with Chinese. China Daily USA, November 18. http://usa.chinadaily.com.cn/epaper/2014-11/18/content_18934705.htm.

  71. Wang, Z. (2014b). The Chinese dream: Concept and context. Journal of Chinese Political Science,19, 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Wang, X. P., & 王小鹏. (2017). Zhongguo Kaoguxuejia Shouci zai Feizhou Faxian Jiushiqi Didian中国考古学家首次在非洲发现旧石器地点 (For the First Time Chinese Archaeologists Discovered a Paleolithic Site in Africa). Renmin Ribao 人民日报 (The People’s Daily), October 22. Accessed January 20, 2018. http://paper.people.com.cn/rmrb/html/2017-0/10/nw.D110000renmrb_20171010_3-22.htm#.

  73. Wang, Y. L., & 王元林. (2017). Zhengjiu Wuge: Guji Baohu yu Kaogu Yanjiu Bingzhong 拯救吴哥:古迹保护与考古研究并重 (Save Angkor: Pay Equal Attention to Cultural Heritage Conservation and Archaeological Research). Zhongguo Shehui Kexue Bao 中国社会科学报 (Reports from the Chinese Academy of Social Science), March 17.

  74. Wang, Y., & 王莹. (2018). Woguo Kexuejia Liyong Yaogan Shouci Faxian Guowai Silu Kaogu Yizhi我国科学家利用遥感首次发现国外丝路考古遗址 (Chinese Scientists Use Remote Sensing to Discover Foreign Silk Road Archaeological Sites for the First Time). Xinhua News, April 20. https://baijiahao.baidu.com/s?id=1598242311327202641&wfr=spider&for=pc.

  75. Wang, J., Berdimimurodov, A., Ma, J., Chen, A., Zhou, X., Sun, W., Cao, H., Khasanov, M. & Raximov, K. 王建新, A. Berdimimurodov, 马健, 陈爱东, 周新郢, 孙危, 曹辉, M. Khasanov, K. Raximov. (2014). Nian Wuzibeikesitan Samaerhan Pendi Nanyuan Kaogu Diaocha Jianbao 2014 年乌兹别克斯坦撒马尔罕盆地南缘考古调查简报 (2014 Archaeological Survey at the Steppe Zone on the Southern Edge of the Samarkand Basin, Uzbekistan). Xibu Kaogu 西部考古 (Western Archaeology), 8, 1–31.

  76. Wang, X. P, & Lu, D. B. 王小鹏, 卢朵宝. (2017). Kenniya Faxian Zheng He Xiaxiyang Shidai Zhongguo Xueyuan Rengu Yihai 肯尼亚发现郑和下西洋时代中国血缘人骨遗骸 (Skeletal Remains with Chinese Ancestry Dating to the Age of Zheng He’s Voyage). Xinhua News, July 29. http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2017-07/29/c_1121400232.htm.

  77. Wang, W., & 王巍.. (2017). Zhongguo Kaoguxue Guojihua de Licheng yu Zhanwang 中国考古学国际化的历程与展望 (The Retrospect and Future of the Internationalization of Chinese Archaeology). Kaogu 考古 (Archaeology),12, 3–13.

  78. Winter, T. (2015). Heritage diplomacy. International Journal of Heritage Studies,21(10), 997–1015.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  79. Winter, T. (2016). One belt, one road, one heritage: Cultural diplomacy and the silk road. The Diplomat,29, 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  80. Xu, M. H. (1996). The origin of the olmec civilization. Edmond: University of Central Oklahoma Press.

    Google Scholar 

  81. Xu, J., Wang, W., Gao, L., & Dai, Y. 徐进, 汪伟, 高磊, 代玉彪. (2017). Shouchu Guomen Lianhe Kaogu 首出国门联合考古 (Stepping Out of the National Border for the First Time to Conduct Joint Archaeological Projects). Zhongguo Wenwubao 中国文物报 (Reports on Chinese Cultural Relics), November 17.

  82. Yan, H. L. (2017). Heritage tourism in China: Modernity, identity and sustainability. Blue Ridge Summit: Channel View Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  83. Yang, Y. (2017). CASS establishes research center for archaeology abroad. Chinese Social Sciences Today, April 5. http://casseng.cssn.cn/news_events/news_events_news_briefing/201704/t20170405_3476471.html.

  84. Yuan, J., & 袁靖. (2017). Jingwai Kaogu Rezhong de Lingsikao 境外考古热中的冷思考 (Calm Thinking in the Frenzy of Overseas Archaeology. Guangming Ribao 光明日报 (Guangming Daily), April 11. http://cul.china.com.cn/2017-04/11/content_9429858.htm.

  85. Zan, L. (2014). Cultural Heritage in China: Between policies development, professional discourse, and the issue of managing. Public Archaeology,13(1–3), 99–112.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  86. Zhang, Y. (2017a). 张杨. Chuanyue Lishi–Jiekai gu Sichouzhilu de Shenmi Miansha穿越历史—揭开古丝绸之路的神秘面纱 (Going through History–Revealing the Mysterious Silk Road). Xi’an Ribao 西安日报, November 24.

  87. Zhang, Y. (2017b). 张勇. Chuanyue Shijian yu Guojie de Qianshou—Yunnan Wenwu Kaogu Mianxiang Dongnanya “Zouchuqu” Jishi’ 穿越时间与国界的牵手—云南文物考古面向东南亚“走出去”纪实 (Holding Hands Across Time and Borders—On the “Going Global” of the Yunnan Cultural Relics and Archaeological Research in Southeast Asia). Guangming Ribao 光明日报, July 11. http://epaper.gmw.cn/gmrb/html/2017-07/11/nw.D110000gmrb201707113-09.htm.

  88. Zhang, F. H., & Courty, P. (2020). The China Museum Boom: Soft power and cultural nationalism. International Journal of Cultural Policy. https://doi.org/10.1080/10286632.2019.1709058.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  89. Zhang, L. R., & Shui, T. 张良仁, 水涛. (2017). Nanjing Daxue yu Yilang Zucheng Lianhe Kaogudui, Hezuo Kaogu Xuxie Silu Gushi 南京大学与伊朗组成联合考古队合作考古续写丝路故事 (Nanjing University and Iran Formed a Joint Archaeological Team to Make Concerted Efforts to Investigate the Silk Road). Guangming Ribao 光明日报 (Guangming Daily), February 28. https://www.yidaiyilu.gov.cn/info/iList.jsp?tm_id=126&cat_id=10005&info_id=8742.

  90. Zhang, L. R., Tishkin, A. A., Grushin, S. P., & Seregin, N. N.. 张良仁, Tишкин A. A. Гpyшин C. П. Cepeгин H. H. (2017). Eluosi Sheshanshi Kalewanghu I Hao Yizhi de Fajue俄罗斯蛇山市卡勒望湖I号遗址的发掘 (The Excavation of Settlement Kalyvanskoe-I in Zmeinogorsk, Russia). Kaogu 考古 (Archaeology), 9, 14–21.

  91. Zhang, X. T., & Zhang, X. G. 张先堂 张小刚. (2017). Dunhuang Yanjiuyuan Zhuanjia Kaochatan Kaiqi Zhongji Wenhua Yichan Jiaoliu Hezuo Zhilü 敦煌研究院专家考察团开启中吉文化遗产交流合作之旅 (Researchers from the Dunhuang Research Academy Started the trip for Sino-Kyrgyz Collaboration in Cutural Heritage). Dunhuang Shiku Gonggongwang 敦煌石窟公共网, July 28, http://public.dha.ac.cn/content.aspx?id=658065268117.

  92. Zhang, W., Zhao, Y. J., & 张伟, 赵永军. (2002). Zai Eluosi Milin zhong–Zhongguo Shouzhi Zhuanye Kaogudui fu Guowai Fajue在俄罗斯密林中—中国首支专业考古队赴国外发掘 (In the Dense Forest of Russia-The First Professional Archaeological Team Excavated in Foreign Countries). Wenwu Tiandi 文物天地 (Cultural Relics),3, 19–21.

    Google Scholar 

  93. Zhang, J. H., & Zhou, B. 张江河,周彬. (2016). Gujn Sichouzhilu diyuan zhengzhi zhibijiao古今丝绸之路地缘政治之较析 (A Comparative Analysis of the Geopolitics of the Ancient and Contemporary Silk Roads). Dongnanya Yanjiu东南亚研究 (Southeast Asia Studies), 6, 31–44.

  94. Zhong, H., & Wang, T. 钟华, 王涛. (2017). 科潘:比较的视角”国际研讨会会议纪要 (Minutes from the ‘Copan: a comparative perspective’ international symposium). Zhongguo kaoguwang中国考古网 (Chinese Archaeology), November 8. https://mp.weixin.qq.com/s/k-YUVpkj9elDDM-Eh8ltfQ?.

  95. Zhu, Y. S., & 朱岩石. (2018). Zhongguo Kaoguxue dui Jingwai Sichouzhilu Gucheng Kaogu de Dute Gongxian中国考古学对境外丝绸之路古城考古的独特贡献 (Unique Contribution of Chinese Archaeology to the Archaeology of Foreign Ancient Cities along the Silk Road). Jiusan Luntan九三论坛 (93 Discussions), 1, 21–25.

  96. Zhu, Y. S., Liu, T., Ai, L. J., & He, S. L. 朱岩石, 刘涛, 艾力江, 何岁利. (2017). Wuzibiekesitan Anjiyanzhou Mingtiepei Chengzhi Kaogu Kantan yu Fajue乌兹别克斯坦安集延州明铁佩城址考古勘探与发掘 (Archaeological Survey and Excavation of the Mingtepa City Ruin in Andijan, Uzbekistan). Kaogu 考古 (Archaeology), 9, 22–38.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful to the 65th China Postdoctoral Science Foundation Grant (2019M651399) and the National Social Science Foundation of China (19CKG019) for financial support. We are also thankful to several anonymous reviewers whose commentary has helped improved the quality of this manuscript.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael J. Storozum.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Storozum, M.J., Li, Y. Chinese Archaeology Goes Abroad. Arch (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11759-020-09400-z

Download citation

Key Words

  • Chinese archaeology
  • Nationalism
  • Soft power
  • Belt and Road Initiative
  • Cultural diplomacy