CHINA HERITAGE QUARTERLY China Heritage Project, The Australian National University ISSN 1833-8461
No. 28, December 2011


Lo Chen-yu Visits the Wastes of Yin | China Heritage Quarterly

Lo Chen-yü Visits the Wastes of Yin

Richard C. Rudolph*

The following article is taken from the collection 'Nothing concealed': essays in honor of Liu Yü-yün, edited by Frederic E. Wakeman and published in Taipei by the Ch'eng wen ch'u pan she in 1970.

Lo Chen-yü 羅振玉 (1866-1940), one of the greatest scholars of early twentieth century China, made many important contributions to Chinese archaeology and was a pioneer in several aspects of this discipline. He was, for example, among the first to collect and to make studies of China's earliest writing found on the oracle bones at Yin-hsü 殷虛, the 'Waste of Yin', the site of the last Shang capital at present day Hsiao-t'un 小屯 near Anyang. He was the first to have material of all types collected from this region for study, and he was apparently the first Chinese to recognize the archaeological and historical importance of tomb figurines.[1] Of the 155 published items in his bibliography, over half are concerned with archaeology.[2]

But in spite of his involvement with archaeology and his ability to pioneer in new fields, Lo Chen-yü still showed some of the attitude of the Sung scholars who also made significant progress in archaeology: a preference to work in the study rather than to seek original material in the field.[3] Although it does not detract from the importance of the contributions he made, it is interesting to note that he himself did not visit the Waste of Yin until 1915, after a number of his books and articles on materials from this site had been published, and some years after it was recognized as the source of the oracle bones. One cannot help but wonder why Lo, with his interest in archaeology in general and in the oracle bones in particular, did not visit Hsiao-t'un before 1911 when he left China for political reasons. Lo Chen-yü was a staunch royalist and an outspoken opponent of the revolutionary party, and he felt it was no longer safe, to remain in China after the downfall of the monarchy. In the winter of 1911 he accepted the invitation of the Japanese sinologist Naito Torajiro **add*** and moved to Kyoto with his family. He remained in Japan for eight years but visited China in 1914 and 1915; it was during his 1915 visit that he went for the first time to the Waste of Yin at Hsiao-t'un.[4]

Much of the material used by Lo Chen-yü for his researches in Shang archaeology before (and even after) 1915 was collected for him at Hsiao-t'un in 1911 by a relatively obscure younger brother, Lo Chen-ch'ang 羅振常. The latter left an extremely interesting diary of his collecting activities, Huan lo fang ku yu chi 洹洛訪古遊記, which is one of the basic texts for the history of this important phase of Chinese archaeology, although it has been overlooked by western scholars. The preface to this work was written in 1936 and in it Lo Chen-ch'ang tells why he went to Hsiao-t'un, and why he did not publish until this late date the notes he made on the objects he collected there 25 years before:

In the fall of 1908 I suffered from a stomach ailment and was confined to my home for about three years. Debts for doctors and medicine finally reached the point where I could no longer remain at home with peace of mind. Because of this, and having recovered my health and having dreamed of it during 'this long seclusion, I went north to visit my elder brother in Peking at the end of the winter of 1910 in spite of the cold weather. I passed the New Year there, and in the second month [5] of the third year of Hsüan T'ung (1911), I went to Honan to visit the Waste of Yin and the Lung Men caves, to enjoy the landscape and search for antiquities, and to forget the anxieties of the past few years.

I kept a diary of the events of this trip of two months and intended to compile from it an 'Account of Hunting for Antiquities' somewhat like the book by Na Hsin [6] 納新 of the Yuan dynasty. But the Revolution broke out, and I had to keep moving and had no leisure to carry out my plan. My elder brother, however, wrote the Yin-hsü ku ch'i wu t'u lu, but the objects he used in it were all collected by me on this trip.Then it seemed to me that since these objects had already been published there was no reason at all for me to do such a book, so I gave up the idea.[7] …But occasionally, when in the proper mood, I would write some simple things. Being lazy by nature, however, I accumulated a number of draft copies of all sorts and there was not a single one that was written out in final form.

Recently, concerned about the approach of old age and moved by vanity, I decided to revise and complete these papers… I reexamined the manuscript of the present work and felt that my notes and studies contained something worthwhile; only the sketches and rubbings of the antiquities made at that time were not satisfactory. But since we already have the T'u lu [8] of my brother, I have based my explanations upon it (for every item I give a reference to the corresponding illustration in the T'u lu), and have discarded my original illustrations…

I recall that two years after making my notes I again visited Shantung and Honan. At that time everything had completely changed. I went to the Waste of Yin, but oracle bones were no longer being found because the officials and the people had fought over them and excavation had been stopped. I went along the Lo River and found robbers everywhere. I visited the Lung Men caves and had frequent encounters with bandits. Wherever I went there were frustrations. If I wanted to make a leisurely trip, as in former times, it was quite impossible. …So why should I not preserve this work to record events of the good years and to make known the memories of peacetime? Now that the book has been completed, I write this preface.

In his diary, under the date of 15 and 16 March 1911, Lo Chen-ch'ang tells in detail how he happened to make the collecting trip and gives some important information on his famous brother's insight into the oracular material and other antiquities dating from Shang times:

Peking. Cloudy. A dealer came from an antique shop and showed us several inscribed oracle bones. He demanded a very high price but my brother kept half of them. Among them were two bones and four or five fragments of bones, but not a single tortoise shell. Chen-yü selected and kept those pieces with new and strange characters on them regardless of the clumsiness of the carving or the number of characters. At that time he was in the process of studying divination texts and at first he relied upon the T'ieh yun ts'ang kuei 鐵雲藏龜 by Liu E 劉鶚. He continued to search for more material and had accumulated quite a bit, but was still dissatisfied with the small number of new characters he had found. For this reason he said to me, 'In ancient times the diviners used tortoise shell and supplemented this with bones of animals. Because the bones are large and the [broken] shells are small, the dealers select only the large ones and generally ignore the tortoise shell. Actually, however, both have this strange writing on them and 'One must collect and save both equally. … If I were not hindered by my position, I would go there and collect as much as possible, and I would not overlook any shell, no matter how small.' I like to travel, and when I heard this I was quite excited. I said that I would go there…and that I would do as my brother directed. …

Peking. Cloudy. …My brother said, 'Other objects found associated with the bones are bound to be things dating from the Three Periods. The bronze vessels and weapons will have been bought up by the dealers, but there still must be other things rejected by them. Even if we don't know their names, they definitely are ancient objects. Please get them for me.' I promised to do this. He also said that only divination bones and shells are found at Chang-te but that recently tomb figurines and inscribed tomb slabs and other antiquities have been found at Loyang in large numbers, and that I could make a trip to that place. …

Accompanied by Fan Heng-hsüan, a relative of the Lo family by marriage, Lo Chen-ch'ang reached Chang-te (Anyang), the nearest city to Hsiao-t'un, the next evening. That same night he learned from the innkeeper where they stayed that some people had been offering oracle bones for sale a few: days earlier but there had been no buyers. At his request, the innkeeper sent a messenger to Hsiao-t'un to advertise the fact that there was now a buyer in Chang-te. This brought immediate results and during the next two days Lo Chen-ch'ang bought a number of oracle bones and also learned much about the business of dealing in these objects as practiced by the villagers from Hsiao-t'un:

When the locals sell these things, they seldom sell in a large quantity. The reason is that, among some thirty or forty families of villagers each sells what he finds. This may even go so far as members of the same family not telling each other about the bones they have found. This is why there are always from several to a dozen men who come, each with his own basket, making an awful racket over prices. Whenever a large quantity of bones is offered for sale it is the result of several men digging together in the same pit, and storing what they find in one home after sealing them up with strips of marked paper so that no one of them can remove any. After the bones are sold, they share the money. When one family has collected a large number of bones, they always mix the good and bad together, divide them into a number of equally matched lots, and sell them one by one. They fear that they will not get the best price if they sell them all at once. …

… These people, through their experience, can roughly distinguish good specimens from poor ones and whenever a bone has an unusual character on it they will demand a high price for it; and if the bone is large, the price will be even higher. Only the small fragments are inexpensive, but they insist on selling large and small together. Moreover, they will not allow one to select what he wants, fearing that the large ones will all be sold and no one will be interested in the small ones. …

After several days of talking with the villagers I could understand their dialect, so I asked one of them if they were still doing any digging. He said, 'No. The digging is all done between crops. We have just planted cotton, so the trenches and pits have been filled in. In the eighth or ninth month, when we are done with the crops, we will dig again until the following spring. What we are selling now is what we got last winter. …

Much of this material collected by his younger brother was taken by Lo Chen-yü when he moved to Japan in the winter of 1911, and much of it was published before his final return to China in 1919. Although Lo may have preferred to work in the quiet of his study, he probably would have visited Hsiao-fun before 1915 had he not been living in Japan. In any event, he has left an interesting and highly personal account of his late visit to the Waste of Yin. It is in diary form and covers his trip from his departure from Kyoto on 8 April to his return on 30 May. He wrote a preface to his diary just two months after his return to Kyoto and in it he says that because for years he had been studying the writing from the Waste of Yin and had never visited it, he wanted to go to the Huan River (where the oracle bones were first found). Two other objectives of this trip were to visit the family tombs and the shrine of Confucius. Because events of his trip of a little over fifty days were already becoming confused, he says in his preface that he named his written account Memories of a Fifty Day Dream. It contains a wealth of information on people and things not related to archaeology, but the coverage of archaeological matters is very broad, both in time and material. The following excerpts are principally concerned with his visit to Hsiao-t'un, but the whole diary merits translation.

8 April. Taking my son Fu-ch'eng with me, I am returning home to perform my filial duties at the family tombs. This afternoon we went by train [from Kyoto] to Kobe and stayed at the Nishimura Inn.

9 April. We boarded the Kasuga Maru around eight, and it departed about ten this morning. Aboard ship I revised the 'Oracle Texts' chapter of the Yin-hsü shu ch'i k'ao shih 殷虛書契考釋 (Study of the Oracle Writing from the Waste of Yin).[9]

3 May [Shanghai]. … In the evening I went to see my son-in-law Liu Chi-ying. He brought out the oracle bones collected by his father to show to me. I selected one with the yi 義 character on it and packed it in my bag; it will fill a gap in my own collection.

4 May. This morning I went to see Wang Kuo-wei. Although his eye trouble has not cleared up, neither has it become worse, so I have decided to start my journey the day after tomorrow. …

13 May. I arrived in Chang-te about 10 o'clock and put up at the Jen Ho Ch'ang Inn. I ate quickly, rented a cart and went to Hsiao-t'un.It is five li northwest of the city and is enclosed on the east, west and north by the Huan River. The Chang-te fu chih takes this place to be the same as the city of Ho-tan-chia 河亶甲. The Sung work K'ao ku t'u 考古圖 records a number of ritual vessels as having been discovered at Ho-tan-chia.[10] That is probably the same as this present place [of Hsiao-fun]. The tortoise shells and animal bones used for divination that have been discovered in the last ten years all come from here. I questioned the villagers about the place where the shells and bones were found. It is an area some 40 acres [mou] square. I walked over this area and the fields were covered with uninscribed shells and bones. I picked up an ancient animal horn and several handfuls of oracle bones. This land is planted with wheat and cotton, and after every harvest the villagers busy themselves making excavations. They dig holes some 20 feet deep [to search for bones] which are later filled up and planted over. Of the things found here besides oracle bones, bivalve shells are very numerous. All of these things were unknown to me in the past. The horns of early animals are also very numerous and are different than the horns we see today. I went to the home of a villager and saw there a number of them. At the base of these horns, near where they were attached to the skull, there is a circular ridge-like a ring on a person's finger. The villagers call them 'dragon horns.'

Recently, three stone chimes were found here. In appearance they are quite different from those described in the Chou kuan k'ao kung 周官考工.… Sometime ago, I also obtained a fragment of an engraved chime stone. The sides and edges were all carved in the same style as the decoration on early ritual bronzes. The Po ku t'u 博古圖 of the Sung dynasty records two stone chimes which are very much like the engraved stone chimes from Yin-hsü, and they differ in appearance from those of the Chou dynasty. At that time [i. e., Sung)] they decided on an accurate name for the stone chime. Formerly, I discussed with Wang Kuo-wei and Mr. Cheng the fact that the archaeological studies of Sung times are not inferior to those of the Ch'ien Lung and Chia Ch'ing periods of the Ch'ing dynasty. When the early scholars decided on names for ancient ritual objects 10-20% of them were certainly in error, but their general reliability was always 70-80%, and Wang Kuo-wei agreed on this. The stone chime is an example of this sort of thing. Nowadays one cannot even get broken stone chimes in Hsiao-fun.

Among the things I obtained earlier were bone arrowheads, ivory and bone daggers and ivory hairpins, as well as bone writing tablets, stone knives and axes. Among the animal remains there were elephant tusks and teeth. These things are very rarely seen today. However, I did obtain a shell pi 璧 disc. It is made from a bivalve and the engraved decoration on it is the same as that on the jade p'u pi 蒲璧. What a pity it was already broken! Getting it made the whole trip worthwhile because I had never seen one of these objects before. I have long wanted to compile an illustrated catalog of remains from Yin-hsü. Now that I have obtained this, I will work very hard to complete this book when I return home. …

The provenance of antiquities is most important for archaeology, but in former times people paid no attention to it. As a result, antiquities were generally procured by merchants in the cities after they had been sold from one person to another, and when they reached the final buyer he had no idea where they were found. This matter is further complicated by deceit, as in the case of the oracle bones which were first obtained by the dealer Fan of Wei hsien. My late friend Liu T'ieh-yun asked him where they came from and the dealer falsely told him that they came from T'ang-yin hsien in Honan. I visited that place for several years until I finally learned that they actually came from the banks of the Huan River. If their provenance had not been learned then the location of Yin-hsu could never have been determined. …

14 May. Early in the morning I packed my baggage to go to Loyang but a crowd of villagers and antique dealers came to sell things to me. I got a pottery tsun 尊 in the shape of an owl, a chia 斝 and a figurine.…

18 May [Loyang]. …Clandestine diggers around Loyang are of three kinds. The first are poor people who seek antiquities so they can exchange them for money. The second are influential families who hire others to dig for them. The third are foreigners who rob tombs. Hsu Tuan-fu says that the head doctor of the railway here,[l1] a native of a certain European country, has obtained a great number of antiquities and has sent them back to his country. We do not know what sort of things he got. I was told that the tomb of Ssu-ma Wen-hsuan was also plundered. As far as the art of tomb robbing is concerned, the people of Loyang have the best technique. They dig an underground tunnel close to a tomb in order to get into it. Thus, while the tomb itself has been emptied, the outward appearance is the same as before and people are not aware of it. Today, although Ssu-ma Wen-hsuan's tomb has been emptied, its solitary tumulus still stands high. I am afraid the royal tombs of the Han dynasty cannot escape the same fate. Alas. …

In recent years, scholars and officials have become more interested in collecting stone monuments but this is no blessing for these things. In the first place, when these stones enter private hands, the making of rubbings of them is prohibited and so very few rubbings of them circulate. In the second place, descendants of the original owner do not appreciate them and may use them as weights for pickled meats or for the bases of pillars.[12] And in the third place, they will pass from one buyer to another and from place to place until they are lost. On the other hand, while the regulations of public repositories such as the Forest Monuments in Ch'ang-an and the Tsun ku ko in Loyang are excellent, there are still losses due to the carelessness of those in charge.

27 May [Shanghai]. Early this morning I went with Wang Kuo-wei to board the Kasuga Maru and recalled how I boarded the same ship last year to return to Japan. My old friend Yang Shou-ching came with his grandson to see me off.

28 May. Clear. Sea very calm. Wang and I talk about the trip but it is all rather vague, like a dream. Wrote letters to relatives and friends in the afternoon.

29 May. Entered Moji harbor early in the morning. Sent telegram to family.

30 May. Entered Kobe harbor early. Went by train to Kyoto and arrived in the afternoon at Kyoto station where my sons were waiting to welcome me. Arrived home at dusk.

Preface to the Ku ming ch'i t'u lu

I first obtained two old tomb figurines in a shop in Liu-li Ch'ang in Peking in the winter of 1907. The shopkeeper told me that they came from an ancient tomb in Honan some years ago. He also said that antique dealers bought other valuable things but all of them ignored such objects and that these were brought back to Peking on a whim, when other things had been purchased and that he did not know that they could be sold. I then told him that there was not a single object in old tombs that could not help in the study of antiquity, and I also told him that all other kinds of grave goods beside figurines of people should be brought to me. The shopkeeper then asked me for a list of such things. The T'ang hui yao (Institutes of the T'ang Dynasty) happened to be on my desk and I found them in it and pointed them out to him. He agreed to everything and left.

In the spring of the next year he came to my place again carrying all sorts of ming ch'i with him. Besides the regular figurines of people there were musicians and dancers, farm buildings, horses and carts, well heads and stoves, grain mills, chickens and dogs. He persuaded me to pay him a high price for them. This was the first time that the public had seen ancient tomb figurines, for at this time collectors both at home and abroad were still unaware of them.

Because the dealer had received a good price, he made a diligent search for these things in the area around the Mang mountains and Loyang in Honan province. As a result, tomb goods flooded the markets of the capital. Although Chinese scholars were not interested in them, foreigners outbid each other for them, and when Liu-li Ch'ang dealers were in Shensi they brought figurines from that region back to Peking.

When I first saw these things, I took everyone I found; but later I selected only the very best and the most unique. In less than a year my desks and tables, as well as the space under them, and the very corners of the room were crowded with row upon row of these figurines. There was not a guest who entered my study who was not amazed by them; they used to say that it was like being in the study of [the Sung antiquarian] Pi Liang-shih.

At that time I was going to undertake a chronological study of the styles of tomb figurines and write a treatise on them, but those I saw mostly dated from the T'ang dynasty, with an occasional one from the Sung; those that came from Shensi province dated from the Han dynasty. I did not see any dating from pre-Ch'in times or the Six Dynasties period. Because I wanted to wait longer for some I needed, a year had passed and the first draft of my book was not half finished when the Revolution broke out [1911]. I then gathered up my family to flee but I could not take all of my cumbersome belongings with me. I first discarded the large and heavy things and then the common ones, and the best among the items in storage were stolen, so more than half of what I had collected was already gone. I took the few remaining objects, packed them and sailed for Japan. But when I reached there the figurines of people all had heads, arms or legs broken off and cups and pots were smashed. Disheartened, I stored them away and did not look at them again.

In 1914[i.e. 1915] [13] I returned to China to visit the tombs of my ancestors, to pay my respects at the grave of Confucius, and to visit the site of the capital of the Yin dynasty. I hunted for antiquities in the Kaifeng-Loyang area, but the contents of the tombs there were practically exhausted and were not nearly so plentiful as in former times. However, I did see tomb goods dating from the Six Dynasties found at Tz'u-chou in the winter of 1911, and the figurines, tsun-goblets, chia-cups and other things found in Shansi province. My joy matched my former hopes and I squandered all of my money on these things.

In the fall of the present year [1916] I arranged all of my early and recent acquisitions in a side room in chronological order. In spite of a large number of damaged objects, there were still over three hundred figures. I hired a man to make photographs of them, eliminated the duplicates and completed the Ming ch'i t'u lu in four sections. First come human figures and spirits, then farm houses, carts, wells and mortars, followed by domestic animals, and at the end are early decorated bricks—181 objects in all. The latter are carved figures of filial sons and chaste women with their names carved beside them; some of them have inscriptions in ink, but these have become indistinct and cannot be made out. They were found in an ancient tomb in Loyang five years ago and have never been seen by archaeologists.

When I finished this book I recalled that the records of grave goods in earlier works consisted only of those in the Po ku t'u and the 'Ku chung p'an yü chi' by Yo-k'e of the Sung dynasty, and they recorded only a single pottery ting-cauldron. I have heard of no others. While my book is not as detailed as some former works, nevertheless it makes use of objects from my own collection, less than one-tenth of them being borrowed from others. The objects that have been shipped abroad can be reckoned in the tens of thousands, so it is obvious that this book is quite limited. For every article recorded, many thousands have been lost. Thus, this book of mine can be regarded as nothing more than a mere beginning. What I hope for is that, when someone carries on this work after me he will complete what I have left undone and thus significantly enrich the world with archaeological materials, so that these ancient objects will not have been brought to light in vain. This would by no means be just for the benefit of a single individual like myself—it would be for the benefit of scholarship in general. Daily I hope for this.

* Richard Rudolph is Professor of Oriental Languages at the University of California, Los Angeles. After getting a Ph.D. in classical Chinese at Berkeley under Professors Lessing and Boodberg, he taught at the University of Chicago, did further research at Berkeley, and directed the Chinese section of the U.S. Navy Language School in Colorado during World War II. After the war, he taught Chinese studies at the University of Toronto and served as a curator of Far Eastern Antiquities in the Royal Ontario Museum of Archaeology. Since 1947 he has taught at the University of California, Los Angeles. Author of 47 learned articles, he has also written Han Tomb Art of West China, A Collection of First and Second Century Reliefs, and A Chinese Printing Manual; as well as co-authoring the three volumes of Literary Chinese by the Inductive Method. Although Professor Rudolph read some Sung texts with Liu, he is his friend rather than his student.

Related material from Nothing Concealed in the current issue:


[1] His Ku ming ch'i t'u lu 古明器圖錄, published in 1916, was the first Chinese publication devoted to figurines. It contains excellent plates of a large number of objects but, unfortunately, contains no descriptive text. However, this book is a landmark in the development of Chinese archaeology and Lo's preface to it is of considerable interest; for this reason a full translation of it is given in the appendix to this article. It should be noted that some westerners preceded Lo in treating tomb figurines as valuable historical material. Berthold Laufer collected ming ch'i in Hsi-an-fu in 1903 and completed a long study on them in 1906. It was published in 1909 as Chinese Pottery of the Han Dynasty.

[2] These figures come from what is apparently a complete list of his published and unpublished writings in the third appendix to his autobiography, Chi liao pien 集寥編, published by his family in 1941. Other bio-bibliographical material may be found in Yen-ching hsüeh-pao, vol.28 (Dec. 1940), pp.257-266, and Tohogaku, vol.23 (Mar. 1962), pp.119-129. A very brief biography of Lo is given in H. L. Boorman, ed., Biographical Dictionary of Republican China, vol.2 (1968), pp.426-427, but I am unaware of any extensive western study on this famous scholar.

[3] Of this and other traditional attitudes of the scholar-antiquarian of Sung times, see R. C. Rudolph, 'Preliminary Notes on Sung Archaeology', Journal of Asian Studies, vol.22 (1963), pp.169-177.

[4] In the preface to his work on artifacts from Hsiao-t'un, Yin-hsu ku ch'i wu t'u lu 殷虛古器物圖錄 written in 1916, Lo says that he visited the site in 1914, and Paul Pelliot follows this, date in T'oung Pao, vol.22 (1923), p.8, n.1. But in his autobiography, Chi liao pien, p.33a, he says that on the 1914 trip to China he got no farther than Shanghai because the water in the canals was too low for travel. In the preface to the diary of his trip to Hsiao-t'un, Wu shih jih meng hen lu 五十日夢痕錄 or Memories of a Fifty Day Dream, written in 1915, he mentions the abortive visit in almost the same words as those in his autobiography, and further says that 'this year' (i.e. 1915) he returned to China again to visit his family tombs, the shrine of Confucius, and Hsiao-t'un. 1915 is thus the date of his first visit to Hsiao-t'un. In the preface to Yin-hsü ku ch'i wu t'u lu he says he learned the true source of the oracle bones in 1908.

[5] He is referring to the second lunar month which in 1911 corresponded almost exactly with March.Other dates have been converted to the western calendar.

[6] This is the Ho shuo fang ku chi 河朔訪古記. Na Hsin was a Mongol educated in China, and in 1345 he made a trip from Chekiang to Mongolia with the express purpose of visiting all important monuments and sites north of the Yellow River on this route and making a complete record of them. This work, originally in sixteen sections, must have contained much interesting and important information, but only two sections, those on Honan and Shansi, have been transmitted in current editions.

[7] One may wonder from this whether Lo Chen-ch'ang was resentful of his elder brother's publishing the material that he laboriously collected and wrote notes upon. Be that as it may, Lo Chen-yü gives him full credit for his help in the preface to the book on this material, the Yin-hsü, which the former published in 1916.

[8] An abbreviation for the Yin-hsü ku ch'i wu t'u lu.

[9] This is an early and fundamental work on the oracle bones which Lo first published in 1914. The revised and enlarged edition, one section of which he revised aboard the Kasuga Maru was published in 1927. A very useful survey of important works on the oracle bones is Jung Keng 容庚, 'Eine Bibliographie der wichtigen Werke fiber die Orakeltexte der Shang-Zeit', Sinologische Arbeiten, vol.3 (1945), pp.114-151, which contains detailed descriptions of 58 works. Jung compiled this' bibliography in Chinese under the title of Pu tz'u yen-chiu 卜辭研究 and gave the manuscript to Max Loehr who translated it into German; apparently the Chinese version was not published.

[10] This problem has been discussed at some length by W.P. Yetts, Anyang: A Retrospect (China Society Occasional Papers, n.s., no.2, 1942), pp.15-20.

[11] He is undoubtedly referring to Dr. F. Bückens of Belgium who based an article 'Les antiquités funéraires du Honan central et la conception de l'âme dans la Chine primitive', Mélanges Chinoises et Bouddhiques, vol.8 (1946/47), pp.l-101, on the material found in tombs uncovered during excavations for a new railroad in Honan.

[12] Reference was made as early as the seventh century to the neglect of stone monuments and the destruction of them for use as weights in the Sui shu 隋書 (Wu ying tien ed.), ch.45, p.13a. Lo here seems to paraphrase this passage.

[13] See note 4.