Solheim, Wilhelm G. II

ScholarSpace at University of Hawai'i at Manoa

A Brief History of the Dongson Concept Received 6 July 1989 WILHELM G. SOLHEIM II THE TERM DONGSON brings to mind the large bronze drums that have taken the name of Dongs on drums. The typical drum, with decoration on its tympanum and sides showing boats loaded with people wearing spectacular feather headdresses, has be-come the symbol of Viet Nam and is displayed in many public places. These drums have been central to the Dongson concept since its beginning. For over 100 years from the first display of these drums at exhibitions in Europe, they were a mystery. No one knew their place of origin, whether from Europe, the Americas, the Middle East, or Asia. Finally, in 1902, a book by Franz Heger located them as coming from Southeast Asia. The first excavated drums came from the site of Dong Son, in Thanh Hoa Prov-ince south of Hanoi, excavated by M. Pajot in 1924 and reported by V. Goloubew in 1929. Goloubew (1929: 11, 1932: 139; Karlgren 1942: 2- 5; van Heekeren 1958: 92-93) dated the early type of drum (Heger Type 1) to the middle or the second half of the first century A.D. Once it became known where they came from, numerous Dongson bronze drums were reported from South China, Thailand, Laos, West Ma-laysia, and Indonesia as far east as western IrianJaya. The largest concentration of the drums is from northern Viet Nam (Kempers 1988). Argument soon developed over the dating of the Dongson Culture and of its ori-gins. The primary protagonists were Robert Heine-Geldern and Bernard Karlgren. I have analyzed this disagreement in some detail before (Solheim 1979: 69-172, 1980a), so I present no more than a brief summary of it here. Heine-Geldern hy-pothesized that "elements of the Dongsonian and of the late Chou art style origi-nated in eastern Europe in the Hallstatt Cultures of the Bronze and early Iron Age of the Caucasus, and the Bronze Age of Transylvania and eastern Hungary" (1937: 186-191); that "these elements were brought to the Orient by Thraco-Cimmerian tribes between about 800 and 600 B.C." (1937: 191-194); and that "the Dongsonian art style (the ornamental art style) was introduced into Indonesia by a colonization of the Yueh of South China and northern Vietnam; from there it continued to be spread by Indonesian tribes" (1937: 197; see Solheim 1979: 170). Karlgren disagreed with both this dating and origin, hypothesizing instead that Wilhelm Solheim is a professor in the Department of Anthropology, University of Hawaii-Manoa, Honolulu. Asian Perspectives Vol. 28, no. 1. © 1990 by University of Hawaii Press. All rights reserved. 24 Asian Perspectives XXVIII (1), 1988-1989 the early Dongson Culture dated to the fourth-third century B.C. (1942:5-25) and that "the early Dongson culture was neighbor of and closely related to-certainly to a large extent influenced by-the Huai style of Central China" (1942:25). While both arguments, in their differing interpretations, were based on the style of decora-tion and the geometric elements of this decoration as it appeared on the Dongson bronzes, both were in agreement that the knowledge of bronze manufacture entered the Dongson Culture with the art style. Olov Janse made several excavations at the Dongson site from 1934 to 1939, but the final report on these excavations, in three volumes, did not come out until after World War II (Janse 1947, 1951, 1958). While these publications presented a great quantity of new data on the Dongson Culture, they settled neither the dating nor the origin problems. Janse excavated a number of brick tombs which contained artifacts obviously dating to the early Han dynasty of China (vol. 1). Several apparently ear-lier tombs were also excavated, some of these containing typical Dongson bronze artifacts, including drums. Janse noted similarities between the Dongson decoration and the Huai art style, as referred to by Karlgren, but he also noted the Dongson decoration's similarities with the Hallstatt Culture, as pointed out by Heine-Geldern (Janse 1958; Malleret 1959). He did not take a stand on either side of the argument. Excavations in Island Southeast Asia, Viet Nam, and Thailand since the early 1950s have required totally different interpretations of both the origins of the Dong-son Culture and its dating. The first threat to either suggestion for dating of the Dongson Culture came from excavations in the Philippines. There a distinctive pottery tradition became evi-dent that incorporated the style and many elements of decoration of the Dongson bronzes. It soon became evident that this pottery tradition started earlier in the Philippines than the earliest dating for Dongson proposed by Heine-Geldern (Sol-heim 1959a, 1959b, 1964, 1967, 1980a; Fox 1970). It became apparent that this pot-tery tradition was not directly related to the Dongson Culture. Nonetheless, both Heine-Geldern and Karlgren had used specifically the geometric decoration and the style of its use as shared by the pottery tradition and the Dongson bronzes to hy-pothesize both the dating and relationships of the Dongson Culture to the Hallstatt Culture or the Huai art style of China. All publications on the spread of Dongson into the rest of Southeast Asia from northern Viet Nam had used this art style as their basis for hypothesizing the Dongson spread-but here it was as part of the Sa-huynh-Kalanay Pottery Tradition, already widespread in the Philippines and much ofIsland Southeast Asia (Solheim 1979: 180-184) before the hypothesized beginning of the Dongson Culture. It became apparent, to me at least, that the art style and the geometric elements used in it required a common ancestor of the styles as found on the pottery and on the Dongson bronzes (Solheim 1967: 172, n. d.). The final blow to both sets of hypotheses came from excavations in Thailand and Viet Nam. Excavations at Non Nok Tha, in northeastern Thailand, produced evi-dence both for local manufacture of bronze and for an art style on pottery that could logically be ancestral to the art style of the pottery and of the Dongson bronzes, long before the hypothesized time of the Dongson Culture or the Sa-huynh-Kalanay Pot-tery Tradition (Solheim 1968, 1979:184-194; Bayard 1972). These dates are still controversial, but the dating indicates that bronze manufacture in Thailand was under way before the end of the third millennium B. c. (Pigott 1984, 1985; Natapintu SOLHEIM: HISTORY OF THE DONGSON CONCEPT PI. I. a, Typical tympanum of Dongs on drum from Dong Son, in Than Hoa Museum, Viet Nam. b-d, bronze artifacts from Shizhai Shan, Yunnan: b-c, small drums with attached figures, and d, ceremonial pillow(?), all in the Yunnan Provincial Museum, Kunming, People's Republic of China. (Photos by Solheim.) 25 1988). The art style was in place in northeastern Thailand by the end of the fourth millennium B.C. (White 1982). Bronze was being manufactured into small artifacts in northern Viet Nam shortly after 2000 B.C. (Ha 1974; Davidson 1975:88-93; Van 1979; Nguyen 1979; Solheim 1980b: 15) in a cultural sequence that led to the Dongson Culture. It thus became obvious that both the tradition of bronze manufacture and the art style expressed on the Dongson bronze drums and other bronze artifacts had been present in Southeast 26 Asian Perspectives XXVIII (1), 1988-1989 PI. II. Bronze artifacts from Shizhai Shan (a, b, d) and Dong Son (c): a, model of house on piles with activity on verandah and on ground at base of house piles; band d, depiction of torture or punishment, a subject never seen on Dongson artifacts; rare Dongson artifacts, however, show copulating couples and other possible fertility symbolism, not found at Shizhai Shan; c, front and back of dagger handle, distinct from Shizhai Shan handles, as in Figure 2. (Photos by Solheim.) Asia long before the Dongson Culture. The origin of the Dongson Culture was right there in northern Viet Nam. The date of this origin depends on the definition of the Dongson Culture, but its ancestry certainly goes back in Viet Nam and neigh-boring areas into the fourth and fifth millennia B. C., and no doubt much earlier. A series of sites in Yunnan, South China (Rudolph 1960), define the Tien Cul-SOLHEIM: HISTORY OF THE DONGSON CONCEPT a Fig. 1. Typical decoration on a tympanum (a) and side of a fully decorated drum (b). These ex-amples of decoration are from a drum known as the Ngoc-Iu drum, after Karlgren (1942: PI. 4). 27 ......... b d Fig. 2. a, Unusual Dongston-style drum with typical geometric patterns bordering bands of Shizhai Shan style decoration on side; drum from Thach Trai Son, Shizhai Shan, adapted from Pham et al. (1987: 19). b-d, Bronze daggers from Shizhai Shan adapted from Anonymous (1959): b, after Fig. 13 (p. 45), c, after Fig. 1 (p. 30), and d, after 3 of Plate (p. 15). Handle on d is hollow with cutouts, similar to a dagger from Dong Son I have seen at the Thanh Hoa Museum. SOLHEIM: HISTORY OF THE DONGSON CONCEPT 29 ture, as it is known to this time. It is obvious that this culture and the Dongson Culture are closely related, and may possibly be variants of one culture. The paper following this one, by John Tessitore, examines the relationship of the two cultures. My paper is meant to be an introduction to Tessitore's, for those who are either not acquainted with the Dongson Culture or not knowledgeable about the recent find-ings on the Dongson Culture in Viet Nam. As Tessitore's paper has no illustrations of either Tien or Dongson bronzes I include a few to show similarities and differ-ences between the bronzes and cultures of the two (PIs. I-II, Figs. 1-2). REFERENCES ANONYMOUS 1959 Yiin-nan Chin-ning Shih-chai-shan ku mu ch'iin fa-chiieh pao-kao. Peking: Wen Wu Press. (In Chinese.) BAYARD, DONN T. 1972 Early Thai bronze: analysis and new dates. S 176: 1411-1412. DAVIDSON, JEREMY H. C. s. 1975 Recent archaeological activity in Viet-nam. ]HKAS 6: 80-99. Fox, ROBERT B. 1970 The Tabon Caves. National Museum Monograph 1. Manila. GOLOUBEW, V. 1929 L' Age du bronze au Tonkin et dans Ie Nord-Annam. BEFEO 29: 1-46. 1932 Sur l'origine et la diffusion des tambours metalliques, in Praehistorica Asiae Orientalis: 137-150. Hanoi: I'Ecoie Fran~aise d'Extreme-Orient. HA, VAN TAN 1974 There was an early Vietnamese civilization. Hoc Tap 1 :48-57. VAN HEEKEREN, H. ROBERT 1958 The Bronze-Iron Age of Indonesia. Verhandelingen van het Koninklijk Instituut voor Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde 22. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. HEGER, FRANZ 1902 Alte Metalltrommeln aus Sudostasien. Leipzig. HEINE-GELDERN, H. ROBERT 1937 L'art prebouddhique de la Chine et de I' Asie Sud-est et son influence en Oceanie. Revue des Arts Asiatiques 11(4): 177-206. JANSE, OLOV R. T. 1947 Archaeological Research in Indo-China I. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Yenching Institute. 1951 Archaeological Research in Indo-China II. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard Yenching Institute. 1958 Archaeological Research in Indo-China III. Bruges: Institut Beige des Hautes Etudes Chinoises. KARLGREN, BERNARD 1942 The date of the early Dong-so'n Culture. BMFEA 14: 1-128. KEMPERS, A. J. BERNET 1988 The Kettledrums of Southeast Asia: A Bronze Age World and its Aftermath. MQRSEA 10. MALLERET, LOUIS 1959 La civilisation de Dong-son d'apres les recherches archeologiques de M. Olov Janse. France-Asie 160-161: 1197-1208. NATAPINTU, SURAPOL 1988 Current research on ancient copper-base metallurgy in Thailand, in Prehistoric Studies: The Stone and Metal Ages in Thailand. Papers in Thai Antiquity 1. Bangkok: Thai Antiquity Work-ing Group. NGUYEN, Duy Ty 1979 The appearance of ancient metallurgy in Vietnam, in Recent Discoveries and New Views on Some Archaeological Problems in Vietnam. Hanoi: Institute of Archaeology, Committee for Social Sci-ence of Vietnam. 30 Asian Perspectives XXVIII (1), 1988-1989 PHAM, MINH HUYEN, NGUYEN VAN HUYEN, AND TRINH SINH 1987 Trong Dong Son. Ha Noi: Nha Xuat Ban Khoa Hoc Xa Hoi. PIGOTT, VINCENT C. 1984 The Thailand Archaeometallurgy Project 1984: survey of base-metal resource exploitation in Loei Province, northeastern Thailand. Southeast Asian Studies Newsletter 17: 1-5. 1985 Pre-industrial mineral exploitation and metal production in Thailand. MASCA Journal 3 (5, Archaeometallurgy Supplements): 170-174. RUDOLPH, RICHARD 1960 China mainland. AP 4:41-54. SOLHEIM, WILHELM G. II 1959a 1959b 1964 1967 1968 1979 1980a 1980b n.d. (Editor) Sa-huynh pottery relationships in Southeast Asia. AP 3(2): 97-188. Sa-huynh related pottery in Southeast Asia. AP 3(2): 177-188. Further relationships of the Sa-huynh-Kalanay Pottery Tradition. AP 8(1): 196-210. The Sa-huynh-Kalanay Pottery Tradition: past and future research, in Studies in Philippine An-thropology: 151-174, ed. Mario D. Zamora. Quezon City, Philippines: Alemar Phoenix. Early bronze in northeastern Thailand. CA 9(1): 9-62. A look at "L'art prebouddhique de la Chine et de I' Asie du Sud-Est et son influence en Oceanie" forty years after. AP 22(2): 165-205. New data on late Southeast Asian prehistory and their interpretations. Saeculum 31 (3-4): 275-344, 409 (in German). Review article: Recent discoveries and new views on some archaeological problems in Viet-nam. AP23(1): 9-16. needed research on the origins of the Lapita Culture in eastern Indonesia. Paper for Fifth Na-tional Archaeological Seminar, 4-7 July 1989, Yogyakarta, Indonesia. VAN, TRONG 1979 New knowledges [sic] on Dong Son culture from archaeological discoveries these twenty years, in Recent Discoveries and New Views on some Archaeological Problems in Vietnam. Hanoi: Institute of Archaeology, Committee for Social Sciences of Vietnam. WHITE, JOYCE C. 1982 Ban Chiang Discovery oj a Lost Bronze Age. Philadelphia: The University Museum, University of Pennsylvania, and The Smithsonian Institution. 

A Brief History of the Dongson Concept

http://scholarspace.manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/16961/1/AP-v28n1-23-30.pdf

A Brief History of the Dongson Concept

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

ScholarSpace at University of Hawai'i at Manoa