This is a limited free preview of this book. Please buy full access.

---

42. Shi did not distinguish the model and core in many cases. The term Shi originally used in this context was mo (“the model”; see “Yin dai de Zhutong Gongyi,” 127), although he was, in fact, referring to the core.

43. Shi, “Yin dai de Zhutong Gongyi,” 109.

44. According to Shi, the core was applied with tallow or wax so craftsmen could easily tell whether the scraped thickness was consistent and adjust it as needed. The tallow or wax, in Shi’s interpretation, could also stabilize the mold assembly; he believed that the dark, shiny layer he observed on the exteriors of some unearthed Anyang cores might have been left by tallow. As Shi presumed, tallow that remained during the casting process could facilitate the flow of the molten metal within the mold, a hypothesis which has been subsequently determined to be incorrect (“Yin dai de Zhutong Gongyi,” 127). As Su has pointed out, the tallow would create a large amount of gas when contacting the hot molten bronze, a situation which would have seriously damaged the casting and even endangered the casters (“Ershi Shiji dui Xianqin Qingtong Liqi Zhuzao Jishu de Yanjiu,” 409).

45. For details, see Shi, “Yin dai de Zhutong Gongyi,” 110–118.

46. The surface ornament of this he is stylistically similar to that of the Erligang ding in fig. 9, but more “primitive”; its vessel shape also preserves the character of a still earlier stage. For image, see Davidson, “Toward a Grouping of Early Chinese Bronzes,” 33, fig. 8.

47. Davidson, “Toward a Grouping of Early Chinese Bronzes,” 51. As Bagley commented, “It should be added that thread relief is not a form of decoration likely to arise in lost-wax casting. The lost-wax caster must carve on the wax model or the finished bronze; the mold is closed and he does not have access to its inner surfaces” (“Shang Ritual Bronzes,” 10).

48. Bagley, “Shang Ritual Bronzes,” 11; 20, note 5.

49. Shi, “Yin dai de Zhutong Gongyi,” 110–118.

50. In fact, Barnard elaborated the section-mold theory in an extremely cumbersome manner (a so-called “sectionalism”) with the partitioning of an unrealistic number of mold sections (Bronze Casting and Bronze Alloys in Ancient China, 112–168). As Wilma Fairbank correctly commented, in Barnard’s interpretation, “the number of horizontal mould sections often seems excessive, and the widespread use of detachable insertions seems overcomplicated” (“Review of Noel Barnard’s ‘Bronze Casting and Bronze Alloys in Ancient China’”). For comment on Barnard’s “sectionalism,” see also Su, “Ershi Shiji dui Xianqin Qingtong Liqi Zhuzao Jishu de Yanjiu,” 400. It is worth mentioning that in his book, Barnard also