Dear Colleagues, Please join me in welcoming François Louis (louis@bgc.bard.edu) to the listserv. With his permission, I copied the following off of his webpage: My current research focuses on the art and material culture of the Kitan-Liao dynasty (907-1125) in northern China. I am evaluating a number of extraordinary archaeological finds made during the past 50 years that allow us to see the history of this little-known dynasty in an entirely new light. Other research projects have ranged more broadly across the history of Chinese artifacts and covered topics from early antiquity to the eighteenth century. I have published on China’s antiquarian culture, the history of ornament, and on gold and silver, including a book based on my dissertation, <http://www.amazon.com/Goldschmiede-Tang-Song-Zeit-wirtschaftsgeschichtliche-Goldschmiedekunst/dp/3906761479/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220452306&sr=1-1> Die Goldschmiede der Tang und Song- Zeit, which examines the formation of the goldsmithing profession in China. Please note that he informs me that linguists prefer “Kitan” to “Khitan.” Please welcome François Louis. Michael

Dear Michael, A warm welcome to Francois Louis from an old graduate of Bard (when there was not an Asianist or a graduate student to be found), and thanks for his note about Kitan over Khitan. Here's another Kitanological query: when should we refer to the dynasty as 'Liao,' and when as 'Kitan'? Or should we use the term Liao for the entire duration? I know our colleagues have addressed the issue, but I can't remember where. Best to all in the waning days of summer, Paul On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Michael A. Fuller <mafuller@uci.edu> wrote: > Dear Colleagues,**** > > ** ** > > Please join me in welcoming François Louis (louis@bgc.bard.edu) to the > listserv. With his permission, I copied the following off of his webpage: > **** > > ** ** > > My current research focuses on the art and material culture of the > Kitan-Liao dynasty (907-1125) in northern China. I am evaluating a number > of extraordinary archaeological finds made during the past 50 years that > allow us to see the history of this little-known dynasty in an entirely new > light. Other research projects have ranged more broadly across the history > of Chinese artifacts and covered topics from early antiquity to the > eighteenth century. I have published on China’s antiquarian culture, the > history of ornament, and on gold and silver, including a book based on my > dissertation, *Die Goldschmiede der Tang und Song- Zeit*<http://www.amazon.com/Goldschmiede-Tang-Song-Zeit-wirtschaftsgeschichtliche-Goldschmiedekunst/dp/3906761479/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220452306&sr=1-1> > *,* which examines the formation of the goldsmithing profession in China.* > *** > > ** ** > > Please note that he informs me that linguists prefer “Kitan” to “Khitan.” > Please welcome François Louis.**** > > ** ** > > Michael**** > > _______________________________________________ > Listserv mailing list > Listserv@mail.songyuan.org > http://mail.songyuan.org/mailman/listinfo/listserv_mail.songyuan.org > > -- Paul Jakov Smith 史樂民 John R. Coleman Professor of Social Sciences Professor of History and East Asian Studies Haverford College Haverford PA 19041

Dear Michael and Paul, Thank you very much for the warm welcome. As to the use of the name Liao or Kitan dynasty, either one is correct. I think using "Liao" for the entire duration of the dynasty is standard, even if Liao was the official designation only since 1066. "Liao" had already been in use since 938 in the Chinese speaking parts of the empire, first designating the Chinese provinces, then the entire state. In the north Kitan (or the Chinese Qidan) was used. After 983 Qidan was to be used statewide. The history of the Kitans' state's name is still somewhat mysterious--mainly because the meaning of the name Liao in the Kitan language is not clear. Daniel Kane has a forthcoming paper on this very issue, where he discusses in detail the epigraphic evidence and recent scholarship in China. He points out that in Kitan language inscriptions the state is always designated with both words, Kitan and Liao (he transcribes them as qïtai and xu.ulj
i -- sorry, a diacritic on the j got lost). What changed after 1066 was the sequence, from Kitan-Liao to Liao-Kitan. I am not sure whether this means we should also refer to the dynasty with both names. Something to think about as more information becomes available. Daniel Kane's paper is slated to appear in the 2013 issue of the JSYS, which will focus on the Liao dynasty and is guest-edited by Daniel, Valerie Hansen, and myself. Best, François On Sat, Jul 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Paul Smith <psmith@haverford.edu> wrote: > Dear Michael, > > A warm welcome to Francois Louis from an old graduate of Bard (when there > was not an Asianist or a graduate student to be found), and thanks for his > note about Kitan over Khitan. Here's another Kitanological query: when > should we refer to the dynasty as 'Liao,' and when as 'Kitan'? Or should > we use the term Liao for the entire duration? I know our colleagues have > addressed the issue, but I can't remember where. > > Best to all in the waning days of summer, > > Paul > > On Fri, Jul 27, 2012 at 7:00 PM, Michael A. Fuller <mafuller@uci.edu>wrote: > >> Dear Colleagues,**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Please join me in welcoming François Louis (louis@bgc.bard.edu) to the >> listserv. With his permission, I copied the following off of his webpage: >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> My current research focuses on the art and material culture of the >> Kitan-Liao dynasty (907-1125) in northern China. I am evaluating a number >> of extraordinary archaeological finds made during the past 50 years that >> allow us to see the history of this little-known dynasty in an entirely new >> light. Other research projects have ranged more broadly across the history >> of Chinese artifacts and covered topics from early antiquity to the >> eighteenth century. I have published on China’s antiquarian culture, the >> history of ornament, and on gold and silver, including a book based on my >> dissertation, *Die Goldschmiede der Tang und Song- Zeit*<http://www.amazon.com/Goldschmiede-Tang-Song-Zeit-wirtschaftsgeschichtliche-Goldschmiedekunst/dp/3906761479/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1220452306&sr=1-1> >> *,* which examines the formation of the goldsmithing profession in China. >> **** >> >> ** ** >> >> Please note that he informs me that linguists prefer “Kitan” to >> “Khitan.” Please welcome François Louis.**** >> >> ** ** >> >> Michael**** >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Listserv mailing list >> Listserv@mail.songyuan.org >> http://mail.songyuan.org/mailman/listinfo/listserv_mail.songyuan.org >> >> > > > -- > Paul Jakov Smith 史樂民 > John R. Coleman Professor of Social Sciences > Professor of History and East Asian Studies > Haverford College > Haverford PA 19041 > > > _______________________________________________ > Listserv mailing list > Listserv@mail.songyuan.org > http://mail.songyuan.org/mailman/listinfo/listserv_mail.songyuan.org > >