英文摘要 |
Controversially, “wide handle objects” have been given various names, ranging from zan, dou, shao and jue. After a careful study of existing arguments and an analysis of related materials, this paper argues that they should not have been named as zan, dou, or shao. Studying the shape of these objects, their inscriptions, and the burial inventories (qian-ce) of the Warring States period, and taking into account the shape of artifacts in the Tengzhou Museum, the author believes that it is most reasonable to name this kind of artifact as jue. The function of “wide handle objects” is also discussed, and the “shao shaped object” is studied by looking at how these objects were placed when they were unearthed. Meanwhile, certain tripod objects have been identified as jue since the Song dynasty, but in fact, this name is not correct. Through an analysis of relevant materials, many questions arise. Looking at the inscriptions on the Yan Hou Zhi and Lu Hou artifacts, the form of the pictograph for “tripod object,” as well as the types of reward items listed in bronze inscriptions, together with interpretations of the inscriptions on the recently found Shu Yu Fang Ding, Chu Gong Ni Zhong, Wen Wang Yu Huan, Ni Gong Bo, this paper comes to the conclusion that it is more reasonable to instead name such tripod objects as shang. In the past, there have been various ideas about the function of these tripod objects, viewing them as drinking tools or wine-warming tools, wine-pouring tools or wine filters. Taking into consideration their own characteristics and shapes, their relationship with other artifacts, and information in inscriptions, they most likely were used in libation sacrifices (guan ji). |