58 Field Museum of Natural History — Anth., Vol. X. 



of Ch'en had religiously kept. ' n Though this is no more than an anecdote 

 ben trovato, it may reveal several important points, — that at the time 

 of Confucius flint arrow-heads were no longer generally known, that 

 they were precious rarities preserved in the royal treasury, and that 

 as early as the twelfth century b. c. they had sunk into a mere em- 

 blematic significance and served as insignia of authority, 2 and that 

 the Su-shen, a Tungusian tribe, are made responsible for their origin. 



Chavannes (Se-ma Ts'ien, Vol. V, p. 341) quotes a passage from 

 the San kuo chi to the effect that in 262 a. d. the governor of Liao-tung 

 informed the court of the Wei dynasty that the country of the Su-shen 

 had sent as tribute thirty bows, each three feet and five inches long, 

 and three hundred arrows with a point of stone and shaft of the tree 

 hu, one foot and eight inches long. But there is a still later reference 

 to the use of flint arrows on the part of this tribe. 



As late as the middle of the fifth century a. d. we hear again of the 

 same Su-shen as being in possession of flint arrows, as attested by a 

 passage in the Wei shu, the Annals of the Wei dynasty (386-532 a. d.). 

 Under the year 459 a. d. it is there recorded that the country of Su-shen 

 offered as tribute to the court arrows with wooden shafts and stone 

 heads, and the same tribute is ascribed for the year 488 a. d. to the 

 territory of Ki in the present P'ing-yang fu, Shansi Province. This 

 account offers a twofold interest in showing that flint arrows were then 

 still held in reverence by the Chinese and regarded as valuable objects, 

 and in affording evidence of the long-continued use of flint arrow- 

 heads among the Su-sMn for whom we can thus establish a period 

 spent on their manufacture lasting over a millennium and a half. 3 



1 G. Schlegel, Uranographie chinoise, pp. 758, 759. This story is derived from 

 the Kuo yii and reproduced in the Annals of Se-ma Ts'ien (see Chavannes' transla- 

 tion, Vol. V, p. 340) where a fuller version of it is given. 



2 Bow, arrows and quiver were conferred upon the vassal princes by the emperor 

 as sign of investiture. 



3 Palladius discovered in 1870 a stone hatchet near the bay of Vladivostok. 

 He was under the impression that it was made of nephrite; microscopical investiga- 

 tion, however, proved that the substance was diorite-aphanite (H. Fischer, Nephrit 

 und Jadeit, pp. 283-284). Palladius drew from this find a somewhat hazarded con- 

 clusion; he believed that "it would decide the question regarding the famous stone 

 arrow-heads made by the aboriginal inhabitants of Manchuria, the Su-shen, and their 

 direct descendants and successors, the I-lou, Ugi and Mo-ho, from oldest times 

 down to the twelfth century." Palladius evidently labored under the error that 

 the arrow-heads of the Su-shen were of nephrite. There is, however, no account to this 

 effect. All Chinese accounts are unanimous in speaking of these arrow-heads as 

 being of plain stone, and never use the word for jade {yii) in connection with them. 

 The stone hatchet of Vladivostok certainly has no bearing on the whole question, 

 and the further conclusions of Palladius in regard to alleged sites in Manchuria and 

 at the mouth of the Amur where, according to Chinese sources, nephrite should 

 have been found, which is not at all correct, are not valid. I am quite familiar 

 with the Amur region, and having seen a good number of stone implements from 

 there, can positively state that no implements whatever of nephrite have been found 

 there. 



