Marking the ninth entry in Columbia University Press’s Tang Center Series in Early China, Luke Waring’s Writing and Materiality aligns perfectly with the series’ emphasis on new approaches to excavated materials, in this case centered on the Mawangdui 馬王堆 tombs (first half of the second century BCE). The study of early Chinese manuscripts has experienced a “material turn” in recent years, which treats manuscripts not merely as texts, but also as written objects or artifacts within archaeological contexts.Footnote ¹ The timing of this methodological shift is not accidental. On the one hand, the publication of high-resolution infrared imagery and greater institutional openness have finally enabled scholars beyond the initial excavation teams to scrutinize the materiality of manuscripts. On the other hand, increasingly internationalized research networks and the development of more platforms, such as journals and websites, have allowed immediate communication among scholars across continents.Footnote ² The new reconstruction of the manuscripts of the Mawangdui tombs and the immediate communications among scholars from different academic backgrounds following the publication of the reconstruction result directly from such changes. Despite aligning with the current “material” trend of manuscript studies, Writing and Materiality is distinct in terms of both its ambition and methodology. Its approach—studying all material forms of writing discovered from the three tombs in a single monograph and treating all these writings as things rather than texts—is unprecedented.

The book comprises an introduction, six chapters, and a conclusion. The introduction establishes the theoretical framework, thoroughly explicating the author’s conceptualization of the key themes—including material culture, writing, and literacy—that underpin the entire study. Notably, the author’s definition of the material culture of texts encompasses “the materials, tools, and processes used to produce writing, the environments in which written texts are created, the different modes of reading, viewing, use, and display through which humans engage with written texts, and the facilities and modes of human organization within which they are stored, curated, and ultimately disposed of” (3). After Chapter 1, the subsequent five chapters are constructed within this all-encompassing framework. Chapter 1 provides the necessary historical and archaeological context for the Li family and their tombs. These tombs are widely attributed to two generations of the Marquess of Dai 軑侯 family: tomb no. 1 to Lady Dai named Xin Zhui 辛追, tomb no. 2 to her husband Li Cang 利蒼, and tomb no. 3 to their son Li Xi 利豨. Among the three tombs, tomb no. 3 preserves the largest quantity of lengthy texts, mainly written on silk. In particular, by reviewing several possible reasons for the burial of these texts, the chapter debunks the assumption of a close personal connection between the occupant of tomb no. 3, Li Xi, and the manuscripts interred with him. The overly technical nature of the manuscripts, their lack of personalization, the lengthy time-span of their production, and the absence of writing paraphernalia lead Waring to conclude that Li Xi did not personally produce, copy, or actively read the manuscripts.

Chapters 2 to 6 approach the textual culture of the Mawangdui tombs through production, curation, performance, visualization, and burial, attempting to answer the questions: why were the manuscripts buried there, and what did they mean to Li Xi or his family? In this framework, the author positions Li Xi and his family primarily as patrons of the manuscripts within the Changsha kingdom, rather than as producers, copyists, or active readers. The Mawangdui corpus consists of predominantly cultural and technical texts in contrast to administrative documents. They were likely selected from a library—rather than an archive—that the family had patronized over a long period of time and interred with Li Xi to provide him with the cultural and technical knowledge needed for successfully navigating the afterlife (125–27). Drawing on evidence from collections discovered in other Han noble tombs, such as that of the Marquess of Haihun 海昏侯, the author argues that the Mawangdui manuscripts exemplify “a shared cultural practice (albeit one that was apparently fairly limited in scope and nowhere codified) of burying texts in tombs to provide deceased elites with useful repositories of knowledge and information as well as material symbols of their status and the kinds of values they (or others) wished to be associated with” (193). Furthermore, echoing his all-encompassing material approach and understanding of literacy, the author also argues that the Mawangdui tombs demonstrate a spectrum of literacy: even lowly female textile workers and tomb construction workers interacted with texts at varying levels (82–90, 210–11).

I commend the author for finding an ideal case to demonstrate his material approach. Despite the considerable damage the manuscripts sustained during excavation and preservation, the enormous volume of material (somewhere between 120,000 and 200,000 characters) inscribed on various surfaces, coupled with the extensive research and reconstruction efforts since the 1970s that Waring introduces (6–12), provides a solid foundation for this case study. I also appreciate the author’s success in drawing upon scholarship from diverse academic traditions, including those of China, Taiwan, Japan, Europe, and North America. However, despite his intention to incorporate the diverse groups involved in the textual culture of the Mawangdui tombs, the portrayal remains decidedly elite-centered. While female textile workers and tomb construction workers left traces of their interactions with texts within the tombs, their role was indeed marginal. Many of the lengthy texts are written on silk, a delicate and expensive material symbolizing elite status.Footnote ³ This is likely not a methodological issue, but rather a consequence of the site itself. In comparison, because of the everyday materials that the dry climate preserved in various structures, Charles Sanft’s treatment of the Han northwestern frontier’s textual culture encompasses both the working environments of frontier officials and soldiers and their broader living communities, including their family members, government laborers, and local residents, thereby revealing a wider spectrum of literacy.Footnote ⁴ The Mawangdui tombs inherently limit the scope for studying non-elite textual engagement.

Furthermore, while the author offers a careful and detailed treatment of writing on diverse surfaces (such as silk, bamboo, wood, silk gloves and textiles, and coffin components), other significant material forms, specifically seals and sealing clays (listed in the appendix), are not fully discussed. Along with seal ribbons (shou 綬), clothing (fu 服), and carriages (yu 輿), official seals (xi 璽, zhang 章, or yin 印) occupied a particular position in the material and visual culture of Han bureaucracy. Han law strictly regulated the seals’ physical form and script to symbolize position and status in the bureaucratic hierarchy.Footnote ⁵ By impressing their seals on clay, for instance, the household assistant (jiacheng 家丞) and right commandant (youwei 右尉) of the Marquess of Dai not only secured objects or documents but also indicated accountability and authenticated identity. Han law required official seal holders to return their seals when they left office. Judging from the materials employed and the script style, scholars have argued that the seals reading “Chancellor of Changsha Kingdom” (Changsha chengxiang 長沙丞相) and “Seal of the Marquess of Dai” (Daihou zhi yin 軑侯之印) were probably mingqi 明器, imitations of the official seals made specifically for burial.Footnote ⁶ Thus, the seals and sealing clays buried in the Li family’s tombs were of comparable significance to other writing surfaces. Given seals’ significance in the lives both aboveground and underground of the Li family, they deserve a more detailed discussion, and would have fit perfectly within the book’s framework.

Nevertheless, this well-researched and carefully structured monograph undeniably contributes significantly to Mawangdui studies. It also presents an important case study in employing a material approach to manuscript studies, particularly relevant to elite tombs. When integrated with studies of manuscripts recovered from the tombs of low-level officials, frontier sites, and discarded wells and storage pits, this work paints a fuller picture of the textual culture of early China.