Guolong Lai. Excavating the Afterlife: The Archaeology of Early Chinese Religion. Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2015.

This is an insightful book exploring early Chinese mortuary religion by focusing on archaeological materials. It distinguishes itself by the author’s solid knowledge of the primary and secondary literature in this field and, more importantly, by adopting various perspectives and methodologies from archaeologists, art historians, and anthropologists. The object of this book is to explore “burial practices of Warring States (ca. 453–221 b.c.e.), Qin (221–206 b.c.e.), and early Han (206 b.c.e.–9 c.e.).” Recent archaeological discoveries greatly enrich our knowledge of this period, and this particular era witnessed significant changes in mortuary practices such as the emergence of horizontal chamber tombs, the pervasive use of spirit artifacts (mingqi 明器), more frequent appearance of anthropomorphic and hybrid images, buried manuscripts, and newly introduced burial objects. The author traces the evolution of these changes and provides provocative interpretations of their meanings in a comparative framework. Following the archaeology of religion proposed by Buddhologist Gregory Schopen (p. 14), the author treats archaeological discoveries as an independent source of cultural and religious expression: independent in the sense that archaeological finds do not serve to validate conventional claims preserved in our transmitted texts. But it is challenging and risky to generate meaning and thereby reconstruct a cultural and theological milieu from those excavated artifacts. The reason for this is simple. Both the preservation and excavation of archeological remains are conditioned by various factors. Remains are fragmentary, representing only a fraction of the material culture in a historical period. While we search for coherent and seamless narratives to explain the religious practices of a particular place and time, we must acknowledge the coexistences of different and even contradictory beliefs and traditions. Making a sound interpretation requires us to analyze available data carefully in historical, sociopolitical, and archeological contexts, but we