也论二里头类型二期遗存的变化——兼与王克林先生商榷

二里头文化二里头类型第一期和第二期是同一种文化连续发展的不同发展阶段。二里头类型主要来源于豫西南地区的河南龙山文化晚期。后羿属于东夷,而非西夷。     

日本右翼势力支持"台独"的历史考察

日本右翼势力对“台独”的支持大体经历了三个时期:战后初期,日本右翼势力是“台独”逆流的始作俑者和首开“台独”运动先河的罪魁祸首;冷战时期,日本右翼势力不仅在中日复交前使本国成为“台独”势力的大本营,而且在中日复交后仍一如既往、不遗余力地支持“台独”;后冷战时期,日本右翼势力支持“台独”不仅变本加厉,而且呈现出民间与政界配合、右翼与政府呼应之特点。     

山地传统村落空间系统风险研究——以重庆为例

选取风险源、风险受体状态、风险响应三个方面16个指标,以外部自然、人文因素、传统村落内部景观和建筑结构等为切入点,构建山地传统村落空间系统风险评价体系,分析重庆市110个传统村落空间系统风险,并针对性地提出保护建议。研究表明：(1)构建的风险评价体系能够综合反映山地传统村落空间系统外部压力和内部脆弱性,体现其空间差异。(2)重庆市传统村落空间系统风险属较高及以上等级的有42个,占村落总数的1/3以上,主要分布于渝东南武陵山中山地区,如酉阳、秀山等地。(3)风险等级较高及以上的传统村落,应提升主体风险防范能力,合理规划村落发展,避免城镇边界扩张挤压传统村落空间,导致其非自然性衰落。山地传统村落空间系统风险研究从宏观揭示风险驱动因子,识别风险胁迫大小,对传统村落精准保护具有重要意义。     

道书音注的语料价值

道教文献在辞书编纂和文献校勘方面具有一定的参考价值,文章利用道书中的音义材料并结合道教文化,从收字、注音等方面对《汉语大字典》的缺漏作补正,并对唐代段成式的《酉阳杂俎》作了校勘。     

从三峡地区的考古发现看楚文化的西进

三峡考古发现表明,楚文化在西周中晚期就已经对巫山地区有一定的影响;到了春秋中晚期和战国早期,楚文化已经完全控制了瞿塘峡以东的巫山地区,并进而对奉节、云阳、万州等地区产生了一定的影响;战国中期晚段至战国晚期早段,楚文化深入到峡江腹地的忠县一带,控制了长江干流沿线的地区。楚文化的几次西进有其不同的历史背景,基本可以与一些重大的历史事件相契合。从楚文化在峡江地区的分布情况看,他主要起着控制交通、扼守战略要地,以及掠夺资源的作用。     

尉迟寺出土陶鬶的启示

史前陶鬶发展的主流看法是起源于海岱地区,然后向周围传播。但是,蒙城尉迟寺遗址出土的陶鬶现象给这种观点带来了难解的课题。本文通过对尉迟寺出土陶鬶的验证,再次肯定了陶鬶应该发源于太湖地区。并且,尉迟寺遗址也是陶鬶发展过程中的关键区域,为陶鬶的传播研究提供了宝贵的资料。     

宜城市几处东周文化遗址调查简报

2006年12月,武汉大学历史地理研究所与宜城市博物馆联合在宜城境内开展进一步的田野考古调查,着重踏勘了分布在蛮河流域的东周秦汉遗址,探讨它们与楚国都城和楚文化的发展、演变关系,此次调查不但加深了对这一地区已知东周文化遗址的认识,同时还发现了几处新遗址。     

巴东县宝塔河遗址东周遗存

宝塔河遗址出土的东周时期遗迹有灰坑、陶窑和墓葬,遗物仅见陶器与石器,器类包括鼎、釜、罐、鬲、盂、豆等。这些遗存分三期,时代跨度从春秋早期至战国早期。内涵分为两组,一组以鼎、釜、罐为核心,代表着峡江地区一支传统的鼎釜文化;一组以鬲、盂、豆为核心,为楚文化。春秋早期以传统鼎釜文化为主,春秋中期以后,楚文化逐渐介入,春秋晚期以后,楚文化在这一地区已成为主导文化。这一过程为我们研究峡江地区传统文化的发展脉络,楚文化的扩展趋势,提供了重要的实物证据。     

Americanist Stratigraphic Excavation and the Measurement of Culture Change

Many versions of the history of Americanist archaeology suggest there was a stratigraphic revolution during the second decade of the twentieth century—the implication being that prior to about 1915 most archaeologists did not excavate stratigraphically. However, articles and reports published during the late nineteenth century and first decade of the twentieth century indicate clearly that many Americanists in fact did excavate stratigraphically. What they did not do was attempt to measure the passage of time and hence culture change. The real revolution in Americanist archaeology comprised an analytical shift from studying synchronic variation to tracking changes in frequencies of artifact types or styles—a shift pioneered by A. V. Kidder, A. L. Kroeber, Nels C. Nelson, and Leslie Spier. The temporal implications of the analytical techniques they developed—frequency seriation and percentage stratigraphy—were initially confirmed by stratigraphic excavation. Within a few decades, however, most archaeologists had begun using stratigraphic excavation as a creational strategy—that is, as a strategy aimed at recovering superposed sets of artifacts that were viewed as representing occupations and distinct cultures. The myth that there was a stratigraphic revolution was initiated in the writings of the innovators of frequency seriation and percentage stratigraphy.     

Beyond Boundaries: Nature,Culture and a Holistic Approach to Domestication in the Levant

The main objective of this paper is to suggest an alternative approach for the investigation of domestication in the Levant. First, basic data regarding domestication in the Levant are presented. Then the various traditional approaches towards domestication in the prehistoric Levant, labeled (1) environmental, (2) social and anthropological, and (3) cognitive, are briefly reviewed. This discussion forms the basis for a proposal of a “holistic approach,” in which domestication is regarded as a long-term, multidimensional and multirelational phenomenon, including many elements—such as plants, animals, humans, material culture and ancestors—with increasing human manipulation of these various constituents. After a presentation of the theoretical framework, a growth metaphor is used to reconstruct the process of domestication (ca. 20,000–6500 B.P.) as a number of phases: (1) germination in the Kebaran; (2) development in the Early Natufian; (3) retreat/dormancy in the Late/Final Natufian; (4) growth in the Pre-Pottery Neolithic A; (5) florescence in the Early- and Middle Pre-Pottery Neolithic B: (6) further development in the Late Pre-Pottery Neolithic B; (7) dispersal in the Final Pre-Pottery Neolithic B and the Pottery Neolithic. In each of these phases, relations between the various elements are dealt with, special attention being paid to symbolical relations, as evidenced by “art” and ritual.