黄河中下游地区史前二层台墓研究

黄河中下游地区40余处遗址的400多座二层台墓资料显示,生土二层台墓的数量在仰韶中晚期以前较熟土台墓多,龙山时代式微。该变化的背后是棺椁的逐渐成熟,生土台墓中小部分带有盖板或原始棺椁,同时熟土台并非判断墓葬带有棺椁的充要条件。通过生土台高度和墓葬深度的二元变量分析,墓葬开挖时预留生土台并未考虑稳固墓室,而应该与构建殓尸空间(或椁室)、进行一系列丧葬活动有关,在台面上放置随葬品的情况存在一定的时空差异。二层台墓的分布具有集中埋葬的倾向,采用二层台墓的群体并无明显的性别和死亡年龄指向,从仰韶中期以来,其所代表的社会群体占据着更为优越的社会财富。     

宁绍地区早期遗址群的量化分析

宁绍地区早期遗址群的时空变化是钱塘江以南聚落考古研究的重要课题。本文全面收集了这一地区的考古资料,着重从量化分析的角度,对距今7000～3000年间的遗址进行了考古地理学考察。在提取高分辨率年代序列的基础上,绘制出多幅遗址群分布地图,初步恢复性重建了宁绍平原考古时代的聚落群景观。     

简牍文物三维虚拟展示平台的研究与实现

以长沙简牍博物馆所收藏的简牍文物为研究模型,提出了将虚拟现实技术与简牍文物展览相结合的新方法。结合简牍文物自身特点和长沙简牍博物馆的实际情况,阐述了简牍文物三维虚拟展示模型的实现原理和过程,以及简牍文物三维虚拟展示平台的实现逻辑流程、系统结构和数据交换方式等。     

湖北潜江龙湾放鹰台Ⅰ号楚宫基址发掘简报

湖北省潜江市龙湾放鹰台Ⅰ号台基东周楚宫殿基址自1987年至2001年历时几个春冬的发掘,发掘面积共350平方米。揭露出东周楚宫殿基址的一、二、三层台主体建筑及其附属建筑遗迹。出土了一大批建筑遗物和铜、陶质生活器皿。为多学科的研究楚文化及楚宫殿建筑艺术提供了丰富的实物资料。     

唐陵大遗址考古的思路与方法——2007～2008年度中国田野考古一等奖获奖项目介绍

<正>陕西唐陵大遗址保护项目的考古工作荣获2007～2008年度全国田野考古一等奖。这是国家文物局和考古学界对我们工作成绩的肯定与鼓励,也是我院田野考古工作者开拓创新、辛勤工作的结果。以下将唐陵考古工作中的思路、方法、措施以及得失作以介绍,以期得到考古界同仁的指教。     

放射性碳素测定年代报告(三八)

本报告发表的是中国社会科学院考古研究所考古科技实验研究中心碳十四实验室和中国科学院地球环境研究所西安加速器质谱测试中心在2007～2011年期间测定的40个考古数据。数据表示方式与以往所发报告相同。为方便应用另做如下几点说明。1.碳十四年代半衰期按5568年计算。2.校正年代所用程序为OxCal,校正曲线为1998年公布版本。3.与以往报告相同,所给年代误差范围均为±16,年代范围的概率分布为68.2%。4.由于树轮年代校正曲线各区段形状不同,校正后年代范围可能形成几组,总合概率为68.2%(与过去报告中总合概率表示为100%相同)。5.校正均按单一样品方式处理。6.数据均作碳十三     

Comments on M. Kuhle and S. Kuhle (2012): ‘Hannibal Gone Astray? A Critical Comment on W. C. Mahaney et al., “The Traversette (Italia) Rockfall: Geomorphological Indicator of the Hannibalic Invasion Route” (Archaeometry, 52, 1 [2010] 156–72)’

The title of Kuhle and Kuhle's (2012) (hereafter K&K 2012) paper in Archaeometry appears to be mostly a tirade against the Traversette Route of Hannibal's Army, as originally favoured by Sir Gavin de Beer—a man possessed of singular scientific experience and near‐singular interest in Carthaginian history—in the mid‐part of the last century. The mere fact that Mahaney et al. (2010a,c) added to de Beer's corpus of evidence that Hannibal followed the southern route appears to have brought K&K (2012) to lodge not only a protest, but one of accusatory tone, stating that Mahaney et al. (2010c) had erroneously misinterpreted historical texts to prove the Col de la Traversette as the Punic Army col of passage into Italia. Aside from the fact that the tone of these allegations rises to a curious level, it is the intention of this discussion to put facts where they belong, rooted in what is known of the Hannibalic Invasion and what is inferred by the prevailing scientific evidence. It is important to note that there is not one preferred route as stated by K&K (2012), but three in fact (see Fig. 1 (a) in Mahaney et al. 2010c), and all have been discussed by a legion of historians (see, e.g., Freshfield 1886, 1899; de Beer 1969; Proctor 1971; Prevas 1998; Mahaney 2008).     

Reconsidering Relocated Buildings: ICOMOS,Authenticity and Mass Relocation 1

ICOMOS charters guide global heritage conservation practices. Fundamental to most is the notion that a ‘monument is inseparable from the history to which it bears witness and from the setting in which it occurs.’ Yet buildings have been moved for centuries. Neither the fabric nor the size of a building, nor planning regulations, nor even heritage listing, have prevented their relocation. This article briefly examines the history of relocation, reviews attitudes to relocation in ICOMOS charters, and analyses two case studies involving the mass relocation of heritage buildings in the UK and in New Zealand to question the assumption that buildings lose their authenticity if moved.     

Visible Archaeological Remains in Towns and Parks

This paper relates a specific and professional understanding of the nature of archaeological sites to management needs and approaches. It focuses on how the nature of the resource itself relates to a system of valuation, conservation and preservation. The perspective taken is that of the contribution of landscape planning to the development of tourism and heritage management. One of the central aims is to explain the visual values of archaeological remains in the landscape, relating them to the different measures of preservation available for archaeological sites. Examples are included from Latvia and other European countries.     

The Heritagescape: Looking at Landscapes of the Past

Heritage sites are one of the most visible, accessible and tangible manifestations of heritage and are also some of the essential building blocks of heritage. Yet we are still without a sense of how they operate over time and in relation to each other. This paper will introduce the notion of the ‘heritagescape’ as a means of interpreting and analysing heritage sites as unique social spaces that offer an experience of the past. In contrast to previous attempts to investigate these places, the heritagescape offers the means to focus both on the underlying similarities and also on the relationships of different sites to each other. As such, heritagescape offers a coherent and overarching methodology by which to identify the universal processes and elements that characterise heritage sites and will allow us to take our examination of heritage as a cultural phenomenon into the future.