“最初中国”西部版图的动态拓展

刘学堂
教授
新疆师范大学民族学与社会学学院
 

　　考古学家张光直提出了“最初中国”的概念。“最初中国”是在“中国相互作用圈或中国以前相互作用圈”的过程中逐渐形成。考古发现与研究表明，“最初中国”的西部包括天山地区。“最初中国”西部版图的动态扩展，为汉代在政治上统一中国和丝绸之路的开辟奠定了历史基础。

The Concept of “Original China” and Ancient China’s Expansion in the Western Territories

 Liu Xuetang
Deputy Dean/Professor
Institute of Ethnology and Sociology, Xinjiang Normal University
 

The archaeologist Zhang guangzhi (张光直; K.C.Chang) put forward the concept of “Original China” (最初中国; literally “China of the very beginning”). This entity was formed gradually by “cultural interaction within China, or cultral interaction preceding China”. Archaeological discoveries and research show that the western part of "Original China" includes the Tianshan area. The dynamic expansion of “Original China” in the western territory laid a historical foundation for the political unification of China and the establishment of the Silk road in the Han dynasty.

农牧文明的边界——人类学视野下的早期亚欧草原考古

于建军
研究员
新疆自治区文物考古研究所
 

　　本文通过尝试将人类学家弗瑞德瑞克•巴斯在（Fredrik Barth）《族群与边界》一书中提出的“边界”概念，纳入到考古学研究中，具体以亚欧草原史前考古为分析对象，阐述农、牧业经济方式的互动带来的社会变革，并以此促进了农牧业各自的发展。

　　文中辨析了畜牧、游牧、牧业之间的关系，以及农业早期强烈的扩张性，农牧业二者之间的互动以农业早期的扩张为发端，以牧业游牧力量的崛起而渐收，最终相互交错，使边界更加模糊。

　　考古学上农牧文明具有典型表现的多数集中在北方和西北地区，这对于以往环境的研究也有着重要的意义。

　　总体来说，这只是一个尝试，希望能够得到更多的指正。

The boundaries of agricultural civilization: An anthropological perspective on the

archaeology of the early Eurasian steppe

Yu Jianjun
Researcher
Xinjiang Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology
 

This paper applies the concept of “boundaries” proposed by anthropologist Fredrik Barth in his work “Ethnic Groups and Boundaries” (1969) into the field of archaeology.

Focusing on the prehistoric archaeology of the Eurasian steppe, this paper looks at the social changes brought about by the interaction of agricultural and pastoralist communities. The paper analyzes the relationship between pastoral nomadism or herding economies, and the expansion of early agriculture. When facing the rise of pastoral nomadism, early agriculturers had to step back in some areas while the boundary between these two subistences modes remained blurred.

Archeological research on the interaction between early farming and pastoralist communities has focused on areas located in North and Northwest China, which hold important evidence for the understanding of the phenomenon.

环青藏高原东缘新石器时代至汉代的文化互动

 王辉
所长\研究员
甘肃省文物考古研究所
 

　　环青藏高原东缘又被称为“蔵彝走廊”，也是童恩正先生提出的“半月形文化分布带”的南部，这一地区是西北黄土高原和西南云贵高原文化交流和迁徙的重要通道，还是欧亚草原和中国北方青铜文化向西南传播的主要途径。
　　从新石器时代晚期马家窑文化时期开始，甘青地区的古代文化即从甘肃南部进入了川西北地区，甚至向南影响所及到达安宁河流域。青铜时代的齐家和寺洼文化的文化因素也通过这条路线向南传播，不过，相对于马家窑文化时期，势头似有所减弱。从战国至汉代，大量北方青铜文化的因素通过青藏高原东缘向南扩散，到达云南。
　　青藏高原东缘地区的文化互动主要是由于羌戎西民族的南迁所造成的。从总体的趋势观察，在汉代之前，主要是甘青地区的古代文化的向南影响。尤其是在秦穆公称霸西戎之后，随着西戎的南迁，大量的北方青铜文化的因素进入了西南地区。在汉代以后，随着统一的中央集权政府的建立、汉代对西南边疆的经略和行政区划的变化，西南地区的文化因素也进入了甘肃南部。西北地区对西南地区的文化影响多沿青藏高原东缘的山前河谷地带向南传播，除三星堆时期外，很少进入四川盆地。

Cultural interaction in the eastern fringe of the Qinghai-Tibet plateau from the Neolithic to the Han period

Wang Hui
Director, Researcher
Gansu Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology

The eastern fringe of the Qinghai-Tibet plateau, also known as the “Zangyi corridor” (蔵彝走廊), formed the southern part of the “crescent-shaped cultural communication belt” (半月形文化分布带) proposed by Tong Enzheng. This area was an important channel for cultural exchange and migration between the northwest loess plateau and the Yunnan-Guizhou plateau. It was the main channel for the spread of bronze cultures from the Eurasian steppe and North China to Southwest China. From the late Neolithic period, with representative sites such as Majiayao, influences from Gansu and Qinghai entered Northwest Sichuan from the south of Gansu province, as well as further south towards the Anning river basin. The bronze cultures of Qi and Siwa also spread southward through this route, but connections seem to have weakened during the Majiayao period. From the Warring States to the Han period, northern bronze culture spread southward towards Yunnan, through the eastern margin of the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau.

Cultural interaction in the Qinghai-Tibet plateau region was mainly fuelled by the southward migration of the Qiang and other western groups. Before the Han period, southward influences mainly came from cultures located in the Gansu-Qinghai region. Especially after the Qin ruler Mugong’s campaign against the Rong, with the southward migration of the western Rong groups, a strong influence of northern bronze cultures was felt in the Southwest. After the Han period, with the establishment of a unified centralized government and following the change in territorial administration on the southwest border of the empire, feedback cultural influences from the southwest reached southern Gansu. Apart from the peculiar example of Sanxingdui, located in the Sichuan basin, most influences coming from the northwestern regions spread towards the southwestern region through the mountain valleys on the eastern edge of the Qinghai-Tibet plateau.

毛庆沟墓地发掘的意义

 杨建华
教授
吉林大学边疆考古研究中心

　　毛庆沟墓地发现于1979年，它与1973年发掘的内蒙古西部的桃红巴拉墓葬共同揭开了内蒙古东周游牧文化研究的序幕。时至今日，38年过去了，这期间发现了很多的北方青铜文化墓地，尤其是宁夏等地同类墓地的发现。通过对比，更加凸显了毛庆沟墓地的意义。
　　毛庆沟墓地位于内蒙古东部岱海地区，在赵国的北部。文献中赵国与北方胡人的关系中赵武灵王提出效法胡服骑射是尽人皆知的。毛庆沟墓地的墓主人很可能就是与赵国有过军事交往的胡人，墓地中随葬的服饰品当是所谓胡服的装束。经过与周边截至目前发现的所有服饰品的比较，毛庆沟墓地这类器物种类最全、数量最多、年代最早。常见的服饰品分为用作带扣的动物纹饰牌和腰带上的带饰，带饰主要分为S形饰牌和联珠饰牌。
　　毛庆沟墓地中发现了目前所知最早最丰富的胡服的装束用品，对周边的中国北方地区甚至境外的欧亚草原都有广泛的影响。
 

Excavation and analysis of the Maoqinggou cemetery

 Yang Jianhua
Professor
Research Center for Chinese Frontier Archaeology of Jilin University
 

The Maoqinggou cemetery was discovered in 1979, and together with the Taohongbala tombs excavated in western Inner Mongolia in 1973, this find pioneered the study of nomadic cultures in Eastern Zhou period Inner Mongolia. Today, 38 years later, many cemeteries belonging to northern bronze cultures have been discovered, especially in Ningxia and other places. By contrast, these finds highlights the significance of the Maoqinggou cemetery.

The Maoqinggou cemetery is located in the Daihai region of eastern Inner Mongolia, in the northern part of the ancient state of Zhao. In historical texts, the relationship between the state of Zhao and the “barbarians” (hu 胡) in the north, is illustrated by an episode where King Wuling of Zhao promulgates an edict to adopt hu clothing, horse riding and archery. The occupants of the Maoqinggou cemetery are likely to have had military intercourse with the state of Zhao, and the clothing worn by deceased correspond to the so-called hu dress. Compared with clothing items found in the surrounding area, this specific type of dress in Maoqinggou cemetery is found in greater number and attributable to an earlier date. These specific clothing items include belt buckles with animal motifs and other belt accessories, such as plaques with S-shaped and linked pearl decoration.

The Maoqinggou cemetery, where early and numerous exmpales of hu costume are found, had a wide influence on the surrounding areas of Northern China, and the Eurasian steppe.

早期金属时代中外文化联系的走向

——读杨建华教授等著《欧亚草原东部的金属之路》有感

乔梁
研究员
中国文化遗产研究院
 

　　中国早期金属时代的文化演进可能与新石器时代独立发展的主流模式有所不同，外来文化影响的作用已非忽略不计的程度，来自西方青铜文明的影响在中国青铜技术起源与发展中的作用无疑是不能视之不见的因素。借助于杨建华等所著《欧亚草原东部的金属之路》征引的资料和研究成果，观察早期金属时代古代中原区域与欧亚草原的文化交流，则不难发现在较早的阶段反映文化影响因素呈现的状态几乎是单一的走向，也即，基本上只能见到来自西方的金属物品或因素出现在甘青乃至中原或北方的相关遗存之中，而在对应西方一侧输出区域的同时期则很难发现源自中国大陆文化的物品或因素。观察广义中原区域早期青铜时代基本文化要素的传播，大致能够理解考古学文化所据及影响在地理分布上的梯次结构和背景因素，而所框定的地域范围也大致可以作为古代中国早期青铜时代的文化聚合单元，以界分和区别于更大背景环境之下的他系统文化单元。考古学中观察到的东西方文化交互的态势多少有点“来而不往”的意味，作为产品或技术提供者的西方，究竟由这种联系中获取了什么？中原早期青铜文化向西传播或影响受限的态势，也可能与当时及更早的西方文化势力更为强大有关。

Sino-foreign cultural relations in the early Metal Age: A reading of “The Metal Road in the Eastern Eurasian Steppe” by Professor Yang Jianhua

 Qiao Liang
Researcher
Chinese Academy of Cultural Heritage
 

 The cultural evolution of China’s early metal age is different from the mainstream model of independent development in the Neolithic period. External influences have been neglected: the influence of bronze cultures from the West on the development of Chinese bronze technology cannot be overlooked.
According to Yang Jianhua, the road for the diffusion of metallurgy ran through the Eurasian grassland in only one direction. This can be observed from metal items found in Qinghai and in the Central Plains of China, as well as in the North. Conversely, it is hard to find items that show any influence coming from mainland China in contemporaneous sites in the West.
The geographic distribution, existing hierarchies and contextual information about the archaeological cultures forming the early Bronze Age of the Central Plains are well-researched aspects, and led to distinguish Chinese Bronze Age culture as a functioning system different from Bronze Age cultures elsewhere in the world. Still, what remains to explain is why the influences remain one-sided, and what was obtained from this transfer in technology and metal items by its Western provider? Could the limited westward spread of the Bronze culture of the Central Plains be due to cultural inequalities between the East and the West?

考古学视野下中国——罗马帝国的交流

劳伦斯•包默尔
教授
瑞士日内瓦大学
 

　　中国与罗马帝国之间的交流往来，在考古发现和文献记载中均有所反映。在考古学方面，叙利亚巴尔米拉和杜拉—欧普洛斯发现的丝织品是目前可见的两者间直接交流的主要证据。在文献资料方面，《后汉书》、《魏略》中有少量的关于两者直接交流的记载，与此同时，文献中也能看到帕提亚（安息）帝国试图控制和限制两者直接交流的记载。

　　考古发现和文献记载从不同的角度描绘了中国—罗马帝国间交流往来的不同情境。尽管从目前掌握的资料来看，中国和罗马帝国间的交流往来并不频繁，但是通过对考古发现的分析研究，能够更好的理解远东和地中海地区之间特别是在经济领域和文化领域的交流情况。
 

Sino-roman encounters in an archaeological perspective：China and the Roman

Empire - Archaeological testimonia for Roman contacts with the Far East

Lorenz E. Baumer
Full professor of Classical Archaeology
Department of Science of Antiquities，University of Geneva (Switzerland)
 

Archaeological testimonial for a direct contact between the Mediterranean world of the Roman Empire and China are archaeologically mostly limited on woven silk that is found e.g. in the Syrian cities of Palmyra and Dura Europos.
On the other hand, Chinese texts, first of all the Weilue and the HouHanshu report a few direct contacts between the Roman and the Chinese world, but testify also of the role of the Parthians who tried to control and to limit quite successfully these encounters.
Taken together, the archaeological finds and the literary testimonia allow drawing a rather differentiated picture, showing that even if the contacts have been rare, there are at least some elements that allow a better understanding of the economic rules and the cultural contacts between the Far East and the Mediterranean world in Antiquity.

汉晋北方游牧部族社会组织考察

 郑君雷
副院长\教授
中山大学社会学与人类学学院
 

　　一、文献史料线索

　　1.内田吟风认为匈奴和鲜卑每户口数以七人计。

　　2.马长寿将乌桓社会组织拟定为“帐幕（家庭）——帐落群——邑落——部”四个层级。

　　3.王明珂认为“汉代辽西及邻近地区的乌桓与鲜卑社会可能包括几个主要层次：家庭——牧团——部落（邑落）——部落联盟（部）”。

　　二、出土印章线索

　　汉印见有“汉保塞乌桓率众长”、“新保塞乌桓□棃邑率众侯印”、“汉乌丸归义仟长”、“汉归义乌桓仟长”、“汉乌桓归义佰长”等名目，分为“率众”（王）、“保塞率众”（长、侯）和“归义”（仟长、佰长）三级。

　　三、游牧民族墓地线索

　　1.林西井沟子墓地。

　　2.泰来平洋墓地。

　　3.西丰西岔沟墓地。

　　四、民族志线索

　　蒙古族历史上有“古列延”、“阿寅勒”、“鄂托克”、“库伦”等牧业组织。哈萨克牧民结成“阿乌尔”进行生产活动，柯尔克孜族牧民的基层血缘组织称为“阿寅勒”。青海果洛藏区社会组织分为部、部落、小部落和“日科”（即“帐房圈”）四级。
　　通常而言，汉晋时期北方游牧部族的部落由二、三十或者更多邑落组成，每一邑落包括10来个帐落群，每个帐落群由数个至十数个帐幕组成；所谓合“数百千落自为一部”，是指以血缘纽带为基础的“部”，或者是以政治依附为基础的“部落联盟”。

Investigation on the social organization of northern nomadic tribes

in the Han and Jin period

 Zheng Junlei
Deputy Dean\Professor
School of Sociology and Anthropology, Sun Yat-Sen University
 

 Evidence from historical texts
Uchida Ginpu believes that each household among the Xiongnu and the Xianbei counted seven people.
Ma Changshou distinguishes four levels in the social organization of the Wuhuan: the tent (or household), the group of tents, the tribe, and the group of tribes.
According to Wang Mingke, the Wuhuan and Xianbei societies located in the western part of modern Liaoning province and the neighbouring areas were structured in several levels in the Han period: the family or household, the herding group, the tribe or clan, and the federation of tribes or clans.
Evidence from unearthed seals
Several Han period seals inscribed with titles of authority such as, for example :
“Han baosai Wuhuan shuai zhong zhang汉保塞乌桓率众长”
“Xin baosai Wuhuan □li yi shuai zhong hou yin新保塞乌桓□棃邑率众侯印”
“Han Wuwan gui yi qian zhang汉乌丸归义仟长”
“Han gui yi Wuhuan bai zhang汉乌桓归义佰长”
The titles can be divided into three levels: the chiefs (shuai zhong率众, corresponding to the king), the leaders who defend a frontier (zhang长, hou侯) and leaders of a hundred (佰长) or a thousand people (仟长).
Evidence from cemetery sites
Jinggouzi cemetery in Linxi county.
Pingyang cemetery in Tailai county.
Xichagou cemetery in Xifeng county.
Ethnographic evidence
In Mongolian history, several types of organization for pastoralist groups are known such as: the “gulieyan”, “a-yin le”, “etok”, “kulun”. The subsistence activity of the Kazakh herdsmen are organized as “ahur”, while Kirghiz herdsmen are organized as “a-yin le”. In Golok, part of the Tibetan area of modern Qinghai province, the society is divided into 4 levels: “day families” (or “tents communities”), small tribes, tribes and sections.
Generally, in the Han period, northern nomadic tribes are composed of twenty, thirty or more smaller units called yiluo 邑落. Every yiluo counts a dozen of tent groups and each tent group counts a dozen tents. The famous saying “hundreds of thousands of tents form one clan”, either refers to clan groupings based on blood ties or to clan groupings based on political alliances.

西西伯利亚和阿尔泰南部铁器时代早期民族文化——对现有文化之顾

 阿列克谢•提什金
教授
俄罗斯阿尔泰国立大学  
 

　　西西伯利亚和阿尔泰南部铁器时代早期（公元前1000年至公元500年）考古遗存研究有着自身的历史，其中最为重要的发现之一便是1865年拉德洛夫（V.V. Radlov）对巴泽雷克文化（Pazyrykskaya culture）墓葬的发掘。前苏联时期，一批杰出科学家如鲁坚科（Rudenko）、格利亚兹诺夫（Gryaznov）、基谢廖夫（Kiselev）、索尔金（Sorokin）、莫基尼科夫（Mogilnikov）等以及当地博物馆及相关机构的人员，都对这一地区古代人类材料的积累做出了贡献。对此系统的研究是在1973年阿尔泰国立大学在巴尔瑙尔成立之后。
　　在现有关于阿尔泰及毗邻地区早期铁器时代研究的框架下，笔者提出了分期编年的三个时段：the Argyan-Mayemir（公元前9世纪至公元前4世纪上半叶）或青铜时代向早期铁器时代的过渡；斯基泰（Scythian-Saki）或巴泽雷克（Pazyryk）时期（公元前4世纪后半段至公元前3世纪末）；匈奴—鲜卑—柔然（Xiungnu-Syanbi-Zhouzhan，公元前2世纪至公元5世纪）或匈奴—萨尔马提亚（Hunno-Sarmatian）时期。这些时期的民族文化状况鲜明反映在考古学文化遗产当中。同时，我们应把握以下特征：在阿尔泰山和森林—草原过渡地带北部，考古遗存表明其军事政治与社会经济发生了改变。
　　由于相关资料的缺失，阿尔泰山地区发达的青铜文化及晚期青铜文化状况尚不明朗。对于the Arzano-Mayemir时期，Biikenskaya文化与Mayemirskaya文化已通过分布在不同地区彼此相异的遗存区分开来。在它们之后便是著名的巴泽雷克（Pazyrykskaya）文化以及布兰—科宾斯卡亚（Bulan-Kobinskaya）文化。所有提及的阿尔泰文化之影响，主要反映在南部游牧族群及同时期其他政权上。
　　西西伯利亚南部的森林—草原过渡地带及草原地带则表现出完全不同的民族文化面貌。青铜时代晚期，几个Postandronian的考古学文化被辨识出来：Sargarinsko-Alekseeevskaya文化, Irmenskaya文化, Korchazhkinskaya文化等。在青铜时代向早期铁器时代过渡阶段，由于不同环境地带各种因素的影响，为人熟知的Bolsherechenskaya族群被斯基泰—萨尔马提亚（Scythian-Sarmatian）时期一系列独特文化如Sratoaleiskaya文化，贝斯特良斯卡亚（Bystryanskaya）文化以及卡缅斯卡亚（Kamenskaya）文化所取代。此外，泰加林带南部的古来部落体现出明显的进步性。公元1千年初在阿尔泰北部的丘陵和萨莱尔地区形成了Maiminskaya部落。在大迁徙时期，Odintsovskaya文化被认为存在于中世纪早期。
　　本研究由俄罗斯政府资助阿尔泰州立大学（Resolution No. 220），contract No. 14. Z50.31.0010.

Ethnocultural situation in the South of Western Siberia and the Altai region in the early Iron Age

 Alexei.A. Tishkin
Professor
Altai State University
 

The study of archaeological monuments of the early Iron Age in the south of Western Siberia and the Altai region (from the 1st millennium BC to the first half of the 1st millennium AD) has its own history. Pioneering work was done by V.V. Radlov in 1865, when he excavated large (“royal”) burial mounds later classified as Pazyrykskaya culture. In the Soviet period, contributions to the knowledge of the concerned groups was made by prominent scientists such as Rudenko, Gryaznov, Kiselev, Sorokin, Mogilnikov etc., as well as by the staff of local museums and organizations. Systematic research was carried out after the opening of Altai State University in Barnaul in 1973.
At present, within the framework of the early Iron Age of Altai and adjacent territories, the author singled out three chronological “horizons”: the Argyan-Mayemir (IX – 2–3 quarter of the 6th century BC) or the transition from the Bronze Age to the Early Iron Age; Scythian-Saki or Pazyryk time (2nd half of the 4th century to the end of 3rd century BC); Xiungnu-Syanbi-Zhouzhan (from the 2nd century BC to the 5th century AD) or “Hunno-Sarmatian” time. These archaeological cultures reflect the ethno-cultural situation in these periods. At the same time, we should note that in the Altai Mountains and in the forest-steppe zone to the north of them, different processes of the military-political and socio-economic plan took place in antiquity. In the Altai Mountains, cultures of the late Bronze Age have not been defined yet since the relevant data is not available. For the Arzano-Mayemir period, the Biikenskaya and Mayemirskaya cultures are characterized by monuments occupying various regions and differing from each other. After them there was the well-known Pazyrykskaya and then – Bulan-Kobinskaya cultures. All the mentioned Altai cultures reflected mostly the southern influence of the existing nomadic powers and other contemporaneous states.
The forested steppe and steppe zone in the south of Western Siberia are characterized by a completely different ethno-cultural situation. For the Late Bronze period, several archaeological cultures of the Postandronian world were identified: Sargarinsko-Alekseeevskaya, Irmenskaya, Korchazhkinskaya, etc. In the transition from the Bronze Age to the early Iron Age, the well-studied Bolsherechenskaya community replaced existing cultures in different environmental zones. Under the influence of different factors in the Scythian-Sarmatian period, came a series of special cultures: Sratoaleiskaya, Bystryanskaya and Kamenskaya. Moreover, there was a marked advance from the southern taiga zone of the Kulai tribes. At the beginning of the first millennium AD, in the northern foothills of the Altai and in Salair region, a community known as Maiminskaya took shape. In the period of the Great Migration, the Odintsovskaya culture was formed which persisted throughout in the early stages of the early Middle Ages.
The study was funded by the grant of the Government of  Russia (Resolution No. 220) received by Altai State University, contract No. 14. Z50.31.0010.

中国古代都城与日本古代都城

武田和哉
准教授
日本大谷大学
 

　　古城在东亚的中心——中国很早就得以发展。这一地域自古以来战乱不断，为了确保一个安全的生存环境，防御设施显得尤为重要。
　　古代中国的城市布局通常呈方形。然而，并非所有的古城都是极为规整的方形规划。虽然有证据显示这种情况确实存在，但先前存在的城垣往往被加以二次利用，并与后期的都城融为一体，而呈不规则形状的城市布局往往与地理限制或者劳动力短缺有关。关于中国古城早期营造法式的记载在《周礼》当中即有所体现。同样的准则在整个东亚尤其是日本更是得到了广泛运用。学界一直致力于将《周礼》中的思想与古城遗址相结合。作为《周礼》诞生地的中国，这里很难将文献中提到的观念设计同都城规划直接对应。相反，同样的观念在日本的几个古都中都得到了体现，尤其是在距离中国很远的藤原京以及渤海。
　　众所周知，日本古都均是以中国作为模板。而在日本的都城之间有时会存在一些结构上的较大差异，如藤原京和平城京。因此，这种模板不止于一个。日本的都城规划有可能还受到了其他文化因素的影响。
　　日本古都规划的主要变化体现在藤原京和平城京的布局上。皇宫的北侧吸收了北阙式结构，如同唐长安城一般。隋唐长安城的影响力是巨大的，長岡京和平安京之后的一些城市均效仿了这种结构。日中古城的一个显著区别在于前者的城墙并没有环绕在外围四周。在目前的研究中，尽管不完整的小型封闭式设施确有存在，但可与那些在中国发现的古城进行比较的城垣尚未找到。在古代日本，尽管涉及都城的战乱不断，但完整的城墙并不是必要的。这可能与日本没有遭受外来侵略有关。相反，围墙起到了视觉性和象征性的作用。日本与唐朝、新罗、渤海之间有序的使节往来确立于奈良时期，由此我们认为围墙的目的主要是用于外事活动。

Ancient Chinese and ancient Japanese capital cities

Takeda Kazuya
Associate Professor
Otani University
 

Walled cities developed early in China, which held a central position in East Asia. The region regularly experienced armed conflicts since ancient times, so that defense facilities were needed to secure a safe environment.
Ancient Chinese city plans are often of rectangular shapes. However, not all of them are well-organized rectangular plans. Although there is evidence for cities integrally built on an ideal rectangular plan, pre-existing fortifications were often re-used and incorporated in the design of later walled cities. Irregularly-shaped city plans can also be due to geographical constraints or an insufficient workforce. Early principles for the construction of Chinese walled cities are found in the Zhou Li (周禮). The same principles were applied to cities throughout East Asia, especially in Japan. Much effort is done in research to correlate the ideology of Zhou Li with the remains of ancient walled cities. In China itself, where the Zhou Li originates, it is in fact difficult to find cases where the precepts mentioned in the text are directly applied to urban design. Conversely, the same precepts are satisfied in several ancient capitals of Japan, especially in Fujiwara-kyo (藤原京) and Bo Hai (渤海), far away from China.
It is of common knowledge that ancient Japanese capital cities were modeled after the Chinese system. There are sometimes large structural differences between ancient Japanese capital cities, such as between Fujiwara-kyo (藤原京) and Heijo-kyo (平城京), so that more than one model might have been available. There is also the possibility that other cultural influences acted on urban design.
Major changes in the design of ancient capitals in Japan are reflected in the layout of Fujiwara-kyo (藤原京) and Heijo-kyo (平城京). The northern side of the imperial palace adopted the bei que (北闕) structure, just like in Tang period Chang’an (長安). Considerable influence came from Sui and Tang period Chang’an (長安), which structure emulated the later cities of Nagaoka-kyo (長岡京) and Heian-kyo (平安京). A major difference between ancient Japanese capital cities and ancient Chinese walled cities is that walls in the former did not surround all of the outer four sides. In the studies conducted thus far, although the existence of small-scale and incomplete enclosed facilities has been confirmed, fortifications comparable to those found in Chinese walled cities have not been found. Complete city walls were not needed in ancient Japan, although the capital was involved in many armed conflicts, possibly because there was no treath of an external invasion to the country. Instead, enclosures played a visual and symbolic role. Stable exchanges of envoys between the Tang Dynasty, Xin Luo (新羅) and Bo Hai (渤海) were established during the Nara period, and it is thought that the purpose of enclosures was essentially for conducting diplomatic activities.

类型学导向的中国考古学——对方法与问题的再评估

 安可•海恩
副教授
英国牛津大学
 

　　中国和西方的考古学者（特别是人类学传统的）在讨论问题时经常会忽略对方的观点，这不仅仅是出于不同语言之间的隔阂，更是根源于双方所秉持理论方法间的差异。尽管如今中国对西方的主要理论工作已经有了较为全面的译释，然而遗憾的是，几乎没有任何英文出版物对中国在考古学理论方法方面进行的尝试做出过介绍。这篇文章旨在消除这种隔阂，并具体讨论三位最具影响力的中国考古学家（李济、苏秉琦和张光直）所提倡研究方法的优劣之处，这篇文章也提供了对中国考古学研究的先决条件的更深刻的认识。同时在文章当中，我也对未来由中外考古学者合作进行的考古工作做出了畅想，这种工作包括对中国境内丰富的出土器物进行的分类工作，但又绝不仅仅拘泥于此。

The Typological Orientation of Chinese Archaeology:

A Reassessment of Methods and Problems

 Anke Hein
Associate Professor
University of Oxford

 

Chinese and Western archaeologists (especially those of the anthropologically-oriented tradition) often seem to be talking past each other, not only because they are publishing in different languages, but also because of differences in theory and method. While the major theoretical works in Western languages are by now available in Chinese translations, hardly any English-language publications exist that explain Chinese approaches to archaeological method and theory. This paper helps to bridge the gap, discussing in detail the merits – and issues – of approaches suggested by three of the most influential Chinese archaeologists (Li Chi, Su Bingqi, and K.C.Chang), this paper provides a deeper understanding of the preconditions of archaeological research in China. It also suggests future directions for archaeological work by local and foreign archaeologists, including but also going beyond the classification of the rich body of artifacts coming to light in Chinese excavations.