Ten Years After—Megaliths, Mortuary Practices, and the Territorial Model
Ten Years After—Megaliths, Mortuary Practices, and the Territorial Model
复制标题
十年后——巨石、太平间实践和领土模式
DOI：
10.1007/978-1-4899-1310-4_2
复制
发表时间：
1995
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
R. Chapman
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
R. Chapman
10年前，我发表了一篇论文（Chapman，1981），在论文中，我发展了科林·伦弗鲁（Colin Renfrew）提出的论点，即最早的西欧巨石墓是农业社区领土的象征。这一论点是作为一种替代的不可信的扩散模型，通过这种坟墓之间的形式相似性，以及它们所体现的丧葬习俗，被解释为在区域范围内社区之间共享仪式习俗和信仰的程度的衡量标准。我热衷于发展这样的想法：从斯堪的纳维亚半岛南部到地中海的此类坟墓的考古记录中可见的变异性需要解释，只有当我们研究变量而不是文化特征时，这种理解才会出现，并且我们的兴趣是在各种问题上，使用不同的模型并以不同的分析规模测量不同的数据。对领土模式的反应既有积极的，也有消极的，这对如何
Ten years ago I published a paper (Chapman 1981) in which I developed the argument proposed by Colin Renfrew that the earliest West European megalithic tombs acted as symbols of territoriality among agricultural communities. This argument was presented as an alternative to the discredited diffusionist model by which formal similarities between such tombs, and the mortuary practices that they embodied, were interpreted as measures of the degree to which ritual practices and beliefs were shared between communities on a regional scale. I was keen to develop the ideas that the variability visible in the archaeological record of such tombs from southern Scandinavia to the Mediterranean required explanation, that understanding would only appear when we studied variables not cultural traits, and that our interest was in a variety of problems, using different models and measuring different data at different scales of analysis. Reaction to the territorial model has been both positive and negative, and is instructive of the ways