Late Neolithic plant remains from Northern China: Preliminary results from Liangchengzhen, Shandong
Late Neolithic plant remains from Northern China: Preliminary results from Liangchengzhen, Shandong
复制标题
DOI：
10.1086/428788
复制
发表时间：
2005-04-01
影响因子：
2.2
通讯作者：
Cai, FS
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Crawford, G;Underhill, A;Cai, FS
1.我们感谢亨利吕斯基金会（1999年，授予昂德希尔、费曼、冯·法肯豪森）和国家科学基金会（2000-2001年，授予昂德希尔和费曼BCS-99-11128）使我们在两城镇的发掘成为可能。植物遗骸分析得到了这些赠款以及加拿大社会科学和人文科学研究理事会的经营赠款的支持，奖励72022345。杰奎琳·布伦、米歇尔·金、凯瑟琳·莫里西和艾米丽·霍兰德在协助样本分析方面做得非常出色。在山东大学和田野博物馆的赞助下，两城镇的展览进行了。我们感谢北京的国家文物局授予挖掘许可证。梁城镇的许多当地人，特别是张子博，非常努力地加工我们的样品。加里·克劳福德（Gary Crawford）准备了所有的数据，只有两个例外：杰夫·库纳（Jeff Cunnar）和拉斯·奎克（Russ Quick）准备了图2，菲尔德博物馆人类学系的吉尔·西格尔（Jill Seagard）准备了图3，克劳福德为本文修改了这两个数据。本材料中表达的任何观点，发现和结论都是作者的观点，不一定反映国家科学基金会的观点。一般倾向于强调年代学、技术、个人定居点和偶然发现的植物和动物遗骸（即未通过漂浮法发现的遗骸）（Chang 1986，Crawford和Shen 1998，Underhill 1997）。如果我们不仅要了解新石器时代晚期的农业，还要了解中国粮食生产的起源，那么将这些研究置于跨学科的框架中是至关重要的。系统地收集植物遗骸一直是对龙山文化（约）进行多方面国际考古调查的一个组成部分。公元前2600-1900年）山东省东南部的凉城镇遗址（图1）。这里报道的发现是第一次来自一个大规模的计划，系统的浮选进行了中国新石器时代晚期的网站。这里报告的样品来自1999年和2000年的前两个田间季节。在这份初步报告中，我们记录并将龙山农作物和其他植物遗骸置于背景中，探索遗址内的空间格局，并回顾新数据对理解新石器时代晚期生存生态学的影响。龙山农业大多数龙山遗址，主要根据共同的陶器风格来区分，在中国中北部的暖温带和冷温带都有发现。这种广泛的分布表明龙山是种族多样性，并会采用当地适当的生存策略。龙山农业被认为是以小米为基础的，水稻的重要性很小，尽管龙山和之前的大汶口晚期的一些遗址都有报告（Underhill 1997）（表1）。农业支撑着一个等级森严的龙山社会。争论的焦点是社会是由酋长还是国家组成（Liu 1996，Underhill 2002）。聚落是按等级组织的，凉城镇是山东东部聚落等级体系中一个重要的区域中心（Underhill et al. 2002）。几个大型遗址周围都有土墙，这表明人们对保护经济资源的关注。Chang 1986年：250）和栾（1997）提出，龙山的社会分化是由密集的资源获取和生产促进的;然而，在龙山及其前身的古民族植物学细节得到评估和适当的标本AMS测年之前，这一假设无法得到充分的验证。
1. We are grateful to the Henry Luce Foundation (1999; award to Underhill, Feinman, von Falkenhausen) and the National Science Foundation (2000–2001; award BCS-99-11128 to Underhill and Feinman) for making our excavations at Liangchengzhen possible. The plant-remains analysis is supported by these grants as well as an operating grant from the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, award 72022345. Jacqueline Brenne, Michelle King, Kathryn Morrisey, and Emily Holland did an exceptional job assisting with the sample analysis. Excavations at Liangchengzhen took place under the auspices of Shandong University and the Field Museum. We thank the National Bureau of Cultural Relics in Beijing for granting the excavation permit. Many local people at Liangchengzhen, especially Zhang Zibo, worked very hard to process our samples. Gary Crawford prepared all the figures with two exceptions; Jeff Cunnar and Russ Quick prepared figure 2 and Jill Seagard of the Department of Anthropology, the Field Museum, figure 3, both of which were modified by Crawford for this paper. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. have tended to emphasize chronology, technology, individual settlements, and chance finds of plant and animal remains (that is, remains not recovered by flotation)(Chang 1986, Crawford and Shen 1998, Underhill 1997). Setting such studies in an interdisciplinary framework is essential if we are to understand not only Late Neolithic agriculture but the origins of food production in China as well. The systematic collection of plant remains has been as integral part of a multifaceted, international archaeological investigation of the Longshan culture (ca. 2600–1900 BC) Liangchengzhen site in southeastern Shandong Province (fig. 1). The findings reported here are the first to come from a large-scale program of systematic flotation carried out at a Chinese Late Neolithic site. The samples reported here are from the first two field seasons, 1999 and 2000. For this initial report, we document and contextualize the Longshan crops and other plant remains, explore intrasite spatial patterning, and review implications of the new data for the understanding of Late Neolithic subsistence ecology. longshan agricultureMost Longshan sites, distinguished mainly on the basis of shared pottery styles, are found in both warm and cool temperate zones in north-central China. This broad distribution suggests that Longshan was ethnically diverse and would have employed locally appropriate subsistence strategies. Longshan agriculture is thought to have been millet-based, with rice having little importance although it is reported from a number of Longshan and preceding Late Dawenkou sites (Underhill 1997)(table 1). Agriculture supported a Longshan society that was ranked. Debate focuses on whether the society consisted of chiefdoms or states (Liu 1996, Underhill 2002). Settlements were hierarchically organized, and Liangchengzhen was a significant regional center within an eastern Shandong settlement hierarchy (Underhill et al. 2002). Earthen walls surround several large sites, suggesting concern with defending economic resources. Chang 1986: 250) and Luan (1997) have proposed that Longshan social differentiation was facilitated by intensive resource acquisition and production; however, until the palaeoethnobotanical details of Longshan and its predecessors have been assessed and appropriate specimens AMS-dated, this hypothesis cannot be adequately tested.