Stages and Periods in Archaeological Interpretation
Stages and Periods in Archaeological Interpretation
复制标题
考古学解释的阶段和时期
DOI：
10.1086/soutjanth.18.1.3629122
复制
发表时间：
1962
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
J. Rowe
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Rowe
阶段和时期是用于组织考古证据的不同类型的单位，以便可以根据文化变迁来解释它。不同之处在于，阶段是文化相似性的单位，而时期是时间的单位，或者更具体地说，是同时性的单位。在一个小区域内，非常相似的文化单位通常也接近当代，因此阶段相当于时期。然而，当问题是在大面积上匹配局部序列时，由于扩散的影响，基于统一标准建立的阶段预计会给出与周期不同的匹配。对考古序列组织中涉及的问题的研究表明，时期为文化解释提供了比阶段更有用的基础，前提是时期是参考某些已知的精确细节的单一局部序列来定义的。正如我们所说，阶段是文化相似性的单位。文化单元被分配到同一阶段，因为它们共享一个或多个已被选择作为该阶段的诊断的特征，并且缺乏被认为是其他阶段的诊断的其他特征。阶段与其他基于相似性的分类单元的区别在于，阶段应该以固定的顺序相互跟随。当使用阶段时，它们的顺序有时仍然以 18 和 19 世纪的方式通过从进步理论中推导来确定，但在考古实践中，顺序通常由经验确定的序列控制。有两种阶段可以用来将当地考古序列相互联系起来，我建议分别将它们称为“简单阶段”和“复杂阶段”。简单阶段是根据单个特征的存在或不存在而定义的阶段。例如，我们可能会发现，在某个特定地区，到处都有陶器的文化单位紧随其他缺乏陶器的文化单位之后。然后，我们可以使用这一观察结果作为定义两个阶段的基础，即非陶器或前陶瓷阶段和陶瓷阶段。没有必要
STAGES and periods are different kinds of units used to organize archaeological evidence so that it can be interpreted in terms of cultural change. The difference is that stages are units of cultural similarity, while periods are units of time, or, more specifically, units of contemporaneity. Within a single small area, cultural units which are closely similar are usually also nearly contemporary, so that stages are equivalent to periods. When the problem is one of matching local sequences over a large area, however, stages established on the basis of uniform criteria can be expected to give a different matching from periods, because of the effects of diffusion. An examination of the problems involved in the organization of archaeological sequences suggests that periods provide a more useful basis for cultural interpretation than stages, provided that the periods are defined with reference to some single local sequence which is known in precise detail.' Stages, as we have said, are units of cultural similarity. Cultural units are assigned to the same stage because they share one or more features which have been selected as diagnostic for that stage and lack other features which are considered diagnostic of other stages. What distinguishes stages from other kinds of classificatory units based on similarity is the fact that stages are supposed to follow one another in a fixed order. When stages are used their order is still sometimes determined in the 18th and 19th century manner by deducing it from the theory of progress, but in archaeological practice the order is usually controlled by empirically established sequences. There are two kinds of stages which can be used to relate local archaeological sequences to one another, and I propose to call them "simple stages" and "complex stages" respectively. Simple stages are those defined on the basis of the presence or absence of a single feature. For example, we may find, in a particular area, that cultural units which include pottery everywhere follow other cultural units which lack pottery. We can then use this observation as the basis for defining two stages, a non-pottery or pre-ceramic stage and a ceramic one. It is not necessary