中国新石器时代长江流域农业化景观的转变.doc

The Transformation of Farming Cultural Landscapes inthe Neolithic Yangtze Area, ChinaKeisuke Makibayashi J World Prehist (2014) 27:295307 Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014Abstract This paper discusses aspects of landscape formation in the age of Neolithization,with examples of the farming-culture formation process in the Yangtze (長江) area of China. This research systematically links practical archaeological artefacts with farming culture to explore the development of the farming cultural landscape. In addition, differences between farming formation processes in the Lower Yangtze and Middle Yangtze areas are demonstrated from a landscape perspective, moving beyond the present culturehistorical understanding of rice cultivation in the greater Yangtze area.Keywords Yangtze area Rice cultivation Cultivation system Consumption system LandscapeObjectivesDiscussion of Landscape Change Caused by the Farming-Culture Formation Process Research on early agriculture in China has progressed remarkably in recent years. Analyses ofnatural rice and early cultivated remains have yielded significant data. It is now believed that the use of rice began around 6000BC in theYangtze area.Additional facts about wild and cultivated rice are emerging, thanks to morphological and DNA analysis. Despite this knowledge, questions remain in regard to the farming-culture formation process that led to rice cultivation.Farming-culture formation processes are those activities by means of which people and societies cultivate and eat. To discover these processes, we need to theoretically and logicallysystematize artefacts of farming culture and use these systems as our principal analytical tools.The process by which farming came into beinga change in the relationship between humans and naturecan be characterized as a process of landscape formation, as this paper will argue.A Single Rice Cultivation Area? The Lower Yangtze and Middle Yangtze AreasThis paper points out differences in the farming formation process for the Lower and Middle Yangtze areas (see Fig. 1), and discusses distinctive features of their respective landscape changes. During Chinas Neolithic, there were two broad categories of agricultural landscape:the millet cultivation (Yellow River) area; and the rice cultivation (Yangtze) area. As John Lossing Back has pointed out, these two agricultural categories were long recognized as the basic structures of the Chinese world (Komoto 1992). A comparative analysis of the cultivation and consumption systems of the Lower and Middle Yangtze areas (see below) stresses that these areas have come to be recognized as rice-cultivation monocultures. Differences between the rice-cultivation landscapes of the Lower and Middle Yangtze areas (which had independent farming formation processes), as well changes within them, are discussed.Farming-Culture Structures and Systems: The Cultivation System and the Consumption SystemTheoretical Framework of Farming-Culture Structures and SystemsFirst, it is important to present a basic theoretical framework for the analysis. We need to look at archaeological artefacts in order to comprehend early farming culture. This can beconceptualized as two systems: the production system and the consumption system (see Fig. 2) (Makibayashi 2008). This division is a crucial step in deriving a cultural theory from the analysis of artefacts. Methodologies based on natural remains have previouslybeen employed in archaeobotany (e.g. Fuller et al. 2008; Fuller and Qin 2010; Hosoya 2011). This paper takes an approach that integrates artefact analysis with data from organic remains, so as to ensure a comprehensive discussion. Discussions of farming cover the plants cultivated (the principal crops), as well as the activities of cultivating and harvesting. Archaeology has generally classed these asfarming culture, which it has broken down into patterns. Farming culture is often defined by the cultigens, botanical remains, and implements present, and by farming activity-patterns evidenced by these cultivating, harvesting, and processing tools. Processing and cooking stages, such as de-husking, polishing, stewing, and baking, are also an important factor. Although cultivating and eating are two different activities, they can be understood as one set of cultural activities in the context of daily routine. This paper attempts to understand farming culture as one continuous process, involving not just cultivation but consumption. Accordingly, the process is divided into cultivation and harvesting (the cultivation system) and processing and cooking (the consumption system). Cultivation involves many activities: ploughing, planting, management (weeding), and harvesting. Cultivation tools include spades, ploughs and hoes. With Neolithic artefacts,it is difficult to know which was used for which task (ploughing, sowing or management);in fact, cultivation tools can be multi-purpose and used in all processes.Harvesting knives and sickles are the tools used during harvest. Cultivating tools and harvesting tools are collectively known as farming tools. Harvested grains are processed,cooked, and finally eaten. Activities after harvesting include threshing (de-husking),polishing, milling, and cooking, and the tools used at these stages are processing and cooking tools. Processing tools include grinding stones, querns, mortars, and mallets, while cooking tools include boiling vessels and steamers. Establishing the practical relationship between archaeological artefacts and the activities of cultivation and consumption,rather than simply creating separate descriptions of physical culture, enables an important approach to the reality of farming culture and agricultural processes that was not previously possible. Of course, crop cultivation itself was not independent from living, raising livestock (herding), and hunting, fishing and gathering; rather, these practices formed a subsistence complex. One conclusion of this research is that combining these practices in a systematization of subsistence processes is a crucial prelude to more profound discussion.Misconceptions and Reaffirmations Regarding Processing ToolsProcessing tools will now be examined in more detail. A mopan (磨盤), as it is known in Chinese, is a typical tool for threshing and pulverizing grains and making flour. It is regarded as an indicator of grain cultivation and farming. This has led to the persistent misconception that mopan did not include grinding stones for wild nutsdespite the presence of querns and mortars (Fig. 3)and to the current situation, where analysis of mopan in the Yangtze area and South China area has stagnated. Rather than considering mopan only in relation to grains, we should reinvestigate their use in processing other edible plants (Makibayashi 2004).The Process from Cultivation to Consumption: Chinese CharacteristicsThe Transformation of Farming Culture in the Lower Yangtze AreaThe Consumption System: Changes in Processing and Cooking ToolsThe Cultivation System: Changes in the Farming Tool AssemblageLandscape Transformation Resulting from Farming CultureThe Transformation of Farming Culture in the Middle Yangtze AreaComparison of Farming Culture Systems in the Lower and Middle Yangtze AreasDifferent Rice Cultivation Development Processes and Landscapes中国新石器时代长江流域农业化景观的转变摘要：本文以长江流域农业化的过程作为具体事例来讨论中国新石器时代的农业景观形成过程。史前中国大陆地区存在有多种多样的农耕方式, 作为稻作地带的长江流域自然也应该有多种多样的农耕生产方式。本文将具体的考古资料与农业生产行为体系相结合作为分析方法。通过对农业行为的分析来讨论农业景观。得到的结论是, 在稻作地带的长江流域, 至少存在“长江下游”和“长江中游”两个不同的农业景观形成过程。关键词：长江流域 水稻种植 栽培系统 消费系统 景观目标农耕文化形成过程中的景观变化探讨 近几年来我国早期农业的研究取得了显著的进展。天然水稻及其早期栽培的分析也获得了重要的数据。证明水稻种植始于公元前6000年左右的长江流域。由于形态和基因分析，更多关于野生和栽培水稻的事实正在浮现。尽管有这些认识，关于水稻种植兴起的农业化过程的问题依然存在。 农业化过程是指通过人们与社会种植与饮食的活动。要发现这些过程，我们需要从理论上和逻辑上系统化农耕文化的文物，并且使用这些系统作为我们的主要分析工具。正如本文将论证的一样，农业进入了一种转变人类之间关系的进程，自然可以被描述为一个景观形成的过程。长江下游和长江中游是单一的水稻种植区？本文指出农业形成过程中长江中下游地区的差异(见图1)，并讨论了各自的特色景观的变化。在中国新石器时代，农业景观有两大类:小米种植区(黄河);和水稻种植区(长江)。正如约翰洛辛所指出的,这两个农业类别早已被公认为华人世界的基本结构(Komoto 1992)。种植的比较分析和长江中下游消费系统(见下文)强调这些区域已经被认为是水稻种植品种单一。长江中下游地区(拥有独立的农业化过程)间水稻种植景观的差异,以及它们的变化,也进行了讨论。农业化结构与系统：培育系统与消费系统农业化结构与系统的理论框架首先,重要的是提出一个分析的基本理论框架。我们需要看看考古文物，以便理解早期农耕文化。这就迫切需要两个系统：生产系统和消费系统（见图1）（makibayashi 2008）。这一划分是从文物分析中得出文化理论的一个重要步骤。基于自然遗迹的方法已被证实依赖于古植物学（如Fuller等人2008；Fuller and Qin 2010；Hosoya 2011）。本文以一种整合有机残余物数据分析的方法，以确保全面的探讨。 考古学通常将农业覆盖栽培（主要作物）的讨论，以及栽培和收获的活动归类为“农业化”，并将其分解成不同模式。农业化往往是由栽培种和植物遗存定义,由农业活动模式实