洛阳地区汉晋墓研究
本文选题:洛阳地区 + 汉晋时期 ; 参考:《郑州大学》2017年博士论文
【摘要】:墓葬制度“汉制”向“晋制”的转变,是中国古代墓葬发展演变的重要阶段。洛阳地区作为汉晋时期统治中心,分布有包括东汉、曹魏、西晋帝陵在内的各个层次的墓葬,为全方位考察该时期墓葬的变化提供了有利条件。该文以“洛阳盆地”内发现的3800余座汉晋时期墓葬为研究对象,结合最新的考古成果与文献资料,通过对墓葬形制、随葬器物、分期年代、文化因素、墓葬制度等问题的分析,试图对洛阳地区汉晋墓进行较为全面、系统地研究。首先针对墓葬形制、典型器物进行类型学分析,将墓葬分为23组,共11期,即西汉早期偏晚、中期偏早、中期偏晚、西汉晚期,王莽至东汉初期,东汉早期、中期、晚期(分前、后段),东汉末期至曹魏早期,曹魏晚期至西晋早期,西晋晚期。在分期基础上,探讨洛阳各时期墓葬文化因素的来源与影响。西汉早中期逐渐受到长安地区的影响,晚期开始出现新因素;东汉早期为南阳、河内等地与洛阳本地文化因素的融合,中期形成洛阳特色,并开始广泛影响全国各地;曹魏早期表现为冀州地区与本地文化因素的融合,并促使新因素的出现;西晋早期主要对洛阳曹魏墓文化因素的继承与延续,晚期大量吸收东吴文化因素,新风格开始形成。上述地域间文化因素的融合多因大规模的人口流动而引起。从层次性、阶段性两个方面,宏观上讨论墓葬制度“汉制”、“晋制”的形成与特点。两汉“汉制”的具体内涵差异较大,且一直处于动态变化之中,西汉晚期至新莽时期高、低两个层次之间的共性逐渐增强,在东汉时期典型形态为:砖(或石)室墓,同室合葬,随葬陶模型明器、祭奠器、动物俑类。西晋“晋制”高、低两个层次之间有较大不同,高等级墓形制为纵长方形单室,仅随葬日用器,低等级墓多为方形单室,随葬以出行仪仗类为主的各类陶器。用“大传统与小传统理论”,阐述墓葬高、低两个层次在汉晋墓葬制度演变过程中如何转化。除西汉承秦制外,其余各时期多是由前种墓制中“小传统”升华为后种墓制的“大传统”,如西汉“汉制”南阳、洛阳小传统中孕育东汉“汉制”大传统,而东汉“汉制”冀州小传统中形成曹魏“魏制”大传统,即便西晋“晋制”大传统也来源于“魏制”小传统,而同时期墓制“大传统”又影响“小传统”,如此墓葬制度发展的连贯性得以体现。相关问题的研究,主要针对洛阳地区汉晋时期墓葬的地域分布、等级差异、帝陵制度、合葬与家族葬、墓葬的祭祀、厚葬与薄葬等具体问题进行分析。墓葬分布,主要讨论了汉河南县城周边的西汉、新莽高等级墓,以及洛阳盆地内包括东周至北魏在内的帝陵分布情况。墓葬等级差异,西汉晚期至新莽开始逐渐增大,东汉时期以玉衣制度、曹魏至西晋则以墓圹内收台阶最具等级特征。帝陵制度在东汉至西晋时期呈衰弱之势,但象征最高地位的等级因素始终存在。合葬与家族葬方面,合葬始终以夫妻双人合葬为主,其中东汉多人合葬较为普遍,西晋同室合葬比例开始下降;家族葬流行于东汉至西晋时期。墓葬的祭祀,分墓内与墓上两个方面,东汉以后重心逐渐由“墓内”转为“墓上”。厚葬与薄葬,汉晋时期占据主导的“灵魂不灭”论,是社会各个阶层都奉行“事死如事生”理论的基础,也是“厚葬”流行的重要原因。两汉“以孝取士”,促使厚葬之风愈演愈烈,魏晋的相对“薄葬”,则是缺少功利主义驱使的理性回归。
[Abstract]:The transformation of the tomb system of "Han system" to "Jin system" was an important stage for the development and evolution of ancient Chinese tombs. As the ruling center of the Han and Jin Dynasties, the Luoyang area was distributed in various levels including the Eastern Han, the Cao Wei and the Western Jin imperial tombs, which provided a favorable condition for the omni-directional inspection of the changes in the tomb burial. This article is based on the "Luoyang basin". The tomb of more than 3800 Han and Jin Dynasties found in the area is the object of study. In combination with the latest archaeological achievements and documents, the paper tries to make a comprehensive and systematic study of the tombs of the Han and Jin Dynasties in Luoyang area through the analysis of the forms of the burial, the funeral objects, the age of the stages, the cultural factors and the burial system. According to the typology analysis, the tombs were divided into 23 groups, which were divided into 11 stages, namely, early in the Western Han Dynasty, early in the middle period, late in the middle of the Western Han Dynasty, early in Wang Mang to the early Eastern Han Dynasty, in the early East Han Dynasty, in the late period of the Han Dynasty to the early period of Cao Wei, from the late period of the Wei Dynasty to the early Western Jin Dynasty, and in the late Western Jin Dynasty. On the basis of the stages, the culture of Luoyang tombs was discussed. The origin and influence of the factors. The early and middle period of the Western Han Dynasty was gradually influenced by the Changan region and the new factors began to appear in the late period. The early Eastern Han Dynasty was the integration of Nanyang, Hanoi and other local cultural factors in Luoyang, and the Luoyang characteristic was formed in the middle period, and it began to influence all parts of the country. The Cao Weizao period showed the integration of the Jizhou area with the local cultural factors, and To promote the emergence of new factors; the early Western Jin Dynasty mainly inherited and continued the cultural factors of the tomb of Cao Wei tomb in Luoyang, a large amount absorbed the cultural factors of the Soochow in the late period, and the new style began to form. The fusion of cultural factors among the above-mentioned regions was caused by the mass flow of population. From two aspects of hierarchy and stage, the tomb system "Han system" was discussed macroscopically. "The formation and characteristics of the" Jin system ". The specific connotation of" Han system "between Han and Han Dynasties has a great difference, and has been in dynamic change. The commonness between the late Western Han Dynasty and the new Shikun period is high and the commonness between the two levels is gradually enhanced. The Jin "Jin system" is high, and there are great differences between the two levels. The high grade tombs form a rectangular single room, only the burial daily use, and the lower grade tombs are mostly square single rooms. Besides the system of the Western Han Dynasty, the rest of the period was mostly the "big tradition" that was sublimated by the "small tradition" in the former tomb system, such as the "Han system" in the Western Han Dynasty, Nanyang, and the traditional Chinese tradition of the Eastern Han Dynasty, while the Eastern Han Dynasty "Han system" in the small tradition of Jizhou formed the great tradition of "Wei system" in the Western Jin Dynasty. Even in the Western Jin Dynasty, the "Jin Dynasty" was the "Jin Dynasty". The great tradition also comes from the small tradition of the "Wei system", and the "great tradition" of the tomb system in the same period affects the "small tradition", and the continuity of the development of the burial system is embodied. The related issues are mainly aimed at the geographical distribution, the difference of grade, the imperial mausoleum system, the joint burial and the family burial and the sacrificial sacrifices of the burial burial in the period of the Han and Jin Dynasties in Luoyang. The distribution of tombs is mainly discussed in the Western Han, new and high grade tombs around the Henan County of Han Dynasty, as well as the distribution of imperial mausoleum in Luoyang basin, including the Eastern Zhou Dynasty and the Northern Wei Dynasty. The difference of the burial grade, from the late Western Han Dynasty to the new mang began to increase gradually, the jade clothing system, the Cao Wei to the West Jin Dynasty in the Eastern Han Dynasty In the Eastern Han Dynasty and the Western Jin Dynasty, the imperial mausoleum system had the most hierarchical characteristics. The imperial mausoleum system was weak in the Eastern Han Dynasty and the Western Jin Dynasty, but the rank factors of the highest status always existed. The joint burial and burial of the joint burial were mainly between the couple and the couple in the joint burial and family burial, among which the joint burial in the Eastern Han Dynasty was more common, the proportion of the joint burial in the Western Jin Dynasty began to decline; the family burial was popular in the East. During the period of the Han Dynasty and the Western Jin Dynasty, the sacrifices of the tombs were divided into two aspects, which were divided into the tomb and the tomb. After the Eastern Han Dynasty, the center of gravity gradually turned from "the tomb" to the "Tomb". The thick burial and the thin burial, the theory of "the soul inextinction" dominated by the Han and Jin Dynasties, was the basis of the theory of "death as a matter of affairs" in all social strata and an important reason for the popularity of the "thick burial". Two Han's "filial piety" has made the trend of thick burial more and more intense. The relative "thin burial" in Wei and Jin Dynasties is a rational regression driven by utilitarianism.
【学位授予单位】:郑州大学
【学位级别】:博士
【学位授予年份】:2017
【分类号】:K878.8
【参考文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 胡新立;;邹城新发现汉安元年文通祠堂题记及图像释读[J];文物;2017年01期
2 张鸿亮;马寅清;;河南孟津县天皇岭东汉墓[J];考古;2016年12期
3 贺辉;任广;程召辉;;河南洛阳市瞿家屯汉墓C1M9816发掘简报[J];考古;2016年01期
4 龚巨平;王海平;骆鹏;邰建胜;董补顺;雷雨;蒋艳华;祝乃军;;南京板桥新凹子两座西晋纪年墓[J];中国国家博物馆馆刊;2015年12期
5 王玉来;;故宫博物院藏西晋石\ 、石定墓志的出土时地与流传[J];中国国家博物馆馆刊;2015年10期
6 杨武站;曹龙;;汉霸陵帝陵的墓葬形制探讨[J];考古;2015年08期
7 齐东方;;中国古代丧葬中的晋制[J];考古学报;2015年03期
8 李长周;柳荫;;南阳高新区标准厂房汉画像石墓[J];南都学坛;2015年04期
9 朱亮;潘付生;田玉娥;范伟;胡瑞;高向楠;高虎;薛方;;洛阳洛龙区唐城御府三座西晋墓发掘简报[J];洛阳考古;2015年01期
10 史家珍;马胜利;马利强;张鸿亮;李继鹏;张海涛;贾晓龙;严辉;;洛阳偃师东汉洛南陵区2008年考古勘探简报[J];洛阳考古;2015年02期
相关重要报纸文章 前9条
1 王咸秋;;洛阳西朱村曹魏大墓考古工作取得重要收获[N];中国文物报;2016年
2 张小虎;;河南新郑坡赵发现东汉晚至三国大型砖室墓[N];中国文物报;2015年
3 韩国河;;安阳西高穴曹操高陵的“多面性”解析[N];光明日报;2014年
4 杨哲峰;;从陵到冢——关于东汉“懿陵”的思考[N];中国文物报;2008年
5 严辉;王文浩;王咸秋;;洛阳邙山陵墓群完成古墓冢文物普查工作[N];中国文物报;2007年
6 史家珍;严辉;李继鹏;;洛阳偃师发现东汉帝陵陵园和陪葬墓园遗址[N];中国文物报;2007年
7 蔡运章;;东汉帝陵封土考辨[N];中国文物报;2007年
8 杨哲峰;;汉墓研究中的七种区域选择类型[N];中国文物报;2004年
9 郭培育;王利彬;;洛阳朱家仓汉墓群考古取得重要收获[N];中国文物报;2004年
相关博士学位论文 前10条
1 朱津;三河地区汉墓研究[D];郑州大学;2015年
2 王玉喜;爵制与秦汉社会研究[D];山东大学;2014年
3 杨国誉;两汉经济生活诸问题考论[D];南京师范大学;2012年
4 李虹;死与重生:汉代墓葬信仰研究[D];山东大学;2011年
5 吕蒙;汉魏六朝碑刻古文字研究[D];西南大学;2011年
6 刘海宇;山东汉代碑刻研究[D];山东大学;2011年
7 王力春;汉魏南北朝石刻书人考辨[D];吉林大学;2009年
8 吴文文;汉碑文字研究[D];福建师范大学;2009年
9 余静;中国南方地区两汉墓葬研究[D];吉林大学;2009年
10 孙欣;汉墓遣策词语研究[D];华东师范大学;2009年
相关硕士学位论文 前10条
1 孙丹玉;姜屯墓地研究[D];吉林大学;2016年
2 包伟柯;魏晋时期南北方地区墓葬比较研究[D];郑州大学;2014年
3 郝轶男;汉代铜印文字研究概况及文字编[D];吉林大学;2013年
4 张丹;汉代铜镜铭文研究概况及文字编[D];吉林大学;2013年
5 赵炜州;河南汉墓出土陶圈舍研究[D];南京师范大学;2013年
6 褚亚龙;河南汉代陶楼考古学研究[D];西北大学;2012年
7 高秀芝;汉代漆器铭文研究概况及文字编[D];吉林大学;2012年
8 杨晓芳;洛阳和西安地区东汉晚期至西晋时期墓葬对比研究[D];吉林大学;2012年
9 佟艳泽;汉代陶文研究概况及文字编[D];吉林大学;2012年
10 石文嘉;汉代墓葬中出土玉璧的研究[D];南开大学;2011年
,本文编号:1996533
本文链接:https://www.wllwen.com/shekelunwen/kgx/1996533.html