發(fā)布時(shí)間：2018-04-01 07:45

  本文選題：青銅帶鉤　切入點(diǎn)：形制　出處：《遼寧大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：筆者搜集到的最早的關(guān)于帶鉤的論述就是1985年王仁湘學(xué)者著述的文章《帶鉤概論》。因此,筆者所搜集的資料也是從1985年開始。在這篇文章中,王仁湘學(xué)者論述的內(nèi)容較為全面。不僅從帶鉤的起源、發(fā)展,進(jìn)行研究,同時(shí),還對(duì)帶鉤的形制做了較為細(xì)致的劃分。他把帶鉤的形制分為八類,很多后人在研究帶鉤這一物件的時(shí)候,也是參考了其分類方法。到了九十年代,也有一些學(xué)者對(duì)帶鉤進(jìn)行研究。 本文從縱向和橫向兩個(gè)方面論述并且研究了從春秋到兩漢時(shí)期,全國各省市所發(fā)掘的帶鉤的情況。從總體上看,全國范圍內(nèi)春秋時(shí)期帶鉤數(shù)量較少,并且分布的范圍僅為黃河中下游一帶的中原地區(qū)。然而到了戰(zhàn)國時(shí)期,帶鉤的數(shù)量明顯增多,分布的范圍也覆蓋到全國,除了新疆、西藏等偏遠(yuǎn)地區(qū),二十多個(gè)省市都有帶鉤的發(fā)現(xiàn)。到了漢代,帶鉤仍然較為流行,但是全國范圍內(nèi)發(fā)現(xiàn)的數(shù)量沒有戰(zhàn)國時(shí)期多。并且?guī)с^盛行的地點(diǎn)也由山東、河北等地,轉(zhuǎn)移到陜西地區(qū),其原因可能是從戰(zhàn)國到漢代經(jīng)濟(jì)政治中心產(chǎn)生了轉(zhuǎn)移。由此,我們可以證實(shí),帶鉤的發(fā)展過程,是跟隨著中原經(jīng)濟(jì)文化發(fā)展而發(fā)展的,因?yàn)槠錇橹性椢幕囊徊糠?也是中原服飾文化的一個(gè)載體。同時(shí),我們可以從側(cè)面看出,各個(gè)朝代都城的更迭,都是一次政治經(jīng)濟(jì)中心的轉(zhuǎn)移,這樣的轉(zhuǎn)移給周圍經(jīng)濟(jì)文化的發(fā)展帶來很大的影響。如果單獨(dú)從西漢時(shí)期來看,帶鉤的數(shù)量遠(yuǎn)遠(yuǎn)少于戰(zhàn)國時(shí)期,從這一點(diǎn)上看,我們可以粗略的認(rèn)為,帶鉤的發(fā)展已經(jīng)沒有戰(zhàn)國時(shí)期那么盛行了。到了東漢時(shí)期,全國發(fā)現(xiàn)帶鉤的數(shù)量就更加稀少了。帶鉤的發(fā)展開始逐漸走向衰退。 從分類的方法來看,本文不同于先前學(xué)者的分類方法,將帶鉤分為琵琶形,棒形,耜形等具體的形制分類,而是先從長度上分為A、B、C三型,再從每一型中,按照形制的規(guī)律,分為abcd等式。具體的內(nèi)容就是,將長度在5厘米以下的帶鉤分為A型帶鉤;長度在5——10厘米之間的帶鉤,為B型帶鉤;長度在10厘米以上的帶鉤為C型帶鉤。按照長度分型的好處在于,各個(gè)不同長度之間的帶鉤其實(shí)際的功能有很大的可能是不同的。但是不同形制的帶鉤在功能上應(yīng)該沒有這種區(qū)別。在同一種長度的帶鉤中再區(qū)分其形制的不同,就更加有對(duì)比性。筆者按照這種方法,將搜集的全國34個(gè)省市的帶鉤進(jìn)行歸納,這些帶鉤均可以劃分到其中,這充分說明了這種方法的可行性。
[Abstract]:The earliest discussion on hooks collected by the author is the article "introduction with hooks" written by Wang Renxiang in 1985. Therefore, the data collected by the author began in 1985. Wang Renxiang not only studied the origin, development and development of hook, but also divided the shape of hook into eight categories. Many later generations have also referred to the classification method when studying the object with hook. By the 1990s, some scholars have also studied the hooks. This paper discusses and studies the situation of hook excavated by provinces and cities from the Spring and Autumn period to the Han Dynasty from the vertical and horizontal aspects. On the whole, the number of hooks in the Spring and Autumn period in the whole country is relatively small. However, during the warring States period, the number of hooks increased significantly, and the distribution also covered the whole country, except in remote areas such as Xinjiang and Tibet. More than 20 provinces and cities have been found with hooks. By the Han Dynasty, the hooks were still relatively popular, but the number of hooks found nationwide was not as large as during the warring States period. And the places where hooks prevailed were also transferred from Shandong, Hebei and other places to the Shaanxi region. The reason may have been the shift from the warring States period to the economic and political center of the Han Dynasty. Thus, we can confirm that the development process with the hook is following the economic and cultural development of the Central Plains, because it is part of the dress culture of the Central Plains. It is also a carrier of the clothing culture of the Central Plains. At the same time, we can see from the side that the change of capital cities in various dynasties is a shift of political and economic center. Such a shift would have a great impact on the development of the surrounding economy and culture. If we look at the Western Han Dynasty alone, the number of hooks is far less than that of the warring States period. From this point of view, we can roughly think that, The development of hooks was not as prevalent as in the warring States period. By the Eastern Han Dynasty, the number of hooks found in the whole country was even rarer. The development of hooks began to decline gradually. From the point of view of classification method, this paper is different from previous scholars' classification method, which divides the hooks into pipa shape, bar shape, Si shape and so on. Instead, they are divided into three types, namely, Aji-Ban C in length, and then in each type, according to the rules of shape. The specific content is that the hooks below 5 cm in length are divided into A type hooks, and those between 5 cm and 10 cm in length are classified as B type hooks. A hook with a length of more than 10 cm is a type C hook. The advantage of classifying by length is that, The actual function of the hook between different lengths is very likely to be different. But there should be no difference in the function of the hook of different shapes. According to this method, the author sums up the hooks collected from 34 provinces and cities in China, and these hooks can be divided into them, which fully shows the feasibility of this method.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：遼寧大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級(jí)別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號(hào)】：K878.8

【參考文獻(xiàn)】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 ;1995年新鄉(xiāng)火電廠漢墓發(fā)掘簡報(bào)[J];華夏考古;1997年04期

2 樊溫泉;河南鄧州市穰東漢墓發(fā)掘簡報(bào)[J];華夏考古;2003年03期

3 王春玲;趙爭鳴;劉習(xí)祥;李慧萍;張春媚;趙昌;何林;張宇;;2003年河南新鄉(xiāng)市火電廠墓地發(fā)掘簡報(bào)[J];華夏考古;2008年02期

4 姚軍英;楊俊偉;趙廣杰;蘇輝;朱滟;許燕;李曉蘊(yùn);劉紅娜;張建華;;河南許昌市倉庫路戰(zhàn)國和漢代墓葬發(fā)掘簡報(bào)[J];華夏考古;2009年04期

5 ;山東壽光縣三元孫墓地發(fā)掘報(bào)告[J];華夏考古;1996年02期

6 ;山東章丘市王推官莊遺址發(fā)掘報(bào)告[J];華夏考古;1996年04期

7 程長新;;北京市通縣中趙甫出土一組戰(zhàn)國青銅器[J];考古;1985年08期

8 馬璽倫;孔繁剛;趙惠榮;;山東沂水發(fā)現(xiàn)一座東周墓[J];考古;1988年03期

9 王子今;周蘇平;焦南峰;;陜西丹鳳商邑遺址[J];考古;1989年07期

10 周興華;;寧夏中衛(wèi)縣狼窩子坑的青銅短劍墓群[J];考古;1989年11期

，

本文編號(hào)：1694600