本文選題：洛陽地區(qū) + 漢晉時期��； 參考：《鄭州大學(xué)》2017年博士論文

【摘要】：墓葬制度“漢制”向“晉制”的轉(zhuǎn)變,是中國古代墓葬發(fā)展演變的重要階段。洛陽地區(qū)作為漢晉時期統(tǒng)治中心,分布有包括東漢、曹魏、西晉帝陵在內(nèi)的各個層次的墓葬,為全方位考察該時期墓葬的變化提供了有利條件。該文以“洛陽盆地”內(nèi)發(fā)現(xiàn)的3800余座漢晉時期墓葬為研究對象,結(jié)合最新的考古成果與文獻資料,通過對墓葬形制、隨葬器物、分期年代、文化因素、墓葬制度等問題的分析,試圖對洛陽地區(qū)漢晉墓進行較為全面、系統(tǒng)地研究。首先針對墓葬形制、典型器物進行類型學(xué)分析,將墓葬分為23組,共11期,即西漢早期偏晚、中期偏早、中期偏晚、西漢晚期,王莽至東漢初期,東漢早期、中期、晚期(分前、后段),東漢末期至曹魏早期,曹魏晚期至西晉早期,西晉晚期。在分期基礎(chǔ)上,探討洛陽各時期墓葬文化因素的來源與影響。西漢早中期逐漸受到長安地區(qū)的影響,晚期開始出現(xiàn)新因素;東漢早期為南陽、河內(nèi)等地與洛陽本地文化因素的融合,中期形成洛陽特色,并開始廣泛影響全國各地;曹魏早期表現(xiàn)為冀州地區(qū)與本地文化因素的融合,并促使新因素的出現(xiàn);西晉早期主要對洛陽曹魏墓文化因素的繼承與延續(xù),晚期大量吸收東吳文化因素,新風(fēng)格開始形成。上述地域間文化因素的融合多因大規(guī)模的人口流動而引起。從層次性、階段性兩個方面,宏觀上討論墓葬制度“漢制”、“晉制”的形成與特點。兩漢“漢制”的具體內(nèi)涵差異較大,且一直處于動態(tài)變化之中,西漢晚期至新莽時期高、低兩個層次之間的共性逐漸增強,在東漢時期典型形態(tài)為:磚(或石)室墓,同室合葬,隨葬陶模型明器、祭奠器、動物俑類。西晉“晉制”高、低兩個層次之間有較大不同,高等級墓形制為縱長方形單室,僅隨葬日用器,低等級墓多為方形單室,隨葬以出行儀仗類為主的各類陶器。用“大傳統(tǒng)與小傳統(tǒng)理論”,闡述墓葬高、低兩個層次在漢晉墓葬制度演變過程中如何轉(zhuǎn)化。除西漢承秦制外,其余各時期多是由前種墓制中“小傳統(tǒng)”升華為后種墓制的“大傳統(tǒng)”,如西漢“漢制”南陽、洛陽小傳統(tǒng)中孕育東漢“漢制”大傳統(tǒng),而東漢“漢制”冀州小傳統(tǒng)中形成曹魏“魏制”大傳統(tǒng),即便西晉“晉制”大傳統(tǒng)也來源于“魏制”小傳統(tǒng),而同時期墓制“大傳統(tǒng)”又影響“小傳統(tǒng)”,如此墓葬制度發(fā)展的連貫性得以體現(xiàn)。相關(guān)問題的研究,主要針對洛陽地區(qū)漢晉時期墓葬的地域分布、等級差異、帝陵制度、合葬與家族葬、墓葬的祭祀、厚葬與薄葬等具體問題進行分析。墓葬分布,主要討論了漢河南縣城周邊的西漢、新莽高等級墓,以及洛陽盆地內(nèi)包括東周至北魏在內(nèi)的帝陵分布情況。墓葬等級差異,西漢晚期至新莽開始逐漸增大,東漢時期以玉衣制度、曹魏至西晉則以墓壙內(nèi)收臺階最具等級特征。帝陵制度在東漢至西晉時期呈衰弱之勢,但象征最高地位的等級因素始終存在。合葬與家族葬方面,合葬始終以夫妻雙人合葬為主,其中東漢多人合葬較為普遍,西晉同室合葬比例開始下降;家族葬流行于東漢至西晉時期。墓葬的祭祀,分墓內(nèi)與墓上兩個方面,東漢以后重心逐漸由“墓內(nèi)”轉(zhuǎn)為“墓上”。厚葬與薄葬,漢晉時期占據(jù)主導(dǎo)的“靈魂不滅”論,是社會各個階層都奉行“事死如事生”理論的基礎(chǔ),也是“厚葬”流行的重要原因。兩漢“以孝取士”,促使厚葬之風(fēng)愈演愈烈,魏晉的相對“薄葬”,則是缺少功利主義驅(qū)使的理性回歸。
[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.
【學(xué)位授予單位】：鄭州大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：博士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2017
【分類號】：K878.8

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前10條

1 胡新立;;鄒城新發(fā)現(xiàn)漢安元年文通祠堂題記及圖像釋讀[J];文物;2017年01期

2 張鴻亮;馬寅清;;河南孟津縣天皇嶺東漢墓[J];考古;2016年12期

3 賀輝;任廣;程召輝;;河南洛陽市瞿家屯漢墓C1M9816發(fā)掘簡報[J];考古;2016年01期

4 龔巨平;王海平;駱鵬;邰建勝;董補順;雷雨;蔣艷華;祝乃軍;;南京板橋新凹子兩座西晉紀年墓[J];中國國家博物館館刊;2015年12期

5 王玉來;;故宮博物院藏西晉石\ 、石定墓志的出土?xí)r地與流傳[J];中國國家博物館館刊;2015年10期

6 楊武站;曹龍;;漢霸陵帝陵的墓葬形制探討[J];考古;2015年08期

7 齊東方;;中國古代喪葬中的晉制[J];考古學(xué)報;2015年03期

8 李長周;柳蔭;;南陽高新區(qū)標準廠房漢畫像石墓[J];南都學(xué)壇;2015年04期

9 朱亮;潘付生;田玉娥;范偉;胡瑞;高向楠;高虎;薛方;;洛陽洛龍區(qū)唐城御府三座西晉墓發(fā)掘簡報[J];洛陽考古;2015年01期

10 史家珍;馬勝利;馬利強;張鴻亮;李繼鵬;張海濤;賈曉龍;嚴輝;;洛陽偃師東漢洛南陵區(qū)2008年考古勘探簡報[J];洛陽考古;2015年02期

相關(guān)重要報紙文章 前9條

1 王咸秋;;洛陽西朱村曹魏大墓考古工作取得重要收獲[N];中國文物報;2016年

2 張小虎;;河南新鄭坡趙發(fā)現(xiàn)東漢晚至三國大型磚室墓[N];中國文物報;2015年

3 韓國河;;安陽西高穴曹操高陵的“多面性”解析[N];光明日報;2014年

4 楊哲峰;;從陵到�！P(guān)于東漢“懿陵”的思考[N];中國文物報;2008年

5 嚴輝;王文浩;王咸秋;;洛陽邙山陵墓群完成古墓冢文物普查工作[N];中國文物報;2007年

6 史家珍;嚴輝;李繼鵬;;洛陽偃師發(fā)現(xiàn)東漢帝陵陵園和陪葬墓園遺址[N];中國文物報;2007年

7 蔡運章;;東漢帝陵封土考辨[N];中國文物報;2007年

8 楊哲峰;;漢墓研究中的七種區(qū)域選擇類型[N];中國文物報;2004年

9 郭培育;王利彬;;洛陽朱家倉漢墓群考古取得重要收獲[N];中國文物報;2004年

相關(guān)博士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 朱津;三河地區(qū)漢墓研究[D];鄭州大學(xué);2015年

2 王玉喜;爵制與秦漢社會研究[D];山東大學(xué);2014年

3 楊國譽;兩漢經(jīng)濟生活諸問題考論[D];南京師范大學(xué);2012年

4 李虹;死與重生：漢代墓葬信仰研究[D];山東大學(xué);2011年

5 呂蒙;漢魏六朝碑刻古文字研究[D];西南大學(xué);2011年

6 劉海宇;山東漢代碑刻研究[D];山東大學(xué);2011年

7 王力春;漢魏南北朝石刻書人考辨[D];吉林大學(xué);2009年

8 吳文文;漢碑文字研究[D];福建師范大學(xué);2009年

9 余靜;中國南方地區(qū)兩漢墓葬研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2009年

10 孫欣;漢墓遣策詞語研究[D];華東師范大學(xué);2009年

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前10條

1 孫丹玉;姜屯墓地研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2016年

2 包偉柯;魏晉時期南北方地區(qū)墓葬比較研究[D];鄭州大學(xué);2014年

3 郝軼男;漢代銅印文字研究概況及文字編[D];吉林大學(xué);2013年

4 張丹;漢代銅鏡銘文研究概況及文字編[D];吉林大學(xué);2013年

5 趙煒州;河南漢墓出土陶圈舍研究[D];南京師范大學(xué);2013年

6 褚亞龍;河南漢代陶樓考古學(xué)研究[D];西北大學(xué);2012年

7 高秀芝;漢代漆器銘文研究概況及文字編[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

8 楊曉芳;洛陽和西安地區(qū)東漢晚期至西晉時期墓葬對比研究[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

9 佟艷澤;漢代陶文研究概況及文字編[D];吉林大學(xué);2012年

10 石文嘉;漢代墓葬中出土玉璧的研究[D];南開大學(xué);2011年

，

本文編號：1996533