Neolithic Prehistoric Ryukyu Islands and Eastern Coast of Taiwan: A Comparative Study and Related Issues
|Keywords:||琉球列島;台灣東海岸;下田原期;新石器時代;比較研究;類型學;技術選擇理論;Ryukyu Islands;eastern coast of Taiwan;Shimotabaru Period;Neolithic period;comparison research;technological choice||Issue Date:||2012||Abstract:||
The Ryukyu Islands can be culturally divided into North, Middle and South Ryukyu. According to the style of artifacts, the Neolithic cultures in North and Middle Ryukyu had close relationships with the Jomon Culture in Kyushu. On the contrary, the Neolithic culture, Shimotabaru, in South Ryukyu is quit distinctive from the cultures in the north, while some types of artifacts are similar to the ones belong to Neolithic cultures in Southeast Asia, especially partially polished stone adzes and Shimotabaru Pottery.
As adjacent islands in the Festoon Islands of the West Pacific, many scholars had debates on the relationships between these two areas in the prehistoric period. Some scholars tried to seek similarities between artifact types in South Ryukyu and Eastern Taiwan. However, they usually emphasized only on certain types of artifacts, such as aforementioned partially polished stone adzes or Shimotabaru Pottery, and discussing cultural interactions according to these limited similarities. The circumstances related are seldom taken into consideration. Thus the importance of culture holism is usually overlooked. Furthermore, arguments were usually influenced by the differences between the classification systems of two academic traditions. Artifacts with same attributes might be placed in different classes, and it therefore makes comparison between two areas become much more difficult.
In this thesis, I will first deal with problem in typology, discussing definitions of kinds of artifacts between areas to make sure artifacts compared without the influence of differences between the classification systems of two academic traditions. According to technological choice theory that takes material culture, culture structure, circumstances and human agency into consideration, I can discuss culture relationship through choices made by human in material culture. Therefore I will secondly compare the similarities in types of artifacts between two areas to find out the sameness, then interpreting the prehistoric subsistence and the choice made in prehistory by similar artifact types, different ratios of artifacts types, ecofact and circumstance conditions. Finally I can try to discuss about cultural relationships of these two areas.
|Appears in Collections:||人類學系|
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.