考古學的家屋社會研究

The Archaeology of House Societies

10.6152/jaa.2008.06.0004

江芝華(Chih-Hua Chiang)

家屋社會 ； 南島語族 ； 社會記憶 ； 史前社會 ； house society ； Austronesian societies ； social memory ； prehistoric societies

考古人類學刊

68期（2008 / 06 / 01）

109 - 136

繁體中文

家屋社會為人類學家李維史陀在探討社會組織時所提出的概念，由於此一概念結合了物質文化與社會組織的探討，因此近年來考古學家廣泛運用此一概念來探討史前的社會關係。本文主要藉由回顧文化人類學及考古學中對於家屋社會的研究，一方面探討學者如何利用此一概念來認識東南亞地區南島語族的社會組織，另一方則討論家屋社會的概念如何協助考古學者運用考古資料來討論史前社會組織，最後則嘗試論述家屋社會概念在臺灣考古學研究的可能性及重要性。 當文化人類學者利用家屋社會的概念來理解南島語族社會時，歸納出一些共有的特徵。由於這些特徵皆和物質文化息息相關，因此提供考古學者推論史前社會組織的線索。考古學的家屋社會研究主要有三個趨勢，一是強調家屋社會在南島語族社會的延續性，認為家屋社會為南島語族社會的古老模式，因此亦存在於南島史前社會中；二是將家屋社會的概念視為啟發式的工具，用於思考建築結構、人群及文化範疇的關係；最後則是將家屋社會視為社會發展中的一個階段，可以在不同地區的史前社會中被驗證。 本文藉由回顧不同地區考古學者對於家屋社會的研究，進一步提出此一概念在對認識臺灣史前社會的重要性，冀望藉由這一概念可以重新提供詮釋臺灣考古資料的可能性。

The concept of House Society was first proposed by Lévi-Strauss in the 1950s. Because this concept provides a link between material culture and social organization, it offers archaeologists an avenue to discuss prehistoric social relations. This article reviews anthropological and archaeological research of the House Society concept and specifically examines cultural anthropologists' usage of this model to understand Austronesian social organization in Southeast Asia. Additionally, a review of archaeological approaches using House Society to discuss social relations is examined. Finally, I suggest that this concept can be an important and useful idea for archaeological research in Taiwan. Cultural anthropologists have identified common traits among the Austronesian societies associated with material culture which provide archaeologists evidence to investigate prehistoric social organization. Three ways of applying the House Society concept to archaeology are recognized. The first, is to emphasize the continuous presence of this type of social organization among Austronesian societies. House Society is regarded as an ancient pattern that can be traced through prehistoric Austronesian societies. Second, House Society is viewed as a heuristic device to consider the relationship between architecture, social relations and cultural categories. The third is to consider House Society as a form of social organization in social history which can then be tested worldwide. The purpose of reviewing archaeological research regarding House Societies around the world is to emphasize the potential forf using this concept to understand prehistoric Taiwanese societies. Also, this concept can help archaeologists to reinterpret archaeological data recovered from Taiwan.

1. Beck, Robin A. (eds.)(2007).The Durable House: House Society Models in Archaeology.Carbondale:Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University.
2. Beck, Robin A.(ed.)(2007).The Durable House: House Society Models in Archaeology.Carbondale:Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University.
3. Bloch, M.,Janet Carsten (eds.),Stephen Hugu-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
4. Bloch, M.,Paul Jen-kuei Li(eds.),Cheng-hwa Tsang(eds.),Ying-kuei Huang(eds.),Dah-an. Ho(eds.),Chiu-yu Tseng (eds.)(1995).Austronesian Studies Relating to Taiwan.Taipei:Academia Sinica.
5. Blust, R.(1995).The Prehistory of the Austronesian-Speaking Peoples: A View from Language.Journal of World Prehistory,9(4),453-510.
6. Blust, R.(1987).Lexical Reconstruction and Semantic Reconstruction: The Case of Austronesian "House" Words.Diachronica,4(1/2),79-106.
7. Boas, F.(1966).Kwakiutl Ethnography.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
8. Bourdieu, P.,Mary Douglas (ed.)(1973).The Berber Houses. In Rules and Meanings: The Anthropology of Everyday Knowledge.Harmondsworth:Penguin.
9. Brereton, Derek P.(2005).House Society and Practice Theories Illuminate American Campsteads.Anthropological Theory,5(2),135-153.
10. Carsten, J.(1995).The Substance of Kinship and the Heat of the Hearth: Feeding, Personhood, and Relatedness among Malays in Pulau Langkawi.American Ethnologist,22(2),223-241.
11. Carsten, J.(1997).Oxford Studies in Social and Cultural Anthropology.Oxford:Clarendon Press.
12. Carsten, J. (eds.),S. Hugh-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House-Levi-Strauss and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
13. Carsten, J.,Charles. Macdonald (ed.)(1987).De la Hutte an Palais: Societies a Maison en Asie du Sud-Est Insulaire.Paris:Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique.
14. Carsten, J.,Janet Carsten (eds.),Stephen Hugh-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
15. Carsten, J.,S. Hugh-Jones,Janet Carsten (eds.),Stephen Hugh-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
16. Chesson, Meredith S.(2003).Households, Houses, Neighborhoods and Corporate Villages: Modeling the Early Bronze Age as a House Society.Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology,16(1),79-102.
17. Chiu, S.(2005).Meanings of a Lapita Face: Materialized Social Memory in Ancient House Societies.Taiwan Journal of Anthropology,3(1),1-47.
18. Chiu, S.(2003).The Socio-Economic Functions of Lapita Ceramic Production and Exchange: A Case Study from Site WKO013A, Kone.Berkeley:University of California.
19. Cunningham, C. E.,Rodney Needham (ed.)(1973).Right and Left: Essays on Dual Symbolic Classification.Chicago:University of Chicago Press.
20. Ellen, R.(1986).Microcosm, Macrocosm and the Nuaulu House: Concerning the Reductionist Fallacy as Applied to Metaphorical Levels.Bijdragen tot de Taal-, Land- en Volkenkunde,142,1-30.
21. Errington, S.(1979).The Cosmic House of the Buginese.Asia,1,8-14.
22. Errington, S.(1987).Incestuous Twins and the House Societies of Insular Southeast Asia.Cultural Anthropology,2,403-444.
23. Fox, J. J.,James J. Fox (ed.)(1993).Inside Austronesian Houses: Perspectives on Domestic Design for Living.Canberra:Australia National University.
24. Fox, J. J.,James J. Fox (ed.)(1993).Inside Austronesian Houses: Perspectives on Domestic Design for Living.Canberra:Australia National University Press.
25. Fox, J. J.,James J. Fox (eds.),C. Sather (eds.)(2006).Origins, Ancestry, and Alliances: Explorations in Austronesian Ethnography.Canberra:Australian National University.
26. Fox, J. J.,Paul Jen-kuei Li(eds.),Cheng-hwa Tsang(eds.),Ying-kuei Huang(eds.),Dah-an Ho(eds.),Chiu-yu Tseng (eds.)(1995).Austronesian Studies Relating to Taiwan.Taipei:Academia Sinica.
27. Gibson, T.,Janet Carsten (eds.),Stephen Hugh-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
28. Gillespie, S. D.(2001).Personhood, Agency, and Mortuary Ritual: A Case Study from the Ancient Maya.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology,20,73-112.
29. Gillespie, S. D. (eds.),R. A. Joyce (eds.)(2000).Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies.Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
30. Gillespie, S. D.,R. A. Joyce,Cheryl Claasen (eds.),Rosemary A. Joyce (eds.)(1997).Women in Prehistory: North America and Mesoamerica.Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
31. Gillespie, S. D.,Susan D. Gillespie (eds.),Rosemary A. Joyce (eds.)(2000).Beyond Kinship: An Introduction. In Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies.Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
32. Gillespie, S. D.,Susan D. Gillespie (eds.),Rosemary A. Joyce. (eds.)(2000).Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies.Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
33. Gillespie, S. D.,Susan D. Gillespie (eds.),Rosemary A. Joyce. (eds.)(2000).Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies.Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
34. Gonzalez-Ruibal, Alfredo(2005).House Societies vs. Kinship-Based Societies: An Archaeological Case from Iron Age Europe.Journal of Anthropological Archaeology,25,144-173.
35. Goodenough, W. H.(1955).A Problem in Malayo-Polynesian Social Organization.American Anthropologist,57,71-83.
36. Green, R. C.(1998).From Proto-Oceanic *Rumaq to Proto-Polynesian *Fale: A Significant Reorganization in Austronesian Housing.Archaeology in New Zealand,41(4),253-272.
37. Headley, S. C.,Charles Macdonald (ed.)(1987).De la Hutte an Palais: Societies a Maison en Asie du Sud-Est Insulaire.Paris:Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique.
38. Headley, S. C.,Charles Macdonald (ed.)(1987).De la Hutte an Palais: Societies a Maison en Asie du Sud-Est Insulaire.Paris:Centre Nationale de la Recherche Scientifique.
39. Hedon, Julia A.,Robin A. Jr. Beck (ed.)(2007).The Durable House: House Society Models in Archaeology.Carbondale:Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University.
40. Hestflatt, K.,Stephen Sparkes (eds.),Signe Howell (eds.)(2003).The House in Southeast Asia: A Changing Social, Economic and Political Domain.New York:Routledge Curzon.
41. Howell, S.,Janet Carsten (eds.),Stephen Hugh-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House: Levi-Straussand Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Presss.
42. Howell, S.,Stephen Sparkes (eds.),Signe Howell (eds.)(2003).The House in Southeast Asia: A Changing Social, Economic and Political Domain.New York:Routledge Curzon.
43. Hugh-Jones, S.,Janet Carsten (eds.),Stephen Hugh-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
44. Janowski, M.,Janet Carsten (eds.),Stephen Hugh-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
45. Joyce, R. A.,David C. Grove (eds.),Rosemary A. Joyce (eds.)(1999).Social Patterns in Pre-Classic Mesoamerica: A Symposium at Dumbarton Oaks, 9 and 10 October 1993.Washington, D.C.:Dumbarton Oaks Research Library and Collection.
46. Joyce, R. A.,Meredith S. Chesson (ed.)(2001).Social Memory, Identity, and Death: Dnthropological Perspectives on Mortuary Rituals.Virginia:American Anthropological Association.
47. Joyce, R. A.,Robin A. Beck (ed.)(2007).The Durable House: House Society Models in Archaeology.Carbondale:Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University.
48. Joyce, R. A.,Susan D. Gillespie (eds.),Rosemary A. Joyce (eds.)(2000).Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies.Philedalphia:University of Pennyslvania.
49. Kahn, J. G.(2005).Household and Community Organization in the Late Prehistoric Society Islands (French Polynesia).Berkeley:University of California.
50. Kahn, J. G.,Robin A. Beck (ed.)(2007).The Durable House: House Society Models in Archaeology.Carbondale:Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University.
51. Kirch, P. V.(1997).The Lapita Peoples: Ancestors of the Oceanic World.Oxford:Blackwell.
52. Kirch, P. V.,J. G. Kahn(2007).Advances in Polynesian Prehistory: A Review and Assessment of the Past Decade (1993-2004).Journal of Archaeological Research,15(3),191-238.
53. Kirch, P. V.,R. C. Green(2001).Hawaiki, Ancestral Polynesian.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
54. Kirch, P. V.,Susan D. Gillespie (eds.),Rosemary A. Joyce (eds.)(2000).Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies.Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
55. Lea, V.,Janet Carsten (eds.),Stephen Hugh-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House: Lévi-Strauss and Beyond.New York:Cambridge University Press.
56. Levi-Strauss, C.,Modelski, S. (trans.)(1982).The Way of the Masks.Seattle:University of Washington Press.
57. Levi-Strauss, C.,Willis, Roy (trans.)(1987).Anthropology and Myth: Lectures 1951-1982.Oxford:Basil Blackwell.
58. Lopiparo, J.(2003).Household Ceramics Production and the Crafting of Society in the Terminal Classic Ulua Valley, Honduras.Berkeley:University of California.
59. Lopiparo, J.,Robin A. Beck (ed.)(2007).The Durable House: House Society Models in Archaeology.Carbondale:Center for Archaeological Investigations, Southern Illinois University.
60. MacDonald, C(1987).De la Hutte au Palais: Sociétés 'à Maison' en Asie du Sud-Est Insulaire.Paris:Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique.
61. Marshall, Y.,Susan D. Gillespie (eds.),Rosemary A. Joyce (eds.)(2000).Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies.Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
62. McKinnon, S.(1991).From a Shattered Sun: Hierarchy, Gender, and Alliance in the Tanimbar Islands.Madison, Wis:University of Wisconsin Press.
63. McKinnon, S.,Janet Carsten (eds.),Stephen Hugh-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
64. McKinnon, S.,Susan D. Gillespie (eds.),Rosemary A. Joyce (eds.)(2000).Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies.Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
65. Monaghan, J.(1996).The Mesoamerican Community as a 'Great House'.Ethnology,35(3),181-194.
66. Murdock, G. P.(ed.)(1980).Social Structure in Southeast Asia.Chicago:Quadrangle.
67. Nordholt, S.,James J. Fox (ed.)(1980).The Flow of Life: Essays on Eastern Indonesia.Cambridge, Mass:Harvard University Press.
68. Parmentier, R. J.(1984).House Affiliation Systems in Belau.American Ethnologist,11,656-676.
69. Reuter, T. A.(2002).The House of Our Ancestors: Precedence and Dualism in Highland Balinese Society.Leiden:KITLV.
70. Riviere, P.,Janet Carsten (eds.),Stephen Hugh-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
71. Rodenburg, J.,Stephen Sparkes (eds.),Signe Howell (eds.)(2003).The House in Southeast Asia: A Changing Social, Economic and Political Domain.New York:Routledge Curzon.
72. Rodman, M. C.(1985).Moving Houses: Residential Mobility and the Mobility of Residences in Longana, Vanuatu.American Anthropologist,87,56-72.
73. Sather, C.,James J. Fox (ed.)(1993).Inside Austronesian Houses: Perspectives on Domestic Design for Living.Canberra:The Australian National University.
74. Sorum, A.,Stephen Sparkes (eds.),Signe Howell (eds.)(2003).The House in Southeast Asia: A Changing Social, Economic and Political Domain.New York:Routledge Curzon.
75. Sparkes, S.,Stephen Sparkes (eds.),Signe Howell (eds.)(2003).The House in Southeast Asia: A Changing Social, Economic and Political Domain.New York:Routledge Curzon.
76. Tringham, R.,Susan G. Gillespie (eds.),Rosemary A. Joyce (eds.)(2000).Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies.Philedalphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
77. Waterson, R.(1995).Houses, Graves and the Limits of Kinship Groupings among the Sa'dan Toraja.Bijdragen tot de Taaland-En Vdkenkunde,151,194-217.
78. Waterson, R.(1998).The Living House: An Anthropology of Architecture in South-East Asia.New York:Watson-Guptill.
79. Waterson, R.,James J. Fox (ed.)(1993).Inside Austronesian Houses: Perspectives on Domestic Design for Living.Canberra:The Australian National University.
80. Waterson, R.,Janet Carsten (eds.),Stephen Hugh-Jones (eds.)(1995).About the House: Levi-Strauss and Beyond.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
81. Waterson, R.,Stephen Sparkes (eds.),Signe Howell (eds.)(2003).The House in Southeast Asia: A Changing Social, Economic and Political Domain.New York:Routledge Curzon.
82. Waterson, R.,Susan D. Gillespie (eds.),Rosemary A. Joyce (eds.)(2000).Beyond Kinship: Social and Material Reproduction in House Societies.Philadelphia:University of Pennsylvania Press.
83. 連照美、宋文薰(2006)。卑南遺址發掘1986-1989。臺北:國立臺灣大學出版中心。
84. 黃麗珍(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學人類學系。
85. 葉淑綾(2001)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立臺灣大學人類學系。
86. 蔣斌、李靜怡、黃應貴編(1995)。空間、力、與社會。臺北:中央研究院民族學研究所。
87. 蔣斌、黃應貴編(1999)。時間、歷史、與記憶。臺北:中央研究院民族學研究所。
88. 譚昌國、黃應貴編(2004)。物與物質文化。臺北:中央研究院民族學研究所。

1. (2022)。釐清臺灣史前建築與聚落研究之進路。考古人類學刊，96，91-127。