籬仔尾遺址出土動物遺留及其空間分布初探

The analysis of faunal remains and their spatial distribution in Litzuwei, southwestern Taiwan

10.6152/jaa.2017.12.0004

陳維鈞(Wei-chun Chen)；陳珮瑜(Peiyu Chen)

動物遺留 ； 空間分析 ； 攝食行為 ； 大湖文化 ； 蔦松文化 ； faunal remains ； intra-site spatial analysis ； consumption behavior ； Dahu Culture ； Niaosong Culture

考古人類學刊

87期（2017 / 12 / 01）

89 - 122

繁體中文

籬仔尾遺址位於台南市新化區，是一處包括了新石器時代晚期的大湖文化與金屬器時代蔦松文化的多文化層遺址。本遺址遺址於2010至2014年間，進行了大規模系統發掘，出土多種不同物種的動物遺留。本文藉由分析本次發掘出土的動物遺留，呈現其同時性的平面空間分布，以及異時性的層位空間分布，探討所屬各別文化的動物資源利用，進而比較大湖文化和蔦松文化的一些特定文化行為異同，包括(1)大湖與蔦松時期動物資源使用的差異，出土的動物遺留數量有無改變？(2)大湖到蔦松時期的出土動物遺留的種類變化及其可能意義；(3)大湖到蔦松時期的空間使用是否有顯著的改變？(4)從大湖到蔦松時期動物遺留分布的脈絡有無變化？量化計算、空間分布與出土脈絡的比較顯示，籬仔尾遺址使用的動物資源以鹿科和豬科動物為主，使用頻率在蔦松時期大幅提高，且利用的動物種類也較為多元，甚至納入了部分的海洋資源。從動物遺留集中分布的趨勢來看，遺址核心區域隨著時間推移而有往北、往東擴張延伸的跡象。

The Litzuwei site, located in southwestern Taiwan, is a multi-component site including the late Neolithic Dahu Culture and the Metal Age Niaosong Culture. The systematic excavation of Litzuwei from 2010 to 2014 yielded abundant faunal remains of various species suitable for intra-site spatial analysis. This study analyzes the intra-site spatial distribution of the unearthed faunal remains from both the Dahu and Niaosong contexts. We then illustrate the contemporaneous and diachronic pattern of the utilization of faunal resources and compare consumption behavior between the two cultures. We aim to discern whether there was a diachronic change in (1) the degree of faunal resource utilization in terms of quantity and density, (2) various utilized species and their associated social meaning, (3) the usage of space within the site area, and (4) the context in which the faunal remains were deposited. The results show that the Cervidae and Suidae dominated the utilized species throughout the occupation history of Litzuwei, but the intensity of utilization of animal resources increased dramatically during the later Naiosong occupation. Additionally, the higher diversity of species we identified suggests that the Niaosong people had a broadened spectrum of animal resources acquisition. This study also points out that the spatial distribution of faunal remains shifted gradually toward the north and east of the site, indicating a slight change of activity area.

1. Atalay, Sonya,Hastorf, Christine A.(2006).Food, Meals, and Daily Activities: Food Habitus at Neolithic Çatalhöyük.American Antiquity,71(2),283-319.
2. Belarte, Maria C.,Camañes, Pilar,Monrós, Meritxell,Principal, Jordi(2016).Cooking in the Iberian Culture (Sixth-Second Century BC): Private or Public?.Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology,29(2),173-196.
3. Binford, Lewis R.(1978).Dimensional Analysis of Behavior and Site Structure: Learning from an Eskimo Hunting Stand.American Antiquity,43,330-361.
4. Crabtree, Pam(1990).Zooarchaeology and Complex Societies: Some Uses of Faunal Analysis for the Study of Trade, Social Status, and Ethnicity.Archaeological Method and Theory,2,155-205.
5. Creamer, Winifred,Hass, Jonathan,Jakaitis, Edward, III,Holguin, Jesus(2011).Far from the Shore: Comparison of Marine Invertebrates in Midden Deposit from Two Sites in the Norte Chico, Peru.The Journal of Island and Coastal Archaeology,6(2),176-195.
6. deFrance, Susan(2009).Zooarchaeology in Complex Societies: Political Economy, Status, and Ideology.Journal of Archaeological Research,17(2),105-168.
7. Dietler, Michael(ed.),Hayden, Brian(ed.)(2010).Feasts: Archaeological and Ethnographic Pespectives on Food, Politics, and Power.Tuscaloosa:University of Alabama Press.
8. Drennan, Robert D.,Peterson, Christian E.(2008).Centralized Communities, Population, and Social Complexity after Sedentarization.The Neolithic Demographic Transition and Its Consequences,Netherlands:
9. Drennan, Robert D.,Peterson, Christian E.,Fox, Jake R.(2010).Degrees and Kinds of Inequality.Pathways to Power,New York:
10. Hayden, Brian(2014).The Power of Feasts: From Prehistory to The Present.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
11. Joyce, Rosemary(1999).Social Patterns in Pre-Classic Mesoamerica.Washington, DC:Dumbarton Oaks.
12. Kahn, Jennifer G.(2016).Household Archaeology in Polynesia: Historical Context and New Directions.Journal of Archaeological Research,24,325-372.
13. King, Stacie(2008).The Spatial Organization of Food Sharing in Early Postclassic Households: An Application of Soil Chemistry in Ancient Oaxaca, Mexico.Journal of Archaeological Science,35,1224-1239.
14. Kirch, Patrick,O'Day, Sharyn Jones(2003).New Archaeological Insights into Food and Status: A Case Study from Pre-contact Hawaii.World Archaeology,34,484-497.
15. O'Conner, Terry(2000).The Archaeology of Animal Bones.Texas:A & M Press.
16. O'Day, Sharyn Jones(ed.),Van Neer, Wim(ed.),Ervynck, Anton(ed.)(2004).Behaviour behind Bones: the Zooarchaeology of Ritual, Religion, Status and Identity.Oxford:Oxbow Books.
17. Reitz, Elizabeth J.(2008).Archaeozoology.Encyclopedia of Archaeology,San Diego:
18. Reitz, Elizabeth J.,Wing, Elizabeth S.(2008).Zooarchaeology.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
19. Rolett, Barry V.,Chiu, Min-yung(1994).Age Estimation of Prehistoric Pigs (Sus scrofa) by Molar Eruption and Attrition.Journal of Archaeological Science,21(3),377-386.
20. Russell, Nerissa(2011).Social Zooarchaeology: Humans and Animals in Prehistory.Cambridge:Cambridge University Press.
21. Smith, Monica L.(2006).The Archaeology of Food Preference.American Anthropologist,108,480-493.
22. 何傳坤(1994)。動物考古學與埋藏學的研究與新發展。田野考古，5(1)，1-19。
23. 何傳坤、劉克竑、陳彥君(2004)。台灣中部鐵器時代遺址新發現狗獾的意義。國立自然科學博物館館訊，199，2。
24. 李匡悌(1994)。龜山遺址出土的食用貝類及其相關問題的探討。田野考古，5(1)，45-86。
25. 李娜莉(2003)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立台灣大學人類學研究所。
26. 林秀嫚(1997)。碩士論文(碩士論文)。國立台灣大學人類學研究所。
27. 祁國琴、袁靖(1994)。動物考古學：形成、發展與問題研究。田野考古，5(1)，21-44。
28. 陳維鈞(2014)。交通部公路總局第五養護工程處委託中央研究院歷史語言研究所交通部公路總局第五養護工程處委託中央研究院歷史語言研究所,中央研究院歷史語言研究所。
29. 陳維鈞、陳珮瑜(2007)。交通部公路總局第五養護工程處委託中央研究院歷史語言研究所交通部公路總局第五養護工程處委託中央研究院歷史語言研究所,中央研究院歷史語言研究所。
30. 臧振華、李匡悌(2013)。南科的古文明。台東:國立台灣史前文化博物館。
31. 臧振華、李匡悌、朱正宜(2006)。先民履跡：南科考古發現專輯。台南:台南縣政府。
32. 顏廷伃(2006)。台19 甲線拓寬改善計畫33K+980~38K+ 191段環境影響差異分析報告（修訂稿）台19 甲線拓寬改善計畫33K+980~38K+ 191段環境影響差異分析報告（修訂稿）,中央研究院歷史語言研究所。