台灣東海岸與琉球列島之史前文化比較暨相關問題研究

Abstract

琉球列島可分為北中南三大文化圈，其中北琉球與中琉球的新石器時代文化和日本列島的繩文文化密切相關，但南琉球同一時期的文化內涵與繩文文化差距甚大，反與位於東南亞地區的史前文化有較多相似之處。與琉球列島同屬東亞島弧的台灣島鄰接於琉球列島南端，過去曾有多位學者針對兩地史前文化關係存否有所爭議，指出南琉球與台灣東海岸遺物的相似處，如局部磨製石斧與下田原式陶器，但討論限於少數器種，結論也僅止於指出部份特徵的類似性，無法進一步討論兩區域史前文化間的關係。 筆者認為過去發掘資料有限，且研究多注重於特殊器物，少全貌觀點或納入文化發展的環境背景作探討。再者日本與台灣考古學使用的器物分類系統不同，部分相同器物被分置於不同分類中，造成比較研究的困難。由於近年來資料增加，並有注重整體觀點及人類能動性的技術選擇理論發展，因此筆者認為可在釐清器物分類後，以技術選擇觀點重新審視台灣與琉球的史前文化關係。 本文將選定過去指出最多相似性的新石器時代文化遺址，首先探討兩地出土遺物的分類方式與類型定義，究明遺物類型的異同，以避免分類系統不同造成研究誤差。而後比較遺址器種與形制，來討論兩地器物組合的相似性。並說明南琉球與台灣東海岸花蓮溪口新石器時代文化具有的器種與形制概念相同，但數量比例不同，藉此進一步詮釋兩地居民史前生業及文化的整體特質的異同，同時討論技術選擇的內涵與成因，以及兩地文化關係的本質。

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.