景观考古与大遗址保护

洹水，沿太行东麓蜿蜒南下，辗转于丰腴富饶的安阳小平原，孕育了古老而灿烂的殷商故都。寻着甲骨文传递的隐晦信息，历经 90 多年的科学考古发掘，这座长眠于地下 3 000 多年的商都的神秘面纱逐渐被揭开。迥异于“商朝五迁”建立的亳、嚣、相、耿、庇、奄等有着明确城垣的早期王城封闭形象，盘庚在此规划的商都大开大合，将洹水作为殷都规划的核心要素，所有功能都依洹河两岸布置展开，绵延超过10 km。一条横贯东西的主干水渠流经几乎半个殷墟，与东南方向的众多支渠形成的枝状水系，保证居民区与作坊区生产生活给水与运输的便利。“两纵三横”的都城干道穿越殷墟腹地，覆盖王族居住与宫殿宗庙区域，昔日车马纵横痕迹犹存。大规模的水系与路网无一不验证了晚商时期的都邑是人工介入自然系统重塑人居环境的结果。它们同甲骨文、青铜鼎等文物遗产一样，讲述着商代晚期的灿烂文明，是证明殷墟为晚商都邑的有力证据。

近年来，大遗址不断被发现，承载着古代先民劳动创造和改造自然的历史结果，大遗址保护的对象不再是彼此孤立的历史遗址，而是扩展到这些遗址所处的山水环境，以及人类与自然交互作用过程中衍生出的独特地域文化，即蕴含人类与自然互动过程意义的景观系统。也正由此，当今大遗址保护也超出了考古学、博物馆学等传统遗产保护学科的研究范畴，呈现跨学科、跨领域的特征。

景观考古学的跨学科性质使遗址保护与区域人居环境间建立桥梁成为可能。早期考古对景观的研究侧重于景观演替与区域人类活动之间的动态相互作用，彼时考古学语义学下的景观动态概念已初具雏形。20 世纪 60 年代，人文地理学的深入研究对考古学理论发展产生了重要的影响，出现“景观考古学”（Landscape Archaeology）的概念。除了对地表空间特征和自然环境变化进行考证外，强调人类在改造自然的过程中对周围环境的认识，并试图揭示不同遗址的社会文脉与景观演替的历史联系，作为通往真实过去的有效途径。20 世纪80年代中后期，随着后过程考古主义的兴起与成熟，景观被视作不同文化背景下社会关系的构成与运作的空间载体，景观考古研究不再局限于人地关系的协调与互动，而是围绕社会认同、社会秩序、社会变迁等社会关系的表达，实现过去人类社会如海德格尔所称的“在世”（being-in-the-world）经验的复制和重建。简言之，景观考古学视野下的考古遗迹，特别是大遗址，为理解当下景观的自然和文化形成过程、解释人类和历史发展进程提供了新的叙事图景。

在景观考古学的学科交叉视野推动下，大遗址从单纯的考古学对象，拓展为破解区域生态环境、人文社会结构耦合关系及过程的关键密码，打开了大遗址在区域景观历史演进过程中的文化现象图景。新的认知视野对大遗址保护工作提出了更具系统性、开放性的要求。诸如国家考古遗址公园等文化遗产活态保护模式，不仅依赖于更广阔的国际保护理念，也需要新的跨学科综合分析与应用技术的支撑，帮助大遗址景观空间要素的研究实现从定性描述向定量分析、计算机模拟的转变，促进了大遗址的科学性、完整性、真实性保护。

2021年适逢中国现代考古学诞生100周年，相比于前辈们的筚路蓝缕，而今的考古学有了更为强大的支撑，也收获了更加精彩的发现。如习近平总书记所强调的“历史、现实、未来是相通的。历史是过去的现实，现实是未来的历史”。景观考古学提供的学术框架与认知视野，大遗址研究与保护展示的丰富区域人文、历史信息，最根本目的仍是回馈当代以及未来人类的发展与生活。结合大遗址保护，增加公众教育、科研、游憩等服务社会的功能成为国家建设大遗址公园的新尝试，通过大遗址文化生态的整体保护，能够实现历史遗产与公众生活的有机对接，让文化遗产更好地活在当下。

Landscape Archaeology and Great Site Protection

Huan River, meandering southward along the eastern foot of Taihang Mountain and passing through the fertile Anyang Plain,gave birth to the ancient prosperous capital of Shang Dynasty.After more than 90 years of scientific and archaeological excavation according to the obscure information transmitted by Oracle Bone Inscriptions, the mysterious veil of this ancient capital which has been sleeping underground for more than 3,000 years, was gradually lifted. Different from Bo, Xiao, Xiang, Geng, Pi, Yan and other early imperial cities established during the “five migrations of the Shang Dynasty”, which had clear closed city walls, the capital of Shang planned by Pan Geng here was open and closed.With Huan River as the core of the capital planning, all functions were arranged on the two sides of Huan River, stretching for more than 10 kilometers. A main canal across the East and West flowed through almost half of the Ruins to form a branched water system with many branch canals in the southeast, which ensured the production and domestic water supply and transportation in the residential and workshop areas. The “two vertical and three horizontal” capital trunk roads passed through the hinterland of the Ruins, covering the area of royal residence as well as the palaces and temples. The vertical and horizontal traces of vehicles and horses are still there. The large-scale water system and road network all proved that the capital in the late Shang Dynasty was the result of artificial intervention in the natural system to reshape the living environment. Just like oracle bone inscriptions, bronze tripods and other cultural relics, they are also telling about the brilliant civilization in the late Shang Dynasty and are powerful evidence proving that the Shang Dynasty Ruins were the capital of the late Shang Dynasty.

In recent years, great sites, which bear the historical achievements of ancient ancestors in creating things and transforming nature, have been discovered one after another.In terms of great site protection, the targets of protection are not only each independent historical site, but also the landscape environment and the unique regional culture derived from the interaction between human and nature, namely, the landscape system which implicates the significance of human-nature interaction. That is also why the great site protection today has gone beyond the research scope of traditional heritage protection disciplines, including Archaeology and Museology, and showed interdisciplinary and cross-domain characteristics.

The interdisciplinary characteristic of Landscape Archaeology makes it possible to bridge site protection and regional human settlements. In early archaeological researches, landscape research mainly focuses on the dynamic interaction between landscape succession and regional human activities. At that time, the concept of landscape dynamics under archaeological semantics had begun to take shape. In the 1960s, the in-depth study on human geography greatly influenced the development of archaeological theory, and the concept of “Landscape Archaeology” was put forward. In addition to textual researches on the characteristics of surface space and the changes of natural environment, Landscape Archaeology attempts to emphasize the human understanding of the surrounding environment in the process of transforming nature and to reveal the historical relationship between the social context and landscape succession of different sites as an effective means to know the real past. In the middle and late 1980s, with the rise and maturity of post process archaeology, landscape was regarded as a spatial carrier for the composition and operation of social relations under different cultural backgrounds, and landscape archaeology research was no longer restricted to the coordination and interaction of human-land relations, but focused on the expression of social relations such as social identity, social order and social change, to realize the reproduction and reconstruction of the “being in the world” experience (which is defined by Heidegger) of human society in the past. In short, archaeological sites, especially great sites, in the perspective of Landscape Archaeology, has provided a new narrative picture for interpreting the natural and cultural formation process of the current landscape and for explaining the process of human and historical development.

Driven by the interdisciplinary perspective of landscape archaeology, great sites are no longer pure archaeological objects but also the key passwords to interpret the coupling relationship between the ecological environment and the human and social structure of a region as well as the coupling process, which opens up the cultural prospect of great sites in the historical evolution of regional landscape. New cognitive visions have put forward more systematic and open requirements for the protection of great sites.The living protection of cultural heritage, such as the National Archaeological Site Park, not only relies on a broader international protection concept, but also requires the support of new comprehensive interdisciplinary analysis and application technology to assist the transformation of great site landscape spatial element research from qualitative description to quantitative analysis and computer simulation and to promote the scientific, integrity and authenticity protection of great sites.

2021 witnesses the 100th anniversary of the birth of modern archaeology in China. Compared with the hardships in the early stage, archaeology today has stronger support and more wonderful discoveries. As general secretary Xi Jinping once said, “History,reality and future are interlinked. History is the reality of the past and reality is the history of future.” The most fundamental purpose of the academic framework and cognitive vision provided by landscape archaeology as well as the rich regional cultural and historical information presented by the research and protection of great sites is to support the development and life of contemporary and future mankind. Establishing public facilities to serve public education, scientific research, recreation etc., on the basis of protecting great sites, has become a new attempt for the country in building great site parks. Through the overall protection of the cultural ecology of great sites, historical heritage and public life can be organically connected, and the cultural heritage can better survive the time.

Editor-in-Chief: Professor ZHENG Xi

October 26, 2021