地理研究 ›› 2018, Vol. 37 ›› Issue (11): 2165-2176.doi: 10.11821/dlyj201811004

• 研究论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

鄂尔多斯高原秦汉遗址空间分布及环境指示意义

黄银洲1,2(), 王乃昂1,2, 付娇1, 唐菊1   

  1. 1. 兰州大学资源环境学院,兰州 730000
    2. 兰州大学干旱区与沙漠研究中心,兰州 730000
  • 收稿日期:2018-03-30 修回日期:2018-07-24 出版日期:2018-11-20 发布日期:2018-11-23
  • 作者简介:

    作者简介:黄银洲(1980- ),男,湖北恩施人,博士,副教授,研究方向为历史地理、生态保护。E-mail: yzhhuang@lzu.edu.cn

  • 基金资助:
    国家自然科学基金重点项目(41530745);国家自然科学基金项目(41371114)

Distribution of archaeological sites on the Ordos Plateau over Qin and Han dynasties and its environmental significance

Yinzhou HUANG1,2(), Nai'ang WANG1,2, Jiao FU1, Ju TANG1   

  1. 1. College of Earth & Environmental Sciences, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China;
    2. Arid Region & Desert Research Center, Lanzhou University, Lanzhou 730000, China;
  • Received:2018-03-30 Revised:2018-07-24 Online:2018-11-20 Published:2018-11-23
  • About author:

    Author: Shi Zhenqin (1988-), PhD, specialized in regional development and land space management in mountain areas. E-mail: kevinszq@163.com

    *Corresponding author: Deng Wei (1957-), Professor, specialized in mountain environment and regional development.

    E-mail: dengwei@imde.ac.cn

摘要:

人类活动遗址是反映过去人类生产、生活环境的重要指标。基于野外调查、文献资料整理和城市地理学相关理论,分析了鄂尔多斯高原168处秦汉聚落遗址的空间分布特征。结果表明,遗址空间结构呈典型的十字模式分布,其中心为今东胜区、伊金霍洛旗所在。秦汉遗址的分布密集区,以鄂尔多斯高原东部的黄土丘陵山地、毛乌素沙地和库布齐沙漠的中间地带为主。库布齐沙漠流动沙丘区没有遗址分布,毛乌素沙地内部尽管分布有不少遗址,但规模相对较小,不存在大型遗址,可能只是区域连接的中转站,不具备区域中心功能。这一分布模式或表明毛乌素沙地在秦汉时期的环境并不宜居,该研究为长期以来鄂尔多斯高原秦汉时期人类活动的环境影响争论提供了新视角。

关键词: 鄂尔多斯高原, 秦汉遗址, 遗址空间结构, 历史交通, 环境背景, 城市地理学

Abstract:

Environments of the Ordos Plateau in historic times have been furiously disputed over the past several decades. Archaeological sites are the most valuable targets for understanding past human living environment. In this paper, based on extensive field survey of archaeological sites, collection of historical records and research archives, the authors employed the theory of urban geography and GIS spatial analysis to interpret human living conditions on the Ordos Plateau over the Qin and Han dynasties. Totally, 168 archaeological sites were included in this paper and 46 of them were field surveyed by the authors. The results show that, spatial distribution of these sites presents a typical cross structure, with the center located in Dongsheng and Yijinhuolo regions. This distribution pattern implies that regions along the axes of the cross are most livable and important areas over the Qin and Han periods. However, much fewer archaeological sites are located in present desert and sandy land, such as Hobq desert, and the Mu Us sandy land has only a few relatively small sites, indicating that these areas have been desertified during the Qin and Han dynasties. Thus previous arguments that the Mu Us sandy land during the Qin and Han periods was a fertile region and it was a "man-made" desert are challenged. Moreover, the authors proposed that proper spatial scale should be considered when archaeological sites are used to reflect historical environment, because the landscape of the Mu Us sandy land varies place to place nowadays and, undoubtedly, should be diverse in historic times. Therefore, it is unsurprised that people have settled in desert and, at proper locations, built cities. This study sheds new light into historical geography studies, which, to some extent, would also contribute to the understanding of regional human-nature relationship in history.

Key words: Ordos Plateau, Qin-Han archaeological sites, spatial structure, historical transport, environmental background, Urban Geography