기원전 14~11세기 요서지역 토착문화와 중원문화의 상관성 검토 - 묘제 양상의 비교를 중심으로

Abstract

Indigenous culture in the Liaoxi region in the 14th–11th century B.C. was represented by Weiyingzi culture. This study newly defines the culture of which characteristics and nature can be summarized as follows. First, as for the scope of distribution, the culture was distributed restrictively to Dalinghe and Xiaolinghe basins. The period was assumed to be 13th–10th century B.C., which was characterized by a transition period of the Shang Dynasty and the Zhou Dynasty. Second, people of the culture did not have their own production technology for bronzeware. The ritual bronzeware in the Zhongyuan-line culture could be restrictively obtained through exchanges with the residents in Hebei who showed similar cultural characteristics. Third, although their means of living were recognized in a small-sized settlement, farming was rarely detected. Their primary means of living were hunting and cattle breeding. Fourth, they had a strong affinity to Gaotaishan culture in terms of the characteristics of tomb systems and funeral ritual services. Fourth, compared with Lower Xiajiadian culture, which was prior to the Weiyingzi culture, it had a strong heterogeneous nature and discontinuity in consideration of means of living, burial characteristics and time discontinuity. Lastly, in the aspect of universal use of Habiankouyanli and boom of steppe-style accessories, part of Material Culture of the Steppe was involved in the formation process of Weiyingzi culture. However, it was not considered that they used predatory means of living against neighbor groups due to the absence of bronze tools or weaponry. This study specifically demonstrates the formation process and the characteristics of Weiyingzi culture. Based on the findings, it also investigates correlations with the culture in the Zhongyuan region through comparison of their tomb systems. In conclusion, it has been found that people in Weiyingzi culture were stuck to very conservative and unique tradition of their own, which was reflected in their tomb systems and funeral services. It was contrasted with foreign material culture, which they had to selectively accept for survival. Those aspects are shown in the fact that Habiankouyanli, a representative foreign earthenware, was not found in the grave goods, which reflected their spiritual culture; that although ritual bronzeware and bronze mirrors, foreign cultural elements, were contained in the list of grave goods, they were used for the purpose of showing off the authority of the high class; that they decided their own post-mortem performances with self developed recognition on the post-mortem world by unifying the direction of the head of the deceased in the tombs; and that they selected the post-mortem usages of main grave goods by putting them at the feet side of the deceased and defined the values of the goods by themselves. With that said, the Zhongyuan-line cultural aspects found in the Liaoxi region could be considered as a reaction of the indigenous culture against influx of foreign cultures, rather than direct advance of Zhongyuan power. It could be considered that there was antagonistic relationship between the cultures in two regions of Liaoxi and Zhongyuan.