| Project/Area Number |
14201046
|
|---|
| Research Category |
Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research (A)
|
| Allocation Type | Single-year Grants |
|---|
| Section | 一般 |
|---|
| Research Field |
考古学(含先史学)
|
|---|
| Research Institution | National Research Institute Cultural Properties, Nara |
|---|
Principal Investigator |
HANATANI Hiroshi Independent Administrative Institution National Research Institute for Cultural Properties, Nara., Department of Asuka/Fujiwara Palace Site Investigations, Architecture Section, Chief, 飛鳥藤原宮跡発掘調査部, 遺構調査室長 (70172947)
|
|---|
| Co-Investigator(Kenkyū-buntansha) |
KUROSAKI Tadashi University of Toyama, Faculty of Humanities, Professor, 人文学部, 教授 (60000494)
KOBAYASHI Kenichi Independent Administrative Institution National Research Institute for Cultural Properties, Nara., Center for Archaeological Operations, Cultural Properties Data Section, Chief, 埋蔵文化財センター, 文化財情報研究室長 (70110088)
KOIKE Nobuhiko Independent Administrative Institution National Research Institute for Cultural Properties, Nara., Department of Asuka/Fujiwara Palace Site Investigations, Senior Researcher, 飛鳥藤原宮跡発掘調査部, 主任研究官 (90205302)
KANEDA Akihiro Independent Administrative Institution National Research Institute for Cultural Properties, Nara., Department of Asuka/Fujiwara Palace Site Investigations, Researcher, 飛鳥藤原宮跡発掘調査部, 研究員 (20290934)
TOYOSHIMA Naohiro Independent Administrative Institution National Research Institute for Cultural Properties, Nara., Department of Heijyo Palace Site Investigations, Researcher, 平城宮跡発掘調査部, 研究員 (90304287)
清野 孝之 独立行政法人文化財研究所, 奈良文化財研究所・平城宮跡発掘調査部, 研究員 (00290932)
|
|---|
| Project Period (FY) |
2002 – 2004
|
| Project Status |
Completed (Fiscal Year 2004)
|
| Budget Amount *help |
¥27,820,000 (Direct Cost: ¥21,400,000、Indirect Cost: ¥6,420,000)
Fiscal Year 2004: ¥8,190,000 (Direct Cost: ¥6,300,000、Indirect Cost: ¥1,890,000)
Fiscal Year 2003: ¥8,970,000 (Direct Cost: ¥6,900,000、Indirect Cost: ¥2,070,000)
Fiscal Year 2002: ¥10,660,000 (Direct Cost: ¥8,200,000、Indirect Cost: ¥2,460,000)
|
|---|
| Keywords | San Yan Culture / Harness / Metal Fittings of Belt / Outfits of Cavalrymen / Gilt Bronze Products / X-ray Fluorescence Analysis / 三燕 / 鞍金具 / 金薄板 / 挂甲 / 鉄地金銅張 / 馬胄 / 縦長板胄 |
|---|
| Research Abstract |
In order to clarify the origin and the descending course of the metal goods considered to be a foreign-made article excavated from the ancient tombs of the Japanese Islands, the comparative study was advanced focusing on a harness, weapons and arms, etc. in common in Japan, China, and the Korean Peninsula geographically located among both areas. As for the article found in China, we selected the relics that were excavated from tombs of the San Yan culture in the 4th and 5th centuries, whose good related data came to be known successively in recent years.
As for the gilt bronze products, such as the harness and the metal fittings of belt, there is a similarity between the Japanese Islands and the western Liaoning area. By conducting technical examination and X-ray fluorescence analysis, the validity of presumption that the manufacture technology of the gilt bronze products in the Kofun period has the same genealogy relation as that of the western Liaoning area was confirmed. Moreover, th
… More
e important key was acquired when considering the genealogy relation of the technology of three areas by having checked the structure and the manufacture technique of wooden part of saddle excavated in China that are also seen in those of the Korean Peninsula and the Japanese Islands.
As for the outfits of the cavalrymen including full outfits of cavalry (both man and horse fixed armor to the whole body), by considering the appearance and the changes of manufacture technology, it became clear that they had originated in the northeastern region of China, and had been brought to the Japanese Islands through the Korean Peninsula. However, comparison of the contents of equipment, the outfits excavated from the Korean Peninsula came directly from the northeastern region of China, but the outfits excavated from the tomb in the Japanese Islands cannot be identified with those of the examples found in China and the Korean peninsula. It is related to the situation of those days and the situation of acceptance in the Japanese Islands.
In Japan, China and Korea, the structure and the burial form of a tomb hold each local feature. But about burial goods, the existence of relics and manufacture technology common to one another became clear, and about some relics of Kofun period which descended from overseas, a possibility of making in the northeastern region of China has increased. Less
|
