Research Articles

Skull morphology and ethnic origin of the people from the Beishenjiaqiao cemetery in Xi’an

  • WANG Shu ,
  • WANG Chunxue ,
  • ZHANG Xiangyu ,
  • ZHOU Yawei
Expand
  • 1. Bioarchaeology Laboratory, School of Archaeology, Jilin University, Changchun 130012
    2. Xi’an Institute of Cultural Relics Protection and Archaeology, Xi’an 710054
    3. School of history, Zhengzhou University, Zhengzhou 450001

Received date: 2023-11-07

  Revised date: 2024-03-06

  Online published: 2025-02-13

Abstract

The Beishenjiaqiao cemetery, located in Yanta District, Xi’an City, Shaanxi Province, is a burial ground of the Qin people during the Warring States Period on the Guanzhong Plain. Through the observation and measurement of 63 basically intact skulls unearthed from this cemetery, the following conclusions have been reached: The Beishenjiaqiao group exhibits a combination of mesocranium, high cranial vault, and narrow cranial shape, along with a relatively broad facial type. The maxillary central incisors are mostly spade-shaped, and the canine fossae and nasal root concavities are weakly developed. In comparison with modern Asian Mongoloid groups, it shows the closest affinity with the Fushun group, North China group, and South China group, while maintaining a greater distance from the Mongolian group and Turgus group. Therefore, the inhabitants of Beishenjiaqiao should be classified as the East Asian Mongoloid race. When contrasted with ancient groups in the early pre-Qin period, the Beishenjiaqiao group is closely related to the residents of the “ancient Central Plains type” such as the Yangshao Merged group, Miaodigou group, Taosi group, Chengzi Phase II group, and Dawenkou group, and is also proximate to the residents of the “ancient North China type” like the Miaozigou group. In comparison with ancient groups of the Bronze-early Iron Age, it has a strong connection with the Yin Shang groups such as the Small and Medium Tombs Group 2 and Group C of the Yin ruins, as well as the Qin and Zhou groups including the Wanli group, the Wayaogou group, and the Matengkong group. Considering the long-term and close associations between the residents of Beishenjiaqiao and those in the middle and lower reaches of the Yellow River, especially the closer relationship with the Yin Shang group, and in combination with literature research and other multidisciplinary evidence, it is hypothesized that the Qin people might have been one of the tribes of the Yin Shang group, thereby corroborating the “theory of originating from the east”. Based on the records in the Tsinghua Bamboo Slips “Chronicle”, we can deduce the development trajectory of the Qin people: The Qin might have initially been an eastern ethnic group, either closely affiliated with or even an integral part of the Yin-Shang tribes. After the fall of the Shang Dynasty, they were banished by the Zhou people to the northwest to defend against the Rong tribes. During this period, they coexisted and interacted with the Rong, leading to cultural and genetic exchanges. However, the main body of the Qin people retained numerous cultural traditions and physical characteristics from the Yin-Shang era. In contrast, the Qin people who assimilated into the Gansu-Qinghai region, such as the residents of Maojiaping, perpetuated more of the local physical traits. In the late Western Zhou period, the Qin were rewarded for their efforts in safeguarding the Zhou royal family during its eastward migration and subsequently took control of the Guanzhong region, further enhancing the interaction and integration among the groups along the Yellow River basin.

Key words: cemetery; skull; ethnic origin; race

Cite this article

WANG Shu , WANG Chunxue , ZHANG Xiangyu , ZHOU Yawei . Skull morphology and ethnic origin of the people from the Beishenjiaqiao cemetery in Xi’an[J]. Acta Anthropologica Sinica, 2025 , 44(01) : 78 -91 . DOI: 10.16359/j.1000-3193/AAS.2024.0069

References

[1] 王玉哲. 秦人的族源及迁徙路线[J]. 历史研究, 1991, 3: 32-39
[2] 王志友. 早期秦文化研究[D].博士学位毕业论文, 西安: 西北大学, 2007, 33-62
[3] 史党社. 秦关北望:秦与“戎狄”文化的关系研究[D].博士学位毕业论文, 上海: 复旦大学, 2008, 1-7
[4] 王建华. 体质人类学与古代社会研究的新进展[J]. 文物, 2011, 1: 43-50
[5] 洪秀媛. 甘谷毛家坪沟东墓葬区出土人骨的研究[D].博士学位毕业论文, 西安: 西北大学, 2014, 59-60
[6] 陈靓, 田亚岐. 陕西凤翔孙家南头秦墓人骨的种系研究[J]. 西部考古, 2008, 164-173
[7] 王一如. 陕西西安马腾空遗址东周时期墓葬出土人骨研究[D].博士学位毕业论文, 长春: 吉林大学, 2019, 159-215
[8] 周春茂. 零口战国墓颅骨的人类学特征[J]. 人类学学报, 2002, 21(3): 199-209
[9] 周婧峰, 周春茂. 秦人族源之人类学信息[J]. 考古与文物, 2007, 6: 98-102
[10] 邓普迎. 陕西临潼新丰秦墓人骨研究[J]. 文博, 2016, 5: 24-29
[11] 高小伟. 临潼湾李墓地2009-2010年出土战国至秦代墓葬人骨研究[D].博士学位毕业论文, 西安: 西北大学, 2012, 53-55
[12] 陈靓. 宝鸡建河村墓地人骨的鉴定报告[A]. 见:陕西省考古研究所(编著).宝鸡建河墓地[M]. 西安: 陕西科学技术出版社, 2006, 194-223
[13] 吴汝康, 吴新智, 张振标. 人体测量方法[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1984, 14-15
[14] 邵象清. 人体测量手册[M]. 上海: 上海辞书出版社, 1985, 34-56
[15] 郑宁, 胡雄, 薛晓光. SPSS 21统计分析与应用从入门到精通[M]. 北京: 清华大学出版社, 2015, 279-281
[16] 薛薇. 统计分析与SPSS的应用[M]. 北京: 中国人民大学出版社, 2014, 129-134
[17] 中国社会科学院历史研究所, 中国社会科学院考古研究所. 安阳殷墟头骨研究[M]. 北京: 文物出版社, 1985, 50-109
[18] 李法军. 陶寺居民人类学类型的研究[J]. 文物春秋, 2001, 4: 8-17
[19] 韩康信, 潘其风. 陕县庙底沟二期文化墓葬人骨的研究[J]. 考古学报, 1979, 2: 255-546
[20] 颜訚. 大汶口新石器时代人骨的研究报告[J]. 考古学报, 1972, 1: 91-134
[21] 颜訚. 西夏侯新石器时代人骨的研究报告[J]. 考古学报, 1973, 2: 91-126+130-141
[22] 韩康信. 山东诸城呈子新石器时代人骨[J]. 考古, 1990, 7: 644-654
[23] 张君, 韩康信. 尉迟寺新石器时代墓地人骨的观察与鉴定[J]. 人类学学报, 1998, 17(1): 23-27+29-32
[24] 朱泓. 内蒙古察右前旗庙子沟新石器时代颅骨的人类学特征[J]. 人类学学报, 1994, 13(2): 126-300
[25] 李法军. 河北阳原姜家梁新石器时代人骨研究[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2008, 88-141
[26] 潘其风, 韩康信. 柳湾墓地的人骨研究[A]. 见:青海省文物管理处考古队,中国社会科学院考古研究所.青海柳湾[M]. 北京: 文物出版社, 1984, 261-303
[27] 韩康信. 宁夏海原菜园村新石器时代墓地人骨的性别年龄鉴定与体质类型[A]. 见:宁夏菜园-新石器时代遗址、墓葬发掘报告[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2003: 349-357
[28] 韩康信, 张振标, 曾凡. 闽侯昙石山遗址的人骨[J]. 考古学报, 1976, 1: 121-144
[29] 张银运, 王令红, 董兴仁. 广西桂林甑皮岩新石器时代遗址的人类头骨[J]. 古脊椎动物与古人类, 1977, 15(1): 4-14
[30] 肖晓鸣. 吉林大安后套木嘎遗址人骨研究[D].博士学位毕业论文, 长春: 吉林大学, 2014, 9-21
[31] 陈靓. 瓦窑沟青铜时代墓地颅骨的人类学特征[J]. 人类学学报, 2000, 19(1): 32-57
[32] 易振华. 河北宣化白庙墓地青铜时代居民的人种学研究[J]. 北方文物, 1998, 4: 8-17
[33] 朱泓. 夏家店上层文化居民的种族类型及相关问题[J]. 辽海文物学刊, 1989, 1: 111-122
[34] 张全超. 内蒙古和林格尔县新店子墓地人骨研究[D].博士学位毕业论文, 长春: 吉林大学, 2005, 64-77
[35] 魏海波, 张振标. 辽宁本溪青铜时代人骨[J]. 人类学学报, 1989, 8(4): 320-328, 395
[36] 潘其风. 平洋墓葬人骨的研究[A]. 见:黑龙江省文物考古研究所.平洋墓葬[M]. 北京: 文物出版社, 1990, 211-212
[37] 韩康信, 谭靖泽, 张帆. 青海大通上孙家寨古代墓地人骨的研究[A]. 见:中国西北地区古代居民种族研究[M]. 上海: 复旦大学出版社, 2005, 1-190
[38] 张君. 青海李家山卡约文化墓地人骨种系研究[J]. 考古学报, 1993, 3: 381-415
[39] 朱泓. 东灰山墓地人骨的研究[A]. 见:甘肃省文物考古研究所,吉林大学北方考古研究室.民乐东灰山考古—四坝文化墓地的揭示与研究[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 1998, 172-179
[40] 黄陵县旅游文物局, 陕西省考古研究院, 延安市文物研究所. 寨头河-陕西黄陵战国戎人墓地考古发掘报告[M]. 上海: 上海古籍出版社, 2018, 182-205+397-402
[41] 朱泓, 等. 内蒙古林西县井沟子遗址西区墓葬出土人骨的人类学研究[A]. 见:内蒙古自治区文物考古研究所,吉林大学边疆考古研究中心(编).林西井沟子-晚期青铜时代墓地的发掘与综合研究[M]. 北京: 科学出版社, 2010, 297-298
[42] 张全超(著). 内蒙古和林格尔县新店子墓地人骨研究[M]. 北京: 科技出版社, 2010, 1-115
[43] 韩康信. 宁夏彭堡于家庄墓地人骨种系特点之研究[J]. 考古学报, 1995, (1): 109-127
[44] 原海兵. 殷墟中小墓人骨的综合研究[D].博士学位毕业论文, 长春: 吉林大学, 2010, 143-145
[45] 王明辉. 前掌大墓地人骨研究报告[A]. 见:中国社会科学院考古研究所.滕州前掌大墓地(上、下册)[M]. 北京: 文物出版社, 2005: 674-727
[46] 刘思源. 东西之争:文献与考古视野下的赢秦族源探索[J]. 三代考古, 2021, 701-720
[47] 蒙文通. 秦为戎族考[J]. 禹贡, 1937, 7: 17-81
[48] 傅斯年. 夷夏东西说[J]. 国立“中央研究院”历史语言研究所集刊, 1933: 1093-1135
[49] 俞伟超. 考古类型学的理论与实践[M]. 北京: 文物出版社, 1989
[50] 韩伟. 关于秦人族属及文化渊源管见[J]. 文物, 1986, 4: 23-28
[51] 刘庆柱. 试论秦之渊源[J]. 人文杂志, 1982, 200: 176
[52] 赵化成. 寻找秦文化渊源的新线索[J]. 文博, 1987, 1: 1-8
[53] 李学勤. 清华简关于秦人始源的重要发现[J]. 新华文摘, 2011, 22: 59
[54] 梁云. 关于早期秦文化的考古收获及相关认识[J]. 中国史研究动态, 2017, 4: 39-43
[55] 梁云. 论早期秦文化的来源与形成[J]. 考古学报, 2017, 2: 149-174
[56] 汪洋. 藁城台西商代居民的人种学研究[J]. 文物春秋, 1996, 4: 16-20+22-24
Outlines

/