進階搜尋


下載電子全文  
系統識別號 U0026-0108201812314300
論文名稱(中文) 遺址保存與脈絡延續的載體 : 以台北圓山遺址為例
論文名稱(英文) Archaeological preservation and the continuity of the context : take Taipei Yuanshan as an example
校院名稱 成功大學
系所名稱(中) 建築學系
系所名稱(英) Department of Architecture
學年度 106
學期 2
出版年 107
研究生(中文) 魏士勛
研究生(英文) Shih-Hsun Wei
學號 N76051089
學位類別 碩士
語文別 中文
論文頁數 112頁
口試委員 指導教授-吳光庭
口試委員-林靜娟
口試委員-薛承倫
口試委員-宋立文
中文關鍵字 圓山遺址  考古遺址  遺址保存 
英文關鍵字 archaeological heritage  in situ  context  culture level  adaptation  intellectuals 
學科別分類
中文摘要   本研究探討遺址保存以及延續脈絡的設計可能,並以圓山遺址為操作對象,以建築設計為媒介,發展關於考古遺址保存、考古遺址教育、舊有遺構再利用,在現有的遺構上建造容納專業者與公眾的文化保存據點。
  考古從發掘到建構歷史的過程中,考古學家需要藉由出土物及遺跡不斷的演繹及推論,對於出土物及出土脈絡都要有所認識及瞭解,在擁有對土地的廣泛及深入認識才能夠建構相對正確的歷史,最終得以將歷史真實傳遞給大眾。建築設計的過程亦是如此,對於土地的條件及脈絡要廣泛且深入的掌握,在建構充足的知識背景下的建築設計,才能與土地有更多的互動,藉此更容易幫助土地傳遞其所蘊含的價值,並以建築作為保存和開發的中介,提出共存的可能。
  圓山遺址在經歷花卉博覽會之後,圓山遺址以及遺址周邊得到很大程度的整理,不論整理過程是否有所瑕疵,而造成遺址的毀壞,在整理過後至今,圓山遺址已經成為台北市民假日休閒的新據點,在整頓後的廣場也有許多商業行為,圓山遺址的經濟及觀光條件已經具備。考古遺址的價值是重要且必須的,但圓山遺址經歷的歷史看來,政府或大眾都對考古遺址的價值認識不足,期間的考古研究也因為經費斷斷續續,雖然目前經歷過多次破壞,所剩餘的遺址價值大不如前,但在經濟及觀光便利性的條件下,圓山遺址應該能成為示範的地點,能夠長期提供考古研究以及教育大眾認識的地點,並結合過去開發遺留的建築構造物創造新的展示空間及考古研究空間,讓圓山遺址首次以考古遺址為主導的方式開發,並能夠成為台灣對於大眾或專業者的教育訓練場所。
英文摘要 ABSTRACT
This study explores the design of the preservation of the archaeological site and the continuity of the context within designs. Taking Yuanshan historical site as an object and using the building as a medium, we propose a design scheme that responds to the preservation, the education of archaeological sites, and the reuse of ancient remains.
 Archaeologists need to constantly interpret and infer the artifacts and relics from excavation to historical constructions. In addition, the land context is an important clue in the process of inference, and has a basis for influencing the authenticity of historical narratives. Only by having a broad and in-depth understanding of the land can we construct a relatively correct history. Ultimately, the truth of the history can be passed on to the public.
 Like the process of architectural design , we need to have a broad and in-depth understanding of land conditions and background before the start of architectural design, and build adequate background knowledge. As a result, we can interact more with the land, make it easier to help the land convey the value it contains, and further use the building as an intermediary for conservation and development to propose the possibility of coexistence.
 After 2010 Taipei International Flora Exposition, the Yuanshan site itself and its surroundings have been largely reorganized and transformed. Regardless of whether the renovation process was flawed and further caused the damage on the site, it has become a new place for Taipei residents to seek recreation and relax. There are also many commercial activities in the square after the rectification, already available for economic use and tourism.
 The value of archaeological sites is important and necessary. Nontheless, during the history development in Yuanshan, the government and the public seems to fail to fully understand the value of archaeological sites. Although there have been many damages at present, and the archaeological sites are not as valuable as before, Yuanshan site should be a demonstration place under the conditions of economy and tourism convenience.
In my design project, Yuanshan site will be developed in an archaeological site-oriented way for the first time. It will be able to provide archaeological research results and educate the public in the long term. On top of that, we combine the original architectural structures that was developed long time ago to create new exhibition space and archaeological research space, and further it will provide educational training ground for the public or the professional.

INTRODUCTION
 Since the enactment of the Cultural Heritage Preservation Act in 1982, there has been a constant discussion on the topic of cultural heritage preservation. Gradually, people have more and more understanding of cultural heritages. In the architectural field, it is also necessary to face the situation of historical and contemporary urban contradictions more consciously. History preservation and reuse are almost inevitable design issues in contemporary history as well.
  For those who are not trained in archaeology, it is not easy to find the value and importance of archaeological sites. However, what should we do when we need to face the development and preservation of archaeological sites in the future? As an architectural professional, I think it is necessary to understand archaeological knowledge when facing an archaeological site. With the full understanding of the knowledge, we would be able to propose more appropriate reuse and design methods to reflect the value of archaeological sites.
DESIGN PROCESS
 This study sets an object from a wide range of archaeological relevant data collection to an architectural design for a single archaeological site. Through the collection of the basic knowledge of the archaeological profession, the definition of the value of the site, and my own architectural profession, the possible coexistence strategy is thus proposed by us as an intermediary in the contradiction between urban development and archaeological site preservation. Additionally, we use Yuanshan site as an operation center, and through spatial design, we ensure to demonstrate the value of the archaeological site.

1. The collection of related materials of archaeological sites
We collect the basic understanding of archaeological sites, the purpose of preservation, and the context of their development in Taiwan. We then further discuss the contradictions of archaeological sites preserved and urban development in Taiwan, and analyze the architectural cases of archaeological sites from different countries.

2. The strategies for preservation and development
Through data collection and analysis, we propose the strategies that use the architecture as an intermediary between urban development and the archaeological site preservation.

3. The selection on a single archaeological site as a design center
We selecting Taipei Yuanshan site as the design center. Where is the starting point of design when architects are facing real archaeological sites? Through the stratified analysis of center’s current situation and the historical events, environment, archaeological reports, etc., the starting point of the design is found from the analysis results. We then use the result from the stratified analysis to operate design and respond to the land context and the current situation of the city. Finally, we hope the architecture both reflects the value of the archaeological site and satisfies the need for the city to undergo urban development.
CONCLUSION
  At different sites, we face different ways of preservation or other different conditions. Therefore, as an architectural professional, we should explore the various factors and clues from the site, and analyze the site from different aspects. We thus will be able use to find the method that best reflects the value of the site itself through the design approaches agreed by everyone with an in-depth understanding of the land and environment.
 The excavation process of the archaeological site is similar to the design process of the building. Archaeological excavations reveal historical evidences or traces, and through the knowledge background and imagination of archaeologists, the evidence is concatenated to present a complete historical story. The beginning of architectural design requires a variety of stratified analysis of the site, discovering the various conditions contained in the site itself. We then further find the factors that can be used as the starting point of the architectural design, and connect the various environmental factors through the imagination of the architect, and finally present them in the architecture.
The beginning of coexistence design strategy must be completed through our thorough understandings of the site, reflecting on the site in an archaeological way, and integrating all the clues with more knowledge and imaginations. The purposes of the coexistence design strategy can reduce the damage to the land and preserve archaeological sites and further use the space as a medium for knowledge transfer.
論文目次 目錄 :

1.0 _ 導論


1.1 _ 研究動機 04

1.2 _ 研究方法 04
    1.2.1 _ 考古遺址相關資料蒐集
    1.2.2 _ 考古遺址與都市開發的策略
    1.2.3 _ 以遺址作為設計操作的基地
1.3 _ 研究目標 05


2.0_都市發展與歷史保存


2.1 _ 考古遺址的意義 08
    2.1.1 _ 台灣考古的價值
    2.1.2 _ 考古挖掘的方法

2.2 _ 台灣考古 11
    2.2.1 _ 台灣考古的發展
    2.2.2 _ 台灣考古的保存問題
    2.2.3 _ 考古遺址的法令與指定流程

2.3 _ 開發與保存的矛盾 16
    2.3.1 _ 台灣的社環境
    2.3.2 _ 台灣考古遺址案例

2.4 _ 發展與保存的共存 19
    2.4.1 _ 考古發掘與工程開挖
    2.4.2 _ 考古教育及訓練
    2.4.3 _ 考古遺址之建築設計案例

3.0 _ 圓山遺址


3.1 _ 地理環境及人文背景 29
    3.1.1 _ 地理環境
    3.1.2 _ 人文背景
    3.1.3 _ 圓山遺址考古挖掘簡史

3.2 _ 歷史發展脈絡 35

3.3 _ 考古文化價值 36
    3.3.1 _ 圓山遺址史前文化層


4.0 _ 保存計畫與空間計畫


4.1 _ 圓山遺址的保存計畫 52
    4.1.1 _ 圓山遺址的開發及保存歷程
    4.1.3 _ 圓山遺址保存策略

4.2 _ 圓山遺址的建築計劃 54
    4.2.1 _ 建築計劃分區
    4.2.2 _ 建築設計原則及手法

4.3 _ 圓山遺址展示計畫 59

5.0 _ 設計操作與詮釋

5.1 _ 設計概念及想像 64
5.2 _ 設計圖面 65
    5.2.1 _ 全區圖面
    5.2.2 _ A、B區圖面
    5.2.2 _ C區圖面
    5.2.3 _ D區圖面


6.0 _ 結論

6.1 _ 結論 83
6.2 _ 檢討及心得


7.0 _ 參考文獻

7.1 _ 參考文獻 87


8.0 _ 附錄

8.1 _ Syllabus of archaeological site management
in theory and practice - a world perspective 92
8.2 _ Cultural Heritage Management Final
Oral Examination
8.3 _ 設計版面
8.4 _ 模型照片
8.5 _ 口試照片
參考文獻 考古相關文獻
█ 陳光祖, 《2017考古遺址監管保護手冊》, 文化部文化資產局, 2017
█ 黃宣衛等,《人類學家的足跡 - 臺灣人類學百年特展》,中研院民族所博物館 ,2011
█ 黃素娟等 ,《走在故事之上 : 遺址與營建工程專書》, 文化部文化資產局 , 2015
█ 臧振華等 ,《南科的古文明》, 台灣史前博物館 , 2013
█ 王淳熙等 ,《2007文化資產實務執行參考手冊 1總則、古蹟與歷史建築》, 行政院文化建設委員會 , 2007
█ 王淳熙等 ,《2007文化資產實務執行參考手冊 3遺址、古物》, 行政院文化建設委員會 , 2007
█ 呂理政 ,《考古遺址現地保存與展示之研究》, 國立台灣史前文化博物館籌備處 , 1993
█ 呂理政 ,《東亞的遺址博物館》, 國立台灣史前文化博物館籌備處 , 1993
█ 商周編輯顧問有限公司 ,《生活從遠古談起:導覽史前台灣你的第一本書 - 國定遺址專輯》, 文化部文化資產局 , 2015
█ 傅朝卿 ,《國際歷史保存級古蹟維護憲章、宣言、決議文、建議文》, 台灣建築與文化資產出版社 , 2002
█ 傅朝卿 ,《舊建築再利用:歷史、理論、實例》, 財團法人古都保存再生文教基金會 , 2017
█ 張光直 ,《考古學專題六講》, 稻鄉出版社 , 1988
█ 劉益昌等 , 《台灣史前史專論》, 中央研究院.聯經出版事業股份有限公司 , 2015
█ 陳歆怡 , 《考古台灣:穿越時空的蒐尋、解謎與保存》, 經典雜誌 , 2017

碩士論文
█ 葉建慈 ,《台灣與大陸考古遺址現地保存方式多個案之比較研究》, 東海大學建築系碩士論文 , 2016
█ 沈世琨 ,《兒童遊憩用地事宜性分析之研究 - 以台北市兒童育樂中心為例》, 淡江大學建築研究所碩士論文 , 1985

圓山考古報告書
█ 黃士強、劉益昌、楊鳳屏, 《 臺北兒童主題公園圓山遺址考古調查研究計劃 》, 台北市立兒童育樂中心, 1999
█ 黃士強、劉益昌、楊鳳屏, 《 圓山遺址史蹟公園範圍區考古發掘研究計劃 》, 台北市立兒童育樂中心, 1999
█ 連照美, 《 台北圓山遺址現況調查研究報告 》, 行政院國家科學委員會,1986
█ 黃士強, 《 台北市圓山遺址第二地點試掘報告 》, 考古人類學刊,no. 45:20-65 ,1989
█ 郭素秋, 《 台灣北部圓山文化的內涵探討 》, Journal of Austronesian Studies 5(2) , 2014

圓山規劃報告書
█ 國立台灣大學建築與城鄉研究所 , 《 圓山遺址史蹟公園圓山貝塚展示區及台北市立兒童育樂中心正門廣場規劃 : 期末簡報報告書 》 , 臺北市立兒童育樂中心 , 1995
█ 中治環境造型顧問有限公司 , 《 台北市立兒童育樂中心遊樂世界遊樂設施調整計畫整體規劃研究 》, 臺北市立兒童育樂中心
█ 中治環境造型顧問有限公司, 《 台北市中山「一號公園整體研究規劃 」 》, 台北市政府文化局 , 2001
█ 張樞建築師事務所 , 《 圓山文化園區整體規劃構想暨台北城市博物館展示工程規劃 》, 台北市政府文化局
█ 金光裕建築師事務所 , 《 台北城市博物館聚落建築景觀暨展示工程規劃設計監造技術服務建議書 》, 台北市政府文化局
█ 陳信樟等 , 《「兒童育樂中心」中「昨日世界」民俗活動調查規劃報告》, 行政院文化建設委員會 , 1986

考古及保存相關英文文獻
█ Paul Bahn ,《Archaeology a very short introduction》, OXFORD , 1996
█ Yannis Hamilakis ,《La trahison des archéologues? Archaeological Practice
as Intellectual Activity in Postmodernity》, Journal of Mediterranean Archaeology 12.1 , 1999
█ CHEN, CHIEN-CHUNG , FU, CHAO-CHING ,《GLOBALIZATION AND LOCALIZATION OF HERITAGE PRESERVATION IN TAIWAN– AN ANALYSIS PERSPECTIVE UNDER THE CULTURAL HERITAGE PRESERVATION》, 2015
█ Kwang-tzuu Chen ,《The Protection of Archaeological Sites in Taiwan》, conservation and mgmt of arch. sites, Vol. 13 No. 1 , 2011
█ Bryony Roberts ,《 Tabula Plena form of urban preservation 》, Lars Müller Publishers , 2016
█ José Luiz Pedersoli Jr. , Catherine Antomarchi , Stefan Michalski ,《 A Guide to Risk Management of Cultural Heritage 》, ICCROM-ATHAR Regional Conservation Centre , 2016
論文全文使用權限
  • 同意授權校內瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2018-08-14起公開。
  • 同意授權校外瀏覽/列印電子全文服務,於2018-08-14起公開。


  • 如您有疑問,請聯絡圖書館
    聯絡電話:(06)2757575#65773
    聯絡E-mail:etds@email.ncku.edu.tw