关于殷墟文化的分期,学术界长期存在邹衡先生和中国社会科学院考古研究所安阳工作队所各自建立的两个体系,它们均经历了一个不断细化、调整的过程。一般认为这两者总体上是一致的,但对于其中的一些差异也不应忽视。本文在回顾这两个分期体系形成过程的基础上,指出它们对殷墟文化第一期的归属以及一些典型单位的年代判断上存在差异,而其中的一些差异又造成了它们对西北岗王陵区内1400、1217、1500号等大墓及宫庙区内乙七、乙十一前期、乙十二等建筑基址年代的不同认识。在两者的研究方法和结论基本一致的认识下考察造成这些差异的原因,或可归结为传统年代学研究方法的局限性、资料积累的阶段性、早期田野发掘技术的不足性等。 As for the staging of the Yin Ruin culture, there are two systems established by the academic circles, Mr. Zou Heng and Anyang Task Force of the Institute of Archeology, Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, all of whom have undergone a process of continuous refinement and adjustment. Generally agreed that the two are generally the same, but for some of these differences should not be ignored. On the basis of reviewing the forming process of these two staging systems, this paper points out that there are differences in the vestiges of the first period of Yin Ruin culture and the dating of some typical units, 1400,1217,1500 and other large tombs and Gongmiao District B seven, B eleven prophase, B 12 building base era different understanding. Considering the similarities between the research methods and conclusions of the two methods, we can find out the causes of these differences, or they can be attributed to the limitations of traditional chronological research methods, the stages of data accumulation and the inadequacy of early field excavation techniques.