人类学学报 ›› 2021, Vol. 40 ›› Issue (03): 378-392.doi: 10.16359/j.1000-3193/AAS.2021.0068

• • 上一篇    下一篇

泥河湾盆地板井子旧石器时代遗址的形成过程

任进成1,5(), 王法岗6, 李锋2,3(), 杨庆江2,4, 陈福友2,3, 高星2,4   

  1. 1.吉林大学考古学院,长春130012
    2.中国科学院脊椎动物演化与人类起源重点实验室,中国科学院古脊椎动物与古人类研究所,北京100044
    3.中国科学院生物演化与环境卓越创新中心,北京100044
    4.中国科学院大学,北京100049
    5.马克斯普朗克人类历史科学研究所,德国耶拿 07745
    6.河北省文物考古研究院,石家庄050031
  • 收稿日期:2021-02-01 修回日期:2021-05-11 出版日期:2021-06-15 发布日期:2021-06-24
  • 通讯作者: 李锋
  • 作者简介:任进成(1990-),男,山东高密人,博士,主要从事旧石器时代考古学研究。E-mail: renjincheng@jlu.edu.cn
  • 基金资助:
    国家重点研发计划项目(2020YFC1521500);中国科学院战略性先导科技专项(XDB26000000);中国科学院国际伙伴计划项目(132311KYSB20190008);中国科学院青年创新促进会(2017102)

Formation processes of the Banjingzi Paleolithic site in the Nihewan Basin

REN Jincheng1,5(), WANG Fagang6, LI Feng2,3(), YANG Qingjiang2,4, CHEN Fuyou2,3, GAO Xing2,4   

  1. 1. School of Archaeology, Jilin University, Changchun 130012
    2. Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100044
    3. CAS Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, Beijing 100044
    4. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049
    5. Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena Germany 07745
    6. Hebei Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Shijiazhuang 050031
  • Received:2021-02-01 Revised:2021-05-11 Online:2021-06-15 Published:2021-06-24
  • Contact: LI Feng

摘要:

板井子遗址是泥河湾盆地晚更新世早期的一处重要遗址,光释光年代为距今8~9万年。本文以2015年出土的考古材料为研究对象,从地层的沉积环境、考古材料本体的埋藏特点两个角度,对板井子遗址的形成过程进行分析。分析表明,主文化层第5层为近原地埋藏类型,水流作用对小尺寸标本的保存及标本的空间集聚特征影响较大,但石制品技术类型组合等基本的人类行为信息仍较为完整;第4、6层均为水流搬运产生的异地埋藏,蕴含的人类行为信息有所缺失。此项分析为提取、研究考古遗址所蕴含的古人类的居址选择、土地利用方式、考古材料使用废弃等方面的信息奠定了基础。

关键词: 泥河湾盆地, 板井子遗址, 旧石器时代, 遗址形成过程

Abstract:

Banjingzi is an important open-air site with the age of 80-90 kaBP in the east margin of Nihewan basin in North China. Several excavations were conducted in 1984, 1986, 1988, 1990 and 1991. In 2015, a new excavation project was organized at this site by staff from the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences (IVPP) and Institute of Hebei Provincial Cultural Relics. A total of 36 m2 was exposed, and three archaeological layers named layer 4, layer 5 and layer 6 were recognized from the profile, with the thickness of about 0.5 m, 1.6 m, 0.3 m, respectively. Layer 5 yielded the most abundant archaeological remains, including 2563 stone artifacts, 1028 animal bones and 716 natural pebbles (L≥50 mm), while together only about 110 pieces were recovered from other two layers.
Based on materials collected in 2015 mentioned above, this paper presents a formation processes study of three archaeological layers recognized at this site by sedimentary and archaeological indicators (particularly the lithic assemblage composition, debitage size distribution, artifact conditions, orientation analysis and spatial patterning). Some important evidence and tentative conclusions could be drawn from our studies as below.
Layer 5 was buried mainly in grey-yellow and grey-green silts, fine sands and clays, and several coarse sand belts and thin beds with a few pebbles encased in the deposit. Stone artifacts are basically unabraded and fresh, and display a coherent assemblage composition, with core and debitage accounting for 3.74%, 89.67% respectively. Artifacts both in horizontal and vertical space show dense accumulations, however, some minor linear and circle patterns can be recognized. The proportion of flaking debris smaller than 20 mm is about 58.7% less than that of the debitage size distribution experiment data obtained by authors of this paper. In addition, the archaeological materials show relatively obvious preferred orientation and inclination. Multiple lines of evidence above suggest that layer 5 has been preserved in a near-primary context and only disturbed by some moderate hydraulic forces occasionally, which mainly results in a large amount of smaller debitage washed out from the site, and has altered the original site configurations to some extent. The assemblage integrity of this layer is still relatively high as a whole and suitable for analyzing early hominin behaviors except the spatial analysis. Layer 4 was buried in fine sands with a few pebbles, while layer 6 was covered totally in sand-gravel. From the qualitative point of view, these two layers have been buried in secondary environments where artifacts were transported by water flows from other areas nearby.

Key words: Nihewan Basin, Banjingzi site, Paleolithic Age, Site Formation Processes

中图分类号: