人类学学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (03): 398-411.doi: 10.16359/j.1000-3193/AAS.2023.0019cstr: 32091.14.j.1000-3193/AAS.2023.0019

• 综述 • 上一篇    下一篇

南亚次大陆打制石器的发现与研究综述

杨紫衣1,2(), 靳英帅1,2, 王社江1, 张晓凌1()   

  1. 1.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
    2.中国科学院大学,北京 100049
  • 收稿日期:2022-07-31 修回日期:2022-10-19 出版日期:2023-06-15 发布日期:2023-06-13
  • 通讯作者: 张晓凌,研究员,主要研究旧石器时代考古学。E-mail: zhangxiaoling@ivpp.ac.cn
  • 作者简介:杨紫衣,硕士研究生,主要研究旧石器时代考古学。E-mail: yangziyi@ivpp.ac.cn
  • 基金资助:
    第二次青藏高原综合科学考察研究(2019QZKK0601);中国科学院A类战略性先导科技专项“泛第三极环境变化与绿色丝绸之路建设”(XDA2004010102);国家自然科学基金(42072033);国家社会科学基金中国历史研究院重大历史研究专项“现代中国人起源;演化与适应模式研究”(21@WTK001)

Discovery and research review of knapped lithics of the South Asian subcontinent

YANG Ziyi1,2(), JIN Yingshuai1,2, WANG Shejiang1, ZHANG Xiaoling1()   

  1. 1. Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100044
    2. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049
  • Received:2022-07-31 Revised:2022-10-19 Online:2023-06-15 Published:2023-06-13

摘要:

南亚次大陆位于欧亚大陆南部,历来与东南亚和东亚关系密切,是东西方旧石器文化交流的枢纽之一。自旧石器时代早期开始,南亚次大陆就有古人类活动的踪迹,这一地区发现的打制石器遗存数量丰富、面貌多样;石核-石片技术具有本土特征,阿舍利技术、莫斯特技术、石叶技术和几何形细石器技术与欧亚大陆西侧十分相似;细石叶技术可能受到东亚的影响。本文回顾了南亚次大陆打制石器的发现与研究简史,梳理其文化分期和石器工业技术面貌特点,希望能对东西方旧石器文化起源、交流与扩散课题的深入研究有所启发,并为中国以后的旧石器考古研究工作提供一定的参考。

关键词: 旧石器时代, 石制品, 类型, 技术, 南亚次大陆

Abstract:

The South Asian subcontinent, located south of the Eurasian continent and adjacent to East Asia, has a close relationship with Southeast Asia and China. It has long been a critical pivot of eastern and western Eurasia playing a unique and irreplaceable role in cultural communication and technology diffusion. In this paper, we clarify the research history, chronology and technology of knapped lithics from the South Asian subcontinent, in order to offer more information for further work.
Traces of ancient humans first appeared in the Early Paleolithic, and numerous lithics of different technological characteristics have been discovered since 1863, when Foote RB collected the first hand-axe in Madras, southeast India. Due to some historical reasons, however, there are three main problems in Paleolithic research of the South Asian subcontinent. First, only a few sites have been excavated, with most findings on the surface, which has led to controversies such as the identity of the Soan culture and its relationship to the Acheulian. Second, both the lack and uncertainty of dating data makes the chronology somewhat questionable and thus ambiguous for each stage of the Paleolithic. Third, despite the efforts of several generations of scholars, most archaeological reports of the subcontinent are still scarce, and many lack clear photographs or 3D models for researchers who do not have access to these important materials.
Various lithic technologies are recognized in the South Asian continent. Core-flake technology, including pebble tool and flake tool assemblages from the Early Pleistocene to the Holocene. This is a unique phenomenon because pebble tools such as chopper-chopping tools decrease and finally disappear with the rise of more complicated technologies in most cases. The Acheulian, Mousterian, blade, and geometric microlithic technologies are similar to those in western Eurasian, respectively. Large cutting tools such as hand-axes, cleavers and picks predominate in the Early Pleistocene, whereas geometric microliths are also widely distributed in Terminal Pleistocene and Holocene. Mousterian and blade products are not as common, which might hint at a different role that the subcontinent plays in human dispersal and communication in the early Late Pleistocene. Microblade products, such as minute blades(microblades) and specially prepared microblade cores, might come from East Asia where these products are large in quantity, mature in technique, and clear and complete in a developing sequence.

Key words: Paleolithic, Lithics, Typology, Technology, South Asian subcontinent

中图分类号: