Acta Anthropologica Sinica >

2020 , Vol. 39 >Issue 03: 392 - 403

DOI: https://doi.org/10.16359/j.cnki.cn11-1963/q.2018.0038

An overview of studies on microblade technology in Hokkaido, Japan

  • Jianping YUE ,
  • Han WANG ,
  • Shinji KATO
Expand
  • 1. Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100044
    2. CAS Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, Beijing 100044
    3. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049
    4. Key Laboratory of Economic Stratigraphy and Palaeogeography, Nanjing Institute of Geology and Palaeontology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Nanjing 210008
    5. Department of Archaeology of Graduate School of Arts and Letters, Tohoku University, Sendai 9808576
    6. Nara National Research Institute for Cultural Properties, Nara 6308577

Received date: 2018-03-14

  Revised date: 2018-06-14

  Online published: 2020-08-31

Fold

Abstract

Microblade technology represents an important technological innovation and adaptation in northeastern Asia and northwestern America during the Late Pleistocene. Hokkaido, located along the edge of far-eastern Eurasia, contains a rich microlithic sequence that began around 25 thousand years ago and lasted for about 12 thousand years. Based on qualitative technological analysis and refitting, several microlithic debitage methods and microblade core types have been identified in Hokkaido. The regional microlithic sequence is characterized by the continuity of wedge-shaped cores, along with periodic changes that appear to correspond with climatic and environmental shifts. This article provides an overview of the climatic and environmental background of Hokkaido during the Late Pleistocene, and the research history of microlithic technology in the region. On this basis, this paper highlights the nature and differences among microblade debitage methods in Hokkaido and clarifies the development of microlithic industry through time. This overview has implication for our understanding of microlithic technology and Late Pleistocene hunter-gatherer mobility and adaptation in the broader region of far-eastern Asia, including the neighboring area of China.

Key words： Microblade technology; Hokkaido; Upper Paleolithic; Debitage method

Cite this article

Jianping YUE , Han WANG , Shinji KATO . An overview of studies on microblade technology in Hokkaido, Japan[J]. Acta Anthropologica Sinica, 2020 , 39(03) : 392 -403 . DOI: 10.16359/j.cnki.cn11-1963/q.2018.0038

References

[1] 安志敏. 中国细石器发现一百年[J]. 考古, 2000, (5):45-56
[2] 朱之勇. 中国细石器相关问题研究[J]. 四川文物, 2009 (3):45-51
[3] 仪明洁. 细石器研究中几个关键概念的厘定[J]. 考古与文物, 2014, (5):37-41
[4] Bleed P. Trees or chains, links or branches: Conceptual alternatives for consideration of stone tool production and other sequential activities[J]. Journal of Archaeological Method and Theory, 2001,8(1):101-127
[5] Gómez Coutouly YA. Industries lithiques à composante lamellaire par pression du Nord Pacifique de la fin du Pléistocène au début de l’Holocène: de la diffusion d’une technique en Extrême-Orient au peuplement initial du Nouveau Monde[D]. Unpublished PhD dissertation of Paris West University Nanterre La Défense, 2011
[6] Nakazawa Y, Izuho M, Takakura J, et al. Toward an understanding of technological variability in microblade assemblages in Hokkaido, Japan[J]. Asian Perspectives, 2005,44(2):276-289
[7] 赵维张, 王可兴. 日本北海道地理概述[J]. 青海师范大学学报(自科版), 1987, (2):47-54
[8] Morisaki K, Izuho M, Sato H. Human adaptive responses to environmental changes during the Pleistocene-Holocene transition in the Japanese Archipelago[A]. In: Robinson E, Sellet F, eds. Lithic Technological Organization and Paleoenvironmental Change[C]. Basel: Springer International Publishing AG, 2018: 91-122
[9] Yokoyama Y, Kido Y, Tada R. Japan Sea oxygen isotope stratigraphy and global sea-level changes for the last 50,000 years recorded in sediment cores from the Oki Ridge[J]. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 2007,247(1-2):5-17
[10] Sato H, Izuho M, Morisaki K. Human cultures and environmental changes in the Pleistocene-Holocene transition in the Japanese Archipelago[J]. Quaternary International, 2011,237:93-102
[11] Kawamura Y. Late Pleistocene to Holocene mammalian faunal succession in the Japanese islands: with comments on the late Quaternary extinctions[J]. Archaeozoologia, 1994,4(2):7-22
[12] Iwase A, Hashizume J, Izuho M, et al. Timing of megafaunal extinction in the late Late Pleistocene on the Japanese Archipelago[J]. Quaternary International, 2012,255:114-124
[13] 山田哲. 北海道における細石刃石器群の研究[M]. 东京:六一書房, 2006
[14] 高橋啓一. 旧石器時代から縄文時代にかけての動物相の変化[J]. 季刊考古学, 2015,132:23-27
[15] 広瀬亘, 岩崎深雪, 中川光弘. 北海道中央部~西部の新第三紀火成活動の変遷:K-Ar年代,火山活動様式および全岩化学組成から見た東北日本弧北端の島弧火成活動の変遷[J]. 地質学雑誌, 2000,106:120-135
[16] Kuzmin YV, Popov VK, Glascock MD, et al. Sources of archaeological volcanic glass in the Primorye (Maritime) Province, Russian Far East[J]. Archaeometry, 2002,44:505-515
[17] Glascock MD, Kuzmin YV, Grebennikov AV, et al. Obsidian provenance for prehistoric complexes in the Amur River basin (Russian Far East)[J]. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2011,38:1832-1841
[18] 長沼孝. 黒曜石原産地の大規模調査:北海道白滝遺跡群[J]. 駿台史学, 2009,135:25-49
[19] 山原敏朗, 寺崎康史. 旧石器文化の編年と地域性:北海道[A].见:稲田孝司,佐藤宏之.講座日本の考古学1:旧石器時代(上)[M]. 东京:青木书店, 2010: 265-308
[20] 吉崎昌一. 白滝遺跡と北海道の無土器時代[J]. 民族学研究, 1961,26(1):13-23
[21] 加藤晋平. 北海道の石刃——とくに細石刃技術について[J]. 歴史教育, 1965,13(3):13-23
[22] 戸沢充則. 北海道安置戸安住遺跡の調査とその石器群[J]. 考古学集刊, 1967,3(3):1-44
[23] 加藤晋平, 鹤丸俊明, 水村孝行. 多面体彫器の問題——北海道東部間村·吉村両遺跡から[J]. 考古学ジャーナル, 1971,57:10-22
[24] 鹤丸俊明. 北海道地方の細石刃文化[J]. 駿台史学, 1979,47:23-50
[25] 加藤晋平. 先土器時代の歴史性と地域性[A]．见：古島敏雄,和歌森太郎,木村礎．郷土史研究と考古学[C]. 东京：朝倉書店, 1979,47:23-50
[26] 北海道埋蔵文化財センター. 今金町美利河遺跡[M]. 札幌:総北海札幌支店, 1985
[27] 北海道埋蔵文化財センター. 木古内町新道4遺跡[M]. 札幌:高速印刷センター, 1988
[28] 北海道埋蔵文化財センター. 千歳市柏台1遺跡[M]. 札幌:キサツ株式会社, 1999
[29] 旧石器文化談話会. 旧石器考古学辞典[M]. 東京:学生社, 2000
[30] 寺崎康史. 北海道細石刃石器群理解への一試論[A].先史考古学論集(第8集)[C]. 东京:印刷两国工厂, 1999: 71-88
[31] 寺崎康史. 北海道の地域編年[A].见:安斎正人,佐藤宏之.旧石器時代の地域編年的研究[M]. 东京:同成社, 2006: 275-314
[32] 佐久間光平. 北海道·東北地方の細石刃文化研究[J]. 旧石器考古学, 2009,72:63-77
[33] 佐藤稔. オバルベツ2遺跡(2)[M]. 長万部町埋蔵文化財調査報告第8集, 2002
[34] 白滝村教育委員会. 白滝第4地点遺跡[M]. 札幌:総北海札幌支店, 2002
[35] 日本考古学協会釧路大会実行委員会. シンポジウム海峡と北の考古学資料集Ⅰ[M]. 釧路:斉野印刷, 1999
[36] 吉崎昌一. 白滝遺跡と北海道の無土器文化[J]. 民族学研究, 1961,26(1):13-23
[37] 杉原荘介, 戸沢充則. 北海道白滝服部台における細石刃文化[M]. 東京:伊豆印刷, 1975
[38] 北海道埋蔵文化財センター. 函館市石川1遺跡[M]. 札幌:総北海札幌支店, 1988
[39] 北海道埋蔵文化財センター. 千歳市オルイカ2遺跡[M]. 札幌:三陽印刷株式会社, 2003
[40] 佐久間光平. 旧石器考古学から見た津軽海峡[J]. 旧石器考古学, 2011,75:25-32
[41] 大場利夫, 近堂祐弘, 柳原哲司, 等. 広郷丸山遺跡発掘調査報告[J]. 北見郷土博物館紀要, 1984,15:3-29
[42] 長沼孝, 佐藤剛. 日東遺跡[M]. 札幌:柏楊印刷株式会社, 2000
[43] 三浦孝一, 柴田信一. 大関校庭遺跡[M]. 函馆: 長門出版社印刷部, 1993
[44] 畑宏明, 田原良信. 水口遺跡[A].日本の旧石器文化2遺跡と遺物(上)[M]. 东京:雄山閣, 1975: 42-56
[45] 高倉純. 北海道北見市吉井沢遺跡B地点出土細石刃石器群の再検討——忍路子型細石刃核を組成する石器群の石器製作工程と石器製作作業の復元[J]. 北海道旧石器文化研究, 2000, (5):1-34
[46] Otsuka Y. The background of transitions in microblade industries in Hokkaido, northern Japan[J]. Quaternary International, 2017,442:33-42
[47] 直江康雄. 北海道における旧石器時代から縄文時代草創期に相当する石器群の年代と編年[J]. 旧石器研究, 2014, (10):23-39
[48] 佐藤宏之, 山田哲, 出穂雅実. 晩氷期の人類社会:北方先史狩猟採集民の適応行動と居住形態[M]. 東京:六一書房, 2016
[49] Kobayashi T. Microblade industries in the Japanese Archipelago[J]. Arctic Anthropology, 1970,7(2):38-58
[50] 佐久間光平. 東北地方における北方系細石刃石器群の波及と展開[J]. 宮城考古学, 2006, (8):17-38
[51] 加藤晋平. 北アジアの旧石器文化におけるクサビ形石核について[J]. 歴史人類, 1976, (10):25-55
[52] 加藤晋平. 日本細石器文化の出現[J]. 駿台史学, 1984,60:38-56
[53] 佐藤宏之. 荒川台型细石刃石器群の形成と展开[J]. 考古学研究, 2011,58(3):51-68.
[54] Kato S. Human dispersal and interaction during the spread of microblade industries in East Asia[J]. Quaternary International, 2014,347:105-112
[55] 安志敏. 中国细石器发现一百年[J]. 考古, 2000, (5):45-56
[56] 盖培. 阳原石核的动态类型学研究及其工艺思想分析[J]. 人类学学报, 1984, (3):244-252
[57] Tang C, Gai P. Upper Palaeolithic cultural traditions in North China[J]. Advances in World Archaeology, 1986,5:339-364
[58] Chen C, Wang XQ. Upper Paleolithic microblade industries in North China and their relationships with Northeast Asia and North America[J]. Arctic Anthropology, 1989,26(2):127-156
[59] 杜水生. 华北北部旧石器文化[M]. 北京:商务印书馆, 2007: 1-309
Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉