Acta Anthropologica Sinica >

2019 , Vol. 38 >Issue 02: 166 - 181

DOI: https://doi.org/10.16359/j.cnki.cn11-1963/q.2018.0047

A study of stone artifacts found in the Tianhuadong Paleolithic site, Heqing, Yunnan

  • Qijun RUAN ,
  • Jianhui LIU ,
  • Yue HU ,
  • Bo LI ,
  • Changcheng YANG ,
  • Xingrong LUO
Expand
  • 1. Yunnan Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Kunming 650118
    2. Centre for archaeological science, School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Wollongong, Australia NSW 2522
    3. Dali institute of cultural relics management, Dali 671000
    4. Heqing county institute of cultural relics management, Heqing 671000

Received date: 2017-09-14

  Revised date: 2018-03-20

  Online published: 2020-09-10

Fold

Abstract

The Tianhuadong Paleolithic site is representative of a number of Late Pleistocene sites in the Caifeng River Paleolithic localities, which are located in the middle valley of the Jinshajiang River, Yunnan Province. The materials studied in this paper were found during field surveys and test excavations at Tianhuadong conducted in 2010, 2013 and 2016. Test excavation at the Tianhuadong site is located at the slope area in front of the cave, and five geological layers can be divided throughout the sequence. Among them, layers 2 to 5 belong to the cultural deposits that characterized by red silty clay. Dating results for each cultural layer are in stratigraphically consistent order and are between 95-50 kaBP. In total, 1122 stone artifacts have been found at the site, with basalt being the predominantly exploited raw material. The lithic assemblage at Tianhuadong possesses a diverse cultural appearance, as shown in various flaking technologies and tool types. Some specialized specimens, including prepared cores, elongated flakes, Levallois-like flakes, flakes produced from classic discoidal cores and Quina-like scrapers represent the unusual technological characteristics of the Tianhuadong site, which are similar to some Middle Paleolithic technological elements in the West.

Key words： Tianhuadong site; Caifeng River Paleolithic localities; Middle Paleolithic; Prepared core technology; Quina-like scraper

Cite this article

Qijun RUAN , Jianhui LIU , Yue HU , Bo LI , Changcheng YANG , Xingrong LUO . A study of stone artifacts found in the Tianhuadong Paleolithic site, Heqing, Yunnan[J]. Acta Anthropologica Sinica, 2019 , 38(02) : 166 -181 . DOI: 10.16359/j.cnki.cn11-1963/q.2018.0047

References

[1] Richard GR, Zenobia J, Li B, et al. Optical dating in archaeology: thirty years in retrospect and grand challenges for the future[J]. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2015(56):41-60
[2] Akhilesh K, Pappu S, Rajapara HM, et al. Early Middle Palaeolithic culture in India around 385-172 kareframes Out of Africa models[J]. Nature, 2018(554):97-101
[3] Richter D, Grün R, Joannes-Boyau R, et al. The age of the hominin fossils from Jebel Irhoud, Morocco, and the origins of the Middle Stone Age[J]. Nature, 2017(546):293-296
[4] Adler DS, Wilkinson KN, Blockley S, et al. Early Levallois technology and the Lower to Middle Paleolithic transition in the Southern Caucasus[J]. Science, 2014(345):1609-1613.
[5] 王幼平.石器研究: 旧石器时代考古方法初探[M]. 北京: 北京大学出版社, 2006,78
[6] Van Peer P. The Levallois Reduction Strategy[M]. Madison: Prehistory Press, 1992
[7] Bo?da E. Le débitage disco?de et le débitage Levallois récurrent centripède[J]. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Fran?aise, 1993(90):392-404
[8] Otte M. The nature of Levallois[A]. Dibble HL, Bar-Yosef O(eds). The Definition and Interpretation of Levallois Technology[C]. Madison : Prehistory Press, 1995: 117-143
[9] Toth N. The Stone Technologies of Early Hominids at Koobi Fora, Kenya: An Experimental Approach.Dissertation[D]. For the degree of doctor of philosophy in the University of California, Berkeley, 1982
[10] 卫奇. 石制品观察格式讨论[A].见: 邓涛,王原.第八届中国古脊椎动物学术年会论文集[C].北京:海洋出版社, 2001, 209-218
[11] Faivre JP, Gravina B, Bourguignon L, et al. Late Middle Palaeolithic lithic technocomplexes (MIS 5-3) in the northeastern Aquitaine Basin: Advances and challenges[J]. Quaternary International, 2017(433):116-131
[12] Peter H, Turq A, Faivre J-Ph, et al. Quina procurement and tool production[A]. eds Adams B,Blades B: Lithic Materials and Paleolithic Societies [C]. West Sussex, 2009: 232-246
[13] Faivre J-Ph, Discamps E, Gravina B, et al. The contribution of lithic production systems to the interpretation of Mousterian industrial variability in south-western France: The example of Combe-Grenal (Dordogne, France)[J]. Quaternary International, 2014 ( 350):227-240
[14] 李炎贤, 蔡回阳. 贵州白岩脚洞石器的第二步加工[J].江汉考古, 1986(2):56-64
[15] 云南省文物考古研究所. 探寻历史足迹,保护文化遗产——纪念云南省文物考古研究所成立50年[M]. 昆明: 云南教育出版社, 2009: 22-26
[16] 吉学平. 大河洞穴之魅——富源大河旧石器遗址揭秘[J]. 中国文化遗产, 2008,28(6):78-83
[17] 王志浩, 侯亚梅, 杨泽蒙, 等. 内蒙古鄂尔多斯市乌兰木伦旧石器时代中期遗址[J]. 考古, 2012,579(7):3-13
[18] 贾兰坡, 卫奇. 阳高许家窑旧石器时代文化遗址[J].考古学报, 1976(2):97-114
[19] Li F, Kuhn SL, Chen FY, et al. The easternmost Middle Paleolithic (Mousterian) from Jinsitai Cave, North China[J]. Journal of Human Evolution, 2018(114):76-84
[20] Ji XP, Kuman K, Clarke RJ, et al. The oldest Hoabinhian technocomplex in Asia (43.5 ka) at Xiaodong rockshelter, Yunnan Province, Southwest China[J]. Quaternary International, 2016(400):166-174
[21] 大理白族自治州文物管理所, 云南省文物考古研究所, 剑川县文物管理所. 剑川象鼻洞旧石器遗址研究[M]. 北京: 文物出版社, 2015: 108-115
[22] 高峰, 闵锐, 李秉涛, 等. 怒江首次考古发掘兰坪玉水坪遗址的重要意义[A], 见:张跃等:峡谷中的怒族社会[C].昆明:云南大学出版社, 2012: 387-402
[23] 朱之勇, 吉学平. 云南保山老虎洞旧石器遗址石器研究[J]. 边疆考古研究, 2011,9(4):1-8
[24] 邱中郎, 张银运, 胡绍锦. 昆明呈贡龙潭山第2地点的人化石和旧石器[J].人类学学报, 1985(3):233-242
[25] Klein RG. Out of Africa and evolution of human behavior[J]. Evolutionary Anthropology, 2008(17):267-281
[26] Oppenheimer S. The great arc of dispersal of modern humans: Africa to Australia[J]. Quaternary International, 2009(202):2-13
[27] Bar-Yosef O, Belfer-Cohen A. Following Pleistocene road signs of human dispersals across Eurasia[J]. Quaternary International, 2013(285):30-43
Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉