Early Paleolithic Technology in Eastern and Southern Asia 9781841711690, 9781407352701

Table of contents :
Front Cover
Title Page
Copyright
TABLE OF CONTENTS
List of Figures and Tables
Foreword
Preface
Chapter 1: Introduction
Chapter 2: Lantian
Chapter 3: Liangshan
Chapter 4: Shilongtou
Chapter 5: Guanyindong
Chapter 6: Bose
Chapter 7: Bhimbetka
Chapter 8: Durkadi
Chapter 9: Hunsgi
Chapter 10: Summary, Discussion, and Conclusions
References Cited
Appendix A: Geological Thin Section Analysis of the Lithic Raw Materials
Appendix B: Glossary of Terms Used To Describe Stone Tools
Appendix C: Types of Stone Tools
Appendix D: Computer Coding Sheet
Appendix E: Data Tables
Index

Citation preview

BAR S924 2001  LENG  EARLY PALEOLITHIC TECHNOLOGY IN EASTERN AND SOUTHERN ASIA

Early Paleolithic Technology in Eastern and Southern Asia

Jian Leng

BAR International Series 924 9 781841 711690

B A R

2001

Early Paleolithic Technology in Eastern and Southern Asia

Early Paleolithic Technology in Eastern and Southern Asia

Jian Leng

BAR International Series 924 2001

Published in 2016 by BAR Publishing, Oxford BAR International Series 924 Early Paleolithic Technology in Eastern and Southern Asia © Jian Leng and the Publisher 2001 Volume Editor: John Hedges BSc(Hons), MA, MPhil, FSA, FSAScot, FRAI, MIFA The author's moral rights under the 1988 UK Copyright, Designs and Patents Act are hereby expressly asserted. All rights reserved. No part of this work may be copied, reproduced, stored, sold, distributed, scanned, saved in any form of digital format or transmitted in any form digitally, without the written permission of the Publisher.

ISBN 9781841711690 paperback ISBN 9781407352701 e-format DOI https://doi.org/10.30861/9781841711690 A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library BAR Publishing is the trading name of British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd. British Archaeological Reports was first incorporated in 1974 to publish the BAR Series, International and British. In 1992 Hadrian Books Ltd became part of the BAR group. This volume was originally published by John and Erica Hedges Ltd. in conjunction with British Archaeological Reports (Oxford) Ltd / Hadrian Books Ltd, the Series principal publisher, in 2001. This present volume is published by BAR Publishing, 2016.

BAR

PUBLISHING BAR titles are available from:

E MAIL P HONE F AX

BAR Publishing 122 Banbury Rd, Oxford, OX2 7BP, UK [email protected] +44 (0)1865 310431 +44 (0)1865 316916 www.barpublishing.com

75

90

105

135

CHINA

30

0

500km

0

S00mi

90

105

0

120

Map of China showing site locations: I. Lantian, 2. Liangshan, 3. Shilongtou, 4. Guanyindong, 5. Bose.

INDIA

20

0 0

70

500km

S00mi

90

Map of India showing site locations: 6. Bhimbetka, 7. Durkadi, 8. Hunsgi.

10

Table of Contents Foreword ....................................................................................................................................................................................... vii Preface ........................................................................................................................................................................................ viii Rationale for this Study ........................................................................................................................................................... viii Chronology and Nature of the Fieldwork ................................................................................................................................ viii Results ........................................................................................................................................................................................ xi Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................................................................................... xii Chapter 1: Introduction ................................................................................................................................................................. 1 Development of the Project ....... ... .... ........... ... ............ ... ...... .... .. .... .... .... ........ ... ... ....... ...... .......... .. ....... ...... .... .. ... ....... ........... ... ... 1 Definition of Terms ..... ............... .................... ................................. ........... ........................ ...... ............. ...................................... 4 Chapter 2: Laotian ........................................................................................................................................................................ 7 1. Geological and Archaeological Background ........................................................................................................................... 7 Location ................................................................................................................................................................................. 7 Dating .................................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Hominid Remains ................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Faunal Remains ...................................................................................................................................................................... 7 Stratigraphy ........................................................................................................................................................................... 9 2. Description and Classification ................................................................................................................................................ 9 Previous Work ....................................................................................................................................................................... 9 The Collection .......................................................................... .............................................................................................. 9 3. Analysis and Replication ....................................................................................................................................................... 11 Technology ........................................................................................................................................................................... 11 Selection of Raw Lithic Material ........................................................................................................................................... 11 Reduction Sequence ............................................................................................................................................................. 14 Chapter 3: Liangshan ................................................................................................................................................................. 20 1. Geological and Archaeological Background .......................................................................................................................... 20 Location ................................................................................................................................................................................ 20 Mammalian Fauna ................................................................................................................................................................. 20 Stratigraphy .......................................................................................................................................................................... 20 2. Description and Classification ............................................................................................................................................... 21 Previous Work ...................................................................................................................................................................... 21 The Collection ....................................................................................................................................................................... 22 3. Analysis and Replication ...................................................................................................................................................... 25 Technology ........................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Selection of Raw Lithic Material ........................................................................................................................................... 2fJ Reduction Sequence ............................................................................................................................................................. 2fJ Chapter 4: Shilongtou ................................................................................................................................................................. 40 1. Geological and Archaeological Background ......................................................................................................................... 40 Location ................................................................................................................................................................................ 40 Mammalian Fauna ................................................................................................................................................................. 40 Stratigraphy .......................................................................................................................................................................... 40 2. Description and Classification ............................................................................................................................................... 40 Previous Work ...................................................................................................................................................................... 40 The Collection ....................................................................................................................................................................... 42 3. Analysis and Replication ....................................................................................................................................................... 44 Technology ........................................................................................................................................................................... 44 Selection of Raw Lithic Material ........................................................................................................................................... 44 Reduction Sequence ............................................................................................................................................................. 45 Chapter 5: Guanyindong ............................................................................................................................................................ 49 1. Geological and Archaeological Background .......................................................................................................................... 49 Location ................................................................................................................................................................................ 49 Stratigraphy .......................................................................................................................................................................... 49 Mammalian Fauna ................................................................................................................................................................. :j) Dating ................................................................................................................................................................................... 51 2. Description and Classification ............................................................................................................................................... 51 Previous work ....................................................................................................................................................................... 51 The Collection ....................................................................................................................................................................... 52 3. Analysis and Replication ....................................................................................................................................................... 55 Technology ........................................................................................................................................................................... 55 Selection ofLithic Raw Material ........................................................................................................................................... 55 Reduction Sequence ............................................................................................................................................................. 56 111

Chapter 6· Bose ........................................................................................................................................................................... 1. Geological and Archaeological Background .......................................................................................................................... Location ................................................................................................................................................................................ Stratigraphy .......................................................................................................................................................................... Dating ................................................................................................................................................................................... 2. Description and Classification ............................................................................................................................................... Previous work ....................................................................................................................................................................... The Collection ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3. Analysis and Replication ....................................................................................................................................................... Technology ........................................................................................................................................................................... Selection of Lithic Raw Material ........................................................................................................................................... Reduction Sequence ............................................................................................................................................................. Chapter 7: Bhimlbetka ........ °"° ............................................... " ..................... "' ............. °" ....................... ,.°" .............................. l. Geological and Archaeological Background .......................................................................................................................... Location ................................................................................................................................................................................ Stratigraphy ..........................................................................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................................................................................... 2. Description and Classification ............................................................................................................................................... Previous work ....................................................................................................................................................................... The Collection ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3. Analysis and Replication ....................................................................................................................................................... Technology ........................................................................................................................................................................... Selection ofLithic Raw Material ........................................................................................................................................... Reduction Sequence ............................................................................................................................................................. &• ll)uurlka,l\i' ...... ,,, ......... ' .. ,. 1. Geological and Archaeological Background .......................................................................................................................... Location ................ , ..... , ......................................................................................................................................................... Stratigraphy .......................................................................................................................................................................... Dating ................................................................................................................................................................................... 2. Description and Classification ............................................................................................................................................... Previous work ....................................................................................................................................................................... The Collection ....................................................................................................................................................................... 3. Analysis and Replication ....................................................................................................................................................... Technology ........................................................................................................................................................................... Selection ofLithic Raw Material ........................................................................................................................................... Chapter 9: HlllillSgi.............. 1. Geological and Archaeological Background ........................................................................................................................ Location .............................................................................................................................................................................. Stratigraphy ........................................................................................................................................................................ Dating ................................................................................................................................................................................. 2. Description and Classification ............................................................................................................................................. Previous work ..................................................................................................................................................................... The Collection ..................................................................................................................................................................... 3. Analysis and Replication ..................................................................................................................................................... Technology ......................................................................................................................................................................... Selection ofLithic Raw Material ......................................................................................................................................... Reduction Sequence ........................................................................................................................................................... Chapter 10: Slllmmary, Di§cussio11, and Condusio111§ .............................................................................................................. Chronology ............................................................................................................................................................................. The Location of the Sites ........................................................................................................................................................ The Lithic Industries ............................................................................................................................................................... 1. Classification: .................................................................................................................................................................. 2. Raw Material: ................................................................................................................................................................... 3. Harnmerstones and Replication: ...................................................................................................................................... Conclusion .............................................................................................................................................................................. References Cited ........................................................................................................................................................................ Appendix A: Geoiogkali Thin Section Analysis of the Lithic Raw Materiails ........................................................................... Appendix lB: Glossary of Terms Used To Describe Stone Tools .... ., .......................................................................................... AppendixC: TypesofStoillleTools ........... °" ............................................................................................................................... Appendix D: Computer Coding Sheet ........................................................................................................................................ Appe111dixJE:Data Tables ............................................................................................................................................................ Index ........................................................................................................................................................................................... ,00

m

••

,

..

...............................................

'

..

,

,

........

"

..........

,

•••

m••·.

ooo••·

,..

.....

.. ·• ....

lV

"''

•• ', ...

'"'"

ooo ........................

......

,.,

........

' ...........

ooo ......................

,, ......

, •• ,.,

..............

,. .................................

Omo

.....

,. om

62 62 62 63 64

ro ro 66 68 68 (I)

69 80

"°

80 80 80 82 83 83 83 85 85 85 86 ••

!Ji(])

90 90 90 91 93 93 93 95 95 97 03 103 103 103 105 105 105 106 108 108 108 109 lll6 116 117 118 118 119 125 125 127 13 2 136 138 139 140 150

]_

List of Figures and Tables Figure 1.1: Notching bamboo with a stone tool. ............................................................................................................................ 3 Figure 1.2: Flowchart describing stone tool manufacture .............................................................................................................. 6 Figure 2.1: Map of the region around Lantian (after An 1989:Figure 1)......................................................................................... 8 Figure 2.2: A comparison of the loess-paleosol sequences at Gongwangling and Chenjiawo with the section in Luochuan (after An 1989:Figure 5) ..................................................................................................................................................................... 8 Figure 2.3: The distribution of Gongwangling fauna in the Early and Middle Pleistocene (after Zhou 1965 :Table 1) .................... 8 Figure 2.4: The author perched on a boulder on the Ba River ....................................................................................................... 12 Figure 2.5: Cobbles from the Lantian site ...................................................................................................................................... 12 Figure 2.6: Replication: a boulder (270xl 46xl00 mm) broken in half, from Lantian ........................................................................ 13 Figure 2. 7: Tools from Lantian. a. through f. type C 1. .................................................................................................................. 15 Figure 2.8: Tools from Lantian. a. through b. type Cl; c. type C2; d. type C3 .............................................................................. 16 Figure 2.9: Tools from Lantian. a. through d. type C5; e. and f. type C9 ....................................................................................... 17 Figure 2.10: Tools from Lantian. a. type C13; b. type Fl; c. type F2; d. type F5 ........................................................................... 18 Figure 2.11: Tools from Lantian. a. type Fl4; b. throughe. type Ul; f. type Dl; g. type D2 ......................................................... 19 Figure 3.1: Map of the region around Liangshan (after Huang 1987:Figure 1) . ............................................................................. 21 Figure 3.2: Geological map of the Hanshui River. (after Yan 1980:Figure 2) .................................................................................. 21 Figure 3.3: Replication at Liangshan. The primary trimming flake (right) is larger than the final core tool (left) ........................... 26 Figure 3.4: Tools from Liangshan. a. through g. type Cl. ............................................................................................................. 28 Figure 3.5: Tools from Liangshan. a. through g. type Cl. ............................................................................................................. 'E Figure 3.6: Tools from Liangshan. a. through d. type C2; e. type C5; f. and g. type C7 ................................................................ 30 Figure 3.7: Tools from Liangshan. a. through g. type C9 .............................................................................................................. 31 Figure 3.8: Tools from Liangshan. a. through i. type C9 ............................................................................................................... 32 Figure 3.9: Tools from Liangshan. a. type Cl l; b. through f. type C13 ......................................................................................... 33 Figure 3.10: Tools from Liangshan. a. through e. type Cl3 .......................................................................................................... 34 Figure 3.11: Tools from Liangshan. a. type Cl 3............................................................................................................................ 35 Figure 3.12: Tools from Liangshan. a. through h. type Cl 7 .......................................................................................................... 36 Figure 3.13: Tools from Liangshan. a. and b. type Fl; c. and d. type F2; e. type F5; f. type F7; g. type F8; h. throughj. type F9 .. ································································································································································································ 37 Figure 3.14: Tools from Liangshan. a. through d. type Fl2; e. type Fl3; f. and g. type Fl4; h. type Fl8; i. type F21. .................. 38 Figure 3.15: Tools from Liangshan. a. through i. type Ul; j. and k. type D2 ................................................................................. 39 Figure 4.1: Map of the Shilongtou cave site (after Li 1974:Figure 1)............................................................................................. 41 Figure 4.2: Tools from Shilongtou. a. and b. type Cl; c. type C2; d. type C3; e. and f. type C5; g. type C7 ................................ 46 Figure 4.3: Tools from Shilongtou. a. and b. type C8; c. through e. type C9; f. through i. type Fl. .............................................. 47 Figure 4.4: Tools from Shilongtou. a. type F8; b. type F9; c. and d. type Fl 0; e. type Fl 1; f. through h. type U 1........................ 48 Figure 5.1: Map ofGuanyindong Cave site (after Pei 1965:Figure 1)............................................................................................. :j) Figure 5.2: Plan view of the Guanyindong Cave site (after Pei 1965:Figure 2) ............................................................................... 51 Figure 5.3: Tools from Guanyindong. a. through f. type C8; g. type Cl l; h. type Cl3; i. type Cl5; j. type Cl 7 ............................ 58 Figure 5.4: Tools from Guanyindong. a. and b. type F2; c. through i. typ F3 ............................................................................... 5J Figure 5.5: Tools from Guanyindong. a. type F4; b. type F7; c. type F8; d. through g. type FlO; h. and i. type Fl4; j. type Fl5; k. typeF20 .................................................................................................................................................................................. ro Figure 5.6: Tools from Guanyindong. a. through g. type Ul. ....................................................................................................... 61 Figure 6.1: Geographical location of the Bose site (after Huang 1990:Figure 1)............................................................................ 63 Figure 6.2: The section of Bose site at Shangsong village (after Li 1975:Figure 1)....................................................................... 64 Figure 6.3: The stratigraphy of the Bose site at Posuan village .................................................................................................... 65 Figure 6.4: Collection of cobbles from Nanpo at the Cultural Relics Museum of Bose ................................................................. 70 Figure 6.5: Tools from Bose. a. through d. type Cl; e. and f. type C2; g. and h. type C3 ............................................................. 71 Figure 6.6: Tools from Bose. a. through f. type C5 ....................................................................................................................... 72 Figure 6.7: Tools from Bose. a. through d. type C5 ...................................................................................................................... 73 Figure 6.8: Tools from Bose. a. through d. type C7; e. type ClO ................................................................................................... 74 Figure 6.9: Tools from Bose. a. through c. type Cl 3 ..................................................................................................................... 75 Figure 6.10: Tools from Bose. a. through c. type Cl 3 ................................................................................................................... 76 Figure 6.11: Tools from Bose. a. and b. type C 13; c. type C 16; d. type C 17; e. type F2 ................................................................ 77 Figure 6.12: Tools from Bose. a. type F5; b. type Fl2; c. and d. type Fl 6 ..................................................................................... 78 Figure 6.13: Tools from Bose. a. and b. type Fl6; c. and d. type Ul. ............................................................................................ 79 Figure 7.1: Map of the Bhimbetkaregion (after Misra 1978:Figure 1)............................................................................................ 81 Figure 7.2: Rock-shelterofBhimbetka ........................................................................................................................................... 82 Figure 7 .3: The roof of the Vikram University Museum, with Dr. V. C. Wakankar 's materials ........................................................ 82 Figure 7.4: A large outcropping of sandstone at Bhimbetka ( 15 cm scale) .................................................................................... 86

V

Figure 7.5: Tools from Bhimbetka. a. type Cl; b. through d. type C9; e. and f. type C 13............................................................. 88 Figure 7.6: ToolsfromBhimbetka. a. typeC14; b. type Cl5; c. typeC17; d. typeF3; e. typeF5; f. typeF13; g. typeF16 ........... 89 Figure 8.1: Map of the Durkadi Nala site (after Armand 1983:Figure l) ......................................................................................... 91 Figure 8.2: Transversal profile of the Narmada River Valley across the Durkadi brook showing a terrace-wise stratigraphic sequence of the area, the extension of the pebble artifacts occurrence, and the distribution of the excavated trenches (after Armand 1983:Figure 2) ............................................................................................................................................................ 92 Figure 8.3: Cobbles covering the south bank of the Narmada River. ............................................................................................. CJ°7 Figure 8.4: Tools from Durkadi. a. type Cl; b. type C3; c. type C8; d. through g. type C9 ........................................................... 99 Figure 8.5: Tools from Durkadi. a. type Cl3; b. type Cl4; c. through e. type Cl 7 ....................................................................... 100 Figure 8.6: Tools from Durkadi. a. through c. type Fl; d. type F3; e. and f. type F5; g. type Fl 4 ............................................... 101 Figure 8.7: Tools from Durkadi. a. type f 19; b. through e. type UI ............................................................................................ 102 Figure 9 .1: Map of the Hunsgi-Baichbal valleys showing the distribution of Acheulean sites (after Paddayya 1985 :Figure 1). 104 Figure 9.2: Replication: Flakes and debitage from trimming one limestone slab ......................................................................... 109 Figure 9.3: Replication: type Cl3, ofHunsgi .............................................................................................................................. 110 Figure 9.4: Tools from Hunsgi. a. through c. type C 13............................................................................................................... 11l Figure 9.5: Tools from Hunsgi. a. and b. type Cl3; c. type C 14............................................................................. .,................... 112 Figure 9.6: Tools from Hunsgi. a. and b. type c. f. type C 17.................................................................... ., ........... 113 Figure 9.7: Tools from Hunsgi. a. through e. type F2; f. type F7 ........................................ " .......................... ., .......................... 114 Figure 9.8: Tools from Hunsgi. a. and b. type FlO; c. type Fl 3; d. type U l; e. type D 1. ............................................................. 115 Figure 10. l: Distribution of stone tool types studied, from eight archaeological sites ............................................................... 119 Figure 10.2: Average percentage of cortex remaining on each specimen. for each of the five raw material types ......... ., ............ 120 Figure 10.3: Percentage of specimens with c011exremaining, for each of the five raw material types ......................................... 120 Figure 10.4: Comparison of Core tool and Flake tool sizes for each of the five raw material types ............................................. 120 Figure 10.5: Comparison of the sizes of primary quar1zite raw material and core tools for ~""""•"·u"~"• and Shilongtou. 121 Figure 10.6: of raw mateiial size with that of finished core tools ............................................................................. 122 Table l: Table 2: Table 3: Table 4: Table 5: Table 6: Table 7: Table 8:

Field artifact information from Lantian ........................................................................................................................... Field artifact information from Liangshan ...................................................................................................................... Field artifact info1mation from Shilongtou ..................................................................................................................... Field ar1ifact infmmation from Guanyindong ................................................................................................................. Field ar1ifact information from Bose ............................................................................................................................... Field artifact infom1ation from Bhimbetka ...................................................................................................................... Field ar1ifact information from Durkadi .......................................................................................................................... Field artifact information from Hunsgi ...........................................................................................................................

Vl

140 141 144 145 146 147 148 149

Foreword As a 1950s' graduate student specializing in Old World archaeology within the University of Chicago Anthropology Department, I absorbed the highlights of Asian Paleolithic prehistory provided in the late 1940s by Hallam Movius. We learned that handaxe industries were distributed from Africa and Western Europe to northern India, and that the rest of Asia was characterized by chopper-chopping tools. Even the sociocultural anthropology graduate students knew this basic fact, if only because it was so likely to appear on the MA-level comprehensive exam. So far as I can remember, cultural implications of this division were not remarked upon explicitly in the world prehistory core course, but in any case Movius himself states clearly in print what he takes those implications to be: just as chopper-chopping tools were obviously technologically inferior to handaxes, so also the people who made them were culturally inferior to handaxe makers. When Jian Leng, as a 1980s' graduate student in Anthropology at Washington University, decided to investigate Lower Paleolithic industries in South and East Asia. her dissertation committee required her to take a summer fieldschool class in flintknapping. She signed up for Jeffrey Flenniken's Washington State University course, subsequently spending several weeks in the Sawtooth Wilderness shaping rocks by various fmms of percussion, and learning the techniques of lithic reduction analysis. Hence, when Jian confronted the Paleolithic industries in Chinese and Indian collections, she viewed them from the perspective of someone who could - and did - replicate what she saw from the same raw material used by the original creators of the tools. That alone makes her work unusual, as does her overt intent to provide an empirical reassessment of the "Movius Line'· that for 50 years has baned handaxes from part of South Asia and all of East Asia. Leng went about that reassessment in the most direct way possible. She examined a carefully chosen set of new and/or unpublished sites and collections from a variety of locales in China and India, documenting the original tools via a reduction analytical (chaine operatoire) approach, collecting the local raw material, and replicating several items in each set. This volume presents the results of Jian Leng's study, including her conclusions about the Movius line. I will not preempt those conclusions here. You should read the book, follow the argument, and come to the punchline on your own. I will strongly assert, however, that Earf:v Paleolithic Technology in Eastern and Southern Asia is a remarkable and a very imp011ant piece of work. It should be required reading for all scholars of Old World Paleolithic archaeology.

November, 2000 Patty Jo Watson Edward Mallinckrodt Professor of Anthropology Washington University, St. Louis

vii

Preface Rationale for this Studly The research presented here originates from my dissertation fieldwork carried out between 1988 and 1989 (Leng 1992). I was assessing the suggestion, proposed by Hallam Movius over 40 years ago, that there is a technological boundary separating eastern Asia, on the one hand, from western Asia, Africa, and Europe on the other. Despite the fact that many features of Movius 's model have since proved illusory, his interpretation persists. I was taught this concept when in college 20 years ago at Jilin University, and many of today's textbooks still supp011 versions of it. This is true not only in China, but also in the United States and many other countries. It is my contention that Movius' classificatory scheme provides no objective basis for ranking the tool traditions of eastern Asia and the rest of the world.

tive classification to the archaeological material of Eastern and Southern Asia, one that challenges categories based solely or primarily on typologies devised for Africa and Europe. This perspective necessitated both a new approach to the classification of Early Paleolithic stone tool technology in Eastern and Southern Asia, and reinterpretation of sociobehavioral inferences about the individuals and groups who left these material remains. The usefulness of the new approach to classification and the resulting shift in interpretation was confirmed when I used the local raw material employed by ancient toolmakers to replicate the technologies in question. The major focus of my fieldwork was the tools themselves, so my primary concerns were the stone tool collections and the supporting archival materials in local museums, archaeological laboratories, and storerooms. The availability of complete collections was not always under my control, and I recognize the serious limitation this brings to my study. Unfortunately, many of the limitations placed on my access to the collections were political in nature and would confront any researcher. l did the best I could with the material I was allowed to see, however, and I believe that while some of my individual samples are statistically weak, the sum total of my observa-tions make a compelling argument Complicated statistical tests lie beyond the database of the small proportion of specimens I was able to use for the eight archaeological sites, but the percentages and other simple descriptive data provide an adequate basis for valid inter-site comparisons.

Why the problem posed by the 'Movius line' still stands is a question that cannot be adequately answered within Movius' conceptual framework. It is time to rethink the use of stone tool assemblages as comparative markers between East and West during the Early and Middle Pleistocene. The issue is an epistemological one; the data do not speak for themselves, they obtain their voices from the paradigmatic loading on the basic concepts used to describe the material. Because the way a stone tool assemblage is classified underlies and justifies the way it is explained, the classificatory scheme is the most basic element of potential paradigmatic loading in the conceptual framework chosen to interpret Early Paleolithic material.

Chronology mullNature of the Fieldwork Research began March 1988, at the Institute of Ve11ebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology (IVPP), Academia Sinica, in Beijing, China. Permission to study relevant collections included the qualification that I could not go into the warehouse to pick up the specimens, and that I could work with the collections in the office only if an IVPP member brought the specimens out of the warehouse for me. The IVPP warehouse contains specimens discovered by their own teams, and also material recovered from most of the provinces of China since the 1920s.

The last few decades have seen important advances in both the geographical scope and the quantity of data upon which an understanding of the origins of modern humans depends (Bartstra 1985, 1987). This flow of inf01mation provides the opportunity to take a new look at long-standing questions regarding the evolution of human behavior. Recent re-dating of two Homo erectus sites in Java, Indonesia, for example, has led Swisher et al. (1994) to suggest that Homo erectus left Africa much earlier than expected, certainly before the invention of Acheulean tools, and that this earlier depm1ure and subsequent isolation from other hominid populations explains the general absence of Acheulean handaxes in eastern Asia. These findings breathe new life into the notion that there is a profound difference separating tool-making cultures in eastern Asia from their counterparts in western Asia, and, by inference, that this difference says something about the evolution of cultural capacity, cognition, and behavior of hominid populations in southern and eastern Asia.

All the collections had undergone preliminary research, and articles on most of them had already been published. I selected the study sites - Lantian, Liangshan, Shilongtou, Guanyindong, and Bose by the following criteria: 1. Reliable chronological placement, preferably with fossiliferous Pleistocene deposits to help pinpoint the age of the site. 2. Sufficient size and diversity of assemblages to support their use as representative examples of the locales from which they come. 3. Inclusion of a variety of tool-making traditions (particularly handaxes and choppers or chopping tools), so that patterning in the selection of raw materials, and in the relationship of raw materials to stone tool type, could be investigated.

My reservations stem from the interpretive frameworks used to describe the primary material evidence offered in support of these claims: the stone tool assemblages. The research that enabled me to rethink basic issues of stone tool classification derives from work at eight Paleolithic sites in southern China and northern and central India. The localities examined, whose locations roughly parallel the areas in Movius' original study, include five sites in China, and three in India. I analyzed the evidence in several ways: reduction typology, thin-section analysis of the lithic raw materials, and use oflocal raw materials to replicate the archaeological industries. I offer an altema-

The warehouse specimens that I examined came from Lantian, Vlll

Liangshan, and Shilongtou. The excavated artifacts from Guanyindong, which I also examined, are kept in Li Yanxian's office. He chose a total of 59 specimens for my study, which represented each type included in the original stone tool assemblage. The Bose collections are in three places. Some specimens collected by Qiu Zhonglang and Huang Weiwen of the IVPP are in the Beijing IVPP warehouse and are included in my study. Other groups of these specimens not included here, are under the control of each of the two researchers, and still others are in the local museum. Hence, either a complete or partial stone tool assemblage from each of the five Chinese sites in my study is among the collections of the IVPP. For each of the five sites, I examined the original excavation reports, and I interviewed the excavators. These discussions usually included the geological background of the locality, the stratigraphy of the excavation, dating, the methods and techniques of excavation, and the possible sources of lithics used in each stone tool assemblage. This information was always the first material I used when beginning the study of each site.

ten of them. The Institute appointed archaeologist Hu Lingui to be my assistant in Shaanxi province. I spent 13 days climbing and investigating the Liangshan Mountains, the ancient gravels of the Hanshui River, and in carrying out my replication work. Next I went to the Ba River, the location of the original Lantian Man find. Here I stayed at the Lantian Museum, which is located half way up Gongwangling hill. The ancient Lantian people used quartzite as a raw material. It is easy to find, but the cobbles are rather large, so it is not very convenient to carry around. On October 10, 1988, I flew to Hubei province to work on the Shilongtou site next to the Yangtze River. Li Tianyuan, who excavated there in 1989 and has worked in this area for twenty years, consulted with me at the site. Because I had a difficult time identifying the original raw material (quartzite cobbles) that was taken from an ancient gravel layer next to Daye Lake or the tributaries of the Yangtze River near the Shilongtou site, he suggested we visit a similar environment at a cave site called Jiudaohe adjacent to the Yangtze River. The only difference between the situation of these two cave sites is that there is a small river passing below the entrance of Jiudaohe, and there are quartzite cobbles along the riverbank. The example of Jiudaohe helped me reconstruct the hominid lifeway at Shilongtou. The replication work at Shilongtou site took about 15 days.

It took approximately three months at the IVPP to record each specimen in the study. First, I recorded the length, breadth, thickness, and weight; and made observations on the extent and location of edge damage, the type of raw material, the quality of raw material, the amount of c01tex remaining, and the direction of striking on both core and flake specimens. I then recorded the number of flake scars on each core specimen; the platform thickness, breadth, and angle; the number of scars on the platform, the number of dorsal scars, and the number of ventral scars on flake specimens. I also took photographs and drew pictures of each specimen (drawings at a scale of 1:1). These data documented tool morphology, and also enabled me to classify and define the reductive techniques used in making the tools.

In the middle of November, with the support and collaboration of Huang Weiwen and Yuan Xiaofeng of the IVPP, the Museum of Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region, and the Cultural Relics Museum of Bose, we carried out a small (36 square meter) excavation at Posuan village in the Bose area. The purpose of the excavation was to clarify the relationship between the third and fourth terraces in this area. The composition of the core specimens, small flakes, and chips in the artifact assemblage indicates that the laterite sediments of the strata represent an ancient knapping location. This lateritized layer belongs to the fourth terrace in the excavation area, and there are large silicified limestone cobbles in the ancient You River gravel. The distance from the source of the raw material to the excavation location is about 100 meters. The replication work in Bose took about two weeks, and Huang and Yuan provided a great deal of help.

In June 1988, I visited Guanyindong with Wei Qi of the IVPP and Geoffery Pope of the University of Illinois. They helped me contact the Institute of Mountainous Region Resources (IMRR), Guizhou Academy of Sciences, so I could begin my work. Cao Zetian from the IMRR had worked in cooperation with the staff of the Provincial Museum of Guizhou and the field team of the IVPP in the 1964 test excavation of the Guanyindong site. He is the authority on this site. When we visited the cave, Shen Guanjun from the Chemistry Department of Guizhou University collected some new samples of the stalagmite canopy on the cave wall and the layer of stalagmitic crust. The results of uranium series dates from this new sample are included in the chapter on Guanyindong. Cao agreed to let his assistant, Zhang Pu, help me during my work in Guanyindong. It took about 10 days to find the source of the chert nodules used as raw material by the Guanyindong flintknappers. The source is in Jinyan village, which is some 4,500 meters (by the most direct route) from the cave site. The local people collected 150 kilograms of chert nodules for me, and for another 10 days I carried out replication work on the stone tool assemblages.

In late November, I opened the first Chinese flintknapping field school, which was held at the Neolithic Xiqiaoshan quarry site in Guangdong. The Department of Anthropology of Zhongshan University and Nanhai County Museum supported the field school. The students were from IVPP, Hubei Provincial Museum, Zhongshan University, Guangdong Provincial Museum, Guangdong Provincial Cultural Relics Bureau, and Nanhai County Museum. Every morning I discussed the theoretical basis of experimental archaeology, lithic technology, and flintknapping. In the afternoon, we did flintknapping work. The raw material was quarried from the Xiqiaoshan limestone cave. (Silicified limestone is very easy to work, and later I found this same kind of limestone has been used in the Hunsgi site). The field school lasted eight days. During this time I also thought through my systematic study of the work on the five archaeological sites in China.

I worked at the Lantian site, Shaanxi province, in the beginning of September. Wei Jingwu and Yin Shenpin of the Shaanxi Province Institute of Archaeology, both of who had done research in the Liangshan area helped me. They showed me some 200 artifacts collected during their work, and I recorded

On December 25, 1988, I arrived in Bombay, India. Professor ix

Paddayya of the Archaeological Department of Deccan College was the host for my fieldwork there. As in China, I first spent about two weeks studying in the library and the museum of Deccan College. Talking to the archaeologists, geologists, paleontologists, and geomorphologists in the college gave me valuable information about the Indian Paleolithic culture. Because the Kashmir and Punjab areas (where the Early Soanian artifacts were widely distributed in river gravels) were closed to foreigners at that time, I had to give up part of my original plan. My fieldwork in India finally focused on work with the stone tool assemblages from three Lower Paleolithic sites: Bhimbetka, Durkadi, and Hunsgi. The excavation artifacts from Durkadi and Hunsgi are stored in the college museum, and I recorded sample specimens from these collections.

drinking water, and suffering some dehydration from a bout of diarrhea, I was able to work at this site for only three days. Under these conditions the replication work was very difficult, but I was able to identify the raw material used for the stone tool assemblages and to locate the source of this raw material, ancient river gravel that is about 1,000 meters from the site. The quality of the quartzite around the Narmada River is very similar to the quartzite cobbles from the Ba and Hanshui Rivers in China. I did some replication work, but I did not record any of the resulting tools, because I was hoping that I could go back to the site later when I had the parts to fix my water purifier. In the middle of February, I visited the Hunsgi site. Here I was greeted with the warning that 75 percent of the village people had malaria due to standing water created by the new irrigation system around the village. Despite this ominous beginning, I was fortunate to have Mr. Basappa, a local teacher who had helped lPaddayya in excavations in this area since 1974, to aid my investigation of the Hunsgi valley. Basappa knew the location of all the archaeological sites and the source of the limestone used as raw material by the ancient Hunsgi !mappers. I was also lucky here because the local people had gathered many limestone blocks from the limestone plateau and brought them to the valley for use as material to make walls. I did not have to quarry raw material rather I used the ready-made limestone blocks to finish my replication work within five

In the middle of January 1989, I joined the excavation at Sanmapur

village. Samnapur is roughly twenty miles from the Narsenghpur train station. V. N. Misra, the chainnan of the Archaeology Department of Deccan College, carried out the dig. Samnapur is about one mile n011hof the NannadaRiver, on an open spot surrounded by many hills. The excavation was on a horizontal plane and covered an area of 1Ox10 square meters. The stone artifacts densely covered the trench floor in the cultural layer, which was about one meter thick. There were basicores. flakes, and the tools are trimmed ~······~~·-·".1 or bifacially on one or two edges. Misra thinks the site is later than the Acheulean layer, because he saw some old terraces that contain handaxes in the lower level, with the kinds of stone tools he found in Samnapur on top. I was in the excavation site at Samnapur for one week. The archaeological students in the excavation slowly and methodically went through every small piece of soil by hand, so they would not miss any chips in the deposits (no screens were used).

In the beginning of February, Professor Bridget All chin of Cam-

bridge University visited Deccan College and gave a talk entitled "Potwar Paleolithic: an Overview of the Work of the British Archaeological Mission to Pakistan". This was a very important topic for me. The Potwar Plateau lies at the foot of the Siwalik Hills in Pakistan. The hills are composed of sedimentary deposits, which were laid down in a deep basin by Himalayan rivers during Early Miocene to Middle Pleistocene times. The deposits were faulted and folded on several occasions and have been cut through by rivers originating in the Himalayas as well as by small local streams. In the 1939 investigation, de Terra and Paterson set f011h a sequence of four glacial and three interglacial periods based on the Upper Siwalik sediments and the terraces formed on them by erosional and aggregational agencies. Ms. Allchin said that the recent results of the British Archaeological Mission in Pakistan have shown de Terra and Paterson's geological and climatic progression and archaeological sequence to be considerably too simple. The mission has not found evidence of the existence of independent Acheulean and Soanian technological traditions. Instead, they located extensive lithic workshops on Lei and Siwalik conglomerates covered by loess. The archaeological component of these sites consists of choppers, flakes, blades, cores, and occasional handaxes, most of which were in mint condition. The most imp011ant and controversial recent finding in the area, a pebble tool covered by volcanic ash, might move the date from 700,000-400,000 years BP to one million years ago. Had I been able to visit the British Archaeological Mission in Pakistan, I could have learned a good deal about the features of the ancient river terraces, and about geological sedimentary deposits in the area. Unf011unately, despite trying and waiting in New Delhi for seven days, I was unable to obtain a visa to visit Pakistan.

After the week at Samnapur, I traveled to the cave of Bhimbetka, the first of my study site. I went via Bhopal (locale of the Union Carbide disaster), and obtained permission to work at Bhimbetka from the Central Circle of the Archaeological Survey of India. The State Archaeology Museum delegated an archaeologist to lead me to the cave the first day in order to introduce us to the guard. The closest housing was in Bhopal; from there it was a two-hour bus ride and a thirty-minute walk to the site. My replication work was done on the hill close to the site and took seven days. After the work at Bhimbetka, I left for Vikram University, in Ujjain, to see the artifacts excavated by Wakankar in 1972 and stored in the University's museum. The director of the museum, D.S. Solanki, took me to study the excavation artifacts. All Wakankar's collections were laid out on the roof of the museum, exposed to the light of day and the forces of the weather. I was permitted to document only ten of the artifacts, although I was able to see and casually examine the entire collection on the roof. The visit proved one thing that is very important, namely that the tools were made of river cobbles from the lower layer of the Lower Paleolithic period deposits. Mixed with these tools made from river cobbles were some artifacts made of sandstone. Solanki told me that he intended to complete the work that Wakankar did not finish. The second site I studied in India was Durkadi Nala. I began work there at the beginning of February. Because I was out of X

Instead, I visited Kathmandu valley in Nepal. Nepal had been an enigma for me when I worked in Tibet. Ghosh (1971), Joshi ( 1966), Banerjee ( 1969), and Sharma ( 1983) have caJTiedout archaeological work around the Himalayan foothills since 1960. The first evidence for the presence of Ramapithecus along the Tinau Khola, in the Nepalese Siwaliks, comes from this region. In 1984-85, Gudrun Corvinus found some artifacts at the foot of the mountains in the Dang and Deokhuri Dunes (Corvinus 1985). In his original report, one can see that the stone tools are made of well-chosen quartzite cobbles, which retain a natural cortex. There are cores, flakes, and a handaxe-like tool. From these discoveries it is inferred that prehistoric people penetrated these Himalayan valleys via the heavily forested Siwalik Mountains. In order to obtain a quick overview of the foothills, I took a twoday mountain bike trip to Nagakot, a small mountain village overlooking the Himalayan range. I then trekked along the Indrawti River for three days to the Buriang Bhanjyang Mountains where there is a glacial valley. The Himalayan Mountains are beyond these foothills.

a split river cobble, a bipolar-flaked cobble, and a small chert flake (Pope's descriptions). One bone (the only one in the excavation report) appears to have been "chopped" or "sawed" in order to produce a flat smface. The evidence indicates to Pope that the Kap Pah Nam rockshelter can be dated to the preHoabinhian period (K-Ar ages of the Hoabinhian industry are 0.8 and 0.6 million years). There are quartzite cobbles in the forest around the cave site. These cobbles have been changed by long exposure to the weather. They have varying colors and shapes, and most of them can only be called blanks. I was very surprised to find that there is bamboo in the forest here, also. Charles Shannon, who was working with me here, did some experiments by using different sizes and angles of stone flakes to cut the local bamboo. This work is quite difficult, and the time to cut down a bamboo stalk is almost equal to the time required to manufacture a flake tool. We were there during the dry season, so it is possible that the bamboo was harder to work than it would be during the monsoon.

I returned to India in the middle of March, and gave a presentation of my thesis and a report on my field experiments to the faculty and students at Deccan College. They were very surprised to see the replication work that I had done in Bhimbetka and Hunsgi, and found it difficult to believe how similar my tools was to the original artifacts. I had hoped to do a little more work in India, such as revisit the Durkadi Nala site, but was unable to obtain an extension of my visa, not even for two weeks.

I took a trip to the famous "Golden Triangle", which is formed by the borders of Thailand, Burma, and Laos. The Mekong River (whose source is on the Qinghai Plateau within China, where it is called the Lancang River) separates these three countries. The Neolithic site of Kamo in Qamdo, Tibet, is on the west bank of the Lancang River. I worked on this site for several months in 1978 and 1979, which is the main reason I wanted to see the Mekong River. When the bus passed the Chiang Mai Basin, I could see red lateritic deposits just like those at Bose Basin. I also visited the Lahu, Akha, and Mae Salong hilltribes, most of whom probably came from China one or two generations ago. There was Chinese writing on the walls inside their houses, although not many people are able to speak Chinese anymore. In early May, I returned to China.

I left India at the end of March, and flew to Thailand. The background to this visit began with the discovery (by a Dutch archaeologist named van Heekeren) of the earliest Lower Paleolithic tools yet known in Thailand. Van Heekeren found the tools during the building of the railway line from Kanchanaburi, Thailand, to Burma in World War II. Movius identified these implements as stone tools made by Pithecanthropus or Homo erectus of Java and China; Thailand was considered a migratory route leading to those countries. Since Movius's pronouncement, more than 3,000 Paleolithic tools have been found in Thailand. Thai archaeologists have suggested that Thailand was not only a migratory route, but also that it served as a living area for groups of hominids. In 1979-80, a joint ThaiAmerican Expedition excavated a site at Kao Pah Nam, in Lampang province ofnorthern Thailand (Pope 1981). Preliminary results indicate that the Kao Pah Nam fauna is probably of at least Middle Pleistocene age. This location may be the oldest hominid site in mainland Southeast Asia. Geoffery Pope had provided me with an introduction to his Thai colleagues, Vadhana Subhavan and Somsak Prankij, at the Museum of Prehistory, Mahidol University, Siriraj Hospital. Ms. Subhavan and Mr. Prankij, who is a very skilled flintknapper, kindly accompanied me to the Kao Pah Nam site. The area is highly dissected and weathered limestone karst, which outcrops about 0.1 km from the Mae Nam Wang River. Fossils occur in a range of sedimentological contexts resulting from the accumulation of bones in what is interpreted as a paleo-cave or paleorockshelter. Somsak told me that the fossils are in limestone breccia and in an overlying and sometimes underlying soil zone. Fossils, angular limestone chunks, and fragments of quartz pebbles were poorly sorted in a fine-grained matrix held together by calcite cement. There were three non-limestone rocks:

Results The results of these investigations contradict not only the traditional interpretation first set forth by Movius in 1948, but also appear to contradict the interpretation of technological evidence used to support recent revisions of Movius' paradigm (Chapter 10). In addition, by providing first hand information about eight Asian Early Paleolithic assemblages (Chapters 2-9), including detailed information on geographic location and the hominid and faunal remains for each site, this study should serve as a source of data for future researchers. The structure of the book is comparatively straightforward. For each site, information on the initial discovery is included in the section called "Geological and Archaeological Background." Detailed information on the stone tool assemblages themselves is in the ·'Description and Classification" section, the beginning of which concerns "Previous Work'. and provides background on the original excavator's or other researchers' work, as well as other opinions about the site. The second section, "The Collection", discusses the categories of the stone tool specimens and so11sthem into my own classification. The last part, "Analysis and Replication", reports the results of lithic analysis that defines the major dimensions of the range of variability within an assemblage. These matters are further discussed under "Technology". The section on "Selection of Raw Xl

Chapter 1: fotrnductnmll Development of the Project Stone tools are one of the most important primary sources of cultural and behavioral information available for the anthropological study of our Early Pleistocene ancestors. Stone tools first appear in the Lower Paleolithic about 2.4 million years ago in East Africa, and it seems very likely that the development of stone technologies played an important role in the success of the genus Homo over the last 2 million years (Toth 1985). While there are limits to the range and depth of information that can be gleaned from the investigation of early stone ai1ifact assemblages, such information is so crucial to our understanding of early hominid origins that we must draw out every clue these lithic assemblages may yield. Detailed analysis and interpretation of these archaeological assemblages is especially important when patterns of significant diversity and variability require explanation. Such is the case with the lithic assemblages from the East and Southeast Asian Paleolithic (see J. S. Aigner 1978, 1981 and K. C. Chang 1967, 1977, 1995 for authoritative summaries of East Asian Pleistocene prehistory).

Studies of Early Paleolithic technology, including analyses of ai1ifact raw material, have been carried out by Andrefsky ( l 993), Binford (1966, 1972), Bordes (1970), Jo D. Clark(1977, 1994), Davis (1983), Ghosh (1973), Hanison (1978), Hay (1968),Jelinek (1976), Jones (1979, Kuhn (1989, 1994), M. D. Leakey (1971), Schick (1993), Stiles (1974, 1979, 1980, 1991), Watanabe (1985), and Yi ( 1983)on artifacts from Olduvai Gorge, Tanzaniao Toth has strongly emphasized the importance of the raw material when interpreting the technology and other characteristics of lithic materials found at Paleolithic sites (Toth 1985). The late Glynn Isaac published a number of relevant and very important ai1icles based in his major projects at Olorgesailie, East Turkana, and Peninj, west of Lake N atron in East Afoca ( 1971, 1972, 1976, 1977, 1984, 1986). Following Binford's (1968) emphasis on the relationship between stone tools and adaptation, Isaac insisted that differences in the use of raw materials in artifact manufacture would have to be discovered and explained before any reliable conclusions concerning the cultural tradition or technological expertise of the producers could be reached. Concern with the varying characteristics of different raw materials has been primarily focused upon Africa and Europe; it has not previously influenced appraisals of the cultural traditions found in East and Southeast Asia. In my work, I apply the raw material and technology approach to Early Paleolithic collections from East and Southeast Asia. By investigating the variability of tool assemblages from the Asian Middle Pleistocene, I hope to provide a basis for inferences about human technology during the Middle Pleistocene as well as the means to make meaningful compai·isons between early Asian stone tool technology and technological traditions found in other parts of the world. The archaeological record of the Lower Paleolithic in Southern and Eastern Asian has given rise to a number of interpretations, many of them seriously flawed. The first major characterization of the area came in 1948 when Hallam L. Movius stated: "The archaeological, or paleo-ethnological, material very definitely indicates that as eai·ly as Lower Paleolithic times Southern and Eastern Asia as a whole was a region of cultural retardation" (Movius 1948:411 ). Although subsequent research in-

dicated that this interpretation was based on inadequate evidence, the methodological orientation derived from it, one in which all Pleistocene material culture was analyzed in relation to a classificatory scheme developed principally for the Paleolithic of Western Europe, continued to influence the Western perception of East Asian lithic industries for many yeai·s (Olsen 1987). Because most East Asian lithic industries do not confo1m well to the typological categories fommlated for European archaeological assemblages, the Asian industries were seen not merely as dissimilar to European and African assemblages but, also as technologically inferior and, hence, culturally retarded. The unrepresentative nature of the eai·ly collections was compounding the problem. The Pleistocene collections made by de Chardin, Breuii, Licent, and others in the l 920's and l 930's ai·e dominated by finished implements and clearly lack nuclei, utilized flakes, and debitage. One reason that these collections do not represent the full typological range of implements originally existing at their localities was the common praCfice of paying the local laborers for retrieving only "typical'' specimens. There was no reward for broken or "atypical'' specimens (Anderson 1973 ). Another reason is that little consideration was given at the time to the natural agencies at work in site formation. The past 30 years have seen a large number of important Paleolithic investigations in both China and India. Although not all of this material has been translated into English and not all of the collections made accessible to Western scholars, enough is known to alter the earlier views and sweeping socio behavioral interpretations that previously dominated the perception of the Asian Paleolithic. The first point this study addresses is the notion that there are two mutually exclusive cultural lithic traditions in Southeast Asia. In the l 930's, the Joint American Southwest Asiatic Expedition for Early Man conducted a five-month field program in the Irrawaddy Valley of Upper Burma (Movius 1948). Burma was selected because of its central geographical position with respect to the four regions in China where P. Teilhard de Chai·din had worked. In addition, Hellmut de Terra had can·ied out research in Northwest India and Burma, and G. H. R. Von Koenigswald had worked in Java. In the l 940's, Movius sought. "'...to provide a basic framework into which to fit the prehistoric archaeological material" (Movius 1948:411) from Punjab Province (northwestern India), the Irrawaddy Valley (Upper Bumm), Zhoukoudian (northern China), and Patjitan in southern Java. Movius' interpretation of these results in Early Man and Pleistocene Stratigraphy in Southern and Eastern Asia (Movius 1944) led to the recognition of a distinctive Paleolithic cultural development in southern and eastern Asia thought to have begun during Middle Pleistocene times. Movius found variants of a Lower Paleolithic chopper-chopping tool complex in Java (the Paljitanian), Burma (the Anyathian), the Punjab (now Pakistan, the early Soanian), N011h China (the Zhoukoudianian), and possibly in the Malay Peninsula (the Tampanian). By contrast, Movius notes, handaxes

'Tj

cio" C:

@

!':' 'Tj

0

TYPESOF STONETOOLS

SltAPECIOOL?--------------YES-----------FLAKErOOL?·----------------------------------------------------------------------------------·

''

.,"'

NO

;:\

I

0

::r

''

YES

I

INFORMALTOOL?·--· --YES-··

- • -FLAKE?

I

UNI FACIAL EDGE?--- - -- • • •••• •• • --- • • •• • - ••• - - • - - -- - --- - - - • • --- • --- • • • • ·········YES

I

I

I

I

~ 0

er

DEBITAGE?··YES··FLAKE?··NO··CORE··NO-·DTHER

::\.

5·

I

I

I

=

!

I

DEBITAGE

FLAKE(D1)

COTE(D2)

FLAKE w---------YES-----SINGLE BIFACJAL EDGE

I

YES

I

DEBlTAGE

FLAKEW·······YES-·········--·-SINGLE UNIFACIALEDGE LATERAL·-----·•YES

I

NO

w

I

OTHER(F25)

I I

e

YES--------·--·-·----·DISTAL

I

,li!i!»

3 .,

= it' 0 2

J

YES----···········-·PROXIMAL

f'\

fl

~

9

~

I

I

I

I

:

&

~

NO

l I I I

YES-------------------ALL

I I I

EDGES

l I

FLAKE WALL @ ® BIFACIAL EDGES(F21)

NO

NO

I

OTHER(F22)

FLAKE IJ BIFACIAL DISTAL END PERPENDICULAR TO DOUBLE LATERAL @ EDGES(F14)

frTI W

:

··•-·

• --- - • ·-· • ·- • • • ·-· • -· • • -- -- - • - ··NO···········

A'

I

SHAPEDDISTAL END(F16)

AS!.

ENOS(F17)

- •••• -· • • • •• • • ••• • • • - • ••• •• - -- •• • -- ···OTHER

YES

I -· - ·- ·- • - • • ·- - - •• • •••••

•• -- • ·YES

''

'I'

COREW SINGLE·····YES·-·SINGLE EOGE?···YES UNIFACIAL EDGE? : : NO COREw SINGLE UNJFACIAL BIFACIAL··-YES··-·SlNGLE EOGE?-······YES I EDGE(C1) EDGE? I I I ,~ DOUBLE EDGES?···YES··EDGES Cc»IPLETELY-·YES : CORE W NO COREW BIFACIAL EDGE(C9) . . f STRAIGHTENED? j NO BIFACIAL EDGE NO CORE w I DOOBLE EDGE?-··YES···EDGES Cc»IPLETELY······YES f DOOBLEUNI FACIAL OTHER(C17) STRAIGHTENED? ALLEDGES?··YES NO EDGESCC2)

I

NO

I

I

j0

Jro

ALL EDGES?···-·YES COR! W Al~NE

/PA(d\ 'Qrl.J\)I

®lP

l

I

Bl FACIAL EDGESCC15)

l

I ~~O O~~~N~~:;~R-··YiS I NO

COREW ONE BIFACJAL ENO PERPENDICULARTO BOTH EDGES(C11)

0

e:f\

ONEEND POINTED?-·-····YES

'

12.'.) COREW ONE BIFACIAL POINT(C12)

li:J fit :j: I

ONE ENO lEAF-SHAPED····-·YES

I

NO

I

11\~ tt'@

I

TO DCXJBr EDGE~~REW ON~ UNlFAC(Al @

EDGES(C7)

f NO

ONE1END·-····--·-·YES PERPENDICULAR

coR~N~F~~:te~®coRE ALL EDGES(C10) UNIFAClAL

NO END PERPENDICULARTO~ I BOTH EDGES(C3} ONE END POINTED?·---····YES f l

lJ

NO CORE W ONE I UNIFACIAL POINT(C4) ''~};_:-:--~ ONE END LEAF SHAPED?·····YES : .

I

I

,~

I .... NO CORE w ONE UNI FACIAL :-. C COREU ONE BIFACIAL LEA.F-,APED ENO(C13) f LEAF·SHAPED END(C5) .,;-;. -.; ~ TW ENDS LEAF·SHAPED?·····YES

TWO ENDS LEAF·SHAPED?····YES

I

NO

j OTHER(C16)

I

~'

@.®

COREW TWOBIFACIAL LEAF SHAPEDENDSCC14) ; . . :_.

I

NO

l

OTHER(C8)

I

t

CORE WITH T\,/Q __ :_ UNIFACIAL LEAF·SHAPED ·j· ENDS(C6)

\iJy

/°:'\

PROXIMAL END(FB>1::t;7

PROXIMAL END-······FLAKE W UNI FACIAL I DISTAL AND PROXIMAL ENDS(F9l NO

f?'I

l

l

\::.n)

NO

I

OTHER(F11)

l

FLAKE W ALL UNI FACIAL EDGES(F10)

~

"A

D!STA{ AND

PROXIMAL & DISTAL····-YES ~ \$£1 END LEAFSHAPED f I FLAKE w NO BlFACIAl LEAF·SHAPEDO® PROXIMAL & DISTAL

I

FLAKE U UNIFACIAL

I t

NO FLAKE W BIFACJAL I DISTAL POINT(F15)€:J}® DISTAL END LEAF SHAPED····----YES

I

NO

NO

j

1

l I

FLAKE W BIFACIAL DISTAL

V\11

I

l

PROXIMAL END·-·········YES

DISTAL END POINTED···YES

PROXIMAL END

'cn:J & PROXIMAL ENDS (F20)

0\

NO

NO

YES··············-·····DlSTAL

I I

EOGES(F13)A\,{l

I

:

FLAKE W BIFACIAL PROXIMAL ENO(F19)

LATERALBJFACIAL

I

LONGIAXIS END

/

~

j

DISTAL END CHIPPED PERPENDICULARTO····YES

NO

DISTAL ENDCF18>

C:

ENO

l

FLAKE W 81FACIAL

DISTAL END------------YES

Ca-tPLETELY I STRAIGHTENED FLAKE U DOUBLE

NO

2..

w

OOUBLELATERAL---YES---LATERALS·--------YES

" 0

I

FLAKE'ol SINGLE LATERAL _ : UNIFACJAL EDGE(F1) "' DOUBLE LATERAL---------ves---------·············LATERALS·----·----·-----YES l Cc>1PLETELYSTRAIGHTENED I NO I FLAKE DCXJBLE j NO LATERAL UNIFACIAL

FLAKE SINGLE ~ LATERAL BIFACIAl EDGE(F12)

NO

I

f)

LATERAL·······YES

I NO

® ~

I

I

I

YES

"' 0

I

NO UNMODIFIEDFLAKE(U1) I BIFACIAL EOGE?··YES

ND

(JO

I

I

YES

f

I

I

NO

@

Chapter 2: Lantian. In 1963, a lower jaw of Homo erectus was found at Chenjiawo in the n011hwestem pat1 of Lantian county, Shaanxi Province (Figure 2.1 ). From 1963 to 1966, excavations at Gongwangling in the san1e county totalled 1,954 square meters. Within this three year excavation period, the 27 localities of the Middle Pleistocene horizon in the Lantian area yielded about 200 stone artifacts made of vein-quai1z and quai1zite cobbles (Dai 1964, 1966). In the Summer of 1964, the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology & Paleoanthropology (IVPP) and the Institute of Archaeology of Shaanxi Province unearthed a fossil human cranium during a comprehensive survey of the Cenozoic at Gongwangling. The fossil was named Homo erectus lantianensis, popularly called "Lantian Man". The mammalian fossils found together with the human remains, are called the "Gongwangling Fauna" (Jia 1966).

suggesting that the Gongwangling and Chenjiawo localities belong to the Middle Pleistocene period.

HominidRemains The morphological features of the fossil from Gongwangling indicate a more primitive Homo erectus form than Peking Man (Wu 1966). The cranium of lantianensis is characterized by a much wider frontal tuberosity than that of Homo erectus. Lantianensis also has a large zygomatic right arch, and large brow ridges; the constriction behind the brow ridges is less marked than in Australopithecus africanus, and there is a remarkable frontal crest. The skull's forehead was much lower and more sloping than those of living humans. The cranial capacity ofLantian Man is about 775- 783cc, larger than almost all australopithecine skulls (400-550cc), but similartoPithecanthropus robustus (77 5-900cc) and smaller than Peking Man (8501300cc ). The Lantian specimen has a very thick skull (16 mm) compared to Peking Man (7.0-9.9 mm). The maxilla ofLantian man forms a uniform arch shape, the premolai·s and molars are not very large in comparison with the front teeth, which distinguishes the Lantian specimen from Australopitheus africanus. The morphological features of the lower jaw of the specimen found at Chenjiawo are very similar to Peking Man, but there are some differences. It is very difficult to compare this mandible with the specimen from Gongwangling, because the latter lacks a mandible. Wu Rukang thinks that the features of the upper and lower jaws, and the size of the teeth indicate that the two are similai·, so he describes the specimen found at Chenjiawo as Sinanthropus lantianensis (Wu 1965).

1. Geological and Archaeological Background Location Lantian county is in the southeastern part of Guanzhong Plain, and is bordered to the south and southeast by the Qinling Mountains. The Wei River is to the north and the Chan River to the west. Gongwangling is 17 km southeast of the Lantian county seat, 66 km southeast of Xian city. It is 34.18 degrees north latitude, 109.2 degrees east longitude. Chenjiawo is on the north side of Ba River (the Lantian Man locality is on the south side of this river), 20 km away.

Dating The magnetostratigraphic age of the loess profile in the Lantian human fossil beds has been published several times. The first was about 0. 75-0.80 million years old for the Gongwangling locality, 0.65 million years old forthe Chenjiawo locality (Ma 1978); the second was about 1 million yeai·s old for Gongwangling and 0.5 million years old for Chenjiawo (Cheng 1978). The most recent report states that "the cranium found in the fossil-bearing strata at Gongwangling is about 1.15 million years old whereas the remains found at the Chenjiawo locality in Middle Pleistocene loess are about 0.65 million years old" (An 1989:213). According to the authors of this most recent report, the newest dating is based on paleomagnetic polarity determinations and on the lithostratigraphic position of the fossils in the loesspaleosol sequence. The Lantian human fossil and associated faunas are located in the 9th layer of the loess sequence, which con-esponds to the middle part of the silty loess L 15 at Luochuan that was dated from 1.09 to 1.20 million years ago.

Faunal Remains The Gongwangling Faunal assemblages contain 25 species:

Leptobos, Ursus thibetanus kokeni Matthew et Granger, Rhinoceros, Hyaena sinensis Owen, Rusa, Canis variabilis Pei, Nyctereutes sinensis (Schlosser), Mustefa, Meles, Megantereon, Acinonyx, Equus sanmeniensis Teilhard et Piveteau, Sus lydekkeri Zdansky, Gazella, Macacus robustus Young, Panthera pardus Linne, Fe/is cf. youngi Pei, Pseudaxis grayi Zdansky, Sinomegaceros, Ailuropoda melanoleuca Milne-Edwards, Stegodon cf. orientalis Owen, Tapirus sinensis Owen, Nestoritherium cf. sinense Owen, Elaphodus cephalophus Milne-Edwards, and Hystrix cf. subcristata Swinhoe (Zhou 1965, Figure 2.3). These comprise Camivora (11), Perissodactyla (4), Artiodactyla (7), Primates (1), Rodentia (1), and Proboscidea (1). The Gongwangling Faunal assemblage is similai· to the fauna from the south of China and the south part of Asia during the Middle Pleistocene, but the Gongwangling Fauna comes from the northerly portion of the Qinling Mountains. These mountains are regarded by most geographers today as the line of demarcation between the north and south of China. Previously it was believed that the species of Ailuropoda, Acinonyx, Stegodon, Tapirus, Nestoritherium, Elaphodus, andRusa were extinct in the north part of Asia after the Middle Pleistocene, but these species are prominent in the Pleistocene fauna of south China (typically in the locality of Yanjinggou, Wan county, Sichuan province), and in southern Asia. The question is why the Gongwangling Fauna in north China is similar to the South China Fauna. There are two reasons: first is the geographical position of Gongwangling, which is farther south than are the other Early Paleolithic sites in China.

Another study of chronological con-elation of early human fossil horizons with the loess deep sea records demonstrated that the climatic curve drawn from the loess-paleosol series of the loess profile running from late Matuyama subchron to the present at Luochuan, Shaanxi province, could be con-elated with the oxygen isotope records of core V28-238. The Gongwangling Lantian Man fossil bed is in the 9th layer of the loess sequence (cycle IX), con-esponding to termination X of the deep-sea records and to stage 20-21 of O 18 isotope stages: 0.73-0.80 million years. The Chenjiawo Man fossil bed is located in the 6th paleosol of the loess sequence (cycle VI), having an age of 0.50-0.59 million years (Liu 1984b, Figure 2.2). Because the dates for the human fossils in the Lantian area have been getting earlier and earlier, there is little problem in 7

10'

109°00'

109°30'

20'

34°

15'

Chenjiawo

Lw/ MapLo~'."(_R 34° 05'

10km

0

CHI~

10'

109°00'

109°30'

20'

Figure 2.1: Map of the region around Lantian (after An 1989:Figure l).

The average temperature in January is six degrees higher than that in Beijing today. Gongwangling is located on the south edge of the delta basin of the Fen and Wei Rivers. In the first interglacial stage, the Qinling Mountains and the Li Mountains were not as high as they are presently, so that some tropical

LUOCHUAN

and semi-tropical animals could have crossed over to the area south of Shaanxi (Liu 1984). The second reason has to do with the ecological zones inhabited by animals and the geological nature of the area. Lower

GONGWANGLING

CHENJIAWO

Zhokoudlan 5 Gongwangling (Localides 1, 13)

:,,iihewm ~

Mammalian genera/species

MiddlePleistocene

Pleistocene

Panjinggf)u6 Wanxian, Slchuan

.............. ..

Leptobos thiberanuskokeniMatthewet Granger

14~1----1------+----+-------fUrsus

----1-----i-----,.------1Rhinoceros

20

1-----1----+------1------1Hyaena 1-----1-----t···

sinensis Owen

..··................... t------1Rusa Canis variabi/is Pei

40

Nyctereutessinensis [Schlosser) Mustela Me/es Megantereon Acinonyx

/

/ / /

/

/

/

/

/

/

EquussanmeniensisTeilhardet Piveteau

/

/ /

/

/

/

Sus lydekkeriZdansky

/

/

/

/

/

/

Gazella Macacus robustus Young

/ / /

/ /

Panthera pardus Linne

Fe/is cf. youngi Pei Pseudaxis grQYiZdansky

100

llllraleosol

D

v;:::;isandy

e.:::ogravel

-

loess

D

Sinomegaceros

silty loeSs

red

calcareous

clay

nodule

--+-----!Ailuropoda

melanoleuca Milne-Edwards

-----·······

..··················l-------1Stegadon cf. orientalis Owen 14 ~1----~··························+------1 Tapirussinensis Owen 1

~ LantianHmno erectus

14-----t

..·····..··..·············+----~

14-----t

..·············..···......+------1Efaphodus

14-----tf----+------t

Figure 2.2: A comparison of the loess-paleosol sequences at Gongwangling and Chenjiawo with the section in Luochuan (after An 1989:Figure 5).

Nestoritheriumcf. sinense Owen

cephalophus Milne-Edwards

Hystrix cf. subcristata Swinhoe

Figure 2.3: The distribution of Gongwangling fauna in the Early and Middle Pleistocene (after Zhou 1965:Table I).

8

Gongwangling was in the region of semi-tropical forest that bordered the forest grasslands of north China in the Pleistocene. Therefore, the environment was suitable for semi-tropical animals, and the Gongwangling Fauna shows southern Ai luropoda-Stegodon characteristic of wmm climates. Among the fossil mammals of the Lantian Man locality, 42 percent firs1 appeared in the Middle Pleistocene and 37 percent represent modern species. Leptobos, which is usually found in the Lower Pleistocene period and occurs only once or twice in western Europe and south Asia as early as the Middle Pleistocene, is also found in the Gongwangling Fauna. It is, therefore, likely that the age of the Gongwangling Fauna is early Middle Pleistocene. Seventy percent of the Gongwangling Fauna species were found in Location 1 and Location 13 of Zhoukoudian, and 4 species became extinct before th1etime of Peking Man. Thus the Gongw,rngling Fauna is earlier tha11ibc fauna found in the Peking Man locality; but it is about the same age as the Djetis ,'-~'IJ..~ ,,#' /"\ R"-

4?'-

~~ --{~~

26°

/

~

0

100km 107°

106°

Figure 5.1: Map of Guanyindong Cave site (after Pei 1965:Figure I).

MammalianFauna

9. Archaeologically and paleontologically layer of sterile, intermixed rough sand, pebbles, and clay, 450 cm- ? thick.

Mammalian fauna from Group B deposits includes 23 families and 13 species: Eulota (Cathaica ) sp., Testudinidae indet., Macaca sp., Hystrix cf. subcristata Swinhoe, Rhizornys cf. sinensis Gray, Vulpes cf. vulgaris L., Ursus thibetanus kokeni Matthew et Granger, Ailuropoda rnelanoleuca fovea/is Matthew et Granger, Mustelidae indet., Crocuta ultirna Matsumoto, Panthera cf. tigris L., Gomphotheriidae indet., Stegodon cf. orientalis Owen, Stegodon guizhouensis Li et Wen sp. nov., Equus sp., Megatapirus augustus Matthew et Granger, Rhinoceros sinensis Owen, Sus cf. scrofa L., Muntiacus sp., Cervus (cf. Pseudaxis) sp., Rusa sp., Bovinae, and Capricornis surnatraensis Bechstein. These include Gastropoda ( 1), Chelonia (1), Primates (1), Rodentia (2), Carnivora (6), Proboscidea (3), Perissodactyla (3), and Artiodactyla (6).

The excavators have divided these deposits into three groups: Group A (Layer 2), red clay; Group B (Layers 3-8), yellow deposits; and Group C (Layer 9). The stone specimens and mammalian remains were found only in Group A, and Group B. There is a Denudation Surface layer of unspecified thickness between the Group A and Group B. This surface indicates that there was a relatively long period when no cultural deposits accumulated. The section just described is similar to other sections at other locations, but most of other sections show only Group B, and some of them run deeply into Group C. It is likely that there was no red clay (Group A) deposit inside the cave. This red clay deposit is not only later than the yellow deposit, but also it is present only at the mouth of the west entrance.

According to the original excavation report (Li 1986), the mammalian fauna of Group A contains 4 species: Hystrix sp., 50

similar to Stegodon hypsilophus Hooijer from the Djetis fauna of Java (early Middle Pleistocene period). Fourth, 73 percent of the species belong to the AiluropodaStegodon fauna of the Middle Pleistocene period, commonly found at cave sites in south China. Therefore, the Group B fauna is referred to the Middle Pleistocene period. Group A species also belong to the common Ailuropoda-Stegodon fauna. Because there were only a few fossil remains, it is difficult to subdivide them. In fact most of these species could go on to the Upper Pleistocene or even the Holocene.

Dating Absolute age determinations for Guanyindong by uranium series dating have been published several times: the first estimate was 115,000 +/- 7,000 years BP for the lowest layer of the deposit with stone specimens and mammalian fossils; this date is representative only of Group B (Yuan 1986). The second estimate was 40,000 years BP for Group A, and 230,000 years BP for Group B (Shen 1990). These figures were arrived at by dating the stalactite canopy on the cave wall and the layer of stalactitic crust. According to the author of the more recent rep011 (1990). cultural remains might not be continuous between the deposits in different locations of the cave. This suggestion not contradicts the original interpretation of both Group A and Group B belonging to the Middle Pleistocene period, but also pushes the date of Group A beyond the range of the present study. The question is whether there is a cultural difference between these two groups.

Figure 5.2: Plan view of the Guanyindong Cave site (after Pei 1965:Figure 2).

Stegodon sp., Rhinoceros sinensis Owen, and Bovinae. Group B fauna may be characterized as follows: first, by the presence of Ursus thibetanus kokeni Matthew et Granger, Ailuropoda melanoleuca fovea/is Matthew et Granger, Crocuta ultima Matsumoto, Stegodon guizhouensis Li et Wen sp. nov., Stegodon cf. orientalis Owen, Megatapirus augustus Matthew et Granger, Rhinoceros sinensis Owen, and Gomphotheriidae indet. Eight species are extinct forms (57.14 %), among them Ursus thibetanus kokeni Matthew et Granger, and Ailuropoda melanoleucafovealis Matthew et Granger which differ only in size, both being larger than the modem species.

Li Yanxian (the author of the excavation report) has published a comparative study of the stone tool technology for both groups (Li 1983). He comes to seven conclusions: 1) there was less che11and more fine sandstone used as raw material in Group A; 2) there were more flakes in Group A than in Group B, but there were fewer tools in Group B; 3) there are fewer broken pieces of cores in Group A than in Group B (from 44% to 28% ); 4) there is an increase from Group A to Group B in the number of flakes with lengths greater than 7 cm (from 10% to 20% ), as well as an increase in thenumberofregularflakes (from 12% to 20%); 5) in Group A most retouch angles on edges decreased (less than 75 degrees) the edges became relatively even, and tools are more regular in shape; 6) in Group A the tools are much smaller (from 2.3% to 0.7% for tools with lengths greater than 10 cm, an increase of 14% to 18% for tools with lengths less than 3 cm); and 7) there is a decrease from Group B to Group A of chopperchopping tools from 6% to 3.9%, and an increase in points from 3.9% to 4.4%. Li points out that, although there were two culture stages in Guanyindong, because the stone specimens in both groups are associated with the Ailuropoda-Stegodon fauna complex, Group A is probably within the Middle Pleistocene period as is Group B. Nevertheless, I include only Group B in this study, because only the material from those levels can be said with certainty to be the Lower Paleolithic.

Second, by the presence of Gomphotheriidae indet., represented by one right upper first molar or deciduous fourth molar with three bunodont lophs and one isolated bunodont cusp. The pattern of the upper tooth recalls that of Anancus or Pantalophodon, while the configuration of the lophs is identical to that of intermediate cheek teeth in Gomphotherium. The structure of the third loph is also the same as in Gomphotherium. Gomphotherium, which is usually found in the Lower Pleistocene period or the Tertiary period, is a survivor from those earlier eras. Hystrix cf. subcristata Swinhoe is also present from the Lower Pleistocene. The third characteristic species is Stegodon cf. orientalis Owen which presents some elements or primitive characters of Koudianodon preorientalis Young from Babu, Guangxi Province, and also resembles Stegodon orientalis Owen from Yanjinggou, Sichuan Province (Middle Pleistocene). Stegodon guizhouensis sp. nov. is a new species in China. It is represented by one right lower third molar, which is smaller than the one in Stegodon orientalis Owen. In general, this species is

2. Description and Classification Previous work In the 1964 test excavation at Guanyindong, five locations covered most of the area within the cave: (1) west mouth; (2) 16 meters from the west mouth at the main entrance; (3) the intersection of main entrance and south branch; (4) the intersection of main entrance and north branch; and, (5) the end of the 51

tool would not be uniform as it is at present. Because 25 percent of the circumference and lateral edge retain cortex, the original report called this tool a semi-handaxe. The point of this tool is slightly damaged, and there is also pitting marks on the butt (proximal end). Although the butt is trimmed bifacially, it is thicker than the point. The length/breadth/thickness measurements are 80x60x30 mm, the weight is l Mg (figure 5.3h).

ness and breadth of the platform are l 8.5x46 mm. the angle of the platform is 127 degrees, the weight is 188 g ( Figure 5.4a). Flake with wzifacial distal end perpendicular to both edges {F3 J /7 specimens) Other than P4261. which is made on a large volcanic flake, the rest of the specimens are made on chert flakes. The shapes vary from rectangular to roughly triangular, hut the distal ends are all made uni facially. There is edge damage present on all the distal edges. 1\1 the same time, there are also trimming scars on the double laterals of most specimens. P4261, P5289, and P5354 also show retouch scars on the platform, perhaps to prepare one more edge for use (see P5289). Only specimen P5366 has the distal edges made from dorsal face to ventral, the distal edges of the other specimens are all rncldc from ventral face to dorsal. The retouch scars on the ,:dgcs of the chel1 flakes are usually even and small, but on the edge of the volcanic flake they are large (see P426 l ). There · no cm1ex on P5289, but there i,, on all the other specimens. The location ofthe c011ex is different for each tool, however: com::·, is retained on pa11of the dorsal faces of P426 I (1/ 10) and P427 4 (1/6); on the platfonns of P5303 (1/16) and P5366 (1/!4 ); and on pai1 of the dorsal faces and platfonns of P4276 ( 1/2) and P5354

Core with all b(facial edges f C 15] ( I .specimen) Specimen P5266 is made on a roughly triangular slab of chert. There is a large section of co11ex on the upper face, and the lower face is covered by flake scars struck from different directions. There are retouch scars on all the edges, but some of them are large deep scars while others are very slight. The angles of the edges are between 65 and 90 degrees. The long edge is jagged, and two ,hon edges exhibit edge dac1

85 Liangshan P6257

F5

130

122

59

1400

ND008

F8

110

144

67

85 Liangshan P627 5 F9

76

74

85 Langshan P6246

Fl0

131

Liangshan 85.6

Fl0

Liangshan 85.8

Fl0

Longgangsi P6215

F13

85 Liangshan P6281

P. TIJick. P.Breadth.

NSP

NDS

NVS

P. Angle

QE

4

7

2

2

3

90

7

17

2

4

none

127

VTD

\/12

FDL

vc vc

40

98

0

7

none

122

VTD

[/2

700

FDE

~E

62

116

0

0

3

125

26

45

FDE

QZ

16

25

2

4

none

91

VTD

[/4

99

34

200

FDP,FSL

QE

28

60

gone

3

none

0

VTD

[/3

67

92

26

50

FDP

QZ

16

86

2

5

none

137

VTD

[/5

38

54

20

30

FDE

1

36

gone

1

none

0

VTD

[/12

72

100

45

200

FA

vc vc

38

80

0

2

7

90

[/4

F13

60

34

22

50

FSL

QZ

6

10

0

3

1

90

[/8

85 LiangshanP6274

F13

81

72

44

200

FSL,FPE

26

48

2

~

5

145

[/7

Liangshan85. 10

F13

84

78

32

200

FSL

vc vc

43

33

0

2

1

120

[/7

85 Liangshan P6271

0

,., 0

s· C p..

.l>,.

VTD

DTV

DTV

DTV

OD

.A.Cortex

N.F. ScaIS

00000

[/2

F14

76

70

32

100

FDE

QZ

32

55

0

4

2

128

[/7

85 Liangshan P627 0 F15

69

84

34

200

FA

QZ

32

56

0

5

4

125

1/3

85 Liangshan P6280

F15

32

62

18

35

FA

QZ

19

44

2

4

3

92

00000

Liangshan 85.7

F20

76

110

33

100

FDE

VC

126

102

2

3

1

115

1/4

85 Liangshan P627 9 F23

57

52

30

40

FA

QZ

14

30

gone

~

5

72

l/13

85 Langshan P6245

Ul

82

123

30

100

FDL,FDE VC

~4

94

0

1

none

127

[/2

85 Langshan P6248

Ul

90

73

18

70

FSL

QE

16

58

0

2

none

115

/5

85 Langshan P6247

Ul

67

94

16

65

FDE

QE

1

70

0

0

none

0

Longgangsi P6229

U1

132

128

62

1100

FDE

QE

65

125

0

2

none

120

/2

LonggangsiP6228

Ul

136

104

~

1000

FA

QE

56

98

0

3

none

130

/2

Liangshan 85.5

Ul

72

102

45

100

FDE

VC

15

83

0

0

none

00

/2

Liangshan 85.9

Ul

125

42

12

10

FSL,FDE

QZ

1

18

0

1

none

0

/4

85 Liangshan P6282

Ul

50

52

18

35

FSL

QZ

20

48

0

none

none

63

/5

Liangshan 85.3

Ul

115

76

~o

100

FSL,FDE

vc

35

40

0

none

none

126

/3

85 Langshan P6309

U2

62

~8

45

100

ex

VC

9/11

3

Yangwangdong 008

D2

100

192

84

400

None

vc

/2

8

\;.l

'/2

g 0 w 'Tl

;;;· is:

Catalogue Nwmer

fype

Length

Breadth lfhickness Weight Damage Mate1ial P. Thick. P.Breadth NSP

P3822

Cl

68

100

54

500

CSE

P3842

Cl

66

74

24

55

CSE

P. Angle vrD

N.F. Scars

QE

4/5

4

CT

/5

6

/3

6

DTV

OD

~ ~

P3831

182

64

64

36

80

CDE

QE

P3836

C3

113

82

33

400

CAE

BA

3/5

8

s

P3837

C5

127

~2

50

1000

CDE,CP QE

2/3

6

3

P3838

cs

104

116

74

1000

CDE,CX ~E

/2

10

0

:,

P3821

C7

80

r78

66

800

~x

QE

4/5

3

:., 0 3

P3823

K::7

70

84

73

800

CAE

QE

i/2

7

en

P3825

cs

57

r78

44

80

CSE

QE

,/3

7

P3824

C9

100

~6

75

800

CSE,CX QE

2/3

6

P3841

K::9

74

54

28

55

CSE

~E

/2

6

41

~E

2/3

4

~

o'

~.

=0 :, °s !=

OD

OD

C9

66

r;,9

l80

CSE

P3845

IFl

62

~

18

50

FDE,FDL QE

18

38

0

7

none

130

VTD

J/10

P3830

IFl

79

62

20

100

!FDE,FDLQZ

24

37

~

1

none

120

VTD

16

P3826

IFl

63

54

16

45

FDE,FDL QE

3

34

2

3

none

~20

VTD

/4

P3834

-1

112

00

30

~80

FSL

~E

30

60

b

2

none

130

VTD

/10(,P)

P3833

IF9

102

72

42

400

FA

QE

gone

gone

gone

6

1

gone

VTD

/3

P3832

IFl0

134

136

37

1900

FDE

QE

gone

gone

3

5

5

gone

P3844

IFll

90

67

28

200

FA

QE

22

58

4

5

~ne

gone

P3843

IFl1

o7

87

60

100

FA

QE

10

31

5

0

8

gone

P3827

1F12

50

53

23

200

!FDE

QE

26

38

2

4

0

132

P3829

01

56

38

17

35

FDL

BA

18

33

0

none

none

129

P3840

tJJ

~

42

16

35

FDL

QE

15

34

2

none

none

131

D/5

P3828

Ul

40

74

21

40

FDE

QE

18

42

0

1

none

122

n12

P3835

t

NVS

A.Cortex

NDS

OD

/3

VTD DI'V

VTD

/2

/2 /7 /7(,P)

;;i er

;:;:I:''Tl

;:;· g:

~ ~

Breadth TI1iclmess Weight Dmmge

Mate1ial

A.Cortex

N.F. Scan

P4119

187

107

100

1500

CPS

vc

J/3

9

P4116

187

81 43

54

42

180

CPS

CT

~/5

4

47

63

58

190

CPS

CT

n110

95 32 78

52 20

n12 n112

32

400 45 500

vc

187 C7

78 51 121

11 4 5 4

P4117

187 C7

s·

3

P5292

Cll

36

40

24

39

~r

P4266

C13

80

60

~o

164

~

P5266

C16

101

102

34

P4115

C17 i;-2

48

43

96

~8 28 50

~

3 0

c::

!s· Q.

0

::, (!ti

.i:,. Vl

Length

None CSE CAE CAE

8'

-

ffype

P4114 P5255 P4118

~

P. TIIick. P.Breadlh

Catalogue Nwrber

NSP

NDS

NVS

P. Augle

VfD

CT

n110 nn

ICPS

CT

nt8

22

500

ICAE

CT

w

8

JOO

ex

CT

n12

4

120 188

IFsL FDE

vc

CT

3 1

127

7

130

F2

82

CT

F3

108

164

44

1000

FA

vc

32

158

4

P5289

F3 ~3

48

70

18

90

FSL,FDP CT

20

60

6

7 8

36

10

FDL,FDE CT WDLFDECT FDL,FDEICT

18

4

125

VTD VTD VTD

9

3

10 17 none 11

118 122

10 20

1 2 0

~o

20 66 24 28

Kl

44

0.9 46 32 9

0

115 70 54 45

18 512 270 27 32

14

IF3 IF3

157 94 94

40

30

13

12

0.8

30

4

10

21 22

27 21

FDL,FP ICT FDL,FDE ICT FA CT

1 22

20 46

2 6

7 none

CT

30

50

4

6 0 0 6

P5366 P5354

F3

P5299

IF3 IF4

P5277 P5258

IF8 IF9

48

~o

38

46

P5276

IFll

56

50

34

FDL,FDE CT FDL,FDE CT

65 62

FA

3

JOO

P4261

45

30 46

11

24 18.5

P5303 P4274 P4276

OD

ICT

50 68

P5271 P3957

DTV

1

6 6

Kl 9 0 0

P5312

IFll

50

56

32 17

FA

K:T

16

45

9

8 none

P5311

IFll

26

16

10

4

FA

K:T

1.5

2

3

13

0 4 8 6

125

OD OD

n18 ~/9 ~/10

OD

00000

VTD

n116(.P) ~/6 n12

DTV

120

n114

133

VTD

n14

gone 90 105 125 125 125 gone 130 115 115 120 130

VTD

poooo OD

nm

VTD

00000

VTD

~/16(.P) n/8

DIV

00000

VTD

P3890

IFll

80

~13

22

300

FA

CT

23

79

3

26

P3951 P5367

IF15 IF15

64

74

FDE FA

24 16

42

52

112 40

ICT

57

24 16

4 5

6 4

P3907

F16 f22

80

48

23

23

43

3

11

41

44

13

171 25

FDL,FP CT

P5297

FDL,FDE CT

JO

22

4

9

P3953

m

74

42

167

FDE

vc

34

24

U1

62 26

18

~

18 18

U1

54

45

10

k5 25

CT FDL CT FDP FDE,FSL CT

0 0 4

3

µ1

33 10

34

P5256 P5260 P3959

38 16 8

10

28

2

2

P3946

Ul

46

20

12

12

CT

11

Ul

49

22

11

9

CT

1.5

120 17

2 2

2

0 0

130

P5257

FSL FSL

00000 /2

gone

00000

60

20

98

FSL

CT

10

60

2

2

0

125

P3941

UJ

67

ICT

38

4

none

1

9 4 4 0 0 0

80

116 125

OD

00000 ~/16(.P) 1/20(.P) [/7(.P) 00000 1/2 1/20 00000

/5

16

~er Type

Leugt:11 Breadth ~1ickness

Weight Daimge

Material

00

HS VTr3:34

C13

167

95

37

650

CDE

"r-1

;.·

IHSV Tr345

C13

174

100

41

800

CP

a. S'

HS VTr3:35

C13

210

110

66

1500

HS VI 'Ir.1 :17

C13

159

85

52

s·

HS V Yr3:32

C13

132

78

3

Ct"

P. Tilick. P. Breadth

NSP

NDS

NVS

P. Angle

VfD

cs: ~

DTV

OD

A. Cortex

N.F. Scars

LE

1/3

22

LE

1/3

38

CP

LE

1/4

24

800

CDE

LE

1/3

22

45

500

CP

LE

00000

24

63

1200

CDE

LE

1/5

22

;;-

o'

HS VTr3:29

C14

202

87

o· ::,

HS VTr3:42

C16

98

77

60

600

CAE

LE

00000

15

0

::;, 3

HS VTr3108

C16

77

73

32

300

CAE

LE

00000

15

::r: ,=

HS V Tr3:83

C17

88

74

69

500

CSE

LE

1/4

12

HS VI 'Ir.1 :262

C17

84

74

58

450

CAE,CX

GE

1/2

5

HS VI 'Ir.13

C17

192

88

84

750

CAE,CX

LE

1/2

12

HS V Tr3:77

C17

109

108

100

1250

CSE

LE

1/8

14

HS V Tr3:52

F2

158

81

43

800

FDL

LE

30

56

none

~

0

128

VTD

00000

~

~

!?S.

.j::,.

HS VTr356

F2

135

73

34

200

FDL

LE

25

41

none

none

8

135

DTV

00000

HS VTr3:28

F7

128

90

48

450

FDE

LE

39

63

2

8

0

120

VTD

00000

HS V Tr.3:24

F7

114

70

34

400

FDE

LE

12

24

none

6

4

115

HS VTr.3:20

F7

116

78

46

600

FDE

LE

46

46

2

9

0

125

VTD

00000

HS VTr.3:271

F8

80

62

17

150

FDE,FSL

LE

17

21

none

5

0

125

VTD

00000

HS VTr.3:127

F11

110

71

40

300

FDE,FDL

LE

28

32

none

9

0

90

VTD

1/6

HS V Tr.3:36

Fl 1

136

109

50

650

FA

LE

31

60

none

9

0

105

VTD

00000

HS V Tr3:27

F14

158

99

44

900

FDE

LE

40

55

none

12

8

115

1/6

HS VTr.3:53

Ul

90

146

40

700

FDE

LE

40

76

none

none

0

120

00000

HS VTr3:272

DJ

57

41

15

50

No

LE

15

22

none

none

0

90

1/8

OD

00000

IC)

Index

A Acheulean viii, x, 2,4, 80--83, 87, 92, 93,103,104, 105-106 Aigner,J. 1 Allchin,B. x Anderson, J. G. 1 angle of the platform 10,67-68, 94-95, 107-108, 124 Anyathian 1, 4, 93 Armand,J. 90--91,95-96 artifact ix,x, 1,4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 20, 21, 22-24,40, 52, 62, 66-67, 69, 80,83-85,90,91-93,93-95,103,104,105,106,110,116, 117-118, 119,125

B Ba River ix,x, 7, 9, 11, 12, 26, 97, 117 bamboo 3, 126 Bartstra, G. J. viii Basappa, Mr. x Bhimbetka x,82,86, 116,117,119,124 Bhimbetka Map 81 Bhopal x,80 biface 2, 4, 9, 21, 27, 65, 80, 83 Binford, L. 1, 118 bipolar 11, 22, 41 blade x block-on-block 11, 22, 26, 52, 69, 122 Bordes,F. 1,3,4,83,90,136,137 Boriskovsky, P. I. 2 Bose viii, ix, 2, 64, 65, 70, 116, 117,118,119, 122-123 Bose Map 63 boulder 11,12,13, 14,25,26,56,80, 103,116,122,126 Bradley, B. A. 137 breccia 41, 44 Breuil, A. 1 bulb of percussion 10, 23-24, 25, 42-44, 45, 53-55, 66, 67-68, 69,84-85,94-95,107-108 burin 52, 93

D dating viii,ix, 7, 51, 64, 82, 90, 91-93, 105, 117 Daye Lake ix,40,44, 117,119 de Chardin, P. T. 1, 62, 64, 65, 93 de Terra, H. x, 1, 93 debitage 1,5, 9, 11,25,42,69, 83,93, 105,106,108,109,110, 117,118,125 Deccan College x, xii, 83, 90, 93, 96, 103 discoid 2, 83 Djetis Fauna 9 dolerite 2, 103, 106 Durkadi x,92, 116,117, 119-121, 122 Durkadi Map 91

E EarlyPleistocene viii, 1,8,20,40,62,65,66, 116 ecology 83 edge angle 52, 53 edge damage ix, 9-11,22-25,42-44, 52-55,66-67, 84-85, 9495,106,118 environment ix, 3, 9, 105, 116, 126 excavation ix, x, 7, 9, 20, 22, 26, 40,45,49, 51, 52, 62, 63, 65, 83, 90,92,97,103,106,110,117

F fauna 7, 8, 9, 20, 21, 40,42,49-50, 91, 105, 106, 116, 117, 118 flake ix,x, 1,2,5,9, 10, ll,23-24,25,26,41,43,44,51,52,5354,55-56,66,67-68,68-69,83,84,85,90,94-95,96, 105, 106,107,108,109-110,117,118,119,120,121,122,123, 124,125 Flenniken, J. vii, 5, 9, 118, 137 flintknapping vii, ix, 14, 22, 55, 56, 69, 118 flintknapper ix, 5, 11, 52, 57, 70, 85, 86, 87, 96, 98,108,110, 121, 122, 124, 125 knapper x, 116 knapping ix, 9, 85, 117, 124, 125 freehand ll,21,25,26,44,52,55,69

C Cao Zetian ix, xii, 52 Chang, K. C. 1 Chang, K. C. xii Chenjiawo 7, 8 chert ix,2,4,41,44,45,49,51,52-55,56,65,90,103,121,123124,125,126,133,134 chopper-chopping vii, 1, 2,4, 21, 41, 51, 52, 65, 69, 80, 83, 93, 125,126 Clark,J. D. 1 cleaver 2, 4, 21, 69, 80, 83, 92, 93, 103, 105, 106, 118 cobble ix,x,4, 9-11, 12, 14, 22-24,40,41,42-44,66-67, 70, 84-85,93-95,97,103,106,108,109,121-122,122-123,124, 125,126 core ix,x,2,4,5,9-10, 11, 14,22,25,26,41,42,44,51,52,5556,65,66-67,68,69,83,84,85,86,93-94, 106,108,109,110, 117,118,119,120,121,122,123,124,125 cortex ix,4, 5, 9-11, 14,22-24,42-44,52-55,66-67,84-85, 93-95,96,106-108,110,119,120,121,122,123,124 Corvinus, G. 105

G geomorphology x, 20, 49, 90 Gongwangling ix, 7-9,8, 9, 11,117 granite 9,26, 103,104,105,107,108,109,125,132 Guanyindong viii,ix,51,69, 116,117,119, 123-124, 125 Guanyindong Map 50

H hammerstone 14, 26, 45, 56, 69, 86, 106, 109, 110, 125 handaxe vii,viii,x,1,2,4,53,83,87,90,93,96,97,103,106, 118, 124, 125 HanshuiRiver ix,x,20,21, 117 Hanzhong Basin 20 Hay,R.L. 1 Homo erectus viii, 7, 9, 92, 105, 116, 117, 118 Hu Lingui ix, xii, 116

150

scraper 2, 4, 9, 21, 41, 52, 65, 69, 80, 83, 92, 93, 105, 106, 118 Shannon, Charles xii, 3 Shen Guanjun ix Shen Yuchang 20 Shilongtou viii, ix,41, 116,117, 119-121, 122 silicified limestone ix, 52, 122-123, 134 Siwalik:Hills x Soanian x soil x,9,49,62,66,80-83,90-91,103 Solanki, D. S. x, 80 spheroid 9, 21, 23, 25, 93, 106 Stiles, D. N. 1 stratigraphy ix, 9, 20-21, 21, 40, 49, 62, 63, 64, 65, 80-82, 9091, 92, 96, 103-105, 116 Subhavan, Vadhana xii Swisher, C. C. viii

z Zhang Mountains 40 Zhang Senshui 2, 52 Zhang Y. P. ix, xii, 9 Zhoukoudian 1, 4, 9, 40, 62, 90

T Tampanian 1 taphonomy 118 terrace ix,x, 9, 20, 21, 26, 62, 65, 66, 90, 91, 92, 93, 96, 97, 117 thin-section viii, xii, 97, 119, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125 Tixier,J. 136, 137 Toth, N. 1, 3, 4, 118, 126 trimming x,4,52-55,84--85,93-95,109,110,121,122,125 trimmed 9-10, 22-25, 67---68,106--107

u unifacial 108, 110 unifacial edge 5, 14, 119 unmodified 5,117,126

V Vikram University x, 80, 82, 83 volcanic 21,22-24,49,52-55, 119,121 Von Koenigswald 1

w Wakankar, V. C. x, 80, 82, 83 Wei Jingwu ix WeiQi ix WuR.K. 9 Wu River 49,55 WuX.Z. 7

X Xiqiaoshan ix

y YanJiaqi 20, 21 Yangtze River ix,20,40,44,52,64,65, Yanjinggou 7, 40 Yin Shenpin ix You River ix, 62, 63, 65, 69, 97, 117 Young, C. C. 64 Young, C. C. 62 Yuan Xiaofeng ix, xii, 42, 69

116,117,119

152