Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences (2019) 11:3477–3490 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-018-0759-7

ORIGINAL PAPER

Technological behavior of the early at Lingjing (Xuchang, )

Hao Li1,2 & Zhan-yang Li3,4 & Xing Gao1,2 & Kathleen Kuman5 & Alexandra Sumner6,7

Received: 6 June 2018 /Accepted: 20 November 2018 /Published online: 9 January 2019 # Springer-Verlag GmbH , part of Springer 2019

Abstract The period approximating 100 ka relates to Middle Paleolithic or Middle Stone Age technological behaviors that are generally characterized by prepared core technology, an expanding range of retouched tools, and the novel exploitation and sourcing of raw materials. As opposed to other regions of the world, the technological features of this period in China are deeply debated and remain unclear. Presently, it is suggested that Chinese lithic technology during this period is marked by the continuation of mode 1 artifacts that are characterized by simple cores, flakes, and tools that lack standardization. Here, we present a lithic assemblage associated with the discovery of two archaic human crania at the Lingjing site, securely dated to ~ 125–90 ka. A detailed analysis of stone artifacts shows increased technological advancement of the Lingjing humans during this period, including bi-conical discoidal core reduction strategies, discrete small-sized tool types, and refined retouch on blanks. Those features are also shared by the contemporaneous sites documented across the broader Eurasian and African continents. However, the rarity of prepared core technologies at Lingjing, such as Levallois or laminar flaking, likely indicates a unique technological trajectory compared to sites outside of China. It is due to this that we herein adopt the term Chinese Middle Paleolithic to more clearly refer to the variations we have identified at Lingjing. The Lingjing lithic assemblage, overall, could potentially represent a regional expression of the Middle Paleolithic technocomplex in China, although details about the processes behind its development are still unclear. The study contributes to a new understanding of the long-standing view of the simplified technological behaviors in China before ~ 40 ka and sheds light on the interpretations of the implied human behavioral transformations in the early Late Pleistocene of China.

Keywords Lingjing . Early Late Pleistocene . Archaic humans . Technological behavior . Chinese Middle Paleolithic

Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-018-0759-7) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

* Zhan-yang Li 4 Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and , [email protected] Zhengzhou 450000, China * Alexandra Sumner [email protected] 5 School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, WITS, Johannesburg 2050, South 1 Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins, Africa Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100044, China 6 Department of Anthropology, DePaul University, Chicago, IL 60604, 2 CAS Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, USA Beijing 100044, China 7 3 Institute of Cultural Heritage, Shandong University, Jinan 250100, Department of Anthropology, University of New Brunswick, Bailey China Drive, Fredericton, E3B-5A3 3478 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490

Introduction of the term Chinese Middle Paleolithic (CMP). We agree that much work has to be done in finalizing the particulars - in- The advent of the Middle Paleolithic (MP) or Middle Stone cluding the exact timing - of what exactly the CMP entails Age (MSA) technocomplex in both the African and the however, that the seeds of more regionally constrained tech- Eurasian continents is accepted as beginning ~ 300–200 ka, nological and behavioral signatures in China are beginning to with its roots in the preceding Acheulean (DeBono and emerge through a growing body of evidence including, Goren-Inbar 2001; White and Ashton 2003;Tryonetal. though not limited to, the research described herein. 2005;Tryon2006;Whiteetal.2006; Porat et al. 2010; It is clear that, in part, the disagreement lies in the variable Moncel et al. 2012;Fontanaetal.2013; Shipton et al. 2013; ways archeologists have for understanding the technological Sahle et al. 2014; Álvarez-Alonso 2014; Adler et al. 2014; characteristics of lithic assemblages found in China, and the Hérisson et al. 2016; Picin 2017; Soriano and Villa 2017; reasons for the disparity in this issue are mainly due to the Richter et al. 2017; Akhilesh et al. 2018). The hypothesis that evidence used in support of such arguments. In particular, the transition from the Acheulean to the MP/MSA can be current data is limited to a few broadly dated archeological regarded as a series of technological advancements in localized, sites, with patchy analysis of often small assemblages lacking geographically dispersed places has been suggested (e.g., standard, contemporary techno-typological methods (Gao DeBono and Goren-Inbar 2001; White and Ashton 2003; 1999;Yee2012). Thus, it is suggested that more precise Shipton et al. 2013; Adler et al. 2014; Picin 2017;Akhilesh methods for examining the details of lithic technology is re- et al. 2018). At approximately 100 ka, occupying quired in order to construct a clear cultural sequence for China parts of Europe and western Asia and early modern humans (Hou et al. 2013). With these issues in mind, the focus of this living in Africa have, by that time, both exhibited variable paper is the analysis of the technological behavior of archaic forms of MP/MSA technocomplexes (Ambrose 2001;Klein humans at the site of Lingjing. We provide key evidence for 2009; Kuhn and Hovers 2013). In addition, both traditionally our understanding of aspects of early Late Pleistocene techno- recognized and new evidence from (e.g., Skhul, Qafzeh logical organization and discuss its contribution in helping to and Misliya ) and more current finds on the Arabian move forward with our shared goal of understanding more Peninsula (e.g., Al Wusta and Jebel Faya) have confirmed an clearly the Middle Paleolithic issue in China and, more broad- earlier presence (older or ca. 100 ka) of modern humans outside ly, East Asia. of Africa, in association with the MP/MSA lithic industries (Grün and Stringer, 1991;Grünetal.2005; Armitage et al. 2011; Hershkovitz et al. 2018;Groucuttetal.2018). The site of Lingjing However, comparatively less is known about East Asia— and China in particular—with respect to the timing and nature The Lingjing site is located in the western margin of Lingjing of the Middle Paleolithic as a distinctive technological period. town, Xuchang City, in northern China’s Henan Province, Specifically, it is often suggested that lithic technology be- situated in the transitional zone bridging the Qinling tween ~ 300 and 40 ka is marked by a slow and conservative Mountains of the Northwest and the Central Plain in the development, with little difference from mode 1 technologies Southeast (Fig. 1a). Work at the site began in 2005, with a characterized by simple cores, flakes, and tools that lack stan- total of 551 m2 excavated and continued until 2016 (Fig. 1b) dardization (Gao and Norton 2002; Norton et al. 2009;Gao (Li 2007, 2010). The stratigraphy of the site can be divided 2013). Thus, this period of the Paleolithic in China has been into 11 layers (Li et al. 2017c). The stone artifacts studied here regarded as demonstrating a different developmental trajecto- are mainly excavated from spring layer 11, with a small num- ry that does not mirror the conceptual framework of the MP or ber of specimens from the lower part of layer 10. The two MSA in the West (West here referring to all regions of the Old archaic human crania and abundant animal fossils were World other than East Asia) (Zhang 1985; Gao and Norton unearthed from layer 11 (Fig. 1c, d; Fig. S1), demonstrating 2002; Norton et al. 2009;Gao2013;Li,2014). An alternate the association of the resident human population and patterns viewpoint holds that, although there is, to date, the apparent of animal and technological exploitation (Li et al. 2017c). lack of typical Levallois prepared core technology, the appear- Cultural materials above layer 10 are limited to the very late ance of well-made classic discoidal cores and regional inno- Pleistocene (ca. 13,500 ± 406 years old; Fig. S2)and vation in the types of tools at some sites in this period indicates Holocene and are therefore not included in the current study clear changes in technology when compared to those that de- (Li et al. 2014;LiandMa2016). scribe mode 1 assemblages (Qiu 1985, 1992; Clark 1998; OSL dating of seven samples from layers 10 and 11 provide Keates 2001;Yee2012; Bar-Yosef and Wang 2012;Bar- chronologically consistent dates of ~ 125–90 ka (Fig. 1c; Fig. Yosef 2015). At this point, based on current observations S3;Table1). These layers correspond to a warm and wet last wherein such variations have been noted, we feel there is interglacial period characterizing Marine Isotope Stage 5, or enough evidence to support for at least the provisional use paleosol S1 (Bradley 2015). During this period, the environment Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490 3479

Fig. 1 The Lingjing site. a Site location, along with those of the sites of BJZ (Banjingzi) and JST (Jinsitai) for the purpose of comparison. b Excavation grid. c Schematic profile of the geo-cultural deposits. d Site stratigraphy during excavation reflects the expansion of a spring-fed pool that attracted humans of dating are presented in the study of the human crania from and other animals to a resource-rich biome. Regarding the OSL Lingjing(Lietal.2017c). dating, medium-grained K-feldspar minerals were used to ob- The human crania from Lingjing show a mosaic of features tain the dates operating under the pIRIR225°C and pIRIR290°C of archaic East Asian humans, Neanderthals and early modern protocols respectively (Table 1). Details concerning the methods humans, demonstrating the morphological complexity of the

Table 1 Sample information and OSL dating results for Lingjing using the medium-grained K-feldspar

Lab no. Depth (m) Layer Artifacts Dose rate (Gy ka−1) pIRIR225°C pIRIR290°C

Uncorrected age (ka) Corrected age (ka) Age (ka)

L1434 6.35 9 None 3.39 ± 0.13 80 ± 4 88 ± 5 92 ± 6 L1436 7.3 10 None 3.40 ± 0.13 87 ± 4 100 ± 8 100 ± 5 L1271 8.1 10 Present 3.08 ± 0.12 89 ± 4 95 ± 4 93 ± 5 L1274 8.8 11 Present 2.99 ± 0.11 88 ± 4 95 ± 4 104 ± 6 L1199 9.0 11 Present 2.99 ± 0.12 97 ± 4 109 ± 4 120 ± 6 L1577 9.0 11 Present 2.99 ± 0.12 98 ± 4 109 ± 5 110 ± 6 L1202 9.25 11 Present 2.97 ± 0.11 98 ± 4 108 ± 5 105 ± 6 L1578 9.55 11 None 3.17 ± 0.12 96 ± 4 106 ± 6 113 ± 6 3480 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490 populations that lived in China ~ 100 ka and suggesting a Proveniences of raw materials degree of east-west admixture (Li et al. 2017c). The examina- tion of animal fossils shows that Equus caballus and Bos Fieldwork was conducted to investigate the sources of raw primigenius are the dominant species at the site. A study of materials used for the production of artifacts. Cortex preserved the mortality structure of these two species demonstrates that on the artifacts indicates that most raw materials come from adult individuals were preferentially hunted by humans, indi- ancient river gravels. Our investigation along the Ying River, cating skillful hunting technologies (Zhang et al. 2009, Zhang which is the river closest to the site, shows a clear pattern of a et al. 2011a, b;Lietal.2011). About 13% of the bones have decrease in the diameter of gravel sizes from the upper valley cut marks, and 98.5% of these marks are located on the down to the lower valley (Fig. S4). Poorly sorted gravels that midshafts of long bones (Zhang et al. 2011a, b). Such modi- contain giant boulders were found in the upper valley, which fication of the bones provides diagnostic evidence that the is about 60 km from the site (Fig. S4b). Nevertheless, large Lingjing humans were the primary consumers of these ani- sized gravels (~ 20 cm in average) were commonly seen in the mals. The modification and use of bone materials as tools area ca. 30 km from the site (Fig. S4c). The closest region of represents another significant aspect of the behavioral reper- the Ying River is currently about 10 km from the site, and here toire of the Lingjing archaic humans. Preliminary microwear raw materials come in the form of relatively small cobbles and analysis suggests that the bone tools were used for boring, pebbles, with an average size of 5 cm (Fig. S4d). Pebbles and piercing and scraping, with some possibly being hafted (Li cobbles with river gravel cortex reflect exploitation of raw and Shen 2010). In addition, as recently revealed, fragmented materials closest to the site. In addition, a small number of long bones and an antler have also been used as bone re- irregular large chunks of quartz with lightly weathered cortex touchers in the manufacture of stone artifacts (Doyon et al. was collected from outcrops. Our investigation of the hills 2018). near the site has not yet located quartz outcrops. Reasons for The mixture of archaic and advanced anatomical features, this may simply be due to logistics insofar as only a limited sophisticated hunting strategies, and the exploitation of bone amount of bedrock was observed to be without plant coverage materials all indicate the complexity of the Lingjing humans and therefore exposed during our survey. In addition, bedrock both physiologically and behaviorally. The study of stone ar- adjacent to the Ying River may well be buried under the thick tifacts from the site provides additional evidence for the diver- fluvial sediments of the river. sity of technology and a new perspective for understanding the behavior and abilities of these populations. Core reduction

Cores (n = 361) from the site are generally small in size (see Lithic technology examples in Fig. 2). The average length, width, and thickness are 44.2, 36.1, and 27.9 mm, respectively. The largest remain- In total, 14,862 stone artifacts have been excavated. Chunks ing flake scars on cores have an average length of 24.0 mm and small flaking debris (the latter < 2 cm in size) represent and a width of 18.7 mm. Cores without cortex account for 86.2% of the artifacts and relates to the predominant use of 47.9% and 22.4% cores retain cortex covering ≤ 25% of the easily-shattered quartz cobbles and pebbles (95.9% of the raw surface. Just 2.5% of cores (n =9)havecortexonmorethan material; Table 2). The quality of quartz is highly variable, three quarters of their surface. Flaking patterns on cores con- with crystal structures ranging from coarse to fine. sist of unidirectional unifacial (26.3%), multidirectional

Table 2 Tool types and raw materials for artifacts from the Types Quartz Quartzite Chert Agate Basalt Chlorite Total % Lingjing site Core 302 56 1 1 1 361 2.43 Flake 639 181 1 821 5.52 Tool 648 32 1 681 4.58 Informal tool 173 15 188 1.26 Hammerstone 1 1 0.01 Chunk 2509 195 2704 18.19 Debris 9985 121 10,106 68.00 Total 14,256 601 2 1 1 1 14,862 % 95.92 4.04 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 100 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490 3481

Fig. 2 Cores at Lingjing. Examples of discoidal cores (a, b), single platform cores (c, d), and cores with centripetal asymmetrical recurrent flaking (e, f). Drawings for each specimen are provided to illustrate the flake scars and flaking directions on cores

(26.0%), and radial flaking (20.8%, including four subtypes) helps to define the MP in diverse regions of the world. As it patterns. Seven additional patterns demonstrate the diversifi- stands, the smaller signature we do have at Lingjing is atypical cation of core orientation during reduction (Fig. 3). Levallois in technological form when compared to western assemblages technology, regarded as a marked feature of the MSA or MP in and plays only a marginal role in the technological repertoire the West (Van Peer 1992;Boëda1993; Otte 1995;Chazan (see also Lycett 2007 for a phylogenetic analysis of the lack of 1997) but comparatively lacking in the East Asian sites (Gao Levallois in China). 2013; Seong and Bae 2016), is a rarity at Lingjing. However, In contrast, multifacial (24.4%; n = 88), discoidal (21.3%; there are seven radially flaked cores with bifacial centripetal n = 77; Fig. 2a, b), and single platform cores (17.2%; n =62; flaking that conforms to an asymmetrical, hierarchical pattern Fig. 2c, d) comprise the majority of core types. Irregular cores, that typically characterizes Levallois cores (Fig. 2e, f). Four of casual cores, opposed platform cores, cores-on-flakes, bipolar these are cores flaked for a preferential removal and three for cores, and more rudimentary chopper cores occur in relatively recurrent removals (typology following Boëda, 1993). A pos- reduced frequencies (Fig. S5; Table 3 and Supplementary sible reason for the paucity of Levallois cores at Lingjing is the Material), indicating the variable methods of core reduction use of quartz as the primary raw material, which is widely employed at Lingjing. Scar numbers on cores are equally var- acknowledged as a difficult raw material to exploit, particu- iable: multifacial cores have the largest number (8.9 on aver- larly when applied in such a reduction strategy (Driscoll 2009; age), followed by discoidal cores (7.5 on average). In contrast, Knight 2016; de Lombera-Hermida and Rodríguez-Rellán casual cores (1.8 on average) and bipolar cores (2.0 on aver- 2016). On the other hand, equally, it may be the case that age) have the least number of scars. Overall, core reduction Levallois technology at Lingjing does not correspond to raw strategies range from expedient to well-organized, with bi- material type at all but instead reflects the as-yet unresolved conical discoidal cores (Fig. 2a, b) being the most standard- possibility that this technology simply does not play a marked ized and heavily reduced type. role in the MP in China as it does elsewhere. In itself, this In general, the form of flakes (n = 821) are consistent with aspect of the assemblage and our current study therefore high- what would be expected based from the nature of the cores. lights an important and interesting area of debate (and vital First, the average size for complete flakes is small (length, area of contemporary and future study) in how the Levallois width, and thickness of 28.0, 21.0, and 10.2 mm) (Table S1). 3482 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490

Fig. 3 Core flaking patterns at Lingjing

Second, the proportion of flakes without cortex is high present but weak (43.5%). This suggests that bipolar flaking, (76.9%). Third, striking platforms are predominantly plain which usually produces linear crushing platforms, flat ventral (47.1%), and facetted platforms are rare (3.0%). Platform sizes faces, and negative scars or fractures on both ends (Diez- are also small, with an average length and thickness of 14.0 Martín et al. 2011;Lietal.2017a, b), is only occasionally and 6.9 mm. Fourth, flake dorsal scar patterns are diverse but employed, and this is supported by the small number of this predominantly unidirectional from the proximal end (37.8%) type of core (n = 8; 2.2%) in the assemblage. As an expedient (Fig. S6). Fifth, bulbs of percussion are prominent (47.6%) or technique for detaching small flakes, bipolar flaking is

Table 3 Classification of cores and measurements (in mm) and weight (in grams) for each subtype

Core types Number % Mean length Mean width Mean thickness Mean weight

Polyhedral core 88 24.4 44.9 38.4 33.4 164.9 Discoidal core 77 21.3 43.8 37.4 27.4 104.1 Single platform core 62 17.2 44.3 33.7 26.5 115.8 Irregular core 56 15.5 42.5 32.0 24.1 65.0 Casual core 27 7.5 34.4 27.6 20.1 64.5 Opposed platform core 24 6.6 43.8 35.1 26.4 121.9 Core-on-flake 14 3.9 57.7 49.2 32.0 120.7 Bipolar core 8 2.2 30.4 23.8 18.6 18.9 Chopper core 5 1.4 102.1 92.5 58 1093.2 Total 361 100 44.2 36.1 27.9 124.9 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490 3483

Fig. 4 Formal tools at Lingjing. Examples of scrapers (a, b), denticulates show specimens with drawings, dashed yellow lines indicate the likely (c, d), notches (e, f), borers (g, h), points (i–k), tools made on pebble basal retouch for hafting. Additional examples are provided in Figs. S6 to blanks (l, m), and an example of a backed tool (n). Yellow underlines S8 commonly documented in Chinese Lower Paleolithic sites the European and the Levant Lower Paleolithic sites do show such as the ~ 1.36 Ma Xiaochangliang site in the Nihewan similarities with Lingjing with respect to variability in size, Basin and the ~ 0.7–0.3 Ma Locality 1 in but tools at these sites are often sharp-edged flakes or more Beijing (Pei and Zhang 1985;Shenetal.2009;Yangetal. rudimentarily retouched tools (Burdukiewicz and Ronen 2016). In contrast, at Lingjing, although the raw material 2003;Burdukiewicz2009;Aurelietal.2016;Despriéeetal. blanks are small, freehand percussion is extensively used. 2018). In contrast, the formal tool types at Lingjing are spe- This demonstrates both a departure from patterns of exploita- cialized and diverse. Scrapers (n = 244), notches (n = 172), tion at other eastern sites and, likewise, the technological so- denticulates (n = 150), points (n = 74), and borers (n =28) phistication and skill that characterize the reduction methods are all represented in relatively large numbers (Fig. 4a–m; of smaller cobbles and pebbles. Figs. S7 to S9; Table 4; Supplementary Material). Five burins and three backed tools (Fig. 4n) are also identified, although these are few in number. Most scrapers at Lingjing are single- Tool production sided (84.4%), followed by convex (8.2%), transverse (5.7%), and double-sided (1.7%) types. Notches are mainly formed by Tools were divided into formal (n = 681) and informal (n = a series of small continuous removals, which characterizes 188) classes. As expected from the natural size of the raw 80.2% of all notches (n = 138). Denticulates in the assemblage material, the size of tools is small, with average length, width, are marked by clear serrated edges, again produced by a series and thickness measurements of 27.4, 19.8, and 12.0 mm. Such of continuous scars. 32.0% (n = 48) of denticulate retouch a size pattern for retouched pieces is not often seen in the consisting of three scars, with each one forming a separate Lower Paleolithic of China. However, the small tool assem- notch. This is followed by four and five scars (30.7%/n =46 blages (or Bmicrolithic^ based purely on size) reported from and 13.3%/n = 20, respectively). Points are characterized by 3484 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490

Table 4 Classification of tools and measurements (in mm) and Tool types Number Percent Mean length Mean width Mean thickness Mean weight weight (in grams) for each tool subtype Light-duty tool types Scraper 244 35.8 26.7 19.2 11.8 8.5 Notch 172 25.3 26.2 19.2 11.5 7.7 Denticulate 150 22.0 27.6 19.5 11.3 7.6 Point 74 10.9 28.0 19.6 11.9 8.7 Borer 28 4.1 24.1 18.3 11.0 5.2 Burin 5 0.7 27.6 17.2 9.7 5 Backed tool 3 0.4 26.4 14.6 8 3.7 Mean 26.8 19.3 11.6 7.9 Heavy-duty tool types Chopper 3 0.4 103.1 79.8 60.0 648.3 Spheroid 2 0.3 82 80 74.8 688 Mean 94.7 79.9 65.9 664.2 Total 681 100 27.3 19.7 12.0 12.8

two retouched edges converging in a sharp or even trihedral Our experiments show that the use of pressure-flaking at tip. Among them, 18 specimens exhibit basal retouch, which Lingjing effectively controlled the application of the force and may be indicative of hafting (Fig. 4k; Fig. S9a–d). reduced the risk of accidental fracture during shaping of quartz The retouch on formal tools is refined, particularly given blanks. Nevertheless, due to the fact that the degree of force the known challenges of quartz exploitation. Knapping used used in this method is comparatively limited, compared with for retouch is dominated by freehand hard hammer technique that produced from a freehand blow, retouch scars retained on (74.2%), but pressure flaking (12.0%) and soft hammer blanks are less invasive and often exhibit micro-denticulated (8.5%) retouch are also considered to be important types of edges (Fig. 5j–m). Our experimental results are consistent percussion (Table S2). Direct evidence for the early use of with previously published work (Mourre et al. 2010;dela pressure flaking was reported from Sibudu , in which Peña et al. 2013), and the technological features shown in three bone pressure flakers were identified from a layer ~ the experimental specimens compare well with the 60 ka (d’Errico et al. 2012). In addition, experimental work archeological samples at Lingjing (Fig. 5a–i). conducted by Mourre et al. at (Mourre et al. The continuous distribution of retouch along one or more 2010) and de la Pena and Wadley at (de la Peña edges accounts for 96.1% of all formal tools, while the re- et al. 2013), confirm that pressure-flaking retouch was well mainder exhibit discontinuous patterns. In terms of scar con- known at the Middle Stone Age sites in . Here, cavities, the proportions of shallow and deep scars are gener- we argue that at Lingjing, pressure flaking represents an ef- ally similar, with the former accounting for 51.2% and the fective technological adaptation for the retouch of small quartz latter for 44.8%. Informal tools with few scars (mean = 2.4) artifacts. and discontinuous retouch are not assigned to particular types, In order to test our interpretations, we used antlers of but nevertheless are an important component of the assem- Capreolus pygargus bedfordi and the fragmented limb bones blage. The retouch strategy in such cases is expedient but of an ox to conduct experimental replications of pressure re- remains consistent with formal tools in blank selection and touch (Fig. 5n). A recent study at Lingjing identified bone size measurements (Table S3). retouchers that use both long bones and antler as raw mate- A relatively unique feature of both formal and informal rials, indicating a sound understanding of the mechanical tools at Lingjing is the selection of chunks more commonly properties of bones and their suitability for making stone arti- than flakes (n = 536 vs. n = 250 respectively) for tool blanks facts (Doyon et al. 2018). In the case of antler, the area closest (Table S4). A possible explanation may be the often small to the convergent distal end is the primary force-loading part working edge of these retouched tools. Specifically, chunks of the tool. For the limb bones, these were broken to form a may have provided advantageous prehensile properties over usable arched end for pressure retouch. The percussor was small, thin flakes with similarly small working edges. Also, then directly and precisely applied at targeted points by way chunks can be produced easily and in large quantities by of pressing down along the margin of the blank (as opposed to smashing quartz pebbles into usable blanks that have suitable applying force through a more typical freehand, Bswinging^ working margins that can be formed or rejuvenated by re- gesture). The exact gesture employed is shown in Fig. 5o, p. touch. This pattern of selection is one part of a broader system Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490 3485

Fig. 5 Comparison of archeological and experimental artifacts produced replication using antler and limb bone as pressure flaking percussors. by press-flaking retouch. Examples of the archeological tools shaped with Note the microdenticulated edges produced by pressure flaking for both pressure flaking (a–i) and comparisons with the experimental samples (j– archeological and experimental examples m). Red lines outline the flake scars along the edges. n–p Experimental of environmental adaptation in which quartz provided an ef- reduction are comparatively well defined (Van Peer 1992; fective and economic material in the Lingjing subsistence Boëda 1993;Otte1995; Chazan 1997), was intentionally strategies. Interestingly, some tools (n = 29) were retouched adopted as a standardized method by individuals at Lingjing, directly along the maximum length of a natural pebble that at least in its strictest form. In this sense, broader questions are retained much of the cortex (Fig. 4l, m; Fig. 6). The average raised surrounding whether or not more evidence for prepared size of these tools is small (length, width, and thickness of core technology will eventually emerge as a more typical 25.3, 16.6, and 12.2 mm), which clearly shows the exploita- component of the CMP and if it does, what "it looks like" in tion of small pebbles as blanks and the skillful freehand per- a technological sense in China when compared to elsewhere. cussion in producing this type of pebble tool. Moreover, this site provides support for a need to more fully investigate this aspect of technology as a regional phenome- non and thereby help define the Chinese Middle Paleolithic as Discussion a concept. Moreover, there is an overall lack of predetermined flake blanks in the assemblage and it may be that the cores that Diverse flaking patterns and various degrees of flaking are approximate this technology are simply asymmetrical discoids represented for the cores at Lingjing. There are seven speci- or a more rudimentary or atypical form of prepared core tech- mens of asymmetrically flaked cores that are similar to nology. This can be regarded as a key difference between Levallois reduction techniques in their volumetric organiza- Lingjing and contemporaneous MP/MSA sites in western tion. However, due to the small number of these cores, it Eurasia and Africa. At Lingjing, the discoidal flaking system can—and should—be debated whether or not Levallois tech- represents the most common and standardized form. In the nology, whose rules and technological guidelines for classic discoidal core morphology, the two surfaces of these 3486 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490

Fig. 6 Examples of tools made on pebbles (a–g) at Lingjing cores are clearly bi-conical and represent standardized long Thus, when compared to typical earlier mode 1 assem- reduction sequences (Terradas 2003;Preysleretal.2003; blages, the lithics from the Lingjing site represent an advance- Peresani 2003; Faivre et al. 2014). Demonstrating such qual- ment in technology, demonstrating both fundamental similari- ities, the overall discoidal core reduction strategy at Lingjing tiesaswellassomedisparitywhencomparedtositesinthe is comparable to cores in the MP or MSA from outside of West. Technological features in the form of the standardized bi- China. Here, we do not deny the occurrence of discoidal cores conical discoidal cores, the presence of bifacial centripetally in Lower Paleolithic or Early Stone Age sites and we are and hierarchically flaked cores, the diversity of tool types, the aware that this can be used as an argument for a lack of dif- refined and skillful retouch on tools are all common to the ferentiation between the early and later periods of the MSA or MP in the West (Kuhn 2013)andin general do not Paleolithic in the region, however, the reduced size and the typically reflect Mode 1/Early Paleolithic tool kits. It is uncer- bi-conical shape are in fact features more commonly exhibited tain as to whether these similarities were generated as a result of on cores in MP or MSA (Peresani 2003). Also, the predomi- information transmission and exchange or the convergence of nance of freehand percussion in flaking small-sized quartz technological innovation emerging in different areas. cores at Lingjing represents an additional technological Nevertheless, if the Levallois is used as the fundamental marker Bratcheting up^ of skill of stone artifact knappers at the site. of what is or is not Middle Paleolithic, the paucity of prepared In comparison to standard mode 1 technologies in China cores makes Lingjing distinct from the West; a distinction (Yang et al. 2016; Pei et al. 2017;Guanetal.2016, 2018;Li which would not be unreasonable nor particularly surprising et al. 2017a, b), tools from Lingjing show a greater degree of given the geographic distance, the ecological and environmen- sophistication in terms of both technology and the consistency of tal differences, and/or the diversity of human species between types. Small-sized (or comparatively more Bmicrolithic^) tools East Asia and the West. Regardless of the inferences that may predominant, suggesting that individuals at Lingjing developed currently stem from the analysis of the Lingjing assemblage, novel approaches for the production of tools on smaller blanks observations offered here differ somewhat from the well- that often lack initial standardization in shape. On the other hand, recognized perspective regarding the nature of technological it may also demonstrate the flexible and more fluid adaptation of behavior in China during the period of ~ 300–40 ka (Gao and Lingjing humans to locally available and smaller forms of raw Norton 2002; Norton et al. 2009;Gao2013). In this case, core materials. Discrete tool types which are also common in non- reduction in Chinese sites is said to have remained casual and Chinese MP or MSA sites are present, including scrapers, den- opportunistic with a lack of diversity of tool types as well as ticulates, notches, points and borers. A number of refined tools tools that were primarily technologically simple, and irregular was made likely using soft hammer and pressure flaking. In in size and morphology (Gao and Norton 2002; Norton et al. addition, a number of basally retouched points may indicate 2009;Gao2013). Undoubtedly, the present study expands our hafting technology. understanding of the technological characteristics of the Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490 3487

Chinese Paleolithic in the early Late Pleistocene period and Another interesting phenomenon revealed recently is that a clearly shows evidence for some manners of technological typical Mousterian assemblage, including Levallois cores and amelioration in stone artifact technologies. Levallois points, has been reported at Jinsitai Cave in Inner Currently, a handful of Paleolithic or palaeoanthropological (Li et al. 2018a). A detailed comparative study shows sites in China have been dated to around 100 ka, a key time- that the occurrence of the assemblage is likely due to population line for the earlier dispersal of modern humans out of Africa dispersal or technological diffusion from the Altai Mountains of (Wei and Wu 2012; Hou et al. 2013;Shenetal.2013; Liu et al. Siberia, as similar earlier lithic assemblages have been discov- 2010, 2015; Bae et al. 2014; Guo et al. 2016; Bae et al. 2017). ered in that region (Li et al. 2018a). Significantly, dating shows However, very few of them can provide reliable dating results, that this assemblage appeared at ca. 47–42 ka (Li et al. 2018a), or large assemblages of stone artifacts for comparison. Nor do much younger than Lingjing. Thus, the evidence from Jinsitai they include those that have been studied or reanalyzed in Cave probably represents a later intrusion of what would be detail. For instance, while the sites of Fuyan Cave and considered more typically western Middle Paleolithic popula- Zhiren Cave, demonstrate fossils that tions. Though different from this classic Mousterian assemblage have been dated to ca. 100 ka, there have been no artifacts at Jinsitai Cave, the lithic assemblage at Lingjing nevertheless yet recovered from either site, and thus nothing is known does share key features with western MP or MSA toolkits. about the technological behaviors associated with the evi- Finally, it is noteworthy that the Acheulean techno-com- dence of human presence at these sites (Liu et al. 2010, plex, which is characterized by large cutting tools (e.g., 2015; but see Michel et al. 2016 for the debate of handaxes, picks, and cleavers), persisted in the Luonan chronology). At present, the best example for suitable com- Basin in northern China to between around 250–70 ka parison to Lingjing is the site of Banjingzi, which is located in (Wang and Lu 2016), overlapping with Lingjing in time. the Nihewan Basin, northern China and which has been re- The coexistence of two different lithic assemblages is either cently re-excavated. Although a detailed report has yet to be due to maintaining distinct technological traditions and the published, key information of the results is provided by Li diversity of populations living in variable biomes, or more et al. (2018a). The site was redated to ca. 89–80 ka (Guo simply due to the availability of raw material size. Either et al. 2016), with this latest excavation producing 2563 stone way, the coexistence of both is a question that requires further artifacts (see Table S5 for assemblage comparisons between investigation. Nevertheless, this demonstrates the diversity of the sites of Lingjing, Banjingzi, and Jinsitai, mentioned technological behaviors in the early Late Pleistocene in North below). The assemblage includes 111 cores, of which 15 China. (14%) are discoidal cores; the rest being simple or polyhedral Overall, the Lingjing lithic assemblage could potentially types. No blade or Levallois cores nor associated debitage demonstrate an existence of the CMP, which has distinct have yet been found. Among 162 retouched tools, scrapers regional characteristics. For a more robust understanding (n = 68, 42%), including side (n = 57, 35%) and transverse of what does or does not constitute the CMP, more lithic (n = 11, 7%) types are predominant, along with denticulates data is needed to summarize the technological characteris- (n = 32, 20%), notches (n = 32, 20%), awls (or borers; n =10, tics of assemblages in the early Late Pleistocene. On the 6%), and others (Li et al. 2018a). The lithic assemblage at other hand, the evidence for the use of other forms of ma- Banjingzi shows important similarities with Lingjing in terms terial culture at the site is significant and we feel it is not of both tool components and core types, although the propor- premature to suggest—provisionally and with caution—a tion of discoidal cores at Banjingzi is smaller. Overall, the two new way of speaking about and framing what we are see- sites may imply common technological features shared by ing in the technological evidence during this key period of early Late Pleistocene sites in northern China. Despite this the Paleolithic. Associated studies of indications for so- additional evidence for a wider, shared technological phenom- phisticated hunting skills of prime-age large animals at enon, we suggest that detailed studies of other sites dating to Lingjing(Lietal.2011) and the production and use of theMiddlePleistocene—and in particular in the latter half of bone implements (Li and Shen 2010; Doyon et al. 2018) Middle Pleistocene—are necessary. For instance, updated reveal other regularly occurring behaviors represented in analyses of lithic assemblages from Zhoukoudian 15 (~ 284– the western Eurasian MP and African MSA (Stiner 1990, 155 ka; Shen et al. 2004) and Dali (~ 267–258 ka; Sun et al. 2013; Conard and Prindiville 2000;Yeshurunetal.2007; 2017) have revealed the diversity of tool types occurring at d’Errico and Henshilwood 2007;Mallyeetal.2012; these sites (Gao 2001; Li and Lotter 2018). This likely indi- Abrams et al. 2014) and lends further support for cates the gradual development—rather than a revolutionary Lingjing having far more in common with the Middle shift—for more sophisticated technologies observed in the Paleolithic than with Mode 1 and the Early Paleolithic. early Late Pleistocene. Future study of a greater number of Such evidence supports the importance of continued study earlier sites will help to decipher in more detail, the process of and a movement toward how we may recognize and inter- the transformation. pret the Chinese Middle Paleolithic and the mechanisms of 3488 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490 it from the perspective of its unique geographic location References and prehistoric cultural context. Abrams G, Bello SM, Modica KD, Pirson S, Bonjean D (2014) When Neanderthals used cave bear (Ursus spelaeus) remains: bone re- touchers from Unit 5of Cave (). Quat Intern 326- 327:274–287 Conclusion Adler DS, Wilkinson KN, Blockley S, Mark DE, Pinhasi R, Schmidt- Magee BA, Nahapetyan S, Mallol C, Berna F, Glauberman PJ, The Lingjing site is potentially one of the most signifi- Raczynski-Henk Y, Wales N, Frahm E, Jöris O, MacLeod A, cant Paleolithic and palaeoanthropological sites found in Smith VC, Cullen VL, Gasparian B (2014) Early Levallois technol- ogy and the Lower to Middle Paleolithic transition in the Southern China in the new century. A clear stratigraphic record Caucasus. Science 345:1609–1613 and secure chronometric dates associated with the de- Akhilesh K, Pappu S, Rajapara HM, Gunnell Y, Shukla AD, Singhvi AK posits, along with the recovery of human crania and (2018) Early Middle Palaeolithic culture in around 385-172 ka abundant animal fossils as well as stone and bone arti- reframes out of Africa models. Nature 554:97–101 facts, provide vital behavioral information for our Álvarez-Alonso D (2014) First settlements in northern Iberia: the Acheulean and the emergence of Mousterian technology understanding of human evolution in the early Late in the Cantabrian region. Quat Intern 326-327:288–306 Pleistocene China. This study presents the detailed and Ambrose SH (2001) Paleolithic technology and human evolution. complete analysis of lithic assemblages that have been Science 291(5509):1748–1753 recovered from excavations spanning 12 years (2005– Armitage SJ, Jasim SA, Marks AE, Parker AG, Usik VI, Uerpmann H B ^ 2016) and which are directly associated with the two (2011) The southern route Out of Africa : evidence for an early expansion of modern humans into Arabia. Science 331:453–456 archaic human crania. We conclude that the nature of Aureli D, Rocca R, Lemorini C, Modesti V, Scaramucci S, Milli S, technological advancement exhibited in the Lingjing as- Giaccio B, Marano F, Palombo MR, Antonio Contardi A (2016) semblage will help to alter and advance long-standing Mode 1 or mode 2? BSmall tools^ in the technical variability of views of Chinese Paleolithic technologies pre-40 ka. In the European Lower Palaeolithic: the site of Ficoncella (Tarquinia, Lazio, central ). Quat Intern 393:169–184 addition, the similarities and differences demonstrated in Bae CJ, Wang W, Zhao JX, Huang SM, Tian F, Shen GJ (2014) Modern lithics from Lingjing when compared to contemporary human teeth from Late Pleistocene Luna Cave (, China). Middle Paleolithic or Middle Stone Age assemblages in Quat Intern 354:169–183 the West highlights the many commonalities Lingjing Bae CJ, Douka K, Petraglia MD (2017) On the origin of modern humans: – shares with such sites outside of China while at the same Asian perspectives. Science 358(6368):1269 1275 Bar-Yosef O (2015) Chinese Palaeolithic challenges for interpretations of time pointing to a unique developmental trajectory for Palaeolithic archaeology. Anthropologie LIII/1–2:77–92 the Middle Paleolithic in China. Finally, from the per- Bar-Yosef O, Wang YP (2012) Paleolithic archaeology in China. Annu spective of understanding regional behavioral patterns, Rev Anthropol 41:319–335 the study of Lingjing, showcases the complexity and di- Boëda E (1993) Le débitage discoïde et le débitage Levallois récurrent – versity of lithic technologies in China and addresses the centripède. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 90:392 404 many fundamental and important questions regarding Bradley RS (2015) Paleoclimatology (third edition): reconstructing cli- what we do and do not know about the behavioral evo- mates of the Quaternary. Academic Press, New York lution of ancient Chinese populations. Burdukiewicz JM (2009) Lower Palaeolithic transitions in the northern latitudes of Eurasia. In: Sourcebook of Paleolithic transitions: Acknowledgements We thank X.M. Sun, L.M. Jia, and Q.P. Zhao from methods, theories, and interpretations. Springer New York, pp – the Henan Provincial Institue of Cultural Relics and Archeology, Luc 195 209 Doyon from the Shandong University, S.Q. Zhang and W. Dong from Burdukiewicz JM, Ronen A (2003) Lower Palaeolithic small tools in the Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Europe and the Levant. Oxford Archaeopress, BAR International Academy of Sciences, and cultural relics units in Xuchang. Our sincerest Series 1115 thanks to all for contributions to site excavation and study. We also thank Chazan M (1997) Redefining Levallois. J Hum Evol 33:719–735 Ignacio de la Torre, from the University College London, for his insight- Clark JD (1998) The Early Palaeolithic of the eastern region of the Old ful comments on an earlier draft. World in comparison to the West. In: Early human behavior in glob- al context: the rise and diversity of the Lower Palaeolithic record. – Funding information This study was funded by the Strategic Priority Routledge, New York, pp 437 450 Research Program of the Chinese Academy of Sciences (XDB26000000, Conard NJ, Prindiville TJ (2000) Middle Palaeolithic hunting economies – XDA19050102), the Chinese Academy of Sciences Pioneer Hundred in the Rhineland. Intern J Osteoarch 10:286 309 Talents Program, the Shandong University 111 Project (111-2-09), the d’Errico F, Henshilwood CS (2007) Additional evidence for bone tech- Youth Project of the National Social Science Fund of China nology in the southern African Middle Stone Age. J Hum Evol 52: (16CKG003), and the National Natural Science Foundation of China 142–163 (41672020). KK’s collaborative work in China is supported by the d’Errico F, Backwell LR, Wadley L (2012) Identifying regional variabil- National Research Foundation of South Africa (grant number 88480). ity in Middle Stone Age bone technology: the case of Sibudu Cave. J Arch Sci 39:2479–2495 Publisher’sNoteSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdic- de la Peña P, Wadley L, Lombard M (2013) Quartz bifacial points in the tional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. Howiesons Poort of Sibudu. South. Afr Arch Bull 68:1196–13 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490 3489 de Lombera-Hermida A, Rodríguez-Rellán C (2016) Quartzes matter. emergence of the Middle Palaeolithic in north-western Europe and Understanding the technological and behavioural complexity in its southern fringes. Quat Intern 411(Part A):233–228 quartz lithic assemblages. Quat Intern 424:2–11 Hershkovitz I, Weber GW, Quam R, Duval M, Grün R, Kinsley L, Ayalon DeBono H, Goren-Inbar N (2001) Note on a link between Acheulian A, Bar-Matthews M, Valladas H, Mercier N, Arsuaga JL, Martinón- handaxes and the Levallois method. J Israel Prehist Soc 31:9–23 Torres M, de Castro J, Fornai C, Martín-Francés L, Sarig R, May H, Despriée J, Moncel M-H, Arzarello M, Courcimault G, Voinchet P, Krenn VA, Slon V, Rodríguez L, García R, Lorenzo C, Carretero Bahain J-J, Falguères C (2018) The 1-million-year-old quartz as- JM, Frumkin A, Shahack-Gross R, Mayer D, Cui Y,Wu X, Peled N, semblage from Pont-de-Lavaud (Centre, ) in the European Groman-Yaroslavski I, Weissbrod L, Yeshurun R, Tsatskin A, context. J Quaternary Sci 33:639–661 Zaidner Y, Weinstein-Evron M (2018) The earliest modern humans Diez-Martín F, Yustos PS, Domínguez-Rodrigo M, Prendergast ME outside Africa. Science 359:456–459 (2011) An experimental study of bipolar and freehand knapping of Hou YM, Yang SX, Dong W, Zhang JF, Liu Y (2013) Late Pleistocene Naibor Soit quartz from Olduvai Gorge (). Am Antiq 76: representative sites in North China and their indication of evolution- 690–670 ary human behavior. Quat Intern 295:183–190 Doyon L, Li ZY, Li H, d’Errico F (2018) Discovery of circa 115,000- Keates SG (2001) Perspectives on BMiddle Paleolithic^ settlement pat- year-old bone retouchers at Lingjing, Henan, China. PLoS One terns in China. Settlement Dynamics of the Middle Paleolithic and 13(3):e0194318 Middle Stone Age. Tübingen Kerns Verlag, In, pp 53–178 Driscoll K (2009). Exploring the Chaîne Opératoires in Irish quartz lithic Klein RG (2009) The human career: human biological and cultural ori- traditions: current research. Internet Archaeology 26, from http:// gins. The University of Chicago Press, Chicago – intarch.ac.uk/journal/issue26/driscollb_index.html Knight J (2016) Vein quartz. Lithics the Journal of the Lithic Studies Faivre J-P, Discamps E, Gravina B, Turq A, Guadelli J-L, Lenoir M Society 12(37) (2014) The contribution of lithic production systems to the interpre- Kuhn SL (2013) Roots of the Middle Paleolithic in Eurasia. Curr – tation of Mousterian industrial variability in south-western France: Anthropol 54(suppl. 8):S255 S268 the example of Combe-Grenal (Dordogne, France). Quat Intern 350: Kuhn SL, Hovers E (2013) Alternative pathways to complexity: evolu- 227–240 tionary trajectories in the Middle Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age. – Fontana F, Moncel M-H, Nenzionic G, Onorevolid G, Peretto C, Combier Curr Anthropol 54(suppl. 8):S176 S182 J (2013) Widespread diffusion of technical innovations around 300, Li ZY (2007) A primary study on the stone artifacts of Lingjing site – 000 years ago in Europe as a reflection of anthropological and social excavated in 2005. Acta Anthropol Sin 26:138 154 transformations? New comparative data from the western Li ZY (2010) 2006 excavation on the Paleolithic Lingjing site in – Mediterranean sites of Orgnac (France) and Cave dall’Olio (Italy). Xuchang. Acta Archaeol Sin 1:73 100 J Anthropol Archaeol 32:478–498 Li F (2014) Fact or fiction: the Middle Palaeolithic in China. Antiquity 88:1303–1309 Gao X (1999) A discussion on BChinese Middle Paleolithic^.Acta Li H, Lotter M (2018) Lithic production strategies during the late Middle Anthropol Sin 18:1–15 Pleistocene at Dali, Shaanxi Province, China: implications for un- Gao X (2001) A study of stone tool typology and retouch technology at derstanding late archaic humans. Archaeol Anthropol Sci. https:// Zhoukoudian Locality 15. Acta Anthropol Sin 20:1–18 doi.org/10.1007/s12520-018-0626-6 Gao X (2013) Paleolithic cultures in China: uniqueness and divergence. Li ZY, Ma HH (2016) Techno-typological analysis of the microlithic Curr Anthropol 54(suppl. 8):S358–S370 assemblage at the Xuchang Man site, Lingjing, central China. B ^ Gao X, Norton CJ (2002) A critique of the Chinese Middle Paleolithic . Quat Intern 400:120–129 – Antiquity 76:397 412 Li ZY, Shen C (2010) Use-wear analysis confirms the use of Paleolithic Groucutt HS, Grün R, Zalmout ISA, Drake NA, Armitage SJ, Candy I, bone tools by the Lingjing Xuchang early human. Chin Sci Bull 55: Clark-Wilson R, Louys J, Breeze PS, Duval M, Buck LT, Kivell TL, 895–903 Pomeroy E, Stephens NB, Stock JT, Stewart M, Price GJ, Kinsley L, Li ZY, Zhang SQ, Zhang Y, Gao X (2011) Mortality curves for horses Sung W, Alsharekh A, Al-Omari A, Zahir M, Memesh AM, (Equus Caballus) from the Lingjing site, Henan Province. Acta Abdulshakoor AJ, Al-Masari AM, Bahameem AA, Murayyi K, Anthropol Sin 30:45–54 Zahrani B, Scerri E, Petraglia MD (2018) Homo sapiens in Arabia Li ZY, Li YN, Kato S (2014) Observation of microblade core technolo- – by 85,0000 years ago. Nat Ecol Evol 2:800 809 gies from Level 5 of the Xuchang Man site, Lingjing. Acta Grün R, Stringer C (1991) Electron spin resonance dating and the evolu- Anthropol Sin 33:285–301 – tion of modern humans. Archaeometry 33:153 199 Li H, Li CR, Kuman K (2017a) Longgudong, an Early Pleistocene site in Grün R, Stringer C, McDermott F, Nathan R, Porat N, Robertson S, Jianshi, South China, with stratigraphic association of human teeth Taylor L, Mortimer G, Eggins S, McCulloch M (2005) U-series and lithics. Sci China: Earth Sci 60:452–462 and ESR analyses of bones and teeth relating to the human burials Li H, Li CR, Sherwood NL, Kuman K (2017b) Experimental flaking in from Skhul. J Hum Evol 49:316–334 the Danjiangkou Reservoir Region (central China): a rare case of Guan Y,Wang FG, Xie F, Pei SW, Zhou ZY,Gao X (2016) Flint knapping bipolar blanks in the Acheulean. J Arch Sci: Reports 13:26–35 strategies at Cenjiawan, an early Paleolithic site in the Nihewan Li ZY, Wu XJ, Zhou LP, Liu W, Gao X, Nian XM, Trinkaus E (2017c) Basin, North China. Quat Intern 400:86–92 Late Pleistocene archaic human crania from Xuchang, China. Guan Y, Xu XM, Kuman K, Wu HZ, Zhou ZY, Gao X (2018) The Science 355(6328):969–972 absence of Acheulean: Qiliting Mode 1 site and the Mode 1 occu- Li F, Kuhn S, Chen FY, Wang YH, Southon J, Peng F, Shan MC, Wang pations in southeast China. Quat Intern 480:152–165 CX, Ge JY, Wang XM, Yun T, Gao X (2018a) The easternmost Guo YJ, Li B, Zhang JF, Yuan BY, Xie F, Roberts RG (2016) Middle Paleolithic (Mousterian) from Jinsitai Cave, North China. J Lumonescence ages for three BMiddle Palaeolithic^ sites in the Hum Evol 114:76–84 Nihewan Basin, northern China, and their archaeological and Liu W, Jin CZ, Zhang YQ, Cai YJ, Xing S, Wu XJ, Cheng H, Edwards L, palaeoenvironmental implications. Quat Res 85:456–470 Pan WS, Qin DG, An ZS, Trinkaus E, Wu XZ (2010) Human re- Hérisson D, Brenet M, Cliquet D, Moncel M-H, Richter J, Scott B, mains from Zhirendong, South China, and modern human emer- Baelen AV, Modica KD, Loecker DD, Ashton N, Bourguignon L, gence in East Asia. PNAS 107(45):19201–19206 Delagnes A, Faivre J, Folgado-Lopez M, Locht J, Pope M, Raynal J, Liu W, Martinón-Torres M, Cai YJ, Xing S, Tong HW, Pei SW, Sier MJ, Roebroeks W, Santagata C, Turq A, Van Peer P (2016) The Wu XH, Edwards R, Cheng H, Li YY, Yang XX, de Castro JM, Wu 3490 Archaeol Anthropol Sci (2019) 11:3477–3490

XJ (2015) The earliest unequivocally modern humans in southern Shen GJ, Gao X, Zhao JX, Collerson KD (2004) U-series dating of China. Nature 526:696–699 Locality 15 at Zhoukoudian, China, and implications for hominid Lycett S (2007) Why is there a lack of Mode 3 Levallois technologies in evolution. Quat Res 62:208–213 East Asia? A phylogenetic test of the Movius-Schick hypothesis. J Shen GJ, Gao X, Gao B, Granger DE (2009) Age of Zhoukoudian Homo AnthropolArchaeol26:541–575 erectus determined with (26)Al/(10)Be burial dating. Nature Mallye JB, Thiébaut C, Mourre V,Costamagno S, Claud É, Weisbecker P 458(7235):198–200 (2012) The Mousterian bone retouchers of : experi- Shen GJ, Wu XZ, Wang Q, Tu H, Feng YX, Zhao JX (2013) Mass mentation and identification of marks. J Arch Sci 39:1131–1142 spectrometric U-series dating of Huanglong Cave in Hubei Michel V, Valladas H, Shen G, Wang W, Zhao J-X, Shen C-C, Valensi P, Province, central China: evidence for early presence of modern – Bae CJ (2016) The earliest modern Homo sapiens in China? J Hum humans in eastern Asia. J Hum Evol 65:162 167 Evol 101:101–104 Shipton C, Clarkson C, Pal JN, Jones SC, Roberts RG, Harris C, Gupta Moncel M-H, Moigne A-M, Combier J (2012) Towards the Middle MC, Ditchfield PW, Petraglia MD (2013) Generativity, hierarchical Paleolithic in western Europe: the case of Orgnac 3 (South-Eastern action and recursion in the technology of the Acheulean to Middle France). J Hum Evol 63:653–666 Palaeolithic transition: a perspective from Patpara, the Son Valley. India J Hum Evol 65:93–108 Mourre V, Villa P, Henshilwood CS (2010) Early use of pressure flaking Soriano S, Villa P (2017) Early Levallois and the beginning of the Middle on lithic artifacts at Blombos cave. South Africa Sci 330(6004):659– Paleolithic in central Italy. PLoS One 12(10):e0186082 662 Stiner MC (1990) The use of mortality patterns in archaeological studies Norton CJ, Gao X, Feng XW (2009) The east Asian middle Paleolithic of hominid predatory adaptations. J Anthropol Arch 9:305–351 reexamined. In: Sourcebook of Paleolithic transitions: methods, the- – Stiner MC (2013) An unshakable Middle Paleolithic? Curr Anthropol ories, and interpretations. Springer New York, pp 245 254 54(S8):S288–S304 Otte M (1995) The nature of Levallois. The definition and interpretation Sun XF, Yi S, Lu H, Zhang W (2017) TT-OSL and post-IR IRSL dating – of Levallois technology. Madison Prehistory Press, In, pp 117 143 of the Dali Man site in central China. Quat Int 434:99–106 Van Peer P (1992) The Levallois reduction strategy. Prehistory Press, Terradas X (2003) Discoid flaking method: conception and technological Madison variability. In: Discoid lithic technology: advances and implications. Pei WW, Zhang SS (1985) A study on the lithic artifacts of Sinanthropus. Oxford Archaeopress, pp 19–32 Science Press, Beijing Tryon CA (2006). BEarly^ Middle Stone Age lithics of the Kapthurin Pei SW, Xie F, Deng CL, Jia ZX, Wang X, Guan Y, Li XL, Ma DD, de la Formation (). Curr Anthropol 47:367–375 Torre I (2017) Early Pleistocene archaeological occurrences at the Tryon CA, McBrearty S, Texier P-J (2005) Levallois lithics from the Feiliang site, and the archaeology of human origins in the Nihewan Kapthurin Formation, Kenya: Acheulian origin and Middle Stone Basin, North China. PLoS One 12(11):e0187251 Age diversity. Afr Archaeol Rev 22:199–229 Peresani M (2003) An initial overview of the Middle Palaeolithic discoid Wang SJ, Lu HY (2016) Taphonomic and paleoenvironmental issues of industries in Central-Northern Italy. In: Discoid lithic technology: the Pleistocene loessic Paleolithic sites in the Qinling Mountains, advances and implications. Oxford Archaeopress, pp 209–224 central China. Sci China: Earth Sci 59:1519–1528 Picin A (2017) Technological adaptation and the emergence of Levallois Wei Q, Wu XJ (2012) Approach to stratigraphy of the Xujiayao- in Central Europe: new insight from the Markkleeberg and Zwochau Houjiayao site in Nihewan Basin, China. Acta Anthropol Sin 31: open-air sites in Germany. J Quaternary Sci 33:300–312. https://doi. 151–163 org/10.1002/jqs.2978 White M, Ashton N (2003) Lower Palaeolithic core technology and the Porat N, Chazan M, Grün R, Aubert M, Eisenmann V, Horwitz LK origins of the Levallois method in North-Western Europe. Curr – (2010) New radiometric ages for the Fauresmith industry from Anthropol 44:598 609 Kathu Pan, southern Africa: implications for the Earlier to Middle White M, Scott B, Ashton N (2006) The Early Middle Palaeolithic in Stone Age transition. J Archaeol Sci 37:269–283 Britain: archaeology, settlement history and human behaviour. J – Preysler JB, Santafé EC, López VR (2003) Recent discoveries of discoid Quat Sci 21:525 541 industries in Western Cantabria (North ). In: Discoid lithic Yang SX, Hou YM, Yue JP, Petraglia M, Deng CL, Zhu RX (2016) The technology: advances and implications. Oxford Archaeopress, pp lithic assemblages of Xiaochangliang, Nihewan Basin: implications 117–126 for Early Pleistocene hominin behavior in North China. PLoS One 11:e0155793 Qiu ZL (1985) The Middle Paleolithic of China. In: Paleoanthropology Yee MK (2012) The Middle Palaeolithic in China: a review of current and Paleolithic archaeology in the People’s Republic of China. interpretations. Antiquity 86:619–626 California Left Coast Press, pp 187–210 Yeshurun R, Bar-Oz G, Weinstein-Evron M (2007) Modern hunting be- Qiu ZL (1992) The stone industries of Homo sapiens from China. In: The havior in the early Middle Paleolithic: faunal remains from Misliya evolution and dispersal of modern humans in Asia. Tokyo Hokusen- – – Cave, Mount Carmel, Israel. J Hum Evol 53:656 677 sha, pp 363 372 Zhang SS (1985) Preliminary investigation of the Middle Paleolithic in Richter D, Grün R, Joannes-Boyau R, Steele T, Amani F, Rué M, north China. Prehis Res 1:8–22 Fernandes P, Raynal JP, Geraads D, Ben-Ncer A, Hublin JJ, Zhang SQ, Li ZY, Zhang Y, Gao X (2009) Mortality profiles of the large McPherron SP (2017) The age of the hominin fossils from Jebel herbivores from the Lingjing Xuchang Man site, Henan Province Irhoud, , and the origins of the Middle Stone Age. Nature and the early emergence of the modern human behaviors in East – 546:293 296 Asia. Chin Sci Bull 54:3857–3863 Sahle Y, Morgan LE, Braun DR, Atnafu B, Hutchings WK (2014) Zhang SQ, Gao X, Zhang Y, Li ZY (2011a) Taphonomic analysis of the Chronological and behavioral contexts of the earliest Middle Stone Lingjing fauna and the first report of a Middle Paleolithic kill- Age in the Gademotta Formation, Main Ethiopian Rift. Quat Intern butchery site in North China. Chin Sci Bull 56:3213–3219 331:6–19 Zhang SQ, Li ZY,Zhang Y, Gao X (2011b) Cultural modifications on the Seong C, Bae CJ (2016) The eastern Asian BMiddle Palaeolithic^ animal bones from the Lingjing site, Henan Province. Acta revisited: a view from Korea. Antiquity 90(353):1151–1165 Anthropol Sin 30:313–326