On the Processes of Diversification in Microblade Technocomplexes in the Late 29 Glacial Hokkaido Yuichi Nakazawa and Satoru Yamada

Nakazawa and Yamada On the Processes of Diversification in Microblade Technocom- plexes in the Late Glacial Hokkaido

ABSTRACT

Microblade technology was a newly invented technology sented by the emergence of various technocomplexes in among modern humans in northeastern Asia during the the Late Glacial. The diversification processes occurred terminal Pleistocene. Because of its pan-regional distri- gradually at a millennial scale, suggesting that the tech- bution, wedge- shaped microblade cores have long been nological changes in microblade technocomplexes and regarded as a cultural marker and a technology critical tool assemblages resulted from demographic pressure. to debates concerning the peopling of the New World. In Hokkaido, where numerous Late Glacial archaeological Introduction sites are recorded, microblade assemblages exhibit notable variability in stone tool classes and the morphotech- The past three decades have witnessed consistent debate nological characteristics of microblade cores. This paper focused on the origin of modern humans. As McBrearty addresses the questions of how and why the variability and Brooks (2000) demonstrated in Africa, the archaic in microblade technocomplexes emerged in Late Gla- to modern behavioral transition was gradual and is ex- cial Hokkaido (northern Japan). By employing a large pressed in certain aspects of the archaeological record data set of microblade technocomplexes from Hokkaido, (i.e., abstract thinking; planning depth; behavioral, eco- we measure richness and evenness of stone tool classes nomic, and technological innovativeness; and symbolic among four continuous phases (i.e., pre–Last Glacial behavior) that vary according to geographic region. Even Maximum [LGM], LGM, early Late Glacial, and late Late in Europe, where the Old Stone Age has been investi- Glacial) and among five technocomplexes (i.e., early Late gated for more than a century, contradictory views on the Glacial technocomplex with bifacial microblade cores, origin of modern human behavior are prominent—for late Late Glacial technocomplex with bifacial microblade example, an abrupt transition from the Neanderthal to cores, late Late Glacial technocomplex with nonbifacial modern humans (Middle to Upper Paleolithic) has been microblade cores, late Late Glacial technocomplex with proposed based on archaeological records in southwest- small boat-shaped tools, and late Late Glacial techno- ern France (e.g., Klein 2008; Mellars 1989), while grad- complex with stemmed points). The frequencies of tool ual and stepwise transitions have been observed in other classes in the assemblages are also compared among the regions of Europe (e.g., Kuhn and Bietti 2000; Straus four phases. Although the small sample size of the pre- 2005, 2012; Straus and Heller 1988). In northeast Asia, LGM and LGM assemblages makes it difficult to evaluate the origin of modern humans and the transition from tool assemblage variability, a gradual increase in tool as- Middle to Upper Paleolithic is complex (Brantingham semblage variability after the end of the LGM toward the et al. 2001; Derevianko 2011). This is partly a result of end of Late Glacial are coupled with the diversification its vast geographic range. Northeastern Asia—northern processes of microblade core reduction methods repre- China, Korea, Mongolia, eastern Siberia, Russian Far

418

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 418 9/3/14 3:44 PM East, and northern Japan—is a large geographic block high. A total of 233 sites have yielded microblade assem- occupying the eastern end of the northern hemisphere blages in Hokkaido (Tsutsumi 2011). This sample size and is situated on the northern Pacific Rim between the could be partly due to the difference between regions in Old and New Worlds. With respect to the Late Glacial and outside Hokkaido, but could also reflect behavioral archaeological records, northeastern Asia has been char- factors including Late Pleistocene hunter–gatherer pop- acterized by microblade technology used in composite ulation dynamics, rate of technological innovations, and tools, which has been commonly recognized as a formal hunter–gatherer technological strategies, as well as en- stone tool technology invented and maintained by termi- vironmental factors that include changes in climate and nal Pleistocene hunter–gatherer societies (Bar-Yosef and density of prey resources in human habitats. Given the Kuhn 1999; Elston and Brantigham 2002; Goebel 1999, current status of Paleolithic archaeology in Hokkaido, this 2002; Yi and Clark 1985). Microblade technology also paper addresses the question of why the observed mor- serves as the major lithic weapon system that was car- photechnological variability in microblade assemblages ried over Beringia and into the New World (e.g., Dixon in Hokkaido emerged during the Late Glacial. 1999; Hamilton and Goebel 1999; Hoffecker et al. 1993). Given its complexity, in terms of both manufacture and Geographic Setting of Hokkaido use, doubtless microblades were a technology newly invented by modern humans. Hokkaido is a large island located at the northern mar- Because of the large geographic region and differences gin of the Japanese Archipelago, extending from 42°N in trajectories of research among various countries, the to 46°N latitude and between 140°E and 146°E longitude quantity and quality of archaeological data vary region- (figure 29.1). The total land surface measures 83,456 km2 ally in northeastern Asia. Hokkaido, located at the east- (2097 acres). The geography of Hokkaido is largely di- ern edge of northeastern Asia, is characterized by both a vided into western and eastern regions by the Hidaka rich Late Glacial microblade industry and dense distri- and Kitami Mountains, which run in a north–south di- bution of Late Glacial (Upper Paleolithic) sites. Micro- rection along the center of the island. An estimation of blade technology, notably characterized by wedge-shaped low surface-water salinity in the Sea of Japan, based on microblade cores, is widely distributed across the north- the planktonic delta oxygen isotopic values, suggests that ern Eurasia. This microblade technology, known as the the sill depths of the straits during the LGM were shal- “Yubetsu method,” was originally recognized from speci- lower than they are at present (Tada 1999). The Tsushima mens found at the Shirataki site, northeastern Hokkaido Strait, situated between the Korean Peninsula and the Sea (Yoshizaki 1961). While scholars have investigated the of Japan, was only 10 km across and 10 m deep (Ono behavioral significance of the pan-geographic distribu- 1990). Therefore, the Sea of Japan was a nearly closed tion of wedge- shaped microblade cores (e.g., Kajiwara environment. Because of the global glacioeustatic drop 2008; Yi and Clark 1985), Japanese Paleolithic archaeolo- in sea level, the four major islands were combined into gists have mostly devoted time and energy to extracting two landmasses: the Paleo-Sakhalin–Hokkaido–Kuril patterns of morphotechnological characteristics in lithic Peninsula that was connected to Sakhalin Island and the artifacts, to build cultural chronologies. The increased Russian Far East. During the Pleistocene, Hokkaido was number of assemblages in Japan resulting from the rush the southern end of this narrow peninsula, stretching of salvage projects over the past four decades provided from the Russian Far East (figure 29.1). The western part an opportunity for this wave of analyses (Nakazawa 2010; of Japan was a large island referred to as Paleo-Honshu Tsurumaru 2001). After decades of research, we now share Island. In addition to large terrestrial mammals, includ- the common perception that microblade assemblages in ing mammoths, horses, and bison, humans could also Hokkaido exhibit technological diversification (Izuho migrate back and forth between Eastern Siberia and et al. 2012; Nakazawa et al. 2005; Yamada 2006). The num- Hokkaido. Despite the ability to reconstruct the mam- ber of sites with microblades and the variability observed mal community, the Pleistocene archaeological sites in in microblade assemblages from Hokkaido is remarkably the Japanese Archipelago normally lack organic remains

On the Processes of Diversification in Microblade Technocomplexes in the Late Glacial Hokkaido 419

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 419 9/3/14 3:44 PM was around the LGM or before (Adachi et al. 2011). How- ever, scarce evidence of the Late Pleistocene hominin fos- sil records from northeastern Asia and Hokkaido makes it difficult to further test the timing of migrations and degree of interactions among Paleolithic populations in northeastern Asia. Phylogenetic relationships of technologies among Late Pleistocene humans in northeastern Asia are characterized by blades and microliths, namely Mode 4 and 5 technologies (Clark 1969; Foley and Lahr 1997). At the regional level, such as the Korean Peninsula, Sakhalin, and Hokkaido, archaeological records paint complex pictures of the evolution of technology, beyond the simple labeling of Modes 4 and 5.

Microblade Assemblages in Hokkaido Contrary to the macrogeographical view of human colonization in northern Eurasia, insight into microblade technology has been centered on morphotechnological issues since the beginning of the archaeological research in Hokkaido, especially on the reconstructions of microblade core reductions and types of microblade cores. Systematic observations of morphological traits on microblade cores (e.g., Anbiru 1979; Tsurumaru 1979) and lithic refitting studies (e.g., Kimura 1992; Takakura 2010) have identified various reduction methods that enabled Figure 29.1 The paleogeography of Japanese Archipelago humans to produce highly standardized microblades. By during the Last Glacial Maximum. (Adapted from Iwase et al. the end of 1980s, most of the methods of microblade core 2012, figure 2.) preparation known today were associated with the various types of microblade cores. Commonly recognized because of acidic sediments and a humid environment. microblade core reduction techniques are largely classi- Such poor preservation conditions have resulted in a very fied into seven methods (Nakazawa et al. 2005). In four limited number of human remains and constrained our of them (Yubetsu, Togeshita, Oshorokko, and Rankoshi), ability to reconstruct human and prey interactions. platforms were prepared by removing spalls along the longest axis of a bifacial core, one is characterized by a Research History boat-shaped core (Horoka), while the remaining two core types do not derive from bifacial core blanks as one Given the nature of the late arrival of human populations, incorporates blade blanks (Hirosato) and the other re- in terms of the migratory history of modern humans quires a conical microblade core (Oketo). from the central Asia, northeastern Asia is regarded as New refit studies, particularly of assemblages from a marginal region in human evolution (Pope and Terrell quarry sites such as the Shirataki obsidian quarry sites 2008). One analysis of mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) (Kimura 1992) and the Pirika sites in southern Hokkaido haplogroups of the Jomon (Holocene hunter–gatherer– where high-quality hard shale is locally available (Tera- fishers) suggests that Paleolithic populations descended saki 1999), have added to our understanding of variation from populations in the lower Amur region of eastern in core-preparation methods (e.g., selected blank types Siberia, and the estimated date of the genetic divergence and methods of platform preparation and rejuvenations)

420 Nakazawa and Yamada

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 420 9/3/14 3:44 PM that often obscured the original definition of the Yubetsu 24,000 years ago (Izuho et al. 2012) (hereafter, all dates method (cf. Nakazawa et al. 2007). Categorization of the are uncalibrated). The earliest dated archaeological site various types of microblade cores by “splitters” among is the open-air Wakabanomori site located at the Tok- lithic analysts suggests that the high degree of morpho- achi Plain, southeastern Hokkaido. The assemblage is logical and technological variation observed in micro- characterized by small flakes detached from pebbles and blade cores may reflect multiple methods of microblade small cobbles of obsidian, which are available in local core manufacture, which should not be obscured by the riverbeds. The majority of the chipped-stone tools are single blanket term Yubetsu (sensu Yoshizaki 1961). The flakes with minimum retouch. No formal tools other evolutionary and behavioral significance surrounding than perforators were identified. The burnt sediments, the various methods in microblade core preparations and from which charcoal specimens for radiometric dates the resultant core types has rarely been addressed (but were obtained, spatially overlapped with lithic scatters. see Elston and Brantingham 2002). However, the burnt sediments that were extensively Core-preparation methods have traditionally been distributed across the excavated area were deformed by predominant in the study of microblade assemblages in cryoturbation, and some burnt patches were not associ- Japan (Bleed 2003). In other words, the study of micro- ated with artifact scatters (Kitazawa 2004). The high rate blade technology in Japan is somewhat biased toward of thermal alteration (38 percent of the lithic artifacts ac- the technotypological study of microblade cores. This cording to the principal investigator, Minoru Kitazawa) research bias in the study of microblade technology that (Kitazawa 2004, 163) indicates that wildfires could have long captured the interests of Paleolithic archaeologists in played a significant role in thermally altering the lithic Hokkaido has now started to be gradually ameliorated by assemblage. Chronometric dates of lithic artifacts and introducing new insights from use-wear studies of micro- the contextual relationship between episodes of fire and blades (e.g., Tsutsumi 2011) and raw material availability formation processes of artifact scatters need to be as- (e.g., Sano 2010). A group of archaeologists working in sessed in future research. The lithic assemblage of Wak- northeastern Hokkaido have also suggested that differ- abanomori would be a variant of older lithic technologies ences in site function are notable based on observations in Hokkaido (Izuho et al. 2012). of variability in stone tool components in Paleolithic sites A lithic technology comparable to that found at (Kato 1970; Yamada 2006). Differences in the frequencies Wakabanomori has not been found in Hokkaido, and of stone tool classes (i.e., “hunting weapons” consisting of affirmative evidence of human occupations (in terms microblades and bifacial stemmed points and “process- of both chronometric dates and artifacts and stratigra- ing tools” including burins, side scrapers, and end scrap- phy) started to appear during the LGM, dated between ers) suggest functional differences among sites along the 21,000 and 18,000 years ago, although as Izuho et al. Tokoro River of northeastern Hokkaido. A sophisticated (2012) notes, there are a few lithic industries with small region-level study employing a variety of updated mor- flakes that possibly date to before the LGM. It was also photechnological tool classes present in Hokkaido as- during the LGM that the first wedge-shaped microblade semblages has been proposed by Yamada (2006). Based core technology appeared. The salvage excavation of the on the difference in relationships between expected Kashiwadai 1 site, conducted between 1997 and 1999 in mobility and stone tool assemblage formation processes central Hokkaido (Hokkaido Buried Cultural Property (Shott 1986), Yamada (2006) suggested that Late Glacial Center 1999) yielded wedge-shaped microblade cores hunter–gatherers changed mobility strategies from “for- made from semi-bifacial core blanks, labeled as the “Ran- ager” to “collector” (Binford 1980) at the transition from koshi type” (Tsurumaru 1979), which are now regarded the early to the late phases of microblade industry. as the initial emergence of microblade core reduction. In addition to the microblades, there are two other variants Pre-LGM and LGM Archaeological Records in the assemblages: macroblades and flakes. A macro- The first evidence of modern humans appeared in the blade assemblage was identified only at the Kawanishi C regional archaeological records approximately 28,000– site on the Tokachi Plain, southeastern Hokkaido. The

On the Processes of Diversification in Microblade Technocomplexes in the Late Glacial Hokkaido 421

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 421 9/3/14 3:44 PM assemblage was recovered from the loam layer below the En-a tephra, dated to ca. 18,000–15,000 years ago, and above the Spfa-1, dated to 45,000–40,000 years ago (Nakazawa et al. 2010). Small flakes with minimum retouch and scrapers made on small, thick flakes charac- terize the flake assemblage. Similar flake assemblages, more than microblade and macroblade assemblages, are frequently found in Hokkaido. The lithic assemblages of the LGM are characterized by high variability, since three blank-production methods—microblades, macroblades, and flakes—are recognized. A comparison of the variability of stone tool assemblages shows that the degree of variation within each tool class is notably different among groups of microblade, macroblade, and flake assemblages, suggesting that people living during the LGM in Hokkaido organized their technology in response to diverse environmental conditions (Nakazawa and Izuho 2006) (figure 29.2). The number of both pre-LGM and LGM assemblages is still so small that a comparison of stone tool assemblage variability may underestimate the “reality” of morphotechnological diversity. In this respect, large numbers of samples from the Late Glacial microblade assemblages are not precisely comparable to those in the LGM and pre- Figure 29.2 Stone tools from the pre-LGM and LGM LGM. In order to make a temporal comparison of stone technocomplexes. 1–4: Wakabanomori (pre-LGM); 5–11: tool assemblage variability with different sample sizes, microblade assemblage from the Kashiwadai 1 (LGM); 12–15: we employ the notion of the technocomplex, originally flake assemblage from the Kashiwadai 1 (LGM); 16: Kawanishi proposed by David Clarke (1968). The technocomplex is C (LGM). 1–4: minimally retouched flakes; 5–8: microblade an analytical unit used to designate a group of cultures cores; 9–11: microblades; 12–15: end scrapers on flakes; 16: characterized by assemblages within which general fami- scraper on blade. lies of artifacts are found. Because multiple elements such as ideas, knowledge, and technologies are encompassed, Microblade Technocomplexes a single technocomplex often does not have aclear- cut Given the highly diversified microblade core reduction spatial and temporal boundary. Following Clarke’s defi- methods that are visible in the Late Glacial archaeolog- nition, we designated “microblade technocomplexes” for ical records (Nakazawa et al. 2005), the technocomplex the Late Glacial microblade assemblages sorted by meth- identified in the LGM assemblages “diverged” into mul- ods of microblade core reductions (i.e., distinctive core- tiple “modes” during the Late Glacial. The Late Glacial preparation sequences) observed in microblade assem- assemblages were categorized by distinctive variation in blages. The assumption regarding the technocomplex is microblade core reductions—that is, sequential steps to that methods of microblade core reductions were created prepare and reduce bifacial and nonbifacial cores. Based by technological strategies that were shared among Late on the cultural chronology and morphotechnological Glacial hunter–gatherer societies who survived under classification of microblade assemblages in Hokkaido diverse and often rigorous climatic and ecological set- (Yamada 2006), the Late Glacial assemblages are divided tings in northeastern Asia. into early and late phases, which we call “early Late Gla-

422 Nakazawa and Yamada

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 422 9/3/14 3:44 PM cial” and “late Late Glacial.” The early Late Glacial was in use by the end of LGM and disappeared by 13,500 years ago. The late Late Glacial began around 13,500 years ago, and terminated by the end of the Pleistocene, 10,000 years ago. The early Late Glacial lasted for 4500 years, between ca. 18,000 and 13,500 years ago; it roughly cor- responds with the Heinrich Event 1 dated between 17,000 and 13,000 years ago (Heinrich 1988; Igarashi and Zharov 2011). The late Late Glacial lasted for 3500 years, between 13,500 and 10,000 years ago. Despite the effort to distinguish microblade core- reduction methods in Hokkaido, we are far from able to provide an explanation as to why such variability in core reduction and microblade manufacture emerged and developed. Even if we consider that microblades functioned as elements in composite tools, it is unknown whether an adaptive view fully accounts for the observed variation in reduction methods or whether more stochastic factors were involved (Dunnell 1978; Torrence 2002, cf. Binford 1963). Given the large amount of data obtained from assemblages recovered in Hokkaido and the extent of variation in core-reduction methods that were influenced by Figure 29.3 Microblade core reduction methods in the the availability of raw material (Izuho and Sato 2007), we Late Glacial Hokkaido. 1: Yubetsu method; 2: Togeshita method; 3: Oshorokko method; 4: Rankoshi method; 5: sorted the technocomplexes according to differences in Horoka method; 6: Hirosato method; 7: Oketo method. the preform type used in the manufacture of microblade (Modified from Nakazawa et al. 2005, figure 3.) cores. The differences in core-blank preforms have been generally accepted as a defining characteristic among the assemblages in northeastern Asia and northern North variant of blade- based microblade core blanks from the America, and initial core preforms more or less deter- early Late Glacial, although the Horoka-type microblade mine the subsequent manufacturing processes of mi- cores are not frequently associated in a single assem- croblades (e.g., Hayashi 1968; Kobayashi 1970). We dis- blage. In addition, the Oketo type, a conical microblade tinguished two technocomplexes: one with bifacial core core, is not represented by enough specimens to place it blanks and the other with nonbifacial core blanks. Micro- into a specific cultural phase in the current chronology blades detached from bifacial core blanks—the Sakkotsu, of the Upper Paleolithic; therefore, we exclude conical Shirataki, Rankoshi, and Oshorokko microblade core cores from the present analysis, and only blade-based types (Nakazawa et al. 2005; Tsurumaru 1979)—are cores (i.e., Hirosato and Togeshita types) serve as the no- ubiquitous in early Late Glacial assemblages and some bifacial cores. In sum, the “technocomplex with bifacial late Late Glacial assemblages (figure 29.3). Nonbifacial microblade cores” (BM) has four groups of microblade microblade cores are represented by blade- based, boat- assemblages represented by the Sakkotsu, Shirataki, Ran- shaped, and conical cores. They are the Hirosato, Horoka, koshi, and Oshorokko types; the “technocomplex with Togeshita, and Oketo types, respectively (figure 29.4). nonbifacial microblade cores” (NBM) is composed of Among the nonbifacial cores, the Horoka type (preforms only microblade assemblages with blade- based cores, made from split cobbles) are often associated with other namely the Hirosato type. In addition to BM and NBM, kinds of core blank types such as the Togeshita type, a there are technocomplex-assigned assemblages without

On the Processes of Diversification in Microblade Technocomplexes in the Late Glacial Hokkaido 423

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 423 9/3/14 3:44 PM Materials and Methods

As illustrated in figure 29.4, the microblade assemblages in Hokkaido are largely divided into technocomplexes represented by bifacial and nonbifacial core blanks, based on empirically recognized variability in the reduction methods of microblade cores. Moreover, temporal changes in microblade technocomplexes likely proceeded at a millennial scale and therefore technological variability reflects some degree of time depth. Be- cause our ultimate goal is to understand how and why microblade technocomplexes changed during the Late Glacial, we compared the variation between the technocomplexes of four continuous phases to see whether there was any evidence of temporal change. Given the assumption that technological strategies were represented by variability in chipped- stone tools in an assemblage, we tested simple expectations. When technological strategies changed (either by adding to technological repertoires with new inventions or losing technologies through time), it is expected that the variability of tool assemblages will increase or decrease. In contrast, when Figure 29.4 Stone tools from the Late Glacial technology was randomly changed (i.e., nonadaptive technocomplexes. 1: Sakkotsu-type microblade core; 2: spall change), it is expected that tool assemblage variability removed from a bifacial microblade core (BM) of Sakkotsu- was not directionally changed through phases. Given type, a variant of BM; 3, 4: Shirataki-type microblade cores, the evolutionary framework, the former expectation is a variant of BM; 5, 6: Oshorokko-type microblade cores, a variant of BM; 7, 8: Hirosato-type microblade cores; 9, 10: adaptation, while the latter is coupled with technolog- Togeshita-type microblade core, a variant of nonbifacial ical drift or historical contingency (e.g., Dunnell 1978; microblade cores; 11–15: stemmed points (SPs); 16–19: Leonard and Jones 1987; O’Brien and Holland 1992). We small boat-shaped tools; 20–22: axe-shaped tools. 1–6: also compared variability in tool assemblages among technocomplex with bifacial microblade cores; 7–10: the different technocomplexes in the Late Glacial. We technocomplex with nonbifacial microblade cores; 11–15: addressed the question of whether or not the observed technocomplex with SPs; 16–19: technocomplex with small technocomplexes were related to increased functional boat-shaped tools. variability in stone tools. To assess the degree of variability in tool assemblages, microblade technology. These are characterized by: (1) we examined richness and evenness in stone tool assem- stemmed points (SPs) (figure 29.4, 11–15), and (2) small blages. Richness and evenness are two major indicators boat-shaped tools (SBTs) (figure 29.4, 16–19). Thus, four that can be used to measure the diversity of species in the kinds of technocomplexes are identified. Sorted into study of biodiversity (Magurran 2004). Archaeologists phases, the early Late Glacial has only technocomplexes have often used richness and evenness to evaluate the with bifacial microblade cores: e-BM (early Late Glacial degree of variability in numerous units of archaeologi- technocomplex with bifacial microblade cores), while the cal records (e.g., Bocquet- Appel and Tuffeau 2009; Graf late Late Glacial has four technocomplexes: l-BM (late 2010; Grayson 1984; Grayson and Cole 1998; Grayson and Late Glacial technocomplex with bifacial microblade Delpech 1998, 2002; Jones 2004; Leonard and Jones 1989). cores), NBM, SBT, and SP. Here, we calculate the richness of stone tool assemblages

424 Nakazawa and Yamada

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 424 9/3/14 3:44 PM based on Margalef’s diversity index (DMg) (Magurran tors, retouched flakes / blades, microblades, and blades 2004, 76), represented as: (see figure 29.4). Boat-shaped tools are shaped by unidi- rectional and centripetal removal of flakes from the flat

DMg = S – 1 / ln N, interior surface of the flake blank, which made the lateral view of the core surface resemble the keel of a ship. One where S = total number of tool classes in an assemblage or two ends of the tools sometimes have tiny parallel re- and N = number of stone tools in an assemblage. Even- moval scars similar to microblades (figure 29.4, 6–1 19). ness is given as the “Shannon evenness measure” (Ma- Axe-shaped tools are characterized by bifacially shaped gurran 2004, 108). The Shannon evenness measure (J′) surfaces with triangular profiles along the shortest axes index is measured as: (figure 29.4, 20–22).

′ Σ J = – pi ln pi / ln S, Results

where pi is the relative frequency of the ith tool class in There was no correlation between the total number of the assemblage, and S is the number of tool classes in the artifacts and the richness of stone tool assemblages (Pear- assemblage. Evenness measures the degree of homoge- son’s r = 0028; p = 0.801). This suggested that there was neity in an assemblage in terms of frequencies of stone virtually no effect of assemblage size on the richness in tools. Raw data used to calculate S, N, and pi were ex- stone tool classes. The richness of stone tool classes was tracted from the comprehensive data set of microblade compared among the four continuous phases: pre-LGM, assemblages compiled by Yamada (2006). For example, LGM, early Late Glacial, and late Late Glacial. The rich- when the stone tool assemblage consisted of thirty bu- ness of tool assemblages was different among the four rins, twenty end scrapers, and ten bifaces, S and N are 3 phases (one-way analysis of variance [ANOVA], F = and 60, respectively. The richness for this assemblage is 17.56; df = 3; p<0.0001). Figure 29.5 shows that the rich- 1.12, and evenness is 0.43. Having eliminated lithic assem- ness of tool classes was highest for the late Late Glacial blages from lithic quarry sites where cumulative lithic re- assemblages and lowest for the pre-LGM assemblages. ductions altered the tool assemblage variability, a total of The small sample size for the pre-LGM (n = 2), and the eighty-four assemblages were chosen for the present anal- LGM (n = 8) did not allow us to fully test the expecta- ysis. Because we assessed both the number of stone tools tions. However, there was a difference in the richness of and the number of lithic assemblages including formal tool classes between the early Late Glacial and Late Gla- tools (e.g., microblades, bifaces, scrapers) and debitage cial assemblages (Tukey’s honest significant difference (e.g., flakes, miroblade cores), we created a new bulky [HSD], p<0.05), which suggested that the variability in data set for the analysis. By summing all examined assem- tool assemblage increased significantly at the transition blages (n = 84), counts of lithic artifacts exceeded 400,000 from the early to the late Late Glacial. pieces (n = 418,819) and number of stone tools identified Next, we compared evenness among the assemblages totaled more than 35,000 (n = 35,937). In assessing the representing the four phases. The evenness of stone tool variability of stone tool assemblages, we first examined assemblages plotted against the richness of stone tool the effect of sample size on the degree of richness. classes provided a notable observation (figure 29.6). Second, we compared frequencies of stone tool classes There was a correlation between richness and evenness in technocomplexes among the contiguous phases (i.e., (Pearson’s r = 0.598; p = 0.001). The more the tool classes, pre-LGM, LGM, and early Late Glacial, and late Late Gla- the more even the proportions of stone tool classes. This cial), to see whether frequencies in specific tool classes indicated that the degree of interassemblage variability showed directional changes (functional) or random decreased in the late Late Glacial as the proportional fluctuations (drift). The specific tool classes compared difference in tool classes was reduced across the tech- among the phases were stemmed points, axe-shaped nocomplexes. Although homogenization of stone tool tools, boat-shaped tools, burins, end scrapers, perfora- assemblages could have been created by multiple occu-

On the Processes of Diversification in Microblade Technocomplexes in the Late Glacial Hokkaido 425

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 425 9/3/14 3:44 PM Figure 29.5 Richness of stone tool classes compared among four phases: pre-LGM, LGM, early Late Glacial, and Figure 29.6 Evenness of stone tool classes plotted against late Late Glacial. richness of stone tool classes, compared among the phases.

TABLE 29.1 Means, Standard Deviations (SD), and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) for Richness and Evenness among the Four Chronozones: pre-LGM, LGM, Early Late Glacial, and Late Late Glacial.

Richness Evenness

Technocomplex N Mean SD 95% CI Mean SD 95% CI

Pre-LGM 2 0.14 0.20 –0.25 to 0.53 0.43 0.60 0.61 to 1.61 LGM 8 0.51 0.37 –0.22 to 1.24 0.43 0.12 0.36 to 0.66 Early Late Glacial 30 0.95 0.36 0.24 to 1.66 0.48 0.22 0.25 to 0.91 Late Late Glacial 44 1.29 0.36 0.59 to 1.99 0.66 0.23 0.66 to 1.11

pations, increased evenness suggests that the range of Given the large number of samples from the Late Gla- activities at sites became unvaried toward the end of the cial assemblages, we also compared the richness of tool Late Glacial. assemblages among the five technocomplexes of the Late As shown in table 29.1, the diversity in stone tool as- Glacial. Technocomplexes from the early Late Glacial semblage gradually increased during the millennium have bifacial microblades, while technocomplexes during from the LGM to the end of late Late Glacial. The LGM the late Late Glacial include four distinctive technocom- assemblages exhibited low richness ( X = 0.51) and low plexes: BM, NBM, SP, and SBT. Similar to the previous evenness ( X = 0.43). In contrast, the late Late Glacial as- observation, the distribution of richness showed that the semblages generally showed the highest richness and technocomplexes from the late Late Glacial exhibited evenness. Although the pre-LGM samples were too small generally higher diversity in tool classes than that of the to evaluate diachronic change in tool assemblage variabil- early Late Glacial (figure 29.7). ity, the results suggest that new tool classes were added to The evenness of tool assemblages was examined in tool inventory and tools came to be found equally among relation to richness among the technocomplexes. Ta- the stone tool classes in the late Late Glacial. ble 29.2 shows the richness and evenness of stone tool

426 Nakazawa and Yamada

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 426 9/3/14 3:44 PM classes compared among the five technocomplexes from and Late Glacial. While both blades and flakes served as the Late Glacial. The combination of richness and even- blanks for burins and scrapers during the LGM, blades ness suggested that stone tool assemblage variability was were primarily used for scrapers and burins during the lowest in the e-BM. It is noteworthy that nonmicroblade Late Glacial. This change suggested that blade technol- technocomplexes (SBT and SP) both showed high rich- ogy, which first appeared in the LGM, came to be ubiq- ness and evenness in tool assemblages. uitous in the Late Glacial. Unlike blades, microblades As displayed in figure 29.8, quantities were compared that first appeared in the LGM showed the highest mean by the mean ratios of specific stone tools in the assem- ratio during the early Late Glacial, but decreased in the blages. The numbers of blades, microblades, burins and late Late Glacial (figure 29.8a). The small decline in end scrapers increased in assemblages through the LGM the ratio of microblades in the late Late Glacial could be the result of new occurrences of non-microblade assemblages, notably the assemblages with boat-shaped tools. Ratios of end scrapers in the assemblages fluctu- ated from the LGM to the late Late Glacial. This suggests that end scrapers during the LGM were as abundant as in the late Late Glacial. The number of burins that first appeared in the LGM gradually increased from the LGM to the late Late Glacial. In contrast, perforators showed the highest ratio in the pre-LGM assemblages and rap- idly dropped by the LGM. This was because the formal tools of pre-LGM assemblages which consisting of only retouched flakes and perforators, as represented in the tool assemblage of Wakabanomori (figure 29.2, 1–4). As shown in figure 29.8b, stemmed points, axe-shaped tools, boat-shaped tools, and bifaces appeared after the LGM. Figure 29.7 Richness of stone tool classes compared The numbers of these new tool classes slightly increased among the technocomplexes in the early and late Late during the Late Glacial. The ratios of specific tool classes Glacial. BM = technocomplex with bifacial microblade cores; showed that stone tools increased in frequency in the NBM = technocomplex with nonbifacial microblade cores; assemblages from the LGM to the Late Glacial. Among SBT = technocomplex with small boat-shaped tools; SP = the examined tool classes, ratios of end scrapers fluctu- technocomplex with stemmed points.

TABLE 29.2 Means, Standard Deviations (SD), and 95% Confidence Intervals (CI) for Richness and Evenness among the Technocomplexes.

Richness Evenness

Technocomplexa N Mean SD 95% CI Mean SD 95% CI

e-BM 27 0.94 0.37 0.22 to 1.67 0.49 0.26 –0.03 to 1.00 l-BM 13 0.98 0.17 0.65 to 1.31 0.52 0.22 0.09 to 0.95 NBM 17 1.29 0.30 0.69 to 1.88 0.66 0.12 0.43 to 0.89 SBT 5 1.47 0.36 0.87 to 2.07 0.78 0.08 0.63 to 0.93 SP 7 1.60 0.31 1.01 to 2.21 0.72 0.23 0.27 to 1.17

e-BM = early Late Glacial technocomplex with bifacial microblade cores; l-BM = late Late Glacial technocomplex with bifacial microblade cores; NBM = technocomplex with non-bifacial technocomplex (i.e., blade-based microblade cores); SBT = technocomplex with small boat-shaped tools; SP = technocomplex with stemmed points.

On the Processes of Diversification in Microblade Technocomplexes in the Late Glacial Hokkaido 427

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 427 9/3/14 3:44 PM Figure 29.8 Mean ratios of the stone tool classes in assemblages among the four phases. Data are expressed as the mean proportion of specific tool classes in the total number of stone tools in an assemblage. a, Mean ratios of the blades, burins, end scrapers, microblades, and perforators. b, Mean ratios of the stone tools appeared after the LGM (i.e., axe-shaped tools, bifaces, boat-shaped tools, and stemmed points).

ated somewhat between the LGM and late Late Glacial. ability of stone tool assemblages from the pre-LGM to the This could be an indication of technological drift, but the end of the Pleistocene. Although the sample size of pre- frequency of end scrapers during the LGM was as high LGM assemblages was small, the variability of tool assem- as that of the late Late Glacial, likely having been influ- blages was found to gradually increase between 21,000 enced by the intensive use of end scrapers in processing and 10,000 years ago. Wedge-shaped microblade tech- activities at large open-air sites, notably represented in nology also appeared in Hokkaido during the LGM, and the Kawanishi C (Iwase and Nakazawa 2013; Nakazawa diversification in core-reduction methods started there- 2007) and Kashiwadai 1 (Nakazawa 2012) assemblages. after. Hence, the LGM and Late Glacial witnessed diversification processes both in microblade core-reduction Discussion technology and associated tools. Because the duration of each phase lasted for a few millennia, during which An exploration of richness and evenness of stone tool the technocomplexes were maintained, rates of changes classes in assemblages of Hokkaido showed signatures of in the variability of stone tool assemblages observed be- change. There was a clear trend of increase in the vari- tween the four periods were rather gradual. Only the ap-

428 Nakazawa and Yamada

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 428 9/3/14 3:44 PM pearance of microblade technology in Hokkaido was an recorded, we cannot presuppose that a specific process abrupt pulse of technological change in Hokkaido. Since created variability in stone tool assemblages during the the LGM, forgers in Hokkaido maintained microblade LGM and Late Glacial. Unlike biological species, stone technology, and they likely developed technological strat- tools are human products developed to solve the prob- egies that relied on formal tools (e.g., burins, scrapers, lems faced by prehistoric hunter–gatherers (Jochim 1989; perforators). As indicated by the increased richness of Torrence 1983). In this sense, we will have to examine stone tool assemblages, a notable change in technological how much observed variation in stone tools and lithic strategies is an emergence of new stone tools. After the assemblages is explained by function and behavior. An end of LGM, the Late Glacial foragers in Hokkaido incor- explicit study of lithic use wear is under way (Iwase and porated new kinds of tools (e.g., stemmed points, boat- Nakazawa 2013), and we are still in the beginning stages shaped tools, axe-shaped tools) into their technological of testing the basic proposition that the morphologically repertoires. New variants of stone tools in the Late Gla- distinctive tool classes in the LGM and Late Glacial as- cial would not necessarily have been invented locally. In- semblages are in accordance with functional differences deed, morphological variation in stemmed points among or are an expression of stylistic variation. For example, the lithic industry in Hokkaido suggested that some despite the fact that boat-shaped tools are a diagnostic variants are comparable to those of the terminal Pleis- tool class that enables researchers to assign it to a tech- tocene industry in the Paleo-Honshu Island (Kurishima nocomplex, we do not know whether they were func- 1984). Given this observation, some new inventories (e.g., tionally designed tools (or cores), or nonutilitarian tools stemmed points) may have been transmitted from neigh- (e.g., symbolic items). Nevertheless, the observed trend boring regions (e.g., Paleo-Honshu Island in the south) in long-term directional change, represented by the in- into Hokkaido during the late Late Glacial by means of crease of variability in tool assemblages (i.e., richness demographic expansion such as migration-driven infor- and evenness) suggests that Upper Paleolithic foragers in mation transmission, while some tools, notably the boat- Hokkaido gradually increased the tempo of lithic techno- shaped tools, could have been independently invented logical change during the Late Glacial. Given the premise by local population with little information transmission that demography plays a critical role in technological in- from neighboring regions. If so, two different processes novation (Powell et al. 2009; Richerson et al. 2009; Shen- (i.e., technological transmission and independent inno- nan 2001; Steel and Shennan 2009; but see Collard et al. vation) resulted in the emergence of new technologies in 2013), we provide an interpretation of how the hunter– the same region, and therefore population dynamics of gatherers using microblades in Hokkaido changed their hunter–gatherers during the late Late Glacial is expected technological strategies, in terms of population dynamics to have been complex. of Paleolithic hunter–gatherers. Complexity in lithic technology was more pro- Given the millennium- scale changes in technocom- nounced during the Late Glacial than during the tran- plexes, we see that the newly invented tools implemented sition from the LGM to the Late Glacial. As represented in microblade technology increased during the late Late by the emergence of multiple technocomplexes, micro- Glacial and were a consequence of demographic shift blade production technology apparently changed at the during the Late Glacial. Increased regional population transition between the early and late Late Glacial. As the density (both by immigrants and population repro- number of technocomplexes increased, the overall rich- duction) in turn accelerated rates of technological in- ness and evenness of stone tool classes among the tech- novation and acceptance of new technologies, through nocomplexes also increased. This shift is a directional information exchange facilitated by increased contacts change and is likely functional. among local / regional groups. We observe, as evidence, The observations of richness raise a question. What the emergence of variability in microblade techno- factors affected the diversification processes of stone tool complexes during the Late Glacial. While the demog- classes and technocomplexes? In the Paleolithic archaeo- raphy of hunger–gatherers was legitimately affected by logical records in which long-term human behavior was density-dependent and external factors (Shennan 2002,

On the Processes of Diversification in Microblade Technocomplexes in the Late Glacial Hokkaido 429

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 429 9/3/14 3:44 PM 119), we have not distinguished whether demographic us to reconsider the accuracy of these assemblage dates pressure during the Late Glacial was caused by intrin- and examine site-formation processes to evaluate site sic natural population increases in response to a gradual integrity. In future research, we must incorporate paleo- increase of resources in the Paleo-Sakhalin–Hokkaido– climatic, demographic, and spatial models into corre- Kuril Peninsula or by immigrants from the neighboring spondent data from Hokkaido and surrounding regions regions. of northeastern Asia to understand interactions between the technological strategies and population dynamics of Conclusion modern humans.

Our analysis of stone tool assemblages of Late Plenigla- Acknowledgments cial Hokkaido (ca. 25,000–10,000 years ago) demonstrated that the processes of diversification in micro- We thank Yousuke Kaifu, Masami Izuho, Hiroyuki Sato, blade reduction methods were coupled with an increase and Ted Goebel for providing us the great opportunity in stone tool classes. A notable change likely occurred to present this paper at their symposium in the National during the transition from the early to the late Late Gla- Museum of Nature and Science, Tokyo. Constructive cial, approximately 13,500 years ago. Nevertheless, the comments from two anonymous reviewers helped to question of whether the transition indeed occurred at improve an earlier draft of this paper. this date or gradually proceeded during the latter part of the Late Glacial (13,500–10,000 years ago) has not been References fully resolved. Division of the Late Glacial into early and late phases (Nakazawa et al. 2005; Terasaki and Yamahara Adachi, N., H. Matsumura, J. Sawada, K. Kitano, K. Matsu- 1999) is largely based on common sense shared among mura, et al. 2011. “Mitochondrial DNA Analysis of Hok- researchers studying the Paleolithic records in Hokkaido kaido Jomon Skeletons: Remnants of Archaic Maternal who have constructed technotypological units in micro- Lineages at the Southwestern Edge of Former Beringia.” blade core-reduction methods and have held the assump- American Journal of Physical Anthropology 146:346–60. tion that the constructed units of analysis (e.g., techno- Anbiru, M. 1979. “Nihon no Saisekkaku [Aspects of Micro- complexes) were sensitive to time. The likely scenario is blade Cores in Japan].” Sundai Shigaku [Sundai Historical that the density and distribution of available resources Review] 47:152–83. (In Japanese.) would have increased as climate ameliorated around Bar-Yosef, O., and S. Kuhn. 1999. “The Big Deal about Blades: 13,500 years ago and millennia onward during the late Laminar Technologies and Human Evolution.” American Late Glacial. While resource density varied in response Anthropologist 101–102:1–17. to a fluctuating Pleistocene climatic, the upper limit of Binford, L. R. 1963. “‘Red Ochre’ Caches from the Michigan hunter–gatherer’s population density would have grad- Area: A Possible Case of Cultural Drift.” American Antiq- ually increased during the Late Glacial. The increased uity 19:89–108. diversity in the microblade technocomplexes in the Late Binford, L. R. 1980. “Willow Smoke and Dogs’ Tail: Hunter- Glacial coupled with gradual demographic pressure Gatherer Settlement Systems and Archaeological Site perhaps prompted human populations to migrate from Formation.” American Antiquity 45:1–17. northeastern Asia to the New World—that is, to east- Bleed, P. 2003. Cheap, Regular, and Reliable: Implications of ern Beringia. The other issues that remain uncertain are Design Variation in Late Pleistocene Japanese Technology. whether the Late Glacial assemblages fall into two phases In Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization, and whether populations of hunter–gatherers continu- edited by R. G. Elston and S. L. Kuhn, 95–102. Arlington, ously occupied Hokkaido during the Late Glacial. An ex- VA: American Anthropological Association. amination of radiocarbon dates from excavated sites did Bocquet-Appel, J.-P., and A. Tuffeau. 2009. “Technological not identify any archaeological sites dated to the Younger Responses of Neanderthals to Microclimatic Variations Dryas in Hokkaido (Nakazawa et al. 2011). This required (240,000-40,000 BP).” Human Biology 81:287–307.

430 Nakazawa and Yamada

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 430 9/3/14 3:44 PM Brantingham, P. J., Krivoshapkin, A. I., Li, J., and Y. Tserend- Grayson, D. K., and F. Delpech. 1998. “Changes in Diet agva. 2001. “The Initial Upper Paleolithic in Northeast Breadth in the Early Upper Palaeolithic of Southwestern Asia.” Current Anthropology 42:735–47. France.” Journal of Archaeological Science 25:1119–29. Clark, G. 1969. World Prehistory, 2nd ed. Cambridge, En- Grayson, D. K., and F. Delpech. 2002. “Specialized Early Up- gland: Cambridge University Press. per Palaeolithic Hunters in Southwestern France?” Journal Clarke, D. L. 1968. Analytical Archaeology. London: Methuen. of Archaeological Science 29:1439–49. Collard, M., Buchanan, B., and M. J. O’Brien. 2013. “Popula- Hamilton, T. D., and T. Goebel. 1999. “Late Pleistocene Peo- tion Size as an Explanation for Patterns in the Paleolithic pling of Alaska.” In Ice Age Peoples of North America: Envi- Archaeological Record: More Caution Is Needed.” Current ronments, Origins, and Adaptations of the First Americans, Anthropology 54:S388–96. edited by R. Bonnichsen and K. L. Turnmire, 156–99. Dixon, J. E. 1999. Bones, Boats, and Bison: Archaeology and College Station: Texas A&M University Press. First Colonization of Western North America. Albuquer- Hayashi, K. 1968. “Fukui Microblade Technology and Its que: University of New Mexico Press. Relationship in Northeast Asia and North America.” Arctic Derevianko, A. P. 2011. “The Origin of Anatomically Mod- Anthropology 5:128–90. ern Humans and Their Behavior in Africa and Eurasia.” Heinrich, H. 1988. “Origin and Consequences of Cyclic Ice Archaeology Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 39:2–31. Rafting in the Northeast Atlantic Ocean during the Past Dunnell, R. C. 1978. “Style and Function: A Fundamental 130,000 Years.” Quaternary Research 29:142–52. Dichotomy.” American Antiquity 43:192–202. Hoffecker, J. F., W. R. Powers, and T. Goebel. 1993. “The Col- Elston, R. G., and P. J. Brantingham. 2002. “Microlithic Tech- onization of Beringia and the Peopling of the New World.” nology in Northern Asia: A Risk-Minimizing Strategy Science 259:46–53. of the Late Paleolithic and Early Holocene.” In Thinking Hokkaido Buried Cultural Property Center. 1999. Kashiwa- Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization, edited by dai 1 iseki [Kashiwadai 1 Site]. Sapporo, Japan: Hokkaido R. G. Elston and S. L. Kuhn, 103–16. Arlington, VA: Amer- Buried Cultural Property Center. (In Japanese.) ican Anthropological Association. Igarashi, Y., and A. E. Zharov. 2011. “Climate and Vegetation Foley, R., and M. M. Lahr. 1997. “Mode 3 Technologies and Change during the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene the Evolution of Modern Humans.” Cambridge Archaeo- in Sakhalin and Hokkaido, Northeast Asia.” Quaternary logical Journal 7:3–36. International 232:24–31. Goebel, T. 1999. “Pleistocene Human Colonization of Siberia Izuho, M., F. Akai, Y. Nakazawa, and A. Iwase. 2012. “The and Peopling of the Americas: An Ecological Approach.” Upper Paleolithic of Hokkaido: Current Evidence and Its Evolutionary Anthropology 8:208–27. Geochronological Framework.” In Environmental Changes Goebel, T. 2002. “The ‘Microblade Adaptation’ and Recolo- and Human Occupation in East Asia during OIS 3 and nization of Siberia during the Late Upper Pleistocene.” In OIS 2, edited by A. Ono and M. Izuho, 109–128. Oxford, Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization, England: Archaeopress. edited by R. G. Elston and S. L. Kuhn, 117–31. Arlington, Izuho, M., and H. Sato. 2007. “Archaeological Obsidian Stud- VA: American Anthropological Association. ies in Hokkaido: Retrospect and Prospects.” Indo-Pacific Graf, K. 2010. “Hunter-Gatherer Dispersals in the Prehistory Association Bulletin 27:114–21. Mammoth-Steppe: Technological Provisioning and Land- Iwase, A., J. Hashizume, M. Izuho, K. Takahashi, and H. Sato. Use in the Enisei River Valley, South-Central Siberia.” 2012. “Timing of Megafaunal Extinction in the Late Late Journal of Archaeological Science 37:210–23. Pleistocene on the Japanese Archipelago.” Quaternary Grayson, D. K. 1984. Quantitative Zooarchaeology: Topics in International 255:114–24. the Analysis of Archaeological Faunas. New York: Aca- Iwase, A., and Y. Nakazawa. 2013. “Use-Wear Analysis of the demic Press. Portable Blade Tools: Organization of Technology among Grayson, D. K., and S. C. Cole. 1998. “Stone Tool Assemblage the Upper Paleolithic Foragers in Hokkaido.” Poster Richness during the Middle and Early Upper Paleolithic in presented at the 78th Annual Meeting of the Society for France.” Journal of Archaeological Science 25:927–38. American Archaeology, Honolulu, April, 2013.

On the Processes of Diversification in Microblade Technocomplexes in the Late Glacial Hokkaido 431

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 431 9/3/14 3:44 PM Jochim, M. 1989. “Optimization in Stone Tool Studies: Wasn’t: A New Interpretation of the Origin of Modern Problems and Potential.” In Time, Energy and Stone Tools, Human Behavior.” Journal of Human Evolution 39:453–63. edited by R. Torrence, 106–11. Cambridge, England: Cam- Mellars, P. A. 1989. “Major Issues in the Emergence of Mod- bridge University Press. ern Humans.” Current Anthropology 30:349–85. Jones, E. L. 2004. “Dietary Evenness, Prey Choice, and Nakazawa, Y. 2007. “Hearth-Centered Spatial Organization: Human-Environment Interactions.” Journal of Archaeolog- A Comparative Approach to the Study of Palimpsests in ical Science 31:307–17. Late Upper Paleolithic Sites in Hokkaido (Japan) and Can- Kajiwara, H. 2008. Microlithization in Eurasia: A Brief tabria (Spain).” Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, University Review of the Microblade Reduction Technology and Its of New Mexico, Albuquerque. Significance as a Behavioral Threshold of the Modern Hu- Nakazawa, Y. 2010. “Dural Nature in the Creation of Disci- mans.” Bulletin of Tohoku Fukushi University 32:207–34. plinary Identity: A Socio-historical Review of Palaeolithic Kato, S. 1970. “Sendoki jidai no rekishisei to chiikisei [Histor- Archaeology in Japan.” Asian Perspectives 49:231–50. ical and Regional Characteristics in the Preceramic Age].” Nakazawa, Y. 2012. “Toward a Reexamination of the Last In Kuyodoshi Kenkyu Koza 1 [Lecture on the Regional Glacial Maximum Occupation of Kashiwadai 1.” Paper History 1], edited by T. Wakamori. Tokyo: Asakura Shoten. presented at the International Workshop of “Upper Paleo- (In Japanese.) lithic Geochronology around the LGM in Northeast Asia,” Kimura, H. 1992. Reexamination of the Yubetsu Technique and Tokyo, Japan, November 2012. Study of the Horokazawa Toma Lithic Culture. Sapporo, Ja- Nakazawa, Y., and M. Izuho. 2006. “Stone Tool Assemblage pan: Sapporo University Press. (In Japanese, with English Variability during the Last Glacial Maximum in Hok- summary.) kaido.” Current Research in the Pleistocene 23:26–8. Kitazawa, M. 2004. Obihiro Wakaboanomori Site. Obihiro, Nakazawa, Y., M. Izuho, and F. Akai. 2007. “The Late Glacial Japan: Obihiro Board of Education. (In Japanese.) Microblade Assemblage from the Kamihoronai- Moi Klein, R. G. 2008. “Out of Africa and the Evolution of Human Site in Hokkaido, Northern Japan: A Newly Discov- Behavior.” Evolutionary Anthropology 17:267–81. ered Yubetsu Site.” Current Research in the Pleistocene Kobayashi, T. 1970. “Microblade Industries in the Japanese 24:37–40. Archipelago.” Arctic Anthropology 7:38–58. Nakazawa, Y., M. Izuho, J. Takakura, and S. Yamada. 2005. Kuhn, S. L., and A. Bietti. 2000. “The Late Middle and Early “Toward an Understanding of Technological Variability Upper Paleolithic in Italy.” In The Geography of Neander- in Microblade Assemblages in Hokkaido, Japan.” Asian tals and Modern Humans in Europe and the Greater Medi- Perspectives 44:276–92. terranean, edited by O. Bar-Yosef and D. Pilbeam, 49–76. Nakazawa, Y., T. Yamahara, and M. Kitazawa. 2010. “On the Cambridge, MA: Peabody Museum of Archaeology and Spatial Distribution of Hearths in the Last Glacial Max- Ethnology, Harvard University. imum Occupation of Kawanishi C, Hokkaido.” Current Kurishima, Y. 1984. “Yukeisentoki no hensen to sono denpa Research in the Pleistocene 27:46–8. [Typological Changes and Diffusion of Stemmed Points].” Nakazawa, Y., A. Iwase, F. Akai, and M. Izuho. 2011. “Human Sundai Shigaku [Sundai Historical Review] 62:50–82. (In Responses to the Younger Dryas in Japan.” Quaternary Japanese.) International 242:416–33. Leonard, R., and G. T. Jones. 1987. “Elements of an Inclusive O’Brien, M. J,. and T. D. Holland. 1992. “The Role of Adapta- Evolutionary Model for Archaeology.” Journal of Anthro- tion in Archaeological Explanation.” American Antiquity pological Archaeology 6:199-219. 57:36–59. Leonard, R., and G. T. Jones. 1989. Quantifying Diversity in Ono, Y. 1990. “Kita no rikyo. [The Northern Land Bridge of Archaeology. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Japan]. Quaternary Research 29:183–92. (In Japanese.) Press. Pope, K. O., and J. E. Terrell. 2008. “Environmental Setting of Magurran, A. E. 2004. Measuring Biological Diversity. Oxford, Human Migrations in the Circum-Pacific Region.” Journal England: Blackwell. of Biogeography 35:1–21. McBrearty, S., and A. S. Brooks. 2000. “The Revolution That Powell, A., S. Shennan, and M. G. Thomas. 2009. “Late

432 Nakazawa and Yamada

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 432 9/3/14 3:44 PM Pleistocene Demography and the Appearance of Modern blages: A View from the Okushirataki-1 Site, Hokkaido, Human Behavior.” Science 324:1298–301. Northern Japan.” Asian Perspectives 49:332–47. Richerson, P. J., R. Boyd, and R. L. Bettinger. 2009. “Cultural Terasaki, Y. 1999. “Hokkaido saisekijin sekkigun rikai Innovations and Demographic Change.” Human Biology heno ichishiron [Microblade Industries in Hokkaido: 81:211–35. a Preliminary Discussion].” Senshi Kokogaku Ronshu Sano, K. 2010. “Mobility and Lithic Economy in the Termi- [Bulletin of Prehistoric Archaeological Studies] 8:71–88. nal Pleistocene of Central Honshu.” Asian Perspectives (In Japanese.) 49:279–93. Terasaki, Y., and T. Yamahara. 1999. “Hokkaido Chiho [Hok- Shennan, S. 2001. “Demography and Cultural Innovation: A kaido Region].” Kyusekki Kokogaku [Paleolithic Archaeol- Model and Its Implications for the Emergence of Mod- ogy] 58:3–10. (In Japanese.) ern Human Culture.” Cambridge Archaeological Journal Torrence, R. 1983. “Time Budgeting and Hunter-Gatherer 11:5–16. Technology.” In Hunter-Gatherer Economy in Prehistory, Shennan, S. 2002. Genes, Memes, and Human History: edited by G. Bailey, 11–22. Cambridge, England: Cam- Darwinian Archaeology and Cultural Evolution. London: bridge University Press. Thames & Hudson. Torrence, R. 2002. “Thinking Big about Small Tools. In Shott, M. 1986. “Technological Organization and Settlement Thinking Small: Global Perspectives on Microlithization, Mobility: An Ethnographic Examination.” Journal of An- edited by R. G. Elston and S. L. Kuhn, 179–89. Arlington, thropological Research 42:15–51. VA: American Anthropological Association. Steel, J., and S. Shennan. 2009. “Introduction: Demography Tsurumaru, T. 1979. “Hokkaido chiho no saisekijin bunka and Cultural Macroevolution.” Human Biology 81:105–19. [Microlithic Cultures in Hokkaido District].” Sundai Shi- Straus, L. G. 2005. “A Mosaic of Change: The Middle-Upper gaku [Sundai Historical Review] 47:23–50. Paleolithic Transition as Viewed from New Mexico and Tsurumaru, T. 2001. “Contemporary Issues and Perspectives Iberia.” Quaternary International 137:47–67. of Paleolithic Archaeology.” Journal of Hokkaido Archaeo- Straus, L. G. 2012. “The Emergence of Modern-like Forager logical Association 37:3–22. Capacities and Behaviors in Africa and Europe: Abrupt or Tsutsumi, T. 2011. Saishu Hyoki niokeru Saisekijinshuryomin Gradual, Biological or Demographic?” Quaternary Inter- to sono tekiosenryaku [Adaptive Strategies of the microblade national 247:350–7. hunters in the Last Glacial]. Tokyo: Yuzankaku. (In Japa- Straus, L. G., and C. W. Heller. 1988. “Explorations of the nese, with English summary.) Twilight Zone: The Early Upper Paleolithic of Vasco- Yamada, S. 2006. Hokkaido niokeru Saisekijin Sekkigun no Cantabrian Spain and Gascony.” In The Early Upper Paleo- Kenkyu [A Study of Microblade Assemblages in Hokkaido, lithic: Evidence from Europe and the Near East, edited by Japan.] Tokyo” Rokuichi Shobo. (In Japanese.) J. F. Hoffecker and C. A. Wolf, 97–110. BAR International Yi, S., and G. Clark. 1985. “The ‘Dyuktai Culture’ and New Series 437. Oxford: Archaeopress. World Origins.” Current Anthropology 26:1–20. Tada, R. 1999. “Late Quaternary Paleooceanography of the Yoshizaki, M. 1961. “Shirataki iseki to Hokkaido no Mudoki Japan Sea: An Update.” Quaternary Research 38:216–22. Bunka [The Shirataki Site and the Preceramic Culture in Takakura, J. 2010. “Refitted Material and Consideration of Hokkaido].” Minzokugaku Kenkyu [The Japan Journal of Lithic Reduction Sequence among the Microblade Assem- Ethnology] 26:13–23. (In Japanese.)

On the Processes of Diversification in Microblade Technocomplexes in the Late Glacial Hokkaido 433

TAM Kaifu 13791.indd 433 9/3/14 3:44 PM