DOCSLIB.ORG

Book Reviews

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Book Reviews BOOK REVIEWS Current Research in Chinese Pleistocene Archaeology. Chen Shen and Susan G. Keates, eds. BAR International Series i i 79. Oxford: Archaeopress, 2003. Reviewed by ERELLA HOVERS, Institute of Archaeology, The Hebrew University ojJerusalem China has been for a long time a large dIe Pleistocene site of Panxian Dadong (on landmass of which little was known by way bone taphonomy, site formation processes of its prehistoric record. The narratives of and human behavior, and on ESR dating); human evolution on which I have been and a contribution dealing with the age of brought up focused on various parts of the the Jinniushan hominin (also of middle Old World, almost invariably ending with Pleistocene age) and its skeletal remains. a caveat: "But we know very little about Other chapters in the volume take a com­ China. We predict that intriguing things parative and/or synthetic approach to the will come out of China that could change study of lithic technology (Chun Chen, the whole picture." Y ouping Wang), site formation processes Indeed. Chinese Pleistocene archaeology (Chun Chen, Susan Keates), and chronol­ has not been static or stagnant, but it ogy (Susan Keates, Qi Chen). The compi­ remained largely unknown to non-Chinese lation of papers results in a volume that readers. After a long spell of scientific isola­ speaks in unison to a profound paradigm tion China has opened to the West, and it change in Chinese Pleistocene archaeology. now reveals riches of prehistoric archaeol­ C. Chen characterizes this change as a shift ogy that stand up to expectations. The from "culture history" to "scientific archae­ volumes by Aigner (1981) and Wu and ology." Olsen (1985) provided first glimpses of the One consensual view that emerges from achievements of Chinese colleagues up to this volume is that the paradigm shift was the early 1980s. Shen and Keates' volume brought about by increasing collaborative follows down the same path, acquainting projects between Chinese and foreign col­ the reader with the main questions, leagues. Cormack's review of Davidson advances, and shifts in worldviews in Chi­ Black's career in China is illustrative in this nese Pleistocene archaeology during the last context. Seemingly out of place and dis­ two decades. tanced from the realities of the here and There are two types of contributions in now in 'Chinese prehistory, it provides a this volume. One group consists of site­ historical account of Black's joint work oriented papers, elaborating on particular with Chinese colleagues. Cormack under­ aspects of single sites or site complexes. lines the reasons for Black's successful sci­ Such are the two chapters on the early entific enterprise in China. She identifies Pleistocene site of Xiaochangliang (dealing his ability to establish true collaborations with site formation processes combined among equal partners (as opposed to scien­ with lithic technology and with taphon­ tific colonialism) as a keystone of his suc­ omy, respectively); two papers on the ITlid- cess. Similar sentiments resonate loud and Asiml Pcrspccti!!cs, Vol. 45, No . .2 «) 2006 by the University of Hawai'j Press. ASIAN PERSPECTIVES . 45(2) FALL 2006 clear in C. Chen's account of the history of earliest to the end of the early (Lower) Paleolithic archaeology in China and are Pleistocene, c. .87 mya. However, in this implicit in many of the papers by Chinese specific case the researchers are acutely colleagues. There is a message here to take aware of the site's properties, which may home (or at least to heart) about the way have caused analytical bias and likely international research in China (or in other resulted in ages that are too young, and parts of the world, for that matter) should they treat it as inconclusive. Similarly, be carried out, as noted also by Shutler in they report the age of Renzindong, earlier his comments. assigned a geologic age of2.6 mya, as being The book's title conveys more than sim­ certainly older than 1.0 my a and possibly ply the time frame encompassed in the older than 1.7 mya. Again the authors e111.­ volume. As the editors emphasize, the Pa­ phasize the inconclusiveness of the results, leolithic cultural sequence of China is such this time due to the large dispersion of the that internal temporal divisions are not dates obtained, and they recognize the need warranted, let alone the use of terminology for further clarification. The chronology of borrowed from Paleolithic research in the Longuppo, where a hominoid mandible was West. Instead, they are of the opinion that magnetostratigraphically dated to the Old­ the appropriate analytical units for dealing uvai Subchron, is also open to dramatically with China's prehistory are temporal, and contrasting interpretations (Brown 2001; they emphasize their preference for the ter­ Q. Chen et al.: 123). In this particular case minology of early, middle, and late Pleisto­ the taxonomic identification of the homi­ cene. Still, the editors seem to have placed noid mandible itself is also debated, though a high premium on the early and middle a few crude lithic artifacts are reported from Pleistocene, as the late Pleistocene is dis­ the site (Schwartz and Tattersall 1996; cussed less frequently in this volume. It is Wanpo et al. 1995; Wu 2000). The strati­ unavoidable in such a context that the an­ graphic description provided in the 1995 tiquity of the early Paleolithic in China publication, however, is not unambiguous will become of major interest. How do with regard to the integrity of the strati­ claims for the existence of late Pliocene graphic context of these finds. and/or early Pleistocene sites in China (am­ This brings us to a second important ply cited throughout the book) stand the point. Polemics about the early sites in test of rigorous research methodologies? China are not concerned exclusively with This is an especially intriguing question, their chronologies. The identification of given the accumulated evidence for the anthropogenic authorship of lithic artifacts great antiquity of the first out-of-Africa within the sites looms as a real issue. With dispersal events (e.g., Anton and Swisher few exceptions (e.g., Xiaochangliang with 2004; Bar-Yosef and Goren-Inbar 1993; over 2000 artifacts; Shen and Chen: 69, Gabunia et al. 2000; Swisher et al. 1994 table 1; but see below), claims for hominin [though rebuttals abound]). presence in early putative sites are based on Based on current evidence (discussed very small lithic assemblages of often crude extensively by C. Chen in his review and specimens. Until recently, such assemblages demonstrated by Q. Chen et al. in their have been studied from a strictly typological evaluation of the validity of ESR dating perspective. A critique voiced in China with results), one cannot argue conclusively that regard to the Renzindong assemblage is the Paleolithic in China goes back all the pertinent here: "Recognition of stone arte­ way to 2 my a or earlier. The critical treat­ facts ... was entirely based on the empiricist ment of newly obtained results is as impor­ approach in which a conclusion is accepted tant as the dates themselves. For instance, on the basis of its authorship rather than a ESR results indicate that the site of Xiao­ critical evaluation of its substance" (Chen: changliang, previously estimated on the 29). Chinese lithic analysts seem to swerve basis of magnetostratigraphy to be either more and more toward technological stud­ c. 1.0 or 1.67 million years old, dates at the ies. The problem, of course, is that little BOOK REVIEWS can be said about operational sequences rethink the validity of the Two Tradition from collections consisting of few speci­ model. There are additional problems with mens, and this could doom the fate of this this model that render it naIve and unsatis­ particular debate. factory (c. Chen: 26). In its stead, explana­ Painstakingly prying apart the effects of tory scenarios now incorporate differences taphonomy and formation processes from in site structure and function (e.g., open­ those of human activities, researchers of air vs. cave sites). China's Pleistocene archaeology now feel In contrast to the results of the Xiao­ ready to make some statements about hu­ changliang faunal taphonomic studies, the man behavior. Peterson et al. examined an detailed taphonomic work carried out on admittedly small sample of bones from the faunal material from Panxian Dadong Xiaochangliang. To the degree that this underlines the role of human behavior as an sample reflects the true nature of the site agent of archaeological patterning. Sche­ (in my mind an open question), they argue partz et al. identify a stratigraphic zone in for the extreme rarity of both anthropo­ which isolated teeth oflarge animals (espe­ genic and carnivore marks. On the other cially rhinoceros) were arguably introduced hand, they document the presence of abra­ to the cave selectively. They suggest sion marks and go on to interpret the (p. 104) that this was an attempt to boost archaeofauna of this early site as "a jumble raw material availability, indicating that of hydraulically processed lithics and fauna" lithic raw material at the site was of low (p. 91). This conclusion is consistent with quality. Indeed, modified tools were found that of Shen and Chen with regard to at the site that had been made on large ani­ the lithics. While the 2000-odd lithic arti­ mal teeth. This intriguing scenario does not facts from the site clearly represent homi­ explain why the use of teeth is restricted to nin activities at the locale, they are not in a specific stratigraphic zone (and by extra­ primary context and arguably are not asso­ polation, a relatively restricted time span), ciated with the faunal remains.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Shang Dynasty
    misterfengshui.com 風水先生 History of China ANCIENT 3 Sovereigns and 5 Emperors Xia Dynasty 2100–1600 BC Shang Dynasty 1600–1046 BC Zhou Dynasty 1122–256 BC Western Zhou Eastern Zhou Spring and Autumn Period Warring States Period IMPERIAL Qin Dynasty 221 BC–206 BC Han Dynasty 206 BC–220 AD Western Han Xin Dynasty Eastern Han Three Kingdoms 220–280 Wei, Shu & Wu Jin Dynasty 265–420 Western Jin 16 Kingdoms Eastern Jin 304–439 Southern & Northern Dynasties 420–589 Sui Dynasty 581–618 Tang Dynasty 618–907 ( Second Zhou 690–705 ) 5 Dynasties & 10 Kingdoms 907–960 Liao Dynasty 907–1125 Song Dynasty 960–1279 Northern Song Xi Xia Southern Song Jin Yuan Dynasty 1271–1368 Ming Dynasty 1368–1644 Qing Dynasty 1644–1911 MODERN Republic of China 1912–1949 People's Republic of China (Mainland China) 1949–present Republic of China (Taiwan) 1945-present from Wilkipedia [email protected] Fax: 852-2873-6859 misterfengshui.com 風水先生 Timeline of Chinese History The recorded history of China began in the 15th century BC when the Shang Dynasty started to use markings that evolved into the present Chinese characters. Turtle shells with markings reminiscent of ancient Chinese writing from the Shang Dynasty have been carbon dated to as early as 1500 BC.[1] Chinese civilization originated with city-states in the Yellow River (Huang He) valley. 221 BC is commonly accepted to be the year in which China became unified under a large kingdom or empire. In that year, Qin Shi Huang first united China. Successive dynasties in Chinese history developed bureaucratic systems that enabled the Emperor of China to control increasingly larger territory that reached maximum under the Mongolian Yuan Dynasty and Manchurian Qing Dynasty.
    [Show full text]
  • The Early Paleolithic of China1) HUANG Weiwen2)
    第 四 紀 研 究 (The Quaternary Research) 28 (4) p. 237-242 Nov. 1989 The Early Paleolithic of China1) HUANG Weiwen2) spread widely and existed for a long time. The Introduction deposits contained very rich fossils of mammal. 1. Geographic Distribution and the Types of The fauna exisiting in the stage from the early Deposits to the middle Pleistocene can be at least divided Before the 1940's, only one locality of the into three groups, which have their own Early Paleolithic period was discovered in characteristics and sequence: Nihewan fauna of China. That is Zhoukoudian near Beijing early Pleistocene, Gongwangling (Lantian Man) City (the site of Peking Man). Since the 1950's fauna of the latest stage of early Pleistocene many new localities have been found, of which or the earliest stage of middle Pleistocene and no less than fifteen are relatively important. Zhoukoudian (Peking Man) fauna of the middle These localities spread in North, South and Pleistocene. In the recent years, some scholars Northeast China covering a range from 23°35' to have suggested that locations of Dali and 40°15'N and from 101°58' to 124°8'E which Dingcun which originally recognized as be- includes two climate zones, namely, the sub- longing to the early stage of late Pleistocene tropical zone and warm temperate zone in the should place in the middle Pleistocene, as the eastern part of today's Asia (Fig. 1). latest stage of this epoch (LIU and DING,1984). The localities include three types of deposit: There also existed fluviatile and fluviol- 1) Fluviatile deposit: acustrine deposits of Pleistocene in South Xihoudu (Shanxi), Kehe (Shanxi), Lantian China.
    [Show full text]
  • Early Pleistocene Soricomorphs and Lagomorphs from the Xiaochangliang Site in the Nihewan Basin, Hebei, Northern China
    ΐῒ῏ῑῐ ῍῎῍῎ῌThe Quaternary Research.1 - p. +/3 +1, June ,**2 Early Pleistocene soricomorphs and lagomorphs from the Xiaochangliang site in the Nihewan Basin, Hebei, Northern China Yingqi Zhang*+, and Yoshinari Kawamura* ,a This paper systematically describes soricomorph and lagomorph remains collected by a screen-washing procedure from the sediments of the Xiaochangliang site with the age of+4-0 Ma. The soricomorph remains described are assigned to the tribe Soricini in the subfamily Soricinae of the family Soricidae, on the basis of the detailed dental morphology. Among the genera of the tribe known from the Pliocene and Pleistocene of Asia,Sorex has morphological characters well coincident with those of the remains. Owing to their incompletion, the specific determination can not be done, and thus they are assigned merely toSorex sp. All the lagomorph remains belong to the family Ochotonidae. The family comprises two genera,Ochotona and Ochotonoi- des, in the Pliocene and Pleistocene of China. The remains are easily divided into a smaller and larger forms by their striking di# erence in size. The dental morphology and size of the smaller form indicate its allocation toOchotona. The smaller form is compared with many species ofOchotona known from the Pliocene and Pleistocene as well as the present day of China, and is assigned to the extinct species,O. youngi. The larger form is, however, assigned merely toOchotona or Ochotonoides sp., because of its limited specimens with poor preservation. Keywords : soricomorph, lagomorph, systematics, Early Pleistocene, Xiaochangliang site, Nihewan Basin, China knowledge on small mammals from the layer I. Introduction had been quite limited, until we washed the The Xiaochangliang site is one of the most sediments stratigraphically equivalent to the important archaeological sites of Early Pleisto- layer with fine-mesh screens in,**/ .
    [Show full text]
  • Paleolithic Archaeology in China
    AN41CH20-BarYosef ARI 21 June 2012 20:36 V I E E W R S Review in Advance first posted online on July 2, 2012. (Changes may still occur before final publication online and in print.) I E N C N A D V A Paleolithic Archaeology in China Ofer Bar-Yosef 1 and Youping Wang2 1Department of Anthropology, Harvard University, Cambridge, Massachusetts 02138; email: [email protected] 2School of Archaeology, Peking University, Beijing 100871, China; email: [email protected] Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 2012. 41:319–35 Keywords The Annual Review of Anthropology is online at Pleistocene, Zhoukoudian, Acheulian, microblades, pottery anthro.annualreviews.org This article’s doi: Abstract 10.1146/annurev-anthro-092611-145832 Despite almost a century of research, the Chinese Paleolithic chrono- Copyright c 2012 by Annual Reviews. cultural sequence still remains incomplete, although the number of well- All rights reserved dated sites is rapidly increasing. The Chinese Paleolithic is marked by 0084-6570/12/1021-0319$20.00 the long persistence of core-and-flake and cobble–tool industries, so interpretation of cultural and social behavior of humans in East Asia by Harvard University on 08/15/12. For personal use only. based solely on comparison with the African and western Eurasian pre- historic sequences becomes problematic, such as in assessing cognitive Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 2012.41. Downloaded from www.annualreviews.org evolutionary stages. For the Chinese Paleolithic, wood and bamboo likely served as raw materials for the production of daily objects since the arrival of the earliest migrants from western Asia, although poor preservation is a problem.
    [Show full text]
  • Current Anthropology
    Forthcoming Current Anthropology Wenner-Gren Symposium Current Anthropology Supplementary Issues (in order of appearance) Current VOLUME 58 SUPPLEMENT 17 DECEMBER 2017 The Anthropology of Corruption. Sarah Muir and Akhil Gupta, eds. Cultures of Militarism. Catherine Besteman and Hugh Gusterson, eds. Patchy Anthropocene. Anna Tsing, Nils Bubandt, and Andrew Mathews, eds. Anthropology Previously Published Supplementary Issues Engaged Anthropology: Diversity and Dilemmas. Setha M. Low and Sally Engle Merry, eds. THE WENNER-GREN SYMPOSIUM SERIES Corporate Lives: New Perspectives on the Social Life of the Corporate Form. December 2017 Damani Partridge, Marina Welker, and Rebecca Hardin, eds. The Origins of Agriculture: New Data, New Ideas. T. Douglas Price and HUMAN COLONIZATION OF ASIA IN THE LATE PLEISTOCENE Ofer Bar-Yosef, eds. GUEST EDITORS: CHRISTOPHER J. BAE, KATERINA DOUKA, The Biological Anthropology of Living Human Populations: World Histories, AND MICHAEL D. PETRAGLIA National Styles, and International Networks. Susan Lindee and Ricardo Ventura Santos, eds. Human Colonization of Asia in the Late Pleistocene Human Biology and the Origins of Homo. Susan Antón and Leslie C. Aiello, eds. Human Colonization of Asia in the Late Pleistocene: The History of an Invasive Species Potentiality and Humanness: Revisiting the Anthropological Object in 58 Volume A Genomic View of the Pleistocene Population History of Asia Contemporary Biomedicine. Klaus Hoeyer and Karen-Sue Taussig, eds. Testing Modern Human Out-of-Africa Dispersal Models Using Dental Nonmetric Data Alternative Pathways to Complexity: Evolutionary Trajectories in the Middle Archaic Hominin Populations in Asia before the Arrival of Modern Humans: Their Paleolithic and Middle Stone Age. Steven L. Kuhn and Erella Hovers, eds.
    [Show full text]
  • Human Origin Sites and the World Heritage Convention in Asia
    39 World Heritage papers39 World Heritage papers HEADWORLD HERITAGES 3 Human origin sites and the Human origin sites and the Heritage World in Asia Convention World Heritage Convention in Asia For more information contact: UNESCO World Heritage Centre papers 7, place Fontenoy 75352 Paris 07 SP France Tel: 33 (0)1 45 68 24 96 Fax: 33 (0)1 45 68 55 70 E-mail: [email protected] http://whc.unesco.org World HeritageWorld Human origin sites and the World Heritage Convention in Asia Nuria Sanz, Editor Coordinator of the World Heritage/HEADS Programme Published in 2014 by the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, 7, place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France and the UNESCO Office in Mexico, Presidente Masaryk 526, Polanco, Miguel Hidalgo, 11550 Ciudad de Mexico, D.F., Mexico. © UNESCO 2014 ISBN 978-92-3-100043-0 This publication is available in Open Access under the Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO (CC-BY-SA 3.0 IGO) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/igo/). By using the content of this publication, the users accept to be bound by the terms of use of the UNESCO Open Access Repository (http://www.unesco.org/open-access/terms-use-ccbysa-en). The designations employed and the presentation of material throughout this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNESCO concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The ideas and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors; they are not necessarily those of UNESCO and do not commit the Organization.
    [Show full text]
  • Small Mammal Fauna of Early Pleistocene Age from the Xiaochangliang Site in the Nihewan Basin, Hebei, Northern China
    ΐῒ῏ῑῐ ῍῎῍῎ῌThe Quaternary Research.1 , p. 2+ 3, April ,**2 Small mammal fauna of Early Pleistocene age from the Xiaochangliang site in the Nihewan Basin, Hebei, northern China Yingqi Zhang*+,- , Yoshinari Kawamura*,a and Baoquan Cai* A large amount of sediments was taken from the horizon stratigraphically equiva- lent to the artifact layer in the Xiaochangliang site, an important archaeological site of Early Pleistocene age. The sediments were washed with fine-mesh screens to col- lect small mammal remains. The layer is dated as+4-0 Ma by paleomagnetic measure- ments. Small mammal remains are important for biostratigraphic and paleoenviron- mental studies, but they have been hardly collected from the site before the present study. A large number of the remains collected by the screen-washing have revealed the characteristics of the small mammal fauna of the site. The fauna is compared with those of the four well-dated localities in the adjacent area. On the basis of the faunal characteristics and comparisons, we discuss the biostratigraphy and faunal turnover in the Late Pliocene and Pleistocene. Furthermore, we reconstruct the paleoenviron- ment around the site in the Early Pleistocene. Keywords : small mammal fauna, biostratigraphy, Early Pleistocene, Xiaochangliang site, Nihewan Basin, China Since then, thousands of artifacts and more I. Introduction than+* forms of mammals have been exca- The Nihewan Basin situated about+/* km vated from the site (Tanget al., +33/ ; Chen et westo north o west of Beijing (Fig. + ) has beenal., +333 ), but the knowledge on small mammals well known for geologists and paleontologists has been quite limited in previous works.
    [Show full text]
  • The Large Mammals from Tuozidong (Eastern China) and the Early Pleistocene Environmental Availability for Early Human Settlements
    Quaternary International xxx (2012) 1e10 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint The large mammals from Tuozidong (eastern China) and the Early Pleistocene environmental availability for early human settlements Wei Dong a,*, Jinyi Liu a, Yingsan Fang b a Key Laboratory of Evolutionary Systematics of Vertebrates, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 142 Xizhimen Outer Street, Beijing 100044, China b Nanjing Provincial Museum, Nanjing 210016, Jiangsu, China article info abstract Article history: To test the possibility if the earliest human settlements in Eurasia could be earlier than commonly Available online xxx accepted 1.7 Ma, large mammals from the Tuozidong cave deposits from eastern China were analyzed. Tuozidong deposits were discovered in 2000 and excavated again in 2007. Compared with other Eurasian Early Pleistocene faunas, the Tuozidong fauna is similar to Yuanmou and Gongwangling faunas associ- ated with Homo erectus, indicating that the environments of Tuozidong fauna were suitable for habi- tation of early humans. It is similar to the Longgupo and Renzidong faunas associated with putative Paleolithic industry around 2 Ma in China. It is also similar in some degree to the Saint Vallier and Chilhac faunas in France, which indicates the existence of faunal exchanges between East Asia and West Europe, and the environment barriers between Eurasian continents were not unconquerable in the early Pleis- tocene for mammal migrations. Based on the capability of good mammal migrators, the earliest tool- makers of 2.6 Ma in East Africa should have been able to expand or migrate to Eurasia within 600 ky.
    [Show full text]
  • The Paleolithic in the Nihewan Basin, China: Evolutionary History of an Early to Late Pleistocene Record in Eastern Asia
    Received: 12 February 2019 Revised: 4 June 2019 Accepted: 21 November 2019 DOI: 10.1002/evan.21813 REVIEW ARTICLE The Paleolithic in the Nihewan Basin, China: Evolutionary history of an Early to Late Pleistocene record in Eastern Asia Shi-Xia Yang1,2,3 | Cheng-Long Deng4,5,6 | Ri-Xiang Zhu4,5,6 | Michael D. Petraglia2,7,8 1Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China 2Department of Archaeology, Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, Jena, Germany 3Chinese Academy of Sciences, Center for Excellence in Life and Palaeoenvironment, Beijing, China 4State Key Laboratory of Lithospheric Evolution, Institute of Geology and Geophysics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China 5Innovation Academy for Earth Science, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China 6College of Earth and Planetary Sciences, University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China 7Human Origins Program, National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, District of Columbia 8School of Social Science, University of Queensland, St Lucia, Queensland, Australia Correspondence Shi-Xia Yang, Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Abstract Evolution and Human Origins, Institute of The Nihewan Basin of China preserves one of the most important successions of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Paleolithic archeological sites in Eurasia. Stratified archeological sites and mammalian Sciences, Beijing 100044, China. fossils, first reported in the 1920s, continue to be recovered in large-scale excavation Email: [email protected] projects. Here, we review key findings from archeological excavations in the Nihewan Michael D. Petraglia, Department of Basin ranging from ~1.66 Ma to 11.7 ka.
    [Show full text]
  • Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia
    SIBERIAN BRANCH OF THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES INSTITUTE OF ARCHAEOLOGY AND ETHNOGRAPHY ARCHAEOLOGY, ETHNOLOGY & ANTHROPOLOGY OF EURASIA Number 1 (25) 2006 Published in Russian and English CONTENTS PALEOENVIRONMENT. THE STONE AGE 2 A.P. Derevianko. The Lower Paleolithic Small Tool Industry in Eurasia: Migration or Convergent Evolution? 33 S.V. Leshchinskiy. Lugovskoye: Environment, Taphonomy, and Origin of a Paleofaunal Site 41 V.N. Zenin, S.V. Leshchinskiy, K.V. Zolotarev, P.M. Grootes, and M.-J. Nadeau. Lugovskoe: Geoarchaeology and Culture of a Paleolithic Site 54 S.V. Leshchinskiy, E.N. Maschenko, E.A. Ponomareva, L.A. Orlova, E.M. Burkanova, V.A. Konovalova. I.I. Teterina, and K.M. Gevlya. Multidisciplinary Paleontological and Stratigraphic Studies at Lugovskoe (2002 – 2004) THE NEOLITHIC 70 V.A. Zakh. Periodization of the Neolithic in the Tobol-Ishim Forest Zone THE METAL AGES AND MEDIEVAL PERIOD 84 Yu.F. Kiryushin, P.V. Volkov, and K.Yu. Kiryushin. A Plate with an Anthropomorphous Representation from Tytkesken-2: Chronological and Technological Aspects of the Torgazhak Tradition in the Altai-Sayan Highland 89 Yu.Yu. Shevchenko. Lower Levels of the Ilinsk Underground Monastery in Chernigov, Hegumens of the Monastery, and the “Jerusalem Trace” in Cave Architecture DISCUSSION ISSUES IN THE STUDY OF PREHISTORIC ART 110 O.V. Kovaleva. Petroglyphs of the Barsuchy Log Mound ETHNOLOGY 117 G.P. Vizgalov, S.G. Parkhimovich, T.N. Glushkova, E.V. Kireyeva, and A.V. Sutula. Early 17th-Century Textiles from Mangazea PHOTOETHNOGRAPHY THE NORTHWESTERN ALTAI: FOUR SEASONS 132 Winter. History of the Turata Kazakhs ANTHROPOLOGY 145 V.G. Moiseyev.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis of Lithic Technology of Lower Pleistocene Sites and Environmental Information in the Nihewan Basin, North China
    Quaternary International xxx (2012) 1e8 Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect Quaternary International journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/quaint Analysis of lithic technology of Lower Pleistocene sites and environmental information in the Nihewan Basin, North China Y. Liu a,b,*, Y.M. Hou a,b,H.Aoc a Laboratory of Human Evolution, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100044, China b University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049, China c State Key Laboratory of Loess and Quaternary Geology, Institute of Earth Environment, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Xian 710075, China article info abstract Article history: The Nihewan Basin is an important area for studying the evolution of early hominids in China. Among 15 Available online xxx recently discovered and reported Lower Pleistocene sites in the Basin, eight (Majuangou, Xiaochangliang, Dachangliang, Banshan, Donggutuo, Feiliang, Huojiadi, Xujiapo) have been specifically analyzed by the authors. This paper is a synthesis of results of analysis of lithic technology and palaeoenvironmental information of these sites. Three distinct arrangements of techniques are identified from the eight sites, which represent the different lithic techniques, cognitive capability and cultural contents. The “DGT Core” from Donggutuo indicates that the cognitive capability and the culture deepness of early hominids in China surpassed expectations. Re-evaluation is required of early human technology and behavioral mode in China. Ó 2012 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction At the high-latitude Nihewan Basin during the Early Pleistocene, the area was characterized by increased environmental and climate The Nihewan Basin of North China is one of the most important fluctuation (Zhu et al., 2007).
    [Show full text]
  • Lithic Technological Variability of the Middle Pleistocene in the Eastern Nihewan Basin) Northern China
    Lithic Technological Variability of the Middle Pleistocene in the Eastern Nihewan Basin) Northern China CHEN SHEN AND WEI QI UNTIL RECENTLY, STUDIES OF PALEOLITHIC TECHNOLOGY IN CHINA have been limited to generalizations about the nature of lithic industries in comparison to European or other Old World localities. From the "chopper-chopping tool tradition" (Movius 1944, 1948, 1969) to the "simple core-flake technology" (Schick 1994, 1998; Schick and Dong 1993), these broad characterizations em­ phasize the non-Acheulean features of the Early to Middle Pleistocene lithic industries in East Asia. This emphasis on technological differences between the East and the West has hampered the study of lithic technological variability from a regional perspective, even though it may reflect early hominid adaptations unique to East Asia. Based on accumulated data in the last two decades, Chinese researchers have recognized two major lithic industries: the pebble/core tool industry in the central-south and the southeast, and the flake tool industry in the north as well as the southwest (Lu 1999; Olsen and Miller-Antonio 1992; Wang 1997, 2001; Zhang 1999). The two industries, each represented by their unique use of raw materials, core reduction modes, and tool utilization, persisted over the entire Pleistocene with slight changes in spatial distribution (Wang 1997). These tech­ nological differences within mainland China have been attributed to regional adaptations to paleoenvironments. Thus analyses of lithic artifacts from Lower Paleolithic sites have been given some attention in a nUlTlber of recent studies, furnishing technological and statistical data for regional comparison (Chen et al. 1999, 2002; Gao 2000a, b, 2001; Hou 1992, 2000; Huang et al.
    [Show full text]