人类学学报 ›› 2023, Vol. 42 ›› Issue (05): 616-625.doi: 10.16359/j.1000-3193/AAS.2023.0031

• 研究论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

河南汝州温泉遗址的发现与初步研究

赵清坡1,2(), 张水木3, 宿凯4, 马欢欢5(), 陈君6, 徐永华7   

  1. 1.河南省文物考古研究院,郑州450000
    2.河南省东亚现代人起源国际联合实验室,郑州450000
    3.平顶山市文物局,平顶山467000
    4.美国圣路易斯华盛顿大学人类学系,美国,密苏里63130
    5.山东大学文化遗产研究院,青岛266237
    6.重庆师范大学历史与社会学院,重庆401331
    7.汝州市文物局,平顶山467500
  • 收稿日期:2022-12-22 修回日期:2023-04-11 出版日期:2023-10-15 发布日期:2023-10-16
  • 通讯作者: 马欢欢,副研究员/博士,主要从事西亚考古和旧石器时代考古研究。E-mail: mahh@sdu.edu.cn
  • 作者简介:赵清坡,硕士,主要从事旧石器时代考古研究。E-mail: hnzhaoqingpo@sina.com
  • 基金资助:
    河南兴文化工程文化研究专项项目(2023XWH030);2020河南省文物保护专项基金;2021河南省科技厅基础业务专项基金;国家社科青年项目(22CKG003);重庆市教委人文社科项目(22SKGH097)

Discovery and preliminary study of the Wenquan Paleolithic site in Ruzhou, Henan

ZHAO Qinpo1,2(), ZHANG Shuimu3, SU Kai4, MA Huanhuan5(), CHEN Jun6, XU Yonghua7   

  1. 1. Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Zhengzhou 450000
    2. Henan Provincial International Joint Laboratory on Origins of Modern Humans in East Asia, Zhengzhou 450000
    3. Pingdingshan Municipal Cultural Heritage Bureau, Pingdingshan 467000
    4. Department of Anthropology, Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri 63130, United States
    5. Institute of Cultural Heritage, Shandong University, Qingdao 266237
    6. History and Social Work College, Chongqing Normal University, Chongqing 401331
    7. Ruzhou Municipal Cultural Heritage Bureau, Pingdingshan 467500
  • Received:2022-12-22 Revised:2023-04-11 Online:2023-10-15 Published:2023-10-16

摘要:

2021年11月,河南省文物考古研究院等单位在河南汝州地区开展旧石器考古调查,新发现汝州温泉遗址,地层厚约3 m,发现石制品148件,分为石核、石片、石锤和石器。原料以石英岩、安山岩为主;石核以简单剥片石核为主,存在盘状石核;石片中以大、中型为主;石器类型包括手斧、薄刃斧、手镐、大型石刀、石球、刮削器、尖状器、钻器、砍砸器等。整体石制品面貌既有简单石核-石片石器工业的特点,又有手斧、薄刃斧等阿舍利石器工业常见器类,年代属晚更新世。温泉遗址的发现是北汝河流域存在阿舍利技术的证据,河南北汝河流域或将成为国内又一处阿舍利技术表现较为集中的区域,将为研究阿舍利技术在我国的出现和扩散等提供新的线索和区域视角。

关键词: 考古学, 石制品, 阿舍利, 晚更新世

Abstract:

In November 2021, an archaeological survey of Paleolithic sites in Ruzhou, Henan Province was conducted by a team led by the Henan Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology and several other institutes. An open-air Paleolithic site was newly discovered due to clearance of a river course. After thorough survey and investigation, we found cultural remains from an area of 80,000 to 100,000 m2 with cultural deposits about 3 m thick. The stratigraphy of the site consisted of 4 layers (from top to bottom): Layer 1, modern disturbed layer; Layer 2, silty clay; Layer 3, cultural deposits including artifacts and fauna, and characterized by sandy gravel; and Layer 4, bedrock. A total of 148 stone artifacts were collected from sections of river course and deposits piled up when clearing up the river away, and include cores, flakes, hammerstones and retouched tools. Raw materials were mainly quartzite and andesite, probably selected from river gravels. Artifacts of a core-flake industry were often made on quartzite, whereas large flakes used as blanks for large cutting tools (such as handaxes and cleavers) were usually made on andesite. Flake-cores play a prominent role in cores, and discoidal cores exist. Hard-hammer percussion was more common than bipolar percussion. Flakes were generally large to medium in size. Giant to large flakes were produced from cobble opening technology and bifacial core technology. Retouched tools included scrapers, points, choppers, handaxes, cleavers, picks, large knives, spheroids. Technological analysis suggests that flake-tool production system based mainly on small flake blanked scrapers and a pebble-core industry based on pebble-made choppers that co-existed with a heavy-duty tool production system made on large flakes, especially Acheulean elements (handaxes, cleavers, picks and knives). The latter shows clear differences from those of Olduvai culture represented by core-flake tradition. According to results of 14C dating based on charcoal samples from the upper unit of Layer 3 (> 40ka) and U-series dating of an animal tooth from the lower unit of Layer 3 (64.8 kaBP), occupation of this site was Late Pleistocene, a crucial period of origins of early modern humans in China. The discovery of the Wenquan site shows clear evidence for an existence of Acheulean technology in Beiruhe River region, providing new clues and a regional perspective on research of dispersal of Acheulean techno-complex in central China.

Key words: Archaeology, Lithics, Acheulean, Late Pleistocene

中图分类号: