对石制品等文化遗存的分类与类型学分析是旧石器时代考古的基础工作之一。旧石器考古类型学发端于法国,由博尔德奠定基础框架,其后多位学者针对不同地区和时段的材料提出有所区别的类型学方案。该体系在发展过程中其主观性和标准不统一等问题一直被质疑,一直在补充和完善,目前已在很大程度上转化为对遗址和材料做整理、分析和描述的工具。类型学对于遗址出土材料的整理、表述和信息简化、分析不可或缺,但相对于与人类生存和认知更近的石器技术、功能、原料利用等方面的研究,其重要性和受重视程度已大大降低。中国旧石器考古类型学融合了西方学术体系的一些元素并进行了本土化实践,发展出一定的区域特色。在操作链理念的指导和数字技术的支撑下,以技术解读、特征分析为目标与导向的技术类型学研究,应是解决旧石器时代考古中分类与类型学研究所遭遇的困难与问题的思路和方向。

This paper made a critical review on the development of stone artifact classification and typological research in paleolithic archaeological field. It traced back the origin of this approach in France and subsequent development in Africa, Southeast Asia and China. Its roles in paleolithic studies as well as the limitation and controversies surrounding it were accessed and analyzed.

Classification on lithic materials and typological analysis are basic academic practice in paleolithic research. F. Bordes’ typological framework came into being in the 1950s and 1960s made profound influence in this subject, other scholars also made contributions to this scheme by adding regional typological variants. Throughout its development, the exercise of lithic classification and typological investigation have been questioned and criticized for its subjective matters and the lack of commonly accepted criteria, and efforts of amendment and improvement have been continued. Today, lithic typological system has largely become a tool-kit for organizing, categorizing, simplifying and describing information of unearthed materials from certain sites. Its function as a descriptive tool is important; it can provide vital information on the content of certain archaeological collection, the nature and formation of the site, lithic technology, stone tool function, cultural tradition and development, etc. However, compared to studies on lithic technology, tool function, raw material exploitation, subsistent pattern, adaptation strategy and landscape utility, which are more closely related to human behavior and cognitive capacity, typological inquiry is becoming less indispensable and more and more marginal in the whole research enterprise. Lithic typology in China is a good example of the general trend of development of this research field; it is an admixture and integration of key western typological elements and terms and innovation with regional characteristics. To better understand the current debates and concerns regarding the status and function of lithic typology, we need to clarify the nature, principle, function and limitation of traditional typology, and to move forward from a basic classification and description tradition to in-depth research into human behavior and adaption. A techno-typological approach guided by the conception of Chaîne opératoire and aided by digital technology might be the solution toward this direction.