研究论文

冀蒙交界裕民文化锛状器的制作技术

  • 叶灿阳 ,
  • 陈胜前 ,
  • 赵潮 ,
  • 胡晓农 ,
  • 郭明建 ,
  • 包青川
展开
  • 1.中国人民大学历史学院考古文博系,北京100872
    2.陕西师范大学历史文化学院,西安710119
    3.乌兰察布博物馆,乌兰察布012000
    4.暨南大学文学院历史学系,广州510632
    5.内蒙古自治区文物考古研究院,呼和浩特010010
叶灿阳,博士研究生,主要从事史前考古及考古学理论研究。E-mail: ycykaogu@163.com

收稿日期: 2022-07-31

  修回日期: 2022-10-31

  网络出版日期: 2023-06-13

基金资助

国家社科基金青年项目“裕民文化遗址石器整理与史前先民生计行为研究”(21CKG004)

Manufacturing technology of adze-shaped stone tools of the Yumin Culture in the border between Hebei and Inner Mongolia

  • Canyang YE ,
  • Shengqian CHEN ,
  • Chao ZHAO ,
  • Xiaonong HU ,
  • Mingjian GUO ,
  • Qingchuan BAO
Expand
  • 1. Department of Archaeology and Museology, School of History, Renmin University of China, Beijing 100872
    2. School of History and Civilization, Shaanxi Normal University, Xi’an 710119
    3. Ulanqab Museum, Ulanqab 012000
    4. Department of History, Jinan University, Guangzhou 510632
    5. Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology of Inner Mongolia, Huhhot 010010

Received date: 2022-07-31

  Revised date: 2022-10-31

  Online published: 2023-06-13

摘要

锛状器是旧石器时代晚期开始出现的一类特殊的打制石器类型,进入新石器时代以后,在北方森林草原交错带延续并有技术改进。十多年来,在裕民文化多个考古遗址的调查和发掘中发现了大量的锛状器,是该文化代表性的石器。本研究通过形态观察与特征测量、加工痕迹与制作技术分析、操作链重建与复制实验等手段,对裕民文化出土的锛状器进行技术观察和实验分析,还原了裕民文化锛状器的生产工艺,并结合文化背景阐释了这类石器工具在裕民文化中的技术适应意义。锛状器可分为以平直刃为特征的单面加工类型和以弧凸刃为特征的两面加工类型,这种类型划分同时具有形态和技术上的意义。结合裕民文化的石器组合来看,锛状器在形态上具有一定规范性,操作链上具有高度灵活性,与其他工具一起反映了裕民文化人群对北方森林-草原交错地带风险环境的弹性技术适应。

本文引用格式

叶灿阳 , 陈胜前 , 赵潮 , 胡晓农 , 郭明建 , 包青川 . 冀蒙交界裕民文化锛状器的制作技术[J]. 人类学学报, 2023 , 42(03) : 317 -330 . DOI: 10.16359/j.1000-3193/AAS.2023.0020

Abstract

Adze-shaped tools are chipped stone tools that emerged during the late Upper Paleolithic period in North China and continued to be used into the early Neolithic in the northern forest-steppe ecotone area. A significant number of adze-shaped tools have been discovered in both survey collections and excavated sites in the distributional zone (the border between Hebei and Inner Mongolia) of the Yumin Culture (8600-7000 BP cal). This study examines the technical characteristics of these tools through morphological observation, feature measurement, analysis of manufacturing process and reduction sequence, as well as experimental replication to reconstruct the chaîne opératoire. The goal of this research is to reconstruct the production process of adze-shaped tools, investigate their technical design, and explore their cultural adaptation in the Yumin Culture.
Our analysis reveals that these tools are steep-edged and end- cutting tools that vary in length from 50 to 90 mm, width from 30 to 45 mm, and thickness from 1/2 to 1/4 of the width. They have an end-cutting angle ranging from 55° to 75° and weigh less than 100 g. They could be divided into flat edge types with unifacial flaking and bulge edge types with bifacial flaking, each with different strategies in raw material preparation, shaping technology, and manufacturing processes. The production of these tools had a high degree of flexibility in the chaîne opératoire due to the application of bifacial skills, which reflects a technological adaptation to the risk environment in the Neolithic forest-steppe ecotone area.
Transition from the Paleolithic to the Neolithic led to the complete replacement of chipped stone tools by polished stone tools as settlement mobility decreased and demand for durable stone tools increased. Adze-shaped tools emerged during this transition, but the process was not linear. In the Yumin Culture, both chipped and ground tools including microlithic tools, were used. The chipped adze-shaped tool technology, along with other coexisting stone tool technologies, reflects a specific adaptation to a semi-mobile lifestyle based on the technological organization and cultural-ecological adaptation theory. This adaptation intensified the utilization of steppe and forest edge resources that maintained a seasonal and mobile way of life. The diversified technological organization strategy of stone tools may also reflect adaptation resilience to resources in this ecotone environment and division of labor within the society.

参考文献

[1] 谢飞, 李珺, 石金鸣. 中国旧石器时代晚期锛状器之研究[A].见:韩国国立忠北大学校先史文化研究所,中国辽宁省文物考古研究所,等.东北亚旧石器文化[C]. 沈阳: 白山文化出版社, 1996, 206-223
[2] Maringer J. Contribution to the Prehistory of Mongolia: A Study of the Prehistoric Collections from Inner Mongolia[M]. Stockholm, 1950
[3] Fairservis WA. Archaeology of the Southern Gobi of Mongolia[M]. Durham: Carolina Academic Press, 1993
[4] 王建, 王向前, 陈哲英. 下川文化——山西下川遗址调查报告[J]. 考古学报, 1978, 3: 259-288
[5] 谢飞, 李珺. 籍箕滩旧石器时代晚期细石器遗址[J]. 文物春秋, 1993, 2: 1-22+70
[6] 朱之勇. 虎头梁遗址石制品研究[D]. 北京: 中国科学院研究生院, 2006, 98-110
[7] 朱之勇. 虎头梁遗址中的锛状器[J]. 北方文物, 2008, 2: 3-8
[8] 张晓凌. 石器功能与人类适应行为:虎头梁遗址石制品微痕分析[D]. 北京: 中国科学院研究生院, 2009, 101-109
[9] 张晓凌, 沈辰, 高星, 等. 微痕分析确认万年前的复合工具与其功能[J]. 科学通报, 2010, 3: 229-236
[10] 乌兰察布盟文物站. 内蒙古乌兰察布盟北部地区新石器时代调查[J]. 考古, 1996, 2: 9-15
[11] 包青川, 胡晓农, 岳够明. 内蒙古化德县发现八千年前村落遗址[N]. 中国文物报,2016-06-03(08)
[12] 胡晓农, 包青川, 李恩瑞, 等. 内蒙古化德县裕民遗址发掘简报[J]. 考古, 2021, 1: 26-50
[13] 胡晓农, 包青川, 李恩瑞, 等. 草原地区新石器时代早期季节性营地式聚落遗址的新发现——内蒙古化德四麻沟遗址发掘取得重要收获[N]. 中国文物报,2020-01-03(08)
[14] 包青川, 陈文虎, 胡晓农. 内蒙古化德县四麻沟遗址发掘简报[J]. 考古, 2021, 1: 51-74
[15] 郭明建, 王刚, 邱振威. 河北康保兴隆遗址发现旧石器末期至新石器早中期遗存[N]. 中国文物报,2019-10-11(08)
[16] 郭明建, 邱振威, 王刚, 等. 河北康保县兴隆遗址2018-2019年发掘简报[J]. 考古, 2021, 1: 3-25
[17] 陈文虎, 胡晓农, 包青川. 内蒙古乃仁陶力盖遗址发现距今8000年新石器时代早期大型聚落[N]. 中国文物报,2020-10-09 (08)
[18] 张文瑞. 内蒙古高原南缘新石器时代中期文化遗存初步认识[J]. 北方文物, 2023, 1: 51-59
[19] 河北地勘局区调队. 康保幅K-50-19太仆寺旗幅K-50-20 1/20区域地质调查报告[R]. 全国地质资料馆,1980
[20] Bailey G, Spikins P. Mesolithic Europe[M]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2008, 74-79
[21] Borrell F, Ibá?ez JJ, Molist M. Stone Tools in Transition: From Hunter-Gatherers to Farming Societies in the Near East[C]. Bellaterra (Barcelona): Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona. Servei de Publicacions:, 2013, 110-198
[22] 谢飞, 孟昭永, 王子玉. 河北玉田县孟家泉旧石器遗址发掘简报[J]. 文物春秋, 1991, 1: 1-13
[23] 郭明建, 邱振威, 王刚, 等. 课题意识引导下的田野工作——坝上地区史前遗存调查及兴隆遗址发掘项目的策划与实施[N]. 中国考古网,2019-12-12. http://kaogu.cssn.cn/zwb/xsyj/yjxl/qt/201912/t20191212_5057911.shtml
[24] 叶灿阳, 陈胜前, 赵潮. 跳出固有模式——草原地带新石器文化新发现的思考[N]. 中国文物报,2022-01-07(06)
[25] Nelson MC. The study of technological organization[J]. Archaeological Method and Theory, 1991, 3: 57-100
[26] Torrence R. Time, Energy and Stone Tools[C]. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989
[27] 魏惠平, 王培生, 刘文清. 河北尚义县四台新石器时代遗址发掘简报[J]. 考古, 2018, 4: 3-15
[28] 河北省文物考古研究院, 张家口市文物考古研究所. 河北尚义四台遗址[N]. 中国文物报,2023-02-17(07)
[29] Ugan A, Bright J, Rogers A. when the technology worth the trouble?[J]. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2003, 30: 1315-1329
[30] Stevens NE, McElreath R. When are two tools better than one? Mortars, millingslabs, and the California acorn economy[J]. Journal of Anthropological Archaeology, 2015, 37: 100-111
文章导航

/