研究论文

甘肃杨上旧石器遗址剥片技术与策略

  • 赵宇超 ,
  • 李锋 ,
  • 周静 ,
  • 陈福友 ,
  • 高星
展开
  • 1.山东大学环境与社会考古国际合作联合实验室,山东大学文化遗产研究院,青岛 266237
    2.中国科学院脊椎动物演化与人类起源重点实验室,中国科学院古脊椎动物与古人类研究所,北京100044
    3.北京大学考古文博学院,北京100871
    4.甘肃省文物考古研究所,兰州 730000
    5.中国科学院大学,北京100049
赵宇超,副研究员,主要从事旧石器考古研究。E-mail: zhaoyuchao@sdu.edu.cn

收稿日期: 2022-07-04

  修回日期: 2023-03-23

  网络出版日期: 2023-10-16

基金资助

国家自然科学基金(41872028);中国科学院“战略性先导科技专项”(XDB26000000);中国科学院国际伙伴计划项目(132311KYSB20190008)

Technology and strategy of core reduction at the Yangshang site, Gansu

  • Yuchao ZHAO ,
  • Feng LI ,
  • Jing ZHOU ,
  • Fuyou CHEN ,
  • Xing GAO
Expand
  • 1. Joint International Research Laboratory of Environmental and Social Archaeology, Institute of Cultural Heritage, Shandong University, Qingdao 266237
    2. Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100044
    3. School of Archaeology and Museology, Peking University, Beijing 100871
    4. Gansu Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, Lanzhou 730000
    5. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049

Received date: 2022-07-04

  Revised date: 2023-03-23

  Online published: 2023-10-16

摘要

本文通过对甘肃杨上旧石器时代遗址出土石核与石片的原料、形态和类型的分析,探讨了石制品所体现的古人类的剥片技术及其特点,并从原料适应与文化传承的角度探讨了其技术策略产生的原因。杨上遗址石制品原料以脉石英为主,打片采用锤击法;包括普通石核和盘状石核两种剥片模式。由于脉石英原料易碎且破裂方式较难预判,导致剥片的掌控难度大,故而石核多呈现出台面选择的机会性与不确定性,缺少对于台面的修整以及剥片面的固定深入开发。在石片毛坯加工修整难度较大的情况下,古人可能更倾向于生产大量的石片,并从中选取形态角度合适的边刃直接使用。石核、石片的类型组合以及原料的构成比例从早到晚无明显变化,体现了陇西黄土高原旧石器时代早期文化传承的稳定性。

本文引用格式

赵宇超 , 李锋 , 周静 , 陈福友 , 高星 . 甘肃杨上旧石器遗址剥片技术与策略[J]. 人类学学报, 2023 , 42(05) : 604 -615 . DOI: 10.16359/j.1000-3193/AAS.2023.0040

Abstract

The Yangshang site (220-140 kaBP) is a late Early Paleolithic locale in Gansu Province. A total of 1696 lithic artifacts and 337 faunal remains were recovered during 2013 excavations. This paper summarizes the lithic reduction technology by analyzing raw materials, morphology and technical attributes of cores and flakes unearthed from the site. The cultural and adaptive implications of the lithic reduction strategies are further investigated. The results show that core reduction is characterized by hard-hammer percussion including platform-migrating and discoid core exploitation methods. The combination of core and flake types and composition of raw materials did not change significantly throughout the site’s occupation, which indicates stability of Early Paleolithic cultural transmission on the Longxi Loess Plateau. The Yangshang lithic assemblage is dominated by vein quartz. This material’s macrocrystalline and developed-inner flaw characters had significant impact on core reduction and flake morphology as the fragility and unpredictability of this material make it difficult to control core reduction process. As a result, core exploitation at Yangshang was a fairly opportunistic, migrating, platform strategy rather than focus on single platform preparation. Due to low workability of vein quartz for retouching and tool maintenance, retouch was only employed occasionally. Yangshang’s inhabitants may have preferred to produce a large quantity of flakes from which to select an edge with the appropriate form and angle for direct use.

参考文献

[1] Zhao YC, Zhou J, Chen FY, et al. Lithic technological responses to environmental change during the penultimate glacial cycle (MIS 7-6) at the Yangshang site, western Chinese Loess Plateau[J]. Quaternary Research, 2021, 103: 148-159
[2] Yang SX, Petraglia MD, Hou YM, et al. The lithic assemblages of Donggutuo, Nihewan basin: Knapping skills of Early Pleistocene hominins in North China[J]. PLoS ONE, 2017, 9: e0185101
[3] Pei SW, Xie F, Deng, CL, et al. Early Pleistocene archaeological occurrences at the Feiliang site, and the archaeology of human origins in the Nihewan Basin, North China[J]. PLoS One, 2017, 11: e0187251
[4] Li H, Li ZY, Gao X, et al. Technological behavior of the early Late Pleistocene archaic humans at Lingjing (Xuchang, China)[J]. Archaeological and Anthropological Science, 2019, 11: 3477-3490
[5] Yang SX, Wang FG, Xie F, et al. Technological innovations at the onset of the Mid-Pleistocene Climate Transition in high-latitude East Asia[J]. National Science Review, 2021, 1: nwaa053
[6] 赵宇超, 周静, 李锋, 等. 甘肃张家川县杨上旧石器时代遗址的发掘[J]. 考古, 2019, 5: 66-77
[7] Nelson MC. The study of technological organization[J]. Archaeological Method and Theory, 1991, 3: 57-100
[8] Debénath A, Dibble HL. Handbook of Paleolithic Typology-Volume One: Lower and Middle Paleolithic of Europe[M]. Philadelphia: University Museum University of Pennsylvania,1994
[9] 高星. 周口店第15地点剥片技术研究[J]. 人类学学报, 2000, 19(3): 119-215
[10] Toth N. The artifact assemblages in the light of experimental studies[A]. In: Isaac, GL.(Ed.) Koobi Fora research project[C]. Oxford: Clarenden Press, 1997
[11] 李锋. “文化传播”与“生态适应”—水洞沟遗址第二地点考古学观察[D]. 北京: 中国科学院大学, 2012
[12] 高星. 周口店第15 地点石器原料开发方略与经济形态研究[J]. 人类学学报, 2001, 20(3): 186-200
[13] Seong CT. Quartzite and vein quartz as lithic raw materials reconsidered: Aview from the Korean Paleolithic[J]. Asian Perspectives, 2004, 43: 73-90
[14] Knutsson K. ‘Simple’ need not mean ‘archaic’[J]. Antiquity, 2014, 88: 950-953
[15] Manninen MA. The effect of raw material properties on flake and flake-tool dimensions: a comparison between quartz and chert[J]. Quaternary International, 2016, 424: 24-31
[16] Knutsson H, Knutsson K, Taipale N, et al. How shattered flakes were used: Micro-wear analysis of quartz flake fragments[J]. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 2016, 24: 517-531
[17] Bordes. Principes d’une méhode d’éude des techniques de déitage et de la typologie du Palélithique ancien et moyen[J]. L’Anthropologie, 1950, 54: 19-34
[18] Terradas X. Discoid flaking method:Conception and Technological Variavvility[A]. In: Peresani M(eds). Discoid Lithic Technology-Advance and Implications[M]. BAR International Series, 2003, 1120: 19-32
[19] Yee MK. The Middle Paleolithic in China: a review of current interpretations[J]. Antiquity, 2012, 86: 619-626
[20] 陈宥成, 曲彤丽. 盘状石核相关问题探讨[J]. 考古, 2016, 2: 88-94
[21] 李占扬. 许昌灵井旧石器时代遗址2006年发掘报告[J]. 考古学报, 2010, 1: 73-100
文章导航

/