Acta Anthropologica Sinica >

2020 , Vol. 39 >Issue 02: 183 - 192

DOI: https://doi.org/10.16359/j.cnki.cn11-1963/q.2020.0005

Production patterns and strategies of the Acheulean large flakes

  • Lei LEI ,
  • Dawei LI ,
  • Xiaorong MA ,
  • Kangti LIU ,
  • Yamei HOU ,
  • Wei WANG ,
  • Hao LI
Expand
  • 1. 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
    2. CAS Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, Beijing 100044
    3. University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing 100049
    4. Institute for History and Culture of Science & Technology, Guangxi University for Nationalities, Nanning 530006;
    5. Guangxi Museum of Nationalities, Nanning, Guangxi 530018
    6. Youjiang Museum of Nationalities, Baise 533000
    7. Institute of Cultural Heritage, Shandong University, Qingdao 266235

Received date: 2019-06-29

  Revised date: 2019-11-09

  Online published: 2020-07-17

Fold

Abstract

Producing large flakes and making the large cutting tools are two core elements of the Acheulean technology. Compared with extensive studies on the manufacture of Acheulean tools, technologies and strategies involved in producing Acheulean large flakes have received less attention in China. In this study, we focus on introducing a variety of the large flake production technologies abroad, with the analysis of patterns and characteristics of each method. According to the complexity of these methods, we have divided them into three groups. The first mainly refers to cobble opening technology, which uses natural features of the cobble to produce a single large flake. The second includes bifacial core, sliced slab and the Kombewa methods, all of which share common technological characteristics involving reduction sequences of large cores. The third includes the Chirki, Tabelbala-Tachenghit and Victoria West methods, which are the most sophisticated core flaking technologies in the Acheulean. These latter methods show a certain degree of core preparation and result in the production of large flakes with consistent morphology. Based on the above analysis, we present a preliminary study of large cores and flakes discovered from the Bose Basin in South China, and discuss the significance of these products in completing our understanding of the lithic technology in this region.

Key words： Archaeology; Lithics; Acheulean; Cores; Flakes; Production; Bose Basin

Cite this article

Lei LEI , Dawei LI , Xiaorong MA , Kangti LIU , Yamei HOU , Wei WANG , Hao LI . Production patterns and strategies of the Acheulean large flakes[J]. Acta Anthropologica Sinica, 2020 , 39(02) : 183 -192 . DOI: 10.16359/j.cnki.cn11-1963/q.2020.0005

References

[1] Toth N, Schick K. Evolution of tool use[A]. In: Michael P. Muehlenbein, Basics in Human Evolution[C]. Academic Press, 2015
[2] Beyene Y, Katoh S, WoldeGabriel G, et al. The characteristics and chronology of the earliest Acheulean at Konso, Ethiopia[J]. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2013,110(5):1584-1591
[3] Texier PJ, Roche H . The impact of predetermination on the development of some Acheulean cha?nes opératoires[J]. Evolución Humana en Europa y los Yacimientos de la Sierra de Atapuerca, 1995,2:403-420
[4] Madsen B, Goren-Inbar N . Acheulian giant core technology and beyond: an archaeological and experimental case study[J]. Eurasian Prehistory, 2004,2(1):3-52
[5] Inizan M, Reduron-Ballinger M, Roche H , et al. Technology and terminology of knapped stone[M]. Crep: Nanterre, 1999
[6] Sohnge PG, Visser DJL, van Riet Lowe CVR. The geology and archaeology of the Vaal RiverBasin[J]. South African Geological Survey Memoirs. 1937,35(1-2):1-184
[7] Sharon G . Acheulian large flake industries: technology, chronology, and significance[M]. British Archaeological Reports Ltd, 2007
[8] Sharon G . Large flake Acheulian[J]. Quaternary International, 2010,223(5):226-233
[9] Balout L, Biberson P, Tixier J . L’Acheuleén de Ternefine (Algérie): gisement de l’Atlanthrope[J]. L’Anthropologie, 1967,71(3-4):217-238
[10] Corvinus G . A Survey of the Pravara River System in Western Maharashtra, India, Vol 2.: The Excavations of the Acheulian Site of Chirki-on-Pravara, India[J]. Tübinger Monographien zur Urgeschichte, 1983,7:1-466
[11] Jansen FJ . A new type of stone implement from Victoria West[J]. South African Journal of Science, 1926,23(12):818-825
[12] Goodwin AJH . The Victoria West Industry[J]. Annals of the South african Museum, 1929,27:53-69
[13] Goodwin AJH . Some developments in technique during the Earlier Stone Age[J]. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa, 1933,21(2):109-123
[14] van Riet Lowe CVR . Fresh light on the prehistoric archaeology of South Africa[J]. Bantu Studies, 1927,3(1):385-393
[15] van Riet Lowe CVR . The Evolution of the Levallois Technique in South Africa[J]. Man, 1945,45:49-59
[16] Kuman K . An Acheulean factory site with prepared core technology near Taung, South Africa[J]. The South African Archaeological Bulletin, 2001: 8-22
[17] Sharon G, Beaumont P. Victoria West: a highly standardized prepared core technology[A]. In: Naama Goren-Inbar, Gonen Sharon eds. Axe age: Acheulian toolmaking from Quarry to Discard[C]. London: Equinox, 2006, 181-199
[18] Li H, Kuman K, Lotter M , et al. The Victoria West: Earliest prepared core technology in the Acheulean at Canteen Kopje and implications for the cognitive evolution of early hominids[J]. Royal Society Open Science, 2017,4(6):170288
[19] Leader G . New excavations at Canteen Kopje, Northern Cape Province, South Africa: A techno-typological comparison of three earlier Acheulean assemblages with new interpretations on the Victoria West phenomenon[D]. 2014
[20] Breuil H . Premieres impressions de voyage sur la préhistoire sud-africaine[J]. L’anthropologie, 1930,40:209-223
[21] Alimen M, Zuber J . L’évolution de l’Acheuléen au Sahara nord-occidental (Saoura-Ougarta-Tabelbala)[M]. France: Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, 1978
[22] Tixier J. Le hachereau dans l′Acheuléen nord-africain. Notes typologiques[A]. Congrès Préhistorique de France. Comptes Rendus de la XVe Session, Poitiers-Angoulème[C]. 1956, 914-923
[23] Champault B . L’industrie de Tachenrhit[J]. 70ème Congrès de l’Association Fran?aise pour l’Avancement des Sciences (Tunis, 1951), 1951,3:123-130
[24] Champault B . Nucléus atechnique Levalloisienne accompagné d’une partie de ses éclats de taille (industrie de Tachenrhit, Sahara algéro-marocain)[J]. Bulletin de la Société préhistorique fran?aise, 1956,53:267
[25] Champault B . L’acheuléen évolué au Sahara occidental. Notes sur l’homme au paléolithique ancien[D]. Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, 1966
[26] Bar-Yosef O, Wang YP . Paleolithic archaeology in China[J]. Annual Review of Anthropology, 2012,41:319-335
[27] Hou YM, Richard P, Yuan BY , et al. Mid-Pleistocene Acheulean-likestone technology of the Bose Basin, South China[J]. Science, 2000,287:1622-1626
[28] Zhang P, Huang WW, Wang W . Acheulean handaxes from Fengshudao, Bose sites of south China[J]. Quaternary International, 2010,223:440-443
[29] Dennell RW. The Acheulean Assemblages of Asia: A Review[A]. In: Gallotti R, Mussi M eds. The Emergence of the Acheulean in East Africa and Beyond[C]. Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology. Springer, 2018
[30] Corvinus G . Homo erectus in East and Southeast Asia, and the questions of the age of the species and its association with stone artifacts, with special attention to handaxe-like tools[J]. Quaternary International, 2004,117(1):141-151
[31] Gao X . Characteristics and significance of Paleolithic handaxes from China[J]. Acta Anthropologica Sinica, 2012,31(2):97-112
[32] Lycett SJ, Bae CJ . The Movius Line controversy: the state of the debate[J]. World Archaeology, 2010,42(4):521-544
[33] Lycett SJ, Norton CJ . A demographic model for Palaeolithic technological evolution: the case of East Asia and the Movius Line[J]. Quaternary International, 2010,211(1-2):55-65
[34] Kuman K. Acheulean Industrial Complex[A]. In: Smith C eds, Encyclopedia of Global Archaeology[C]. Springer New York, 2019
[35] Moncel MH, Santagata C, Pereira A , et al. A biface production older than 600 ka ago at Notarchirico (Southern Italy) contribution to understanding early Acheulean cognition and skills in Europe[J]. PloS One, 2019,14(9)
[36] Petraglia MD, Shipton C . Large cutting tool variation west and east of the Movius Line[J]. Journal of Human Evolution, 2008,55(6):962-966
[37] Wang W, Lycett SJ, Cramon-Taubadel NV , et al. Comparison of Handaxes from Bose Basin (China) and the Western Acheulean Indicates Convergence of Form, Not Cognitive Differences[J]. PloS one, 2012,7(4):e35804
[38] Wang SJ . Perspectives on Hominid Behaviour and Settlement Patterns: A Study of the Lower Palaeolithic Sites in the Luonan Basin, China. BAR International Series 1406, Oxford: Archaeopress, 2005
[39] Sun X, Lu H, Wang SJ , et al. Age of newly discovered Paleolithic assemblages at Liuwan site Luonan Basin, central China[J]. Quaternary International, 2014,347:193-199
[40] Li H, Li CR, Kuman K , et al. The Middle Pleis-tocene Acheulean site of Shuangshu in the Danjiangkou ReservoirRegion, central China. Journal of Archaeological Science, 2014,52, 391-409
[41] Li H, Kuman K, Li CR . Re-examination of the morphological variability of East Asian handaxes from a comparative perspective[J]. World Archaeology, 2014,46(5):705-733
[42] Li H, Kuman K, Li CR . What is currently (un) known about the Chinese Acheulean, with implications for hypotheses on the earlier dispersal of hominids[J]. Comptes Rendus Palevol, 2018,17(1-2):120-130
[43] Yang SX, Huang WW, Hou YM , et al. Is the Dingcun lithic assembly a “chopper-chopping tool industry”, or “Late Acheulian”?[J]. Quaternary International, 2014,321:3-11
Options
Outlines

/

〈 〉