2012
DOI: 10.1016/j.crpv.2012.06.007
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Discovery of a prehistoric site at Sao Din (Nanoi, Nan province, Northern Thailand): Stone tools and new geological insights

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

1
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 8 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 16 publications
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…From a wider regional perspective, the eventual discovery of equally early sites in continental Southeast Asia would come as no surprise given the presence of very early industries in Pakistan at the site of Riwat dated to around 2.5 Ma (Rendell and Dennell,1985;Dennell, 2009), in southern India at Attirampakkam, which is older than 1.5 Ma (Pappu et al, 2011), Southern China with Longgupo dated to over 2.0 Ma (Hou and Zhao, 2010;Boëda and Hou, 2011) and insular Southeast Asia with Pacitan in Java (Sémah et al 2000) and the Mata Menge site in Flores around 0.8 Ma (Sondaar et al, 1994;Van den Bergh et al, 1996;Morwood et al, 1998;Simanjuntak et al, 2010). This probability has already been hinted at by earlier discoveries in Myanmar (Movius, 1943), Cambodia (Saurin, 1966) and Thailand (Sarasin, 1933;Van Heekeren, 1947), further reinforced by more recent finds from Northern Thailand (Zeitoun et al 2012). 1) Undifferentiated Quaternary deposits; 2) Quaternary basalts; 3) Tertiary; 4) Undifferentiated pre-Tertiary deposits; 5) Hydrographic network; 6) Major cities; 7) Location of radiometric samples (Pope et al, 1986 (in white) and Sasada et al, 1987 (in black)); 8) other known archaeological sites.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…From a wider regional perspective, the eventual discovery of equally early sites in continental Southeast Asia would come as no surprise given the presence of very early industries in Pakistan at the site of Riwat dated to around 2.5 Ma (Rendell and Dennell,1985;Dennell, 2009), in southern India at Attirampakkam, which is older than 1.5 Ma (Pappu et al, 2011), Southern China with Longgupo dated to over 2.0 Ma (Hou and Zhao, 2010;Boëda and Hou, 2011) and insular Southeast Asia with Pacitan in Java (Sémah et al 2000) and the Mata Menge site in Flores around 0.8 Ma (Sondaar et al, 1994;Van den Bergh et al, 1996;Morwood et al, 1998;Simanjuntak et al, 2010). This probability has already been hinted at by earlier discoveries in Myanmar (Movius, 1943), Cambodia (Saurin, 1966) and Thailand (Sarasin, 1933;Van Heekeren, 1947), further reinforced by more recent finds from Northern Thailand (Zeitoun et al 2012). 1) Undifferentiated Quaternary deposits; 2) Quaternary basalts; 3) Tertiary; 4) Undifferentiated pre-Tertiary deposits; 5) Hydrographic network; 6) Major cities; 7) Location of radiometric samples (Pope et al, 1986 (in white) and Sasada et al, 1987 (in black)); 8) other known archaeological sites.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 86%
“…Archaeological research carried out elsewhere in this vast region adds information on the ancient hominin settlement at the boundary between the Lower and Middle Pleistocene. Artifacts from the site of Sao Din in northern Thailand reveal an undeniable closeness to the South Chinese and Vietnamese collections (Zeitoun et al, 2012). Moreover, the researchers of this site argue not only similar features (bifacial technology), but also the specifi city typical of the Early Paleolithic industries of Southeast Asia (Ibid.).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 96%