Technological behavior of the early Late Pleistocene archaic humans at Lingjing (Xuchang, China)

Li, Hao; Li, Zhanyang; Gao, Xing; Kuman, Kathleen; Sumner, Alexandra

doi:10.1007/s12520-018-0759-7

Cited by 19 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 72 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The Lingjing artifacts are associated with two archaic human crania demonstrating a mixture of traits from archaic East Asian humans, Neanderthals and early modern humans. Taken together, these two assemblages lend support to recognition of a Chinese Middle Paleolithic, as a regional variant of the Middle Pleistocene technological advances documented at Eurasian and African archaeological sites (Li et al, 2019). What makes the Chinese Middle Paleolithic distinct from the Middle Pleistocene assemblages in the Western Hemisphere is the low frequencies of prepared core technologies and pieces produced using a Levallois strategy.…”

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 60%

“…Recent reassessment of the chronology and stone artifact technology at Guanyindong Cave in Guizhou Province, China, identified traces of the Levallois strategy dated to approximately 170–80 ka (Hu et al, 2019). Similarly, traces of Levallois have been described in the stone artifact assemblage from Lingjing (Henan Province, China), dated to 125–90 ka (Li et al, 2019). The Lingjing artifacts are associated with two archaic human crania demonstrating a mixture of traits from archaic East Asian humans, Neanderthals and early modern humans.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Luminescence chronology and lithic technology of Tianhuadong Cave, an early Upper Pleistocene Paleolithic site in southwest China

Ruan

Liu

et al. 2019

Quat. res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Tianhuadong is a cave site located in the northwest of Yunnan Province, China. Since 2010, several surveys and one test excavation have yielded more than 1000 stone artifacts. The lithic assemblage shows some features of Levallois and Quina technologies, similar to those found in Middle Paleolithic sites in the Western Hemisphere. In this study, we summarize the lithic industry and propose a reliable chronology for the site using optically stimulated luminescence (OSL) dating of individual quartz grains extracted from sediments. We applied the standardized growth curve method to deal with the problem associated with the saturation in natural OSL signals in quartz. Our dating results yielded ages of 90–40 ka, suggesting that the associated lithic assemblage could be assigned to Marine Oxygen Isotope Stages 5 and 4 and could potentially represent Middle Paleolithic technologies. Because the number of Middle Paleolithic sites in southwest China is small, this site provides one of the few traces of human occupation in southwest China during the early upper Pleistocene. Thus, it is important for understanding hominin evolution and dispersal in this region.

show abstract

Section: Introductionsupporting

confidence: 60%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Luminescence chronology and lithic technology of Tianhuadong Cave, an early Upper Pleistocene Paleolithic site in southwest China

Ruan

Liu

et al. 2019

Quat. res.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Mortality patterns, skeletal element representation and anthropogenic modification on the faunal remains [133][134][135][136], as well as the osseous and lithic toolkit [31,32,124,125,130] are…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Quartz and quartzite are the two predominant raw materials used for the manufacture of tools. Alterations of the cortex still present on lithic artefacts, estimation of the original size of the river pebbles selected for knapping, and outcrops survey of the Yinghe River suggest the prehistoric occupants at Lingjing exploited raw material found within 10km from the site [ 124 ]. Differences in selected raw material are documented between layer 10 and 11.…”

Section: Archaeological Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

A 115,000-year-old expedient bone technology at Lingjing, Henan, China

Doyon

Wang

et al. 2021

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Activities attested since at least 2.6 Myr, such as stone knapping, marrow extraction, and woodworking may have allowed early hominins to recognize the technological potential of discarded skeletal remains and equipped them with a transferable skillset fit for the marginal modification and utilization of bone flakes. Identifying precisely when and where expedient bone tools were used in prehistory nonetheless remains a challenging task owing to the multiple natural and anthropogenic processes that can mimic deliberately knapped bones. Here, we compare a large sample of the faunal remains from Lingjing, a 115 ka-old site from China which has yielded important hominin remains and rich faunal and lithic assemblages, with bone fragments produced by experimentally fracturing Equus caballus long bones. Our results provide a set of qualitative and quantitative criteria that can help zooarchaeologists and bone technologists distinguish faunal remains with intentional flake removal scars from those resulting from carcass processing activities. Experimental data shows marrow extraction seldom generates diaphyseal fragments bearing more than six flake scars arranged contiguously or in interspersed series. Long bone fragments presenting such characteristics can, therefore, be interpreted as being purposefully knapped to be used as expediency tools. The identification, based on the above experimental criteria, of 56 bone tools in the Lingjing faunal assemblage is consistent with the smaller size of the lithics found in the same layer. The continuity gradient observed in the size of lithics and knapped bones suggests the latter were used for tasks in which the former were less or not effective.

show abstract

“…The lithic assemblage from layer 11 comprises mostly quartz and quartzite artefacts. The presence of cores, flakes, formal tools and debris, plus the identification of use wear on some artefacts (Li 2007; Li et al 2019), of bone retouchers, organic soft hammer and pressure flakers (Doyon et al 2018, 2019), suggest that knapping activities, including tool manufacture and use, occurred at the site. The two engraved bone fragments described in this study also derive from layer 11.…”

Section: Archaeological Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%