试论鄂尔多斯乌兰木伦遗址第1地点的性质和功能

鄂尔多斯乌兰木伦遗址是2010年新发现的一处旧石器时代旷野遗址,经过多年发掘出土大量石制品、动物化石、颜料块和火塘等遗迹现象。石制品组合和拼合、动物考古埋藏学以及用火遗迹表明乌兰木伦遗址属于原地埋藏,较好地保存了古人类原料采集、预剥片、剥片、加工和使用的完整动态链,表明该遗址具有石器制造场的性质。大量动物碎骨、骨骼上的切割痕迹以及火塘和烧骨的发现表明在乌兰木伦遗址还发生了屠宰动物的行为和生活行为。综合来看,乌兰木伦遗址是一个多功能的古人类活动营地。     

旧石器时代旷野居址初探

一、引言旧石器时代的遗址可以分为两大类型：一类为洞穴遗址，一类为旷野遗址。在这两类遗址中，洞穴遗址作为远古人类居址的证据是确凿而屡见不鲜的。洞穴中文化堆积的厚度及其连续性是人类占居洞穴的时间跨度的呈现，而文化堆积中的遗迹现象如居住面、灰烬以及文化遗物如石器、骨器甚至精神产品如洞穴壁画成为反映人类在洞穴内生产、生活活动的具体表征。众多的发现表明，营洞穴而居是人类在一段相当长的时期内的一种生存适应方式，其时间跨度贯穿旧石器时代、新石器时代甚至较晚的历史时期。以数量而论，旧石器时代的旷野遗址或地点远远…     

山西吉县柿子滩旧石器时代遗址第五地点发掘简报

柿子滩遗址第五地点是距今2~1万年左右的旧石器时代晚期细石器遗址。该地点于2010年进行了发掘,四个文化层均埋藏于河流相阶地堆积中,出土有石制品、动物化石和人类化石,多以用火遗迹为中心集中分布。其中原生埋藏的人类化石为该遗址的首次发现,为研究晚更新世晚期人类的演化提供了珍贵材料。     

关于遗址形成过程研究

在许多史前遗址中,我们会将与文化遗存共存的大量其他遗物和遗迹看作是人类行为所致,比如将动物骨骼看作是人类狩猎或食用的庖厨垃圾。就像用静态方法分析器物工具一样,其实这种看法是有问题的。考古遗址也一样,它们在发现时也早已处于被弃置状态,从被古人类栖居到被发掘出来的漫长岁月中,饱经地质、气候、生物和人类的种种动力作用,沧海桑田,早已是面目全非了。因此,单凭发掘过程中所获得的表面印象而做的结论,难免与遗址本来的面目有很大的出入。埋藏学和遗址形成过程研究,就是要把影响遗址和文化遗存堆积的各种自然因素和人为因素区分开来,从而能比较客观和全面地了解古人类的活动与行为方式。本文作者是最早提出遗址形成过程概念的美国考古学家,他认为一处考古遗址是由人类文化的和自然动力过程共同塑造的。自遗址形成阶段开始,文化动力和自然动力就无时不刻地对文化材料产生影响,它们决定了文化遗存保存下来的条件和机会,并直接影响到考古学家对它们的解读和古人行为复原。遗址形成过程,特别是遗址废弃后的扰动会导致考古记录呈现一种被扭曲的人类行为和社会活动图像,造成我们了解和重建过去的偏差。由于考古遗址的改造和扰动不存在有没有问题,而是程度大小的问题,所以,绝大部分的考古记录向我们展示的并非是一种凝固的远古社会形态,而是受到破坏后的扰动状态。在本文中,作者对如何研究形成过程,分辨自然动力和文化动力提出了一些理论方法的经验之谈,对于我们在考古发掘中分辨遗址形成过程有相当的参考价值。美国考古学家伍德和约翰逊指出,对于考古学家来说,对文化遗存和遗迹的关系以及它们和遗址自然迹象关系的准确辨认和判别,是我们这门学科的基础。如果我们误读了这些关系或对这些关系做出了错误的解释,那么我们就无法得出可信的考古学结论。     

旧石器遗址中的遗迹——以泥河湾为例

泥河湾盆地是中国旧石器时代遗址分布非常集中的地区,从1923年至今,已经发现了众多早、中、晚期遗址,出土了丰富的文化遗物和许多重要的遗迹。本文对泥河湾盆地发现的旧石器时代遗迹进行梳理与分析,对不同的遗迹进行了分类研究,并提出在发掘中对遗迹现象应予以重视。     

安徽东至县华龙洞旧石器时代遗址发掘简报

华龙洞旧石器时代遗址出土了丰富的动物骨骼化石、加工使用痕迹清晰的骨器和百余件石制品。其石制品组合具有旧石器时代晚期工业的特征。动物骨骼化石上同时发现了动物啃咬与人工切割的痕迹,推断该遗址的动物骨骼被人类利用,但人类可能是利用动物残余的食腐者,而非这些动物的狩猎者。     

万象更新 庚子话鼠

从广义的动物学来看,大部分啮齿目动物可称为鼠,如松鼠、竹鼠、豚鼠、田鼠等。狭义的鼠,主要是指老鼠,俗称"耗子",它们通常体小尾长、门齿发达、繁殖迅速。据不完全统计,全世界约有鼠类1700多种,广泛分布于世界各地,不论在城市还是农村,鼠都是人类常见的物种,自古以来与人类有着密切的联系。鼠也是一种古老的动物,在旧石器时代,古人类就捕捉鼠类作为食物。在北京周口店北京人遗址发现了许多鼠类骨骼,它们都被烧焦了,可以推断当时的鼠是北京人的果腹物。到了旧石器时代晚期,人类扩大了渔猎动物的范围。     

鸽子洞遗址时代的再研究

一、绪言鸽子洞是辽宁省首次发现的旧石器文化遗址,也是东北地区旧石器时代中期代表遗址。1973年和1975年,曾对该遗址进行过两次发掘,1975年发掘的材料尚未发表,根据1973年的报告,发现旧石器68件、哺乳动物化石22种及人类用火遗迹。初步认为该遗址的年代为“旧石器时代早期向中期过渡时期,     

甘肃镇原县旧石器时代文化遗存综述

甘肃省镇县位于陇东黄土高原泾河流域,是甘肃最早发现人类活动遗迹的地方之一。镇原县旧石器时代遗存分为中期和晚期两个阶段,其中姜家湾遗址点和寺沟口遗址点是目前甘肃境内发现唯一的旧石器时代中期遗存。镇原县境内旧石器时代遗存需要更多的考古发掘及深入研究。     

湖北郧西县五斗种遗址发掘简报

郧西五斗种遗址发掘出土一批具楚文化特点的遗物以及陶窑等遗迹,还有动物骨骼、铁器等.简报介绍遗址发掘工作,对遗物文化特点进行简要分析,对遗址微地貌、动物骨骼与古环境、动物骨骼与遗址经济特点等也提出初步认识.     

THE PALEOLITHIC CAVE ART OF VASCO-CANTABRIAN SPAIN

Summary. This article explores the relationship between cave art and Upper Paleolithic archeology in northern Spain (and extreme southwestern France). Among the 83 known art sanctuaries, only three can probably be terminus ante quem dated to the early Upper Paleolithic (c. 35,000-20,000 BP). Other types of evidence (virtual absence of ornaments and mobile art objects before the Solutrean, stylistic similarities between works of late Upper Paleolithic mobile art and parietal art, overwhelming association of Solutrean and/or Magdalenian cultural deposits with art sanctuaries) clearly suggest that most of the cave art was done in the period between c. 20,000-10,000 BP. Cave art sanctuaries are distributed in non-random fashion. The clusters of sanctuaries usually correspond with dense clusters of habitation sites. The clusters are separated by substantial geographical gaps. These chronological and geographical facts coincide with contemporaneous subsistence intensification, all of which tends to support the hypothesis of increased territorialism in the late Last Glacial.     

浙江旧石器考古综述

从2002年开始,浙江进行了一系列旧石器考古调查与发掘,成果表明古人类在浙江活动频繁、从早更新世晚段开始一直延续到晚更新世的某一阶段,持续时间很长。石制品的组合大多数归属于南方主工业,但也表现出了一些小流域的特色。从目前所发现旧石器地点分析,浙江旧石器考古研究的前景广阔。     

略论史前聚落的萌芽与发生

聚落作为人类重要的文化现象,普遍发达于新石器时代,但其本身也存在着一个漫长的发展过程。从世界范围来看,聚落的萌芽似应发端于晚期直立人以来的地面穴居现象,并随着房屋建筑、墓葬以及窖穴等诸多要素的相继出现而日渐复杂。至迟在旧石器时代晚期可能就逐渐开始形成了一些较为显著的聚落布局规划现象,为史前聚落的进一步发展奠定了基础。     

Excavations at the Bairaki Lower Paleolithic Site,Trans-Dniesteria,in 2011

Early Paleolithic deposits of the left-bank high seventh fluvial terrace of the Dniester were excavated at Bairaki, Trans-Dniestria. The assemblage is comprised of 28 artifacts including distinct flakes, cores, and Lower Paleolithic tools. Based on the 2011 geological and archaeological study, tools from the riverbed alluvium, paralleled by those of the Middle Oldowan, date to the earliest Lower Pleistocene. Bairaki, then, should be classified among the most ancient Paleolithic sites in Eastern Europe.     

THE TRADE OF INDO-PACIFIC SHELLS INTO THE MEDITERRANEAN BASIN AND EUROPE

Summary. This paper is on shells which originate in the Indo-Pacific marine province (Red Sea or other waters to the south and east) and are found at sites in the Mediterranean Basin and Europe over 250 km. from their source. The catalogue of over 160 sites yielding these shells ranges in date from the Upper Paleolithic to recent times. Sixteen sites which supposedly produced Indo-Pacific shells are shown to be incorrect identifications.
Many of these exotic shells are seen to come from graves and sanctuary sites. Some shells are unmodified, others made into simple beads, and some finely worked by engraving and incising.     

Radiocarbon Chronology of the Siberian Paleolithic

We have compiled 462 C-14 determinations for 120 Paleolithic and Mesolithic sites from Siberia and the Russian Far East. The Mousterian sites are dated to ca. 46,000–28,500 BP. The Middle–Upper Paleolithic transition dates to ca. 43,300–28,500 BP. Although there are a few earlier sites, most of the Upper Paleolithic sites are dated to the time interval between ca. 34,000 BP and 10,000 BP. The earlier Upper Paleolithic stage is characterized by macroblade technology and is radiocarbon-dated to ca. 34,000–20,000 BP. The earliest microblade technology occurs in the late stage of the Upper Paleolithic, dated to ca. 23,000–20,000 BP, but the majority of microblade sites is dated to ca. 20,000–11,000 BP. The Final Paleolithic (Mesolithic) sites date to ca. 12,000–6000 BP. At ca. 13,000–11,000 BP, the earliest Neolithic appeared in both the Russian Far East (Amur River basin) and the Transbaikal. The Paleolithic–Neolithic transition occurred ca. 13,000–6000 BP.     

The Upper Paleolithic in Mediterranean Spain: A Review of Current Evidence

In spite of an active and sophisticated archaeological research program, the Paleolithic of the Iberian peninsula remains comparatively little known to English-speaking prehistorians, with the exception of Cantabrian Spain. The rich data set compiled by Spanish prehistorians and their colleagues over the past several decades stands to make a valuable and unique contribution to our understanding of the Pleistocene prehistory of Europe. We present a detailed overview of Upper Paleolithic chronology, sites, and assemblages for Mediterranean Spain, an area of over 1,600,000 km ² that extends from the French border to the Straits of Gibraltar. To interpret these data, we employ a regional perspective that emphasizes studies of paleoeconomy (especially zooarchaeology) and settlement. The Middle–Upper Paleolithic transition and Upper Paleolithic art also receive detailed treatment, and the Upper Paleolithic of Mediterranean Spain is discussed in the broader context of the late Upper Pleistocene of western Europe and the Mediterranean Basin.     

The Upper Paleolithic of Northern Asia: Achievements,problems, and perspectives. II. Central and Eastern Siberia

Earlier scholars believed that the Upper Paleolithic of Central and Eastern Siberia appeared very late. However, modern research has shown that not only was there a local Middle Paleolithic, but also there was a very early series of sites in Central Siberia which show both Middle and early Upper Paleolithic traits. These are called the Makarovo horizon and may be 70,000–50,000 years old; features derived from this horizon can be dated to about 30,000 B.P. and can be seen in the early D'uktai culture. The true early Upper Paleolithic is relatively homogeneous in Central and Eastern Siberia and includes artwork. The local Upper Paleolithic reached its florescence in the culture of Mal'ta and Bur'et', which developed out of local antecedents and which is here reinterpreted in light of recent research (including the artwork, structures, and burials). The final stages of the Upper Paleolithic show considerable variability, perhaps including some exotic traits.     

Mobility patterns and core technologies in the Middle Paleolithic of the Levant

Mobility is thought to be a significant source of Middle Paleolithic archaeological variability in the East Mediterranean Levant. However, models of Levantine Middle Paleolithic land-use have historically been based on rare and taphonomically sensitive evidence from a limited number of sites. Because lithic artifacts are the most ubiquitous archaeological remains available to the prehistorian, relationships between stone tool technology and mobility patterns can improve tests of hypotheses about prehistoric land-use strategies. This paper examines variation in Middle Paleolithic mobility strategies in the Levant from the perspective of core technology. A model linking expedient core reduction techniques and decreased mobility is adapted from one developed for late prehistoric contexts in the New World. Incorporating core data from numerous Levantine Middle Paleolithic assemblages, this study tests hypotheses about diachronic change, synchronic geographic variation, and possible hominin behavioral differences in mobility strategies.     

河南境内古人类及旧石器遗存的发现及其问题

河南省自1954年发现第一块旧石器时代人工制品以来,境内已发现众多古人类-旧石器遗址或地点,尤其是近十年来在许昌灵井发现了距今约10万年前的古人类头骨化石和数万件人工制品,在新密李家沟发现了新旧石器时代的地层及文化遗物,以及在栾川、登封和淅川等地发现了古人类化石或石叶技术,使之成为研究现代人类起源、新旧石器时代过渡等的热点地区。