旧石器时代残留物分析:回顾与展望

残留物分析是1970年代在西方发展起来的一项功能学分析技术, 即借助自然科学的多种手段, 对工具表面加工对象残存物的提取和鉴定分析。本文对西方石制品残留物分析研究史做了回顾和综述, 简要介绍此种方法的概念、原理及相关技术问题, 同时对中国旧石器时代石制品残留物分析的前景进行了展望, 希望对相关理论和方法的引进和应用起到铺垫和促进作用。我国旧石器时代考古资源非常丰富, 残留物分析在石器功能解读、遗址环境重建、古人类行为复原和食谱分析等方面都会起到重要的作用, 成为破解很多学术疑点和难题的钥匙。     

奥杜威工业石制品分类综述

石制品是旧石器时代考古的主要研究对象,其分类是旧石器生产技术和文化研究的基础与前提,然而,中国旧石器时代考古有关石制品分类目前尚无一致标准,这对开展旧石器时代考古学术研究的国际交流产生了负面影响。鉴于似奥杜威(Oldowan-like)或模式I工业在我国古人类石器工业面貌占有非常特殊的地位,因此,本文对以非洲为代表的奥杜威(Oldowan)工业(模式I)石器技术研究中有关石制品的分类体系进行整合和梳理,同时借鉴Mary Leakey、Glynn Isaac和Nicholas Toth等为代表的不同分类系统,并对中国境内有关石制品分类的现状进行讨论。     

旧石器时代早期石制品分析方案

本文提出一种应用于旧石器时代早期石制品研究的分析方案。本方案以宏观分析方法为主,不包括同样重要的微观分析方法,主要应用于旧石器时代早期石制品的技术-类型学分析,不涉及特定地区和特殊石制品的讨论。在旧大陆旧石器时代早期石器研究中,鉴于学者们使用的技术学与类型学分析方案总体相似,我们认为在研究中使用标准化的分析方案会提高地区间石器面貌的可比性,并有助于理解旧石器时代早期旧大陆古人类的技术行为模式。从这个角度出发,本文将回顾旧石器时代早期石器研究的主要理论和方法,并提出分析视角和术语建议,希望有助于研究中对描述剥片类、废片类、锤击工具、拼合工具和传统石制品的测量与绘图惯例。     

天津蓟县东营坊遗址出土的石制品

东营坊遗址位于天津蓟县境内。2007年,对该遗址进行抢救性发掘,发掘面积200m2,出土石制品90件。石制品原料系就地取材于遗址附近的河床或基岩;石制品类型包括石核、石片、石器和断块;剥片采用锤击法;石器以小型为主,包括刮削器和雕刻器,由硬锤直接加工而成,方向以正向居多。根据文化层底部哺乳动物化石的测年结果,遗址年代为旧石器时代中晚期过渡阶段或旧石器时代晚期早段。     

河南淅川坑南遗址调查发现的石制品

河南淅川坑南遗址位于丹江口库区,丹江口库区是近年来旧石器考古发掘和研究的重点地区。2016年对坑南遗址发掘前,在周边调查发现旧石器时代石制品209件,石制品类型包括石核、石片、石叶和石器等。剥片方法有锤击法和砸击法。石器毛坯类型多为片状,少量为块状、砾石。石器修理方式以正向为主,其次为反向和复向。初步判断其时代最早能到旧石器时代中期。新发现对于探讨晚更新世南北旧石器过渡地带的特点,具有重要意义。     

旧石器时代石制品热处理研究:回顾与展望

热处理技术作为旧石器时代古人类提高石器制作工艺水平的代表性技能, 一直以来倍受国际学术界的重视, 在已经开展的40余年工作中积累了丰硕的研究成果。由于我国旧石器时代石料的特点及热处理研究的某些技术手段本身存在局限性, 尚未在考古遗址中发现热处理行为及相关遗物, 目前我国热处理研究仍处于空白阶段。本文主要介绍旧石器时代热处理技术的原理与工艺及相关研究手段, 特别是针对热处理技术的实验研究。相信随着认识的加深, 石制品热处理研究会在我国旧石器考古学研究中发挥重要作用。     

云南鹤庆天华洞旧石器遗址石制品研究

天华洞旧石器遗址是金沙江中游地区财丰河流域旧石器地点群的代表性遗址之一。本文研究的材料来源于该遗址2010、2013和2016三年度的野外调查和试掘。天华洞遗址试掘位置为洞前缓坡区域,地层堆积可划分为5层,其中2-5层为遗址文化层,属红色亚黏土沉积。遗址文化层沉积结构稳定,年代数据分布在距今9.5-5万年之间。遗址共发现石制品1122件,以玄武岩为主要原料。石制品组合的内涵丰富,剥片技术和工具类型多样,一些特殊类型的石制品标本如预制石核、长石片、似-勒瓦娄哇石片、盘状石核石片、似-基纳型刮削器等代表了天华洞遗址石工业独特的技术文化面貌,也表现出西方旧石器时代中期文化的一些技术特点和因素。     

王府井东方广场遗址石制品研究

王府井东方广场遗址出土石制品共计1098件,主要来自下文化层。除石锤、石砧和人工石块外,其他石制品的原料几乎全部为黑色燧石。石制品普遍较小,主要为小型和微型。石核数量很少,但石片占石制品总数的一半还多。碎屑在探方中的几个区域密集分布。石器加工精致,刃缘大部分都比较平齐且其上的修疤排列均匀、整齐,尤其表现在端刮器上。原料、类型与技术特点表明,东方广场遗址石制品组合属于中国旧石器时代晚期的以石片为主要特征的文化系列。这一文化系列与周口店北京猿人遗址、周口店第15地点、许家窑遗址等有较多的相似性,推测东方广场石制品组合是由中国旧石器时代早期和中期石器工业演变而来。     

三峡库区池坝岭遗址石制品拼合研究

池坝岭遗址位于重庆市丰都县境内, 是三峡库区一处重要的旧石器时代考古遗址。2007年对该遗址进行首次抢救性发掘, 分A、B两区, 揭露面积514m2, 共出土石制品213件。其中A区面积500 m2, 出土石制品200件, 有9件可以拼合为4个拼合组, 拼合率为4.5%。对拼合标本的研究显示, 古人类以就地取材于河漫滩上丰富的河卵石为原料, 采用硬锤锤击法进行剥片, 碰砧法也被使用; 拼合组为石核+石核和石核+石片类型, 剥片程度较低。拼合组标本的出现表明A区标本虽然制作后被快速埋藏, 但在后期受到外界营力作用的作用下脱离原生层位, 改造或者扰动作用不大, 为近距离搬运。     

广西百色公篓遗址石制品的初步研究

公篓遗址位于广西百色市田阳县境内, 地处百色盆地右江南岸第四级阶地, 地理坐标为23°45.568'N, 106°42.210'E。该遗址最早发现于上世纪八十年代, 当时采集石制品88件, 是百色盆地较早发现的一处旧石器时代遗址; 2010年我们对遗址进行复查时又采集石制品14件, 本文对两次采集的石制品进行了分析。石制品类型有石核、石片、砍砸器、手镐、刮削器、手斧和断块, 其中砍砸器数量最多; 原料来源于遗址附近第四级阶地的砾石层, 有石英岩、硅质岩、石英、粉砂岩、细砂岩和角砾岩6种, 以石英岩为主; 石制品以大型和中型为主, 也有一定数量的小型石制品; 剥片和修理方法主要为锤击法。根据地貌和地层可以判断该遗址年代为中更新世早期。     

On the origin of the Hirudinea and the demise of the Oligochaeta

The phylogenetic relationships of the Clitellata were investigated with a data set of published and new complete 18S rRNA gene sequences of 51 species representing 41 families. Sequences were aligned on the basis of a secondary structure model and analysed with maximum parsimony and maximum likelihood. In contrast to the latter method, parsimony did not recover the monophyly of Clitellata. However, a close scrutiny of the data suggested a spurious attraction between some polychaetes and clitellates. As a rule, molecular trees are closely aligned with morphology-based phylogenies. Acanthobdellida and Euhirudinea were reconciled in their traditional Hirudinea clade and were included in the Oligochaeta with the Branchiobdellida via the Lumbriculidae as a possible link between the two assemblages. While the 18S gene yielded a meaningful historical signal for determining relationships within clitellates, the exact position of Hirudinea and Branchiobdellida within oligochaetes remained unresolved. The lack of phylogenetic signal is interpreted as evidence for a rapid radiation of these taxa. The placement of Clitellata within the Polychaeta remained unresolved. The biological reality of polytomies within annelids is suggested and supports the hypothesis of an extremely ancient radiation of polychaetes and emergence of clitellates.     

On the ontogeny of the haptor and the evolution of the Monogenea

Data on the ontogeny of the posterior haptor of monogeneans were obtained from more than 150 publications and summarised. These data were plotted into diagrams showing evolutionary capacity levels based on the theory of a progressive evolution of marginal hooks, anchors and other attachment components of the posterior haptor in the Monogenea (Malmberg, 1986). 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks are assumed to be the most primitive monogenean haptoral condition. Thus the diagrams were founded on a 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hook evolutionary capacity level, and the evolutionary capacity levels of anchors and other haptoral attachement components were arranged according to haptoral ontogenetical sequences. In the final plotting diagram data on hosts, type of spermatozoa, oncomiracidial ciliation, sensilla pattern and protonephridial systems were also included. In this way a number of correlations were revealed. Thus, for example, the number of 5 + 5 marginal hooks correlates with the most primitive monogenean type of spermatozoon and with few sensillae, many ciliated cells and a simple protonephridial system in the oncomiracidium. On the basis of the reviewed data it is concluded that the ancient monogeneans with 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks were divided into two main lines, one retaining unhinged marginal hooks and the other evolving hinged marginal hooks. Both main lines have recent representatives at different marginal hook evolutionary capacity levels, i.e. monogeneans retaining a haptor with only marginal hooks. For the main line with hinged marginal hooks the name Articulon-choinea n. subclass is proposed. Members with 8 + 8 hinged marginal hooks only are here called Proanchorea n. superord. Monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks only are here called Ananchorea n. superord. and three new families are erected for its recent members: Anonchohapteridae n. fam., Acolpentronidae n. fam. and Anacanthoridae n. fam. (with 7 + 7, 8 + 8 and 9 + 9 unhinged marginal hooks, respectively). Except for the families of Articulonchoinea (e.g. Acanthocotylidae, Gyrodactylidae, Tetraonchoididae) Bychowsky's (1957) division of the Monogenea into the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea fits the proposed scheme, i.e. monogeneans with unhinged marginal hooks form one old group, the Oligonchoinea, which have 5 + 5 unhinged marginal hooks, and the other group form the Polyonchoinea, which (with the exception of the Hexabothriidae) has a greater number (7 + 7, 8 + 8 or 9 + 9) of unhinged marginal hooks. It is proposed that both these names, Oligonchoinea (sensu mihi) and Polyonchoinea (sensu mihi), will be retained on one side and Articulonchoinea placed on the other side, which reflects the early monogenean evolution. Except for the members of Ananchorea [Polyonchoinea], all members of the Oligonchoinea and Polyonchoinea have anchors, which imply that they are further evolved, i.e. have passed the 5 + 5 marginal hook evolutionary capacity level (Malmberg, 1986). There are two main types of anchors in the Monogenea: haptoral anchors, with anlages appearing in the haptor, and peduncular anchors, with anlages in the peduncle. There are two types of haptoral anchors: peripheral haptoral anchors, ontogenetically the oldest, and central haptoral anchors. Peduncular anchors, in turn, are ontogenetically younger than peripheral haptoral anchors. There may be two pairs of peduncular anchors: medial peduncular anchors, ontogentically the oldest, and lateral peduncular anchors. Only peduncular (not haptoral) anchors have anchor bars. Monogeneans with haptoral anchors are here called Mediohaptanchorea n. superord. and Laterohaptanchorea n. superord. or haptanchoreans. All oligonchoineans and the oldest polyonchoineans are haptanchoreans. Certain members of Calceostomatidae [Polyonchoinea] are the only monogeneans with both (peripheral) haptoral and peduncular anchors (one pair). These monogeneans are here called Mixanchorea n. superord. Polyonchoineans with peduncular anchors and unhinged marginal hooks are here called the Pedunculanchorea n. superord. The most primitive pedunculanchoreans have only one pair of peduncular anchors with an anchor bar, while the most advanced have both medial and lateral peduncular anchors; each pair having an anchor bar. Certain families of the Articulonchoinea, the Anchorea n. superord., also have peduncular anchors (parallel evolution): only one family, the Sundanonchidae n. fam., has both medial and lateral peduncular anchors, each anchor pair with an anchor bar. Evolutionary lines from different monogenean evolutionary capacity levels are discussed and a new system of classification for the Monogenea is proposed.In agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. EditorIn agreeing to publish this article, I recognise that its contents are controversial and contrary to generally accepted views on monogenean systematics and evolution. I have anticipated a reaction to the article by inviting senior workers in the field to comment upon it: their views will be reported in a future issue of this journal. Editor