Jump to content
  • A 40,000-year-old Chinese stone tool culture unlike any other

    Karlston

    • 623 views
    • 6 minutes
     Share


    • 623 views
    • 6 minutes

    Not every culture left a mark on those around it.

    bladelet-with-haft-800x267.png

    This chert bladelet still has a remnant of its bone haft attached.
    Wang et al. 2022

    We know the oldest human cultures only from their most durable parts: mostly stone tools, sometimes bone. Show an experienced Pleistocene archaeologist a chert blade, and they can probably tell you which hominin species made it, how long ago, and where. But the 40,000-year-old stones and bones archaeologist Fa-Gang Wang and his colleagues recently unearthed at a 40,000-year-old Chinese site called Xiamabei look like nothing archaeologists have seen before.

    Unique stone tool technology

    The people who lived at Xiamabei, in northern China's Niwehan Basin, used a toolkit that consisted mostly of tiny bladelets (small, sharp pieces of stone), often hafted onto bone handles. Based on microscopic traces of wear and tear on the tools, people at Xiamabei seemed to have used the same generic bladelets for everything from scraping hides and cutting meat to boring wood and whittling softer plant matter.

     

    Nearly every one of the 382 stone tools unearthed at Xiamabei is less than four centimeters long; making and using these smaller blades would have allowed early humans to do more work with less material. Handles helped make the tools easier to grip and more versatile; Wang and his colleagues found one bladelet with part of a bone haft still attached to the stone. On several of the 17 other bladelets the researchers examined closely for microscopic signs of wear, they found tiny scratches left by bone handles, along with imprints from the plant fibers used to bind the bladelets in place.

     

    The result, as Wang and his colleagues put it, is a "complex technical system" completely different from what any other group of people—whether Homo sapiens, Neanderthal, or Denisovan—used at the time.

    A Pleistocene workshop

    Along with their bone-handled bladelets, people at Xiamabei made and used prodigious quantities of ocher—enough to stain the ground red for the next 40 millennia.

     

    Wang and his colleagues found two chunks of ocher, along with an ocher-smeared limestone slab and a battered cobblestone hammer, lying at the center of a patch of red-stained dirt. Closer inspection with X-ray fluorescence and a scanning electron microscope showed that the dirt was full of iron oxide and microscopic fragments of hematite.

     

    "The quantity of ocher powder produced was large enough for the leftover material to permanently impregnate the sediment of the area on which tasks took place," wrote Wang et al.

     

    Ocher makes a good pigment for painting walls, objects, or skin; it's also useful for tanning animal hides or mixing adhesives to help haft stone tools. Wang and his colleagues say the people at Xiamabei almost certainly used ocher for making resin glue and tanning hides. The archaeologists believe this because, at the site, they found bits of ocher on four stone tools that were still stuck to the part of the tool that would once have sat inside a haft, or handle. Ocher also still clung to the working edges of two other tools that showed traces of wear from scraping hides.

     

    The tableau at Xiamabei—ocher nodules and worker's tools lying amid ground stained by previous work—is the continent's oldest evidence of people doing the work of processing ocher. An engraved and painted bone from another site, 105,000 to 125,000 years old, has bits of ocher residue still clinging to its crevices. This older site suggests that Neanderthals and Denisovans in the region had been working with ocher long before our species arrived and long before anyone set up shop at Xiamabei. But we've had no indication of the processing associated with that older site.

    Humans were here, but which ones?

    Who made these small, efficient chert blades and used so much ocher at Xiamabei? Neanderthals, Denisovans, and our own species all lived in the region, so without finding telltale fossils or combing through the soil for ancient DNA or proteins, it's impossible to be sure.

     

    Wang and his colleagues, however, suspect the toolmakers at Xiamabei were members of our species, since Homo sapiens fossils dating to around the same time as Xiamabei have turned up at sites a few hundred kilometers away. If that's the case, the archaeologists say, then the people who made the bladelets and stained the ground with ocher may have been part of the first wave of our species to reach eastern Asia.

     

    Over the last 200,000 years, our species emerged in Africa and began to venture out into the rest of the world, eventually taking over the entire planet (potentially to its detriment). And evidence from sites in the Levant and in Europe shows that H. sapiens didn't burst into the world all at once but in fits and starts, sometimes failing and sometimes gaining a foothold.

     

    Wang and his colleagues suggest that, as different groups of people, perhaps from different areas of Africa, migrated at different times, each group would have brought slightly different cultures and tools to their new homes. Sometimes the newcomers brought innovations that took hold and spread; other times, they adopted aspects of the local culture.

     

    That process played out differently everywhere. At Grotte Mandrin in what's now France, the first H. sapiens in the area eventually disappeared as Neanderthals moved back into the area; the two species don't appear to have traded ideas or technology. Elsewhere in Eurasia, Neanderthals and H. sapiens seem to have borrowed some tools and techniques for survival from each other. And at several times and places, we know that Neanderthals, Denisovans, and our species all exchanged DNA (which is definitely not what the kids are calling it these days).

     

    At Xiamabei, where the tools are so strikingly different from other, more recent sites in the same river basin, Wang et al. suggest that later waves of H. sapiens, expanding north and east from Africa, may eventually have replaced the Xiamabei toolmakers.

     

    "The record emerging from northern China challenges dominant paradigms by showing that during a critical time window around 40,000 years ago, a variety of cultural adaptations existed," the authors wrote.

     

    The Anatomical Record, 2022 DOI: 10.1038/s41586-022-04445-2 (About DOIs).

     

     

    A 40,000-year-old Chinese stone tool culture unlike any other

    • Like 2

    User Feedback

    Recommended Comments

    There are no comments to display.



    Join the conversation

    You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
    Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

    Guest
    Add a comment...

    ×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

      Only 75 emoji are allowed.

    ×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

    ×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

    ×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...