石叶及细石叶剥制实验研究
摘要
本文以普通的玻璃及黑曜石为原料,采用直接、间接两种方法进行石叶及细石叶的剥制实验研究。分析归纳两种方法产生的石叶及细石叶的异同,并与不同地点出土遗物进行比对,从而研究石器时代人类剥制石叶及细石叶所采用的方法。通过不同工艺细石核的模拟实验,对细石核预制阶段各部位的修整所起到的作用予以再认识,并对个别型制细石核进行动态类型学分析。
The author was absorbed in the exquisite technology of blades and micro blades in Late Paleolithic, especially the technology of the micro blades and cores. With great interesting, the author simulated the manufacture processes of blades and micro blades, then presented his own opinions.
The obsidian was the most suitable as the material for peeling blades and micro blades, and should be the first choice for the experiment, however the obsidian was difficult to get. So the author used the blocks of glass which were most close to the obsidian in the physical characteristics as the experiment material. Other experiment materials included stone hammer, bone hammer and leather etc. The experiment put emphasis on the research of two ways of peeling blades and micro blades, i.e. the direct peeling and indirect peeling respectively. The blades and micro blades made by the two ways were statistically analyzed (types of platform, the grades of blades, length, width, index of length and width, index of width and thickness included) and compared with archaeological remains.
The analysis of the platforms of blades and micro blades was animportant evidence to decide the peeling methods. The types of the platformsof the direct peeling included the type of point, blade, flat strip, ellipse(circular and half ellipse), triangle, trapezoid and parallel quadrilateral. Thesemi-cones often flat, the back of the platforms often had overlapped tiny scars.This characteristic can be seen most obviously on the platform of point andblade. The semi-cones of platforms of indirect peeling were convex, the pointand blade platforms were seldom seen. So the blades and micro blades withpoint platform and the blade platform were the best prove of direct peeling. Infact, these two kinds were common in many sites.
The author divided the blades into four grades according to the back characteristics of blades and micro blades. The proportion occupied by the different grades of blades and micro blades presented much information. For example, if the second grade blades are in high proportion, that means the cores maybe narrow-body cores, or the utilization ratio of cores in site is low.
The experiment also analyzed different parts of cores from
The author was absorbed in the exquisite technology of blades and micro blades in Late Paleolithic, especially the technology of the micro blades and cores. With great interesting, the author simulated the manufacture processes of blades and micro blades, then presented his own opinions.
The obsidian was the most suitable as the material for peeling blades and micro blades, and should be the first choice for the experiment, however the obsidian was difficult to get. So the author used the blocks of glass which were most close to the obsidian in the physical characteristics as the experiment material. Other experiment materials included stone hammer, bone hammer and leather etc. The experiment put emphasis on the research of two ways of peeling blades and micro blades, i.e. the direct peeling and indirect peeling respectively. The blades and micro blades made by the two ways were statistically analyzed (types of platform, the grades of blades, length, width, index of length and width, index of width and thickness included) and compared with archaeological remains.
The analysis of the platforms of blades and micro blades was animportant evidence to decide the peeling methods. The types of the platformsof the direct peeling included the type of point, blade, flat strip, ellipse(circular and half ellipse), triangle, trapezoid and parallel quadrilateral. Thesemi-cones often flat, the back of the platforms often had overlapped tiny scars.This characteristic can be seen most obviously on the platform of point andblade. The semi-cones of platforms of indirect peeling were convex, the pointand blade platforms were seldom seen. So the blades and micro blades withpoint platform and the blade platform were the best prove of direct peeling. Infact, these two kinds were common in many sites.
The author divided the blades into four grades according to the back characteristics of blades and micro blades. The proportion occupied by the different grades of blades and micro blades presented much information. For example, if the second grade blades are in high proportion, that means the cores maybe narrow-body cores, or the utilization ratio of cores in site is low.
The experiment also analyzed different parts of cores from
引文
[1]贾兰坡.中国细石器的特征和它的传统、起源与分布.古脊椎动物与古人类,1978,16(2):137-143
[2]盖培.阳原石核的动态类型学研究及其工艺思想分析.人类学学报,1984,3(3):245-252
[3]杜水生.楔形石核的类型划分与细石器的起源.人类学学报, 第23 卷,增刊,2004:211-222
[4]Clyde B. Smith . Blades and pressure flaking (VCD).Produced by University of California Extension Media Center
[5]刘景芝.石叶直接打制技术的研究.史前研究,1990-1991年合刊:225-244
[6] Chenchun, Wangxiangqian. Upper Paleolithic in North China and Their Relationships with Northeast Asia and Noerth American.arctic anthropology,26(2): 127-157
[7] 侯亚梅. “东谷坨石核”类型的命名与初步研究. 人类学学报,2003,22(4):279-292
[8]克洛迪娜.卡蓝.(孙建民译).从燧石打制技术问题的分析导向对社会问题的探讨.华夏考古,2002.3:100-109
[9]赤泽成,小田野夫,山中一郎.日本の旧石器.立风书房.1980
[10]在与日本同志社大学文学部的松藤和人教授交谈中获知
[11]同4
[12]陈淳.几何形细石器和细石叶的打制及用途.文物季刊,1993,4:72-78
[13] 将璐,朱永刚.查干木伦河下游细石器初步分析.边疆考古研究,第2辑,2004:66-87
[14]王健,陶富海,王益人.丁村旧石器时代遗址群调查发掘简报.文物季刊,1994,(3):1-75
[15] Ю.А.莫恰诺夫С.А.费多谢叶娃А.Н.阿列克谢耶夫等.雅库特考古遗迹-阿尔丹河和奥廖克马河流域.《科学》出版社西伯利亚总分社.新西伯利亚1983:130
[16]筑波大学遠間资料研究グル-プ編.湧别川-逺間栄治採集幌加沢遗跡地点石器図錄.逺軽町先史資料舘収蔵資料集.北海道紋别郡逺軽町教育委员会. 1990:136
[2]盖培.阳原石核的动态类型学研究及其工艺思想分析.人类学学报,1984,3(3):245-252
[3]杜水生.楔形石核的类型划分与细石器的起源.人类学学报, 第23 卷,增刊,2004:211-222
[4]Clyde B. Smith . Blades and pressure flaking (VCD).Produced by University of California Extension Media Center
[5]刘景芝.石叶直接打制技术的研究.史前研究,1990-1991年合刊:225-244
[6] Chenchun, Wangxiangqian. Upper Paleolithic in North China and Their Relationships with Northeast Asia and Noerth American.arctic anthropology,26(2): 127-157
[7] 侯亚梅. “东谷坨石核”类型的命名与初步研究. 人类学学报,2003,22(4):279-292
[8]克洛迪娜.卡蓝.(孙建民译).从燧石打制技术问题的分析导向对社会问题的探讨.华夏考古,2002.3:100-109
[9]赤泽成,小田野夫,山中一郎.日本の旧石器.立风书房.1980
[10]在与日本同志社大学文学部的松藤和人教授交谈中获知
[11]同4
[12]陈淳.几何形细石器和细石叶的打制及用途.文物季刊,1993,4:72-78
[13] 将璐,朱永刚.查干木伦河下游细石器初步分析.边疆考古研究,第2辑,2004:66-87
[14]王健,陶富海,王益人.丁村旧石器时代遗址群调查发掘简报.文物季刊,1994,(3):1-75
[15] Ю.А.莫恰诺夫С.А.费多谢叶娃А.Н.阿列克谢耶夫等.雅库特考古遗迹-阿尔丹河和奥廖克马河流域.《科学》出版社西伯利亚总分社.新西伯利亚1983:130
[16]筑波大学遠間资料研究グル-プ編.湧别川-逺間栄治採集幌加沢遗跡地点石器図錄.逺軽町先史資料舘収蔵資料集.北海道紋别郡逺軽町教育委员会. 1990:136
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |