{"title":"What can lithics tell us about technological complexity? Reflections on and around the Hoabinhian phenomenon in the cobble world","authors":"Yuduan Zhou, Xiangxi Lan, Zixuan Shen, Kaiwei Qiu, Yuanjin Jiang, Heng Sophady, Ruxi Yang, Hubert Forestier","doi":"10.1111/arcm.13086","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>For a long time, scientific discussions of the behavioral, technological, cultural, and cognitive complexity of <i>Homo sapiens</i> have been Europe- and Africa-centered for their abundant archaeological discoveries related to behavioral modernity and cultural diversity of <i>H. sapiens</i>. However, the techno-cultural complexity of <i>H. sapiens</i> is still poorly understood in southern China and mainland Southeast Asia. In the East, the Paleolithic industries are famous for the long-lasting cobble-tool industry, also called “chopper-chopping tool tradition” by Hallam L. Movius in the 1940s. Under this historical recognition, which is still widely accepted, it seems that no evident technological changes could be identified in the Paleolithic industries. In this paper, we take the Hoabinhian phenomenon as an example to question the idea of using terms like simplicity, archaism, and crudeness to describe the stone tools and paleo-cultures born in the cobble world, and also discuss the behavioral and technological complexity of Hoabinhian hunter-gatherers seen in and beyond stone tools. We conclude that more integrative studies should be conducted on stone artifacts to deepen our understanding of the complexity of the Hoabinhian and other phenomena represented by the simple-looking technologies.</p>","PeriodicalId":8254,"journal":{"name":"Archaeometry","volume":"68 S3","pages":"S50-S67"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2026-06-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archaeometry","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/arcm.13086","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/3/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
For a long time, scientific discussions of the behavioral, technological, cultural, and cognitive complexity of Homo sapiens have been Europe- and Africa-centered for their abundant archaeological discoveries related to behavioral modernity and cultural diversity of H. sapiens. However, the techno-cultural complexity of H. sapiens is still poorly understood in southern China and mainland Southeast Asia. In the East, the Paleolithic industries are famous for the long-lasting cobble-tool industry, also called “chopper-chopping tool tradition” by Hallam L. Movius in the 1940s. Under this historical recognition, which is still widely accepted, it seems that no evident technological changes could be identified in the Paleolithic industries. In this paper, we take the Hoabinhian phenomenon as an example to question the idea of using terms like simplicity, archaism, and crudeness to describe the stone tools and paleo-cultures born in the cobble world, and also discuss the behavioral and technological complexity of Hoabinhian hunter-gatherers seen in and beyond stone tools. We conclude that more integrative studies should be conducted on stone artifacts to deepen our understanding of the complexity of the Hoabinhian and other phenomena represented by the simple-looking technologies.
长期以来,关于智人行为、技术、文化和认知复杂性的科学讨论一直以欧洲和非洲为中心,因为他们有大量与智人行为现代性和文化多样性有关的考古发现。然而,在中国南部和东南亚大陆,人们对智人的技术文化复杂性仍然知之甚少。在东方,旧石器时代的工业以长期存在的鹅卵石工具工业而闻名,哈勒姆·l·莫乌斯(Hallam L. Movius)在20世纪40年代也将其称为“剁刀工具传统”。在这种仍然被广泛接受的历史认识下,旧石器时代的工业似乎没有明显的技术变化。在本文中,我们以霍布汉现象为例,质疑用简单、古语和粗糙等术语来描述石器和诞生于鹅卵石世界的古文化的想法,并讨论霍布汉狩猎采集者在石器和石器之外的行为和技术复杂性。我们的结论是,应该对石器文物进行更多的综合研究,以加深我们对霍布汉的复杂性和其他由看似简单的技术所代表的现象的理解。
期刊介绍:
Archaeometry is an international research journal covering the application of the physical and biological sciences to archaeology, anthropology and art history. Topics covered include dating methods, artifact studies, mathematical methods, remote sensing techniques, conservation science, environmental reconstruction, biological anthropology and archaeological theory. Papers are expected to have a clear archaeological, anthropological or art historical context, be of the highest scientific standards, and to present data of international relevance.
The journal is published on behalf of the Research Laboratory for Archaeology and the History of Art, Oxford University, in association with Gesellschaft für Naturwissenschaftliche Archäologie, ARCHAEOMETRIE, the Society for Archaeological Sciences (SAS), and Associazione Italian di Archeometria.