Introduction

Over the past few decades, several important monuments have been discovered in Korea that demonstrate the gradual development of stone technologies from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic (VP) (Figure 1): Chunnari near Suncheon (Lee G. K., Choi, Kim, 2000), Dosan in Wu. Hwaseong [Lee G. K., 2002a], Koreri woo. Miryang [Park, Seo, 2004], Wolpyeong near Suncheon [Lee G. K., 20026; Lee G. K. et al., 2004], Noyeongdong [Han et al., 2003] and Yeonkhodon near Daejeon [Han, 2002], Chingeul in wu. Jinan [Lee G. K., 2004], Hahwageri in Honchon County [Choi, 2004], Changhyun-ri near Jinju [Park, Seo, 2004], Ho-hyeongdong in Wu. Namyangju [Hong, 2003, 2004], Jeongokni in wu. Yeoncheon [Bae et al., 2001], Geumphari in wu. Phaju [Bae, 1999; Bae and Kim, 2004] and Bukkeri Sinbuk in Changheung County [Lee G. K., 2004].

The Chunneri, Yeongkhodon, and Hahwageri sites have four Middle-and Upper-Paleolithic cultural layers, while the Koreri, Chinggynul, Hoppyeong, Changhyongri, Shinbuk, and Wolpyeong sites have four Upper - Paleolithic cultural layers (Figures 2, 3). Most sites are characterized by typical artifacts, such as plate and microplate nuclei, scrapers, incisors, and petiolate points. For many layers, there are 14 S-dates. The new data allowed us to build a chronology of the Korean Paleolithic and trace the processes of cultural development. In this article, the transition from the Middle to Upper Paleolithic in Korea will be considered in terms of raw material selection, splitting techniques, and tool types.

Selection of raw materials

The Middle and Upper Paleolithic period is characterized by changes in the choice of raw materials. During the Middle Paleolithic the main raw material was vein quartz,

Figure 1. Map-scheme of Upper Paleolithic sites in Korea. 1-Sanmurenri; 2 - Jeongdokni; 3-Geumphari; 4-Hahwageri; 5-Hoppyeongdong; 6-Suyangye; 7-Seokchanni; 8-Yeonkhodon; 9-Noyongdong; 10 - Chingheul; 11-Dosan; 12-Shinbuk; 13-Wolpyeong; 14-Chun-neri; 15 - Changhenri; 16-Koreri.

The author is grateful to his students Su-ah Kim and Yun-sang Wan for their help in preparing the drawings.

page 31

2. Stratigraphic section of the Chunnari site.

3. Stratigraphic section of the Volyghen site.

quartzite and tuff; in the Upper Paleolithic period, along with previously used materials, rhyolite, cornea, siliceous shale, obsidian, hyaline quartz and high-quality vein quartz were used.

High-quality vein quartz was easier to extract than rhyolite, hornblende, siliceous shale, obsidian, and hyaline quartz, so it was used to produce flakes and make most tools, including choppers, choppers, spheroids, small choppers, scrapers, notched tools, awls, and others. Various scrapers were often made from this quartz.

Rhyolite, cornea, siliceous shale, obsidian, and hyaline quartz are more homogeneous, elastic, fine-grained, and strong materials than tuff and quartzite. They were used mainly for the production of plates and microplates, the manufacture of complex tools, such as petiolate points, double-sided massive points and incisors. In the Chunnari, Hopphendon, and Wolphen site complexes, the proportion of artifacts from high-quality vein quartz was 70-90%, and from rhyolite, corneal, siliceous shale, obsidian, and hyaline quartz was 10-30 %.

In South Korea, high-quality vein quartz and rhyolite were the main raw materials, while hyaline quartz and obsidian were the least commonly used materials. In the central district of Korea, prov. Chuncheon, the main material was siliceous shale and cornea, the least popular was obsidian. In Gangwon-do and Gyeonggi-do provinces, obsidian was the most common source material, while hyaline quartz and rhyolite were very rare. These features are directly related to the distribution of raw materials. Obsidian is rich in the central and northern regions of Korea, while rhyolite is widespread in the south of the peninsula.

During the Middle and Upper Paleolithic, stone artefacts were made mainly of pebbles. Raw materials were usually obtained from the bottom of the river near the parking lot, but obsidian was obtained from other areas, possibly due to exchange operations.

Splitting technique

As a result of studying the Middle and Upper Paleolithic complexes, three main techniques of primary cleavage (production of flakes, plates and microplates), as well as several techniques of secondary processing were identified.

For the Middle Paleolithic, two primary cleavage methods are distinguished: 4); 2) crushing - for removing large flakes (12 cm or more) from large pebbles (diameter more than 20 cm). The essence of the second method (Figure 5) consisted in striking pebbles placed between the legs with a large hard bump (Schick and Toth, 1993, p. 246-247). A tuff core from the Chunnari site, split in this way, demonstrates the use of negatives created as a result of previous shootings as shock elements.

page 32

4. Repair of a nucleus and flakes of vein quartz from cultural layer 1, Chunnari site.

5. Rock crushing method (Schick and Toth, 1993).

6. Repair of the tuff core and flakes from cultural layer 1, Chunnari site.

1-6 - chips; 7 - nucleus.

7. Bilaterally treated nuclei and flakes from cultural layer 4, Chunnari site.

sites for subsequent cleavage; sequential cleavage may have been performed in many directions, large, medium (7-12 cm) and small (7 cm or less) flakes were removed (Fig. 6).

Comparison of the Middle and Upper Paleolithic flakes showed that the proportion of small flakes among the latter gradually increased with a decrease in the area of residual impact sites, the traces of preparation became more distinct and the impact bumps became less convex. These features indicate the improvement of the splitting technique in the Upper Paleolithic period.

In the Upper Paleolithic period, the Chunnari site used a unipolar technique using an anvil and a solid chipper, along with the well-known bipolar method of obtaining blanks. The first one was used when working with high-quality vein quartz to remove small narrow and thin flakes, the second one-when working with rhyolite, mainly to obtain more flakes from small and hard workpieces (Figs. 7, 8).

The typical plate technique emerged and became dominant in the Upper Paleolithic period. A large number of nuclei intended for the manufacture of plates and rib plates, chips for reviving the impact pad, "diving" chips and joining fragments of nuclei and plates were found

page 33

Figure 8. Repair of rhyolite nuclei and flakes from cultural layer 4, Chunnari site.

9. Plate industry, Chingynyl parking lot. 1-repair of the nucleus for plates and plates; 2-rib plate; 3-plate with a "diving" end; 4-cleavage of the revival site of the nucleus.

10. Microplate industry, Wolphen parking lot. found at the sites of Koreri and Chingynyl (fig. 9).

The nuclei from which the plates were obtained are divided into pyramidal, prismatic and shapeless. The length of plates from the lower layer of the Koreri site is 10 cm, from the upper layer-20 cm (Park and Seo, 2004). These plates were often formed into petiolate points, incisors and scrapers.

Many microplate nuclei have been recorded at the sites of Suyange (Lee Y. J., 1985), Sinbuk, Changhyongri, Hoppongdong, Seokchanni (Sohn, 1993), San Murenri (Hwang and Shin, 1989), and Wolphen. Along with the nuclei, there are also cross-shaped chips, rib plates, and chips of the impact site animation (Fig. 10). Double-sided processed products (such as yubetsu) or flakes were used in the design of microplate nuclei. The shape of microplate nuclei can be divided into four categories: navicular, wedge - shaped, pyramidal, and shapeless. Among them, the yubetsu, horoka, rankoshi, togeshita, and hiroshito types are identified (Figure 11).

page 34

Figure 11. Different types of microplate nuclei. 1-7-Wolphen; 8,9-Shinbuk; 10-Geumsen.

Figure 12. Middle Palaeolithic industry of Dosan monuments(1, 2, 4 - 7, 10), Chunnari (3), Noendon (8) and Khvatok (9), prov. Jeolla. 1-subspheroid; 2-scraper; 3-awl; 4-chopping; 5 - notched gun; 6-large scraper; 7-chopper; 8-chopper; 9-jib; 10-pike.

13. Petiolate (1-10) and bilaterally treated (11-13) points. 1-6, 11-Wolphen; 7, 12-Shinbuk; 8-10-Chingynul.

Types of guns

Middle Paleolithic tools include not only "pebble" tools, such as choppers, choppers, choppers, cleavers, spades, polyhedra, spheroids, but also tools made on chips - scrapers, notched, toothed and punctures (Fig. 12). During the Upper Paleolithic period, the proportion of "pebble" tools decreases, and the choppers become smaller in size. New types appear - petiolate and triangular points, leaf-shaped bifaces, scrapers and incisors (Fig. 13), which are very convenient for hunting, processing hides, wood, bone and horns.

Scrapers and cutters were made on plates and flakes. There are fan-shaped, scaphoid, spiked (a muso), nail-shaped, round scrapers, etc. (Fig. 14). There are various simple angular and median incisors, multi-facet angular and median incisors on the break and truncation planes (Fig. 15). They are similar to European Upper Paleolithic incisors (Piel-Desruisseaux, 1986; Inizan et al., 1999).

An adze (axe) with a polished edge, a whetstone, split and sanded tiles, pebbles with traces of knocking out and friction, accompanied by microplate industry, were unexpectedly found at the Shinbuk site (Figure 16).

page 35

14. Different types of scrapers (11, 12) from the Wolphen (1 - 7), Sinbuk (8 - 10) and Chingynil sites (11, 12). 1, 3 - with a spout; 2, 9-fan-shaped; 4, 8-nail-shaped; 5, 6-navicular; 7-round; 10-12-large.

15. Different types of incisors from the Wolphen sites (1, 2) and Shinbuk sites (3-8). 1-simple angular incisor on a transverse scrap; 2 - simple angular incisor on a tronked layer; 3 - simple dihedral incisor; 4 - multi-facet angular incisor on a transverse negative; 5-simple median incisor tronked chip cutter; 6-simple angular tronked chip cutter; 7 - simple jete type cutter; 8-multi-facet mid-dihedral cutter.

16. Stone artefacts with various traces of harmony, Shinbuk site. 1-adze (axe) with a worked edge; 2-5-pebbles with traces of clogging and harmony; 6-whetstone; 7-tiles with traces of harmony and splitting.

Their radiocarbon dates (obtained by the AMS method) are 18.5 - 25.5 Ka BP.Axes with a polished edge were also found at the Changhyun - ri and Seongcheongdong sites (Lee H. W., 2004). Thus, on the territory of Korea, the grinding technique was mastered in the middle of the Upper Paleolithic era; it is advisable to compare axes with a polished edge and axes of the Upper Paleolithic of Japan (Otake, 2004).

Conclusion

During the transition from the Middle to the Upper Paleolithic, there were changes in the technique of splitting and the choice of raw materials, and the types of tools made changed. Large flakes (12 cm or more) have practically disappeared; microplate technology products have become dominant. More uniform, elastic, fine-grained and durable stones, such as rhyolite, siliceous slate, and obsidian, were used.,

page 36

hyaline quartz; some raw materials were imported. The production of more advanced tools, such as scrapers, chisels and various points, began.

The development of new splitting techniques and the extraction of appropriate raw materials gave the Upper Paleolithic man the opportunity to make more subtle and miniature tools. The main blanks for petiole points, incisors and scrapers were plates, the main element of composite tools - microplates. Upper Paleolithic man used a grinding technique.

Middle Paleolithic stone complexes, including large flakes, on the territory of Korea are similar to the Dingtsun complexes in China (Pei et al., 1958; Wang et al., 1994). It should be noted that the Levallois technique presented in Siberia has not yet been found on the Korean Peninsula (Derevyanko, Petrin, and Rybin, 2000). Archaeological studies have shown that during the Upper Paleolithic period, Korea was part of the Northeast Asian Paleolithic region, where microplate industries were found. At the same time, the collections show local features - a lot of petiole points, the coexistence of microplate nuclei and petiole points, the presence of partially polished adzes (axes).

List of literature

Derevyanko, A. P., Petrin, V. T., and Rybin, E. P., Character of the transition from the Mousterian to the Late Paleolithic in the Altai (based on the materials of the Kara-Bom site), in Archeology, Ethnography, and Anthropology of Eurasia. - 2000. - N 2(2). - p. 33-52.

Bae K.D. The Geumpari Palaeolithic site. - Seoul: National Research Institute of Cultural Properties, 1999. -291 p .( in cor. yaz.).

Bae K.D., Kim D.L. The Paju Geumpari Palaeolithic site // Proceeding of Korean Palaeolithic Symposium - Seoul: The Korean Palaeolithic Society, 2004, pp. 67-74 (in Russian).

Bae K.D., Hong M.Y., Lee H.Y., Kim Y.Y. Jeongokni Palaeolithic site. - Ansan: Institute of Cultural Properties of Hanyang University, 2001. - 308 p. (in cor. yaz.).

Choi B.K. Palaeolithic and Mesolithic of Hahwagae-ri site at Hongcheon County // Proceeding of Korean Palaeolithic Symposium. - Seoul: The Korean Palaeolithic Society, 2004, pp. 27-32 (in Russian).

Han C.G. Daejeon Yongho-dong Palaeolithic Site // Palaeolithic Studies in Northeast Asia. - Ansan: Institute of Cultural Properties of Hanyang University, 2002. - P. 163 - 171 (на кор. яз.).

Han C.G., Kim K.W., You K.J., Heo S.Y., Jeon I.K., Seo D.W., Gu J.J. Daejeon Noeun-dong Site. - Daejeon: Hannam University Museum, 2003. - 605 p. (in cor. yaz.).

Hong M. Y. 2nd Preliminary Report of Hopyeong-dong Site atNamyangju County. - Suwon: Institute of Cultural Properties of Gijeon, 2003. - 15 p. (in cor. yaz.).

Hong M. Y. 3rd Preliminary Report of Hopyeong-dong Site atNamyangju County. - Suwon: Institute of Cultural Properties of Gijeon, 2004. - 33 p. (in cor. yaz.).

Hwang W.H., Shin B.S. Excavation of the Kyeonghee University // Sangmuryongni. - Chuncheon: Gangwon University Museum, 1989. - P. 481 - 660 (на кор. яз.).

Inizan M. -L., Reduron-Ballinger M., Roche H., Tixier J. Technology and Terminology of Knapped Stone. -Nanterre: Cercle de Recherches et d'Etudes Prhisoriques, 1999. - 189 p.

Lee G.K. Hwasun Dosan Palaeolithic Site. - Gwangju: Chosun University Museum, 2002a. - 90 p. (in cor. yaz.).

Lee G.K. Suncheon Wolpyeong Site - Excavation in 1998. -Gwangju: Chosun University Museum, 20026. -219 p. (in cor. yaz.).

Lee G.K. The Jingeuneul Upper Palaeolithic Site around the Yongdam Dam in Jinan County of Submerged Area and its Significance//HonamGogoHakbo 19. -Gwangju: TheHonam Archaeological Society, 2004. - P. 5 - 23 (на кор. яз.).

Lee G.K. Sinbuk Upper Palaeolithic Site in Jangheung County, Jeollanamdo Province, Korea // Evaluating the Cultural Features of the Sinbuk Upper Palaeolithic Site in the Northern Asia. - Gwangju: Chosun University Museum, 2004. - P. 31 - 38 (на кор. яз.).

Lee G.K., Choi M.N., Kim E.J. Suncheon Jungnaeri Site. - Gwangju: Chosun University Museum, 2000. - 276 p. (in cor. yaz.).

Lee G.K., Kim E.J., Kim S.J., Yoon J.G., Kim S.A. Suncheon Wolpyeong Site - Excavation in 2001. - Gwangju: Chosun University Museum, 2004. - 96 p. (in cor. yaz.).

Lee H. W. Preliminary excavation report of the Songchon-dong site at Jeonju city. - Institute of Cultural Properties of Jeonbuk, 2004. - 10 p. (in cor. yaz.).

Lee Y.J. Excavation Report of Suyanggae Palaeolithic Site in Danyang. - Cheongju: Chungbuk University Museum, 1985. - P. 101-252 (in cor. yaz.).

Otake N. Polished Stone Axes of the Paleolihtic Period in the Japanese Archipelago // Evaluating the Cultural Features of the Sinbuk Upper Palaeolithic Site in the Northern Asia. - Gwangju: Chosun University Museum, 2004. - P. 125 - 135 (на яп. яз.).

Park Y.C., Seo Y.N. Mlyang Goryeori and Jinju Jiphyeon Jangheungri Site // 20th Anniversary of Youngnam Archaeology. Busan: The Yongnam Archaeological Society, 2004, pp. 15-29 (in English).

Pei W.C., Chia LP, Wang C.Y., Woo JK, Liu H.T., Chow M.C. Report on the Excavation of Palaeolithic Sites at Tingtsun, Hsiangfen-Hsie, Shansi Province. - Beijing: IVPP, 1958. - 111 p. (накит. яз.).

Piel-Desruisseaux J. -L. Outils Prehistoriques-forme, fabrication, utilisation. -P.: Masson, 1986. - 183 p.

Schick K. D., Toth N. Making Silent Stones Speak. - L.: Weidenfeld andNicolson, 1993. - 351 p.

Sohn R. K. Seogjangni Prehistoric Site. - Seoul: Dong-a Publishing Co., 1993. - 326 p. (in cor. yaz.).

al. Wang J. et Preliminary Report on Investigation and Excavation of Dingcun Paleolithic Sites // J. of Chinese Antiquity, 1994. - N 3. - 75 p. (in Chinese).

The article was submitted to the Editorial Board on 09.01.06.

page 37

Permanent link to this publication: