Pub Date : 2011-07-09DOI: 10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12026
L. Lbova
The Baikal region is viewed as the easternmost territory where the Upper Paleolithic complex appeared the earliest. Its chronology is relevant in establishing the chronologies of its adjacent regions. The Baikal Upper Paleolithic sites are numerous and well-represented. The beginning of this period is well-defined as shown by the dated profiles, detailed technical or typological characteristics of industries, elements of symbolic activity, and subsistence strategies. This paper will present some archaeological evidence, retrieved from own excavations in the region, of Modern Human behavior in the area at around 40,000 BP.
{"title":"Evidence of Modern Human Behavior in the Baikal Zone during the Early Upper Paleolithic Period","authors":"L. Lbova","doi":"10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12026","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12026","url":null,"abstract":"The Baikal region is viewed as the easternmost territory where the Upper Paleolithic complex appeared the earliest. Its chronology is relevant in establishing the chronologies of its adjacent regions. The Baikal Upper Paleolithic sites are numerous and well-represented. The beginning of this period is well-defined as shown by the dated profiles, detailed technical or typological characteristics of industries, elements of symbolic activity, and subsistence strategies. This paper will present some archaeological evidence, retrieved from own excavations in the region, of Modern Human behavior in the area at around 40,000 BP.","PeriodicalId":158063,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129590468","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2011-07-09DOI: 10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.10808
H. Woodward
The aim of this article is to better define the historical position of Wendan (Land Zhenla), an 8th-century kingdom known from Chinese sources, which had a capital in northeastern Thailand. The material evidence from Thailand, primarily in the form of Buddhist boundary stones, will not yield a coherent story until it is studied more deeply, with careful attention to issues of chronology. Architectural ruins in the Angkor region show that temple building (in contrast to what some have previously thought) fell off dramatically in about the second quarter of the 8th century, consistent with the hypothesis that the area fell under the domination of Wendan. For evidence that Angkor-region craftsmen were taken north by Wendan, it is necessary to look at sculpture and monumental remains taken from or remaining in Si Thep, a city likely to have stood west of Wendan’s political center. Evidence from the Delta region (“Water Zhenla”), finally, dating from the second half of the 8th century, reveals contact with Si Thep in this period and also indicates that at least some of the craftsmen who worked on Mt. Kulen (probably beginning prior to Jayavarman II’s coronation in 802) were likely to have been brought from this region.
{"title":"Dvaravati, Si Thep, and Wendan.","authors":"H. Woodward","doi":"10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.10808","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.10808","url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to better define the historical position of Wendan (Land Zhenla), an 8th-century kingdom known from Chinese sources, which had a capital in northeastern Thailand. The material evidence from Thailand, primarily in the form of Buddhist boundary stones, will not yield a coherent story until it is studied more deeply, with careful attention to issues of chronology. Architectural ruins in the Angkor region show that temple building (in contrast to what some have previously thought) fell off dramatically in about the second quarter of the 8th century, consistent with the hypothesis that the area fell under the domination of Wendan. For evidence that Angkor-region craftsmen were taken north by Wendan, it is necessary to look at sculpture and monumental remains taken from or remaining in Si Thep, a city likely to have stood west of Wendan’s political center. Evidence from the Delta region (“Water Zhenla”), finally, dating from the second half of the 8th century, reveals contact with Si Thep in this period and also indicates that at least some of the craftsmen who worked on Mt. Kulen (probably beginning prior to Jayavarman II’s coronation in 802) were likely to have been brought from this region.","PeriodicalId":158063,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125352032","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2011-07-09DOI: 10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.10862
Charlotte Galloway
During the last 100 years artistic relationships between the Pyu and Mon of Burma and the Dvāravatī Mon of Thailand have been frequently hinted at yet until recently these ideas had not been explored further. In light of contemporary research, and in particular, relatively stable access to Burma, there is renewed interest in the cultures which inhabited the region extending from Upper Burma through Lower Burma and into central and south-west Thailand during the first millennium CE. Conventionally viewed as distinct cultural groups, on reappraising archaeological and historical research associated with the Pyu, Mon and Dvāravatī it is now suggested that these communities were more closely linked than traditionally thought. The art from these regions supports this. Buddhism was the common catalyst for visual culture and the artistic repertoires of the Pyu, Mon and Dvāravatī share many similarities. Examination of themes and styles which appear in the art of these cultures indicates there was a flow of ideas back and forth across the region, and likely beyond. The apparent openness of these groups to the integration of new ideas offers insight into the patterns of knowledge exchange and challenges preconceived notions of cultural division throughout this large region of mainland Southeast Asia.
{"title":"Ways of Seeing a Pyu, Mon and Dvaravati Artistic Continuum","authors":"Charlotte Galloway","doi":"10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.10862","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.10862","url":null,"abstract":"During the last 100 years artistic relationships between the Pyu and Mon of Burma and the Dvāravatī Mon of Thailand have been frequently hinted at yet until recently these ideas had not been explored further. In light of contemporary research, and in particular, relatively stable access to Burma, there is renewed interest in the cultures which inhabited the region extending from Upper Burma through Lower Burma and into central and south-west Thailand during the first millennium CE. Conventionally viewed as distinct cultural groups, on reappraising archaeological and historical research associated with the Pyu, Mon and Dvāravatī it is now suggested that these communities were more closely linked than traditionally thought. The art from these regions supports this. Buddhism was the common catalyst for visual culture and the artistic repertoires of the Pyu, Mon and Dvāravatī share many similarities. Examination of themes and styles which appear in the art of these cultures indicates there was a flow of ideas back and forth across the region, and likely beyond. The apparent openness of these groups to the integration of new ideas offers insight into the patterns of knowledge exchange and challenges preconceived notions of cultural division throughout this large region of mainland Southeast Asia.","PeriodicalId":158063,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association","volume":"43 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122962086","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2011-07-09DOI: 10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12027
P. Habgood, Natalie R. Franklin
Late Pleistocene Sahul has provided a test for the debate surrounding the appearance of the ‘package’ of modern human behaviour within the archaeological record. A detailed review of the late Pleistocene archaeological record of Sahul (Franklin and Habgood 2007; Habgood and Franklin 2008) found both chronological and geographical patterning for the appearance of the individual traits - four broad Phases and seven ‘Zones of Innovation’. We consider potential causes for this patterning including taphonomy and artefact function, but conclude that it reflects material culture differences and cultural preferences.
晚更新世的Sahul为围绕考古记录中现代人类行为“一揽子”出现的争论提供了一个测试。对Sahul晚更新世考古记录的详细评述(Franklin and Habgood 2007;Habgood和Franklin(2008)发现了个体特征出现的时间和地理模式——四个大阶段和七个“创新区”。我们考虑了这种模式的潜在原因，包括埋藏学和人工功能，但结论是它反映了物质文化差异和文化偏好。
{"title":"Explanations for patterning in the ‘package of traits’ of modern human behaviour within Sahul","authors":"P. Habgood, Natalie R. Franklin","doi":"10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12027","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12027","url":null,"abstract":"Late Pleistocene Sahul has provided a test for the debate surrounding the appearance of the ‘package’ of modern human behaviour within the archaeological record. A detailed review of the late Pleistocene archaeological record of Sahul (Franklin and Habgood 2007; Habgood and Franklin 2008) found both chronological and geographical patterning for the appearance of the individual traits - four broad Phases and seven ‘Zones of Innovation’. We consider potential causes for this patterning including taphonomy and artefact function, but conclude that it reflects material culture differences and cultural preferences.","PeriodicalId":158063,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association","volume":"7 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116955125","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2011-07-09DOI: 10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12029
A. Pawlik
Behavioural modernity has been a widely neglected topic for Southeast Asia’s Prehistory. Evidence of modern packages or even traits is basically absent in the Palaeolithic assemblages. This absence has considerably influenced the discussion of hominid behaviour and their cultural and cognitive abilities. In a case study on terminal Pleistocene artefacts from Ille Cave on Palawan Island, indications of the presence of several items of the modern trait list, foremost the first evidence of hafted lithic tools and the use of adhesives in the Philippine Palaeolithic, were detected through microwear analysis. The results showed that unretouched and morphologically less characteristic flaked artefacts often considered as mere expedient tools could have served as hafted armatures of multicomponent tools. For the ongoing discussion on the development and expansion of modern behaviour, methods like microwear analysis can enhance the limitations of traditional technological and morphological analysis of lithic assemblages.
{"title":"Have We Overlooked Something? Hafting Traces and Indications of Modern Traits in the Philippine Palaeolithic","authors":"A. Pawlik","doi":"10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12029","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12029","url":null,"abstract":"Behavioural modernity has been a widely neglected topic for Southeast Asia’s Prehistory. Evidence of modern packages or even traits is basically absent in the Palaeolithic assemblages. This absence has considerably influenced the discussion of hominid behaviour and their cultural and cognitive abilities. In a case study on terminal Pleistocene artefacts from Ille Cave on Palawan Island, indications of the presence of several items of the modern trait list, foremost the first evidence of hafted lithic tools and the use of adhesives in the Philippine Palaeolithic, were detected through microwear analysis. The results showed that unretouched and morphologically less characteristic flaked artefacts often considered as mere expedient tools could have served as hafted armatures of multicomponent tools. For the ongoing discussion on the development and expansion of modern behaviour, methods like microwear analysis can enhance the limitations of traditional technological and morphological analysis of lithic assemblages.","PeriodicalId":158063,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association","volume":"39 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"128681273","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2011-07-09DOI: 10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12028
M. Haidle, A. Pawlik
{"title":"Pleistocene Modernity: An Exclusively Afro-European Issue? An Introduction to Session A1","authors":"M. Haidle, A. Pawlik","doi":"10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12028","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12028","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":158063,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132081376","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2011-07-09DOI: 10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.9978
I. Gilligan
Material and behavioural elements associated with the term Neolithic are almost completely absent in Australia. Among the few exceptions are the domesticated dog (originating in the Near East and reaching Australia by 3,500 years ago as the dingo), together with limited evidence for permanent settlements, food storage, long-distance trade and manipulation of wild resources in some areas. While it has been suggested that the latter developments represent independent local trends toward more complex societies that might have led to an Australian Neolithic if not for the arrival of Europeans, the Neolithic is essentially conspicuous by its absence. Particularly striking is the absence of agricultural practices, despite recent claims to the contrary. Also not present is another one of the original (though generally over-looked) defining attributes of the Neolithic: the weaving of textile fibres for clothing. Claims for indigenous Australian agriculture are reviewed here, and the few purported cases are found to be weak. An unconventional model for the transition to agriculture is presented, advocating a significant formative role for clothing, specifically textiles. This suggests that a typical absence of clothing (and total absence of textile clothing) provides a clue as to why agriculture did not develop in Australia.
{"title":"Agriculture in Aboriginal Australia: Why Not?","authors":"I. Gilligan","doi":"10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.9978","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.9978","url":null,"abstract":"Material and behavioural elements associated with the term Neolithic are almost completely absent in Australia. Among the few exceptions are the domesticated dog (originating in the Near East and reaching Australia by 3,500 years ago as the dingo), together with limited evidence for permanent settlements, food storage, long-distance trade and manipulation of wild resources in some areas. While it has been suggested that the latter developments represent independent local trends toward more complex societies that might have led to an Australian Neolithic if not for the arrival of Europeans, the Neolithic is essentially conspicuous by its absence. Particularly striking is the absence of agricultural practices, despite recent claims to the contrary. Also not present is another one of the original (though generally over-looked) defining attributes of the Neolithic: the weaving of textile fibres for clothing. Claims for indigenous Australian agriculture are reviewed here, and the few purported cases are found to be weak. An unconventional model for the transition to agriculture is presented, advocating a significant formative role for clothing, specifically textiles. This suggests that a typical absence of clothing (and total absence of textile clothing) provides a clue as to why agriculture did not develop in Australia.","PeriodicalId":158063,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122657024","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2011-07-09DOI: 10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.10809
Ian G. Glover
The author’s principal research has mainly been in the field of Southeast Asian prehistoric archaeology rather than art history but one topic that has preoccupied me since I first excavated between 1980–1985 at the site of Ban Don Ta Phet in west-central Thailand is the relationships between the late prehistoric Iron Age cultures of Southeast Asia and the Indian influenced Buddhist and Hindu civilizations of the early first millennium of the present era and especially the Dvaravati Civilization of Central Thailand which occupied the same region as the late prehistoric Iron Age communities– albeit after an interval of several hundred years.
作者的主要研究领域主要是东南亚史前考古，而不是艺术史，但自从1980年至1985年在泰国中西部的Ban Don Ta Phet遗址进行首次发掘以来，我一直关注的一个主题是东南亚史前铁器时代晚期文化与当今时代第一个千年早期受印度影响的佛教和印度教文明之间的关系，特别是Dvaravati文明位于泰国中部，与史前铁器时代晚期的社区占据着相同的地区——尽管间隔了几百年。
{"title":"The Dvaravati Gap - Linking Prehistory and History in Early Thailand","authors":"Ian G. Glover","doi":"10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.10809","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.10809","url":null,"abstract":"The author’s principal research has mainly been in the field of Southeast Asian prehistoric archaeology rather than art history but one topic that has preoccupied me since I first excavated between 1980–1985 at the site of Ban Don Ta Phet in west-central Thailand is the relationships between the late prehistoric Iron Age cultures of Southeast Asia and the Indian influenced Buddhist and Hindu civilizations of the early first millennium of the present era and especially the Dvaravati Civilization of Central Thailand which occupied the same region as the late prehistoric Iron Age communities– albeit after an interval of several hundred years.","PeriodicalId":158063,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"126569113","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2011-07-09DOI: 10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12030
M. Porr
This contribution is aimed at drawing attention to the fact that the current most widely accepted understanding of the origins of modern behaviour is very much dominated by Western concepts of the character of humanity. Here, it is briefly discussed that this understanding not only produces less than convincing results in the current discussion on ‘modern human origins’, but it is still plagued by problems that were already evident in the 18th and 19th centuries. It is suggested that these issues are connected to a simplistic and essentialist understanding of human historical development. The concept of ‘modernity’ inevitably produces a version of human history that is unilinear, Eurocentric and concentrates on the development and history of state societies. It is therefore suggested that 'modernity' in all its versions is very much counterproductive for our aim to understand the human past and present. It needs to be replaced by an understanding of organisms, humans and their environments as mutually constituting each other and as products of their situated becoming and not of essential (cognitive and/or genetic) and time-less qualities.
{"title":"Identifying Behavioural Modernity: Lessons from Sahul","authors":"M. Porr","doi":"10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12030","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.12030","url":null,"abstract":"This contribution is aimed at drawing attention to the fact that the current most widely accepted understanding of the origins of modern behaviour is very much dominated by Western concepts of the character of humanity. Here, it is briefly discussed that this understanding not only produces less than convincing results in the current discussion on ‘modern human origins’, but it is still plagued by problems that were already evident in the 18th and 19th centuries. It is suggested that these issues are connected to a simplistic and essentialist understanding of human historical development. The concept of ‘modernity’ inevitably produces a version of human history that is unilinear, Eurocentric and concentrates on the development and history of state societies. It is therefore suggested that 'modernity' in all its versions is very much counterproductive for our aim to understand the human past and present. It needs to be replaced by an understanding of organisms, humans and their environments as mutually constituting each other and as products of their situated becoming and not of essential (cognitive and/or genetic) and time-less qualities.","PeriodicalId":158063,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"127248637","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2011-07-09DOI: 10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.9968
Carmen Sarjeant
After numerous seasons of excavation, a long sequence of occupation has been revealed at Ban Non Wat in Northeast Thailand from the Neolithic to the Iron Age. In this paper, the results of a characterisation of ceramic vessels identified in burial contexts are provided. The studied sample included Bronze and Iron Age ceramics. The analysis involved a characterisation of morphology, surface treatment and the fabrics to uncover the technology for pottery manufacture at Ban Non Wat in prehistory. The fabric analysis of the clays and tempers was conducted with the electron microprobe. The results revealed two distinct manufacturing methods. The Bronze Age phase 2 and 3 burials were tempered with sand in almost all of the studied sherds, while fibre tempered ceramics were dominant in the assemblage in burials from Bronze Age phase 4 to the Iron Age phases. The adoption of fibre tempering appears to have taken place between Bronze Age 3 and 4 at Ban Non Wat, positing the earliest known use of this method on the Khorat Plateau at c.800 BC.
{"title":"A Characterisation of Mortuary Ceramics from Ban Non Wat, Northeast Thailand","authors":"Carmen Sarjeant","doi":"10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.9968","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.7152/BIPPA.V30I0.9968","url":null,"abstract":"After numerous seasons of excavation, a long sequence of occupation has been revealed at Ban Non Wat in Northeast Thailand from the Neolithic to the Iron Age. In this paper, the results of a characterisation of ceramic vessels identified in burial contexts are provided. The studied sample included Bronze and Iron Age ceramics. The analysis involved a characterisation of morphology, surface treatment and the fabrics to uncover the technology for pottery manufacture at Ban Non Wat in prehistory. The fabric analysis of the clays and tempers was conducted with the electron microprobe. The results revealed two distinct manufacturing methods. The Bronze Age phase 2 and 3 burials were tempered with sand in almost all of the studied sherds, while fibre tempered ceramics were dominant in the assemblage in burials from Bronze Age phase 4 to the Iron Age phases. The adoption of fibre tempering appears to have taken place between Bronze Age 3 and 4 at Ban Non Wat, positing the earliest known use of this method on the Khorat Plateau at c.800 BC.","PeriodicalId":158063,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association","volume":"64 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2011-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125574664","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：