Evidence of smoke mummification in South China and Southeast Asia more than 10 000 years ago.

Archaeologists classify Human burials in two ways. In primary burials, the deceased is placed into the ground without modification, with-or-without grave goods. In secondary burials, the body is modified in some way before being buried. Burials classified as secondary include cremations, mummified remains, and a variety of embalming and body-modification techniques. Burials left by the ancient pre-Neolithic peoples of South China and Southeast Asia, who lived in the area from the Late Pleistocene till between 5000 and 3500 years ago, appear to have undergone complex mortuary procedures before being buried. Such burials are typically found in tightly flexed, crouching, or squatting positions, often with signs of having been tightly bound. These remains often show signs of scorching on their bones, but this appears to be localised to certain areas, rather than indicating a cremation process has occurred. Others show signs of partial dismemberment or mutilation.

In a paper published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on 15 September 2025, a team of scientists led by Hsiao-chun Hung of the Department of Archaeology and Natural History at the Australian National University,  and Zhenhua Deng of the Key Laboratory of Archaeological Science and School of Archaeology and Museology at Peking University, present the results of a study in which they analysed 94 pre-Neolithic burials from northern Vietnam and Guangxi Province, China.

Hung and Deng et al. theorised that many burials from ancient South China and Southeast Asia were subjected to long periods of smoke-drying, which effectively mummified the bodies before they were buried. This practice was still carried out in parts of Australia and the New Guinea Highlands within recent history. Burials which Hung and Deng et al. believe were similar in nature are extremely numerous in northern Vietnam and Guanxi Province, with a lesser number of examples from the Philippines, Laos, Thailand, Malaysia, and Indonesia. There are also some possible examples from northern China, Korea, Japan, Australia, and other parts of the world. 

Recorded hunter-gatherer sites with flexed and squatting burials in Southeastern Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Middle Holocene. (1) Gaomiao, (2) Niupodong, (3) Zhaoguodong, (4) Qihedong*, (5) Daowei 1, (6) Xiaoma, (7) Jiaoziyan, (8) Zengpiyan, (9) Miaoyan, (10) Dayan, (11) Xingyi, (12) Baida, (13) Gexinqiao, (14) Beidaling, (15) Liyuzui, (16) Fengyan, (17) Huangmenyan, (18) Xiankezhou, (19) Baxun, (20) Liyupo, (21) Changtang, (22) Lingwu, (23) Huiyaotian, (24) Qingshan, (25) Dingsishan, (26) Qiujiang, (27) Xijin, (28) Ganzao, (29) Hecun, (30) Jiangbian, (31) Chongtang, (32) Lang Cuom, (33) Mai Da Nguom, (34) Pho Binh Gia, (35) Hang Doi, (36) Dong Thuoc, (37) Hang To 1, (38) Hon Hai Co Tien, (39) Cai Beo, (40) Liyudun, (41) Dong Can, (42) Du Sang, (43) Lang Gao, (44) Hang Cho, (45) Hang Muoi, (46) Xom Trai, (47) Hang Mang Chieng, (48) Hang Con Moong, (49) Hang Diem, (50) Mai Da Dieu, (51) Mai Da Nuoc, (52) Hang Lang Bon, (53) Da But, (54) Con Co Ngua, (55) Banyan Valley Cave, (56) Spirit Cave, (57) Tham Lod, (58) Ban Rai, (59) Doi Pha Kan, (60) Ban Tha Si, (61) Quynh Van, (62) Pha Phen, (63) Yingdun, (64) Bau Du, (65) Krong No, (66) Bubog-1, (67) Ille Cave*, (68) Duyong Cave, (69) Sa’gung, (70) Moh Khiew, (71) Gua Kerbau, (72) Gua Kepah, (73) Gua Kajang, (74) Gua Teluk Kelawar, (75) Gua Gunung Runtuh, (76) Gua Peraling, (77) Gua Cha, (78) Niah Cave, (79) Kimanis, (80) Liang Tebo, (81) Keboboh Cave, (82) Gua Tengkorak, (83) Leang Panninge, (84) Cappalombo1, (85) Gua Harimau, (86) Gua Pawon, (87) Gua Braholo, (88) Song Tritis, (89) Song Terus, (90) Song Keplek, (91) Gua Lawa, (92) Song Gentong, (93) Tron Bon Lei, (94) Ratu Mali 2, (95) Liang Lembudu (*suspected flexed). Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

Hung and Deng et al. recorded the positions in which burials were placed within the ground, as well as signs of burning and cut marks upon bones. X-ray diffraction and Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy were used to detect prior heating of bones, by looking for characteristic recrystallisation structures. Finally, they compared the ancient remains to records of smoke-drying mummification in Australia and the New Guinea Highlands. 

Zengpiyan Cave, a pre-Neolithic site in the northeast of Guangxi Province, was occupied from approximately 12 000 to 7000 years before the present. At this site 26 individual burials were found, some of which were placed in squatting positions in small pits, while others were placed on their sides in flexed postures. 

Human burials exposed in Zengpiyan Cave (approximately 12 000-7000 years before present), Guangxi, southern China, excavated in 1973. (A) Three human burials exposed in excavation square BT2, viewed from the east; (B) Burial BT2M1 in a hyper-flexed position; (C) The three burials viewed from the south; (D) Burial BT2M5 in a flexed position, though not as tightly flexed as BT2M1. Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

Huiyaotian Shell Mound, by the banks of the River Yongjiang in Nanning City in central Guangxi, has produced 169 individual burials, one of which has been radiocarbon-dated to approximately 9030-8975 years before the present. Hung and Deng et al. examined 60 burials from this site, with 21 being flexed, 17 placed in squatting positions, and 22 too poorly preserved to determine. Twelve of the flexed burials were placed on their sides, three on their backs, and one was lying face down (the original position of the remaining flexed burials was unclear).

The Luyupo Shell Mound is located about 50 km from Huiyaotian in Long'an County and contains a series of burials dated to between approximately 8000 and 6700 years before the present. Many of the burials here were flexed, and covered by large stones, which were placed on the heads, chests, or stomachs of the deceased. 

Examples of Early and Middle Holocene Human burials from southern China. This figure shows six Human burials from Huiyaotian in Nanning City: (A) M14, (B) M19,  and (C) M20, and Liyupo in Long’an County: (D) M23, (E) M24, and (F) M28. Both shell-midden sites arelocated in the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region. All individuals are in flexed positions, with several exhibiting hyper-flexed postures. (A) and (E) are male, (B)–(D) and (F) are female. Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

The Hoabinhian-Da But-Quynh Van Group burials of northern Vietnam comprise a series of sites, such as Mai Da Dieu, Hang Cho, Hang Diem, Hang Mang Chieng, Con Co Ngua, Quynh Van, and Bau Du, which record a material culture similar to that of ancient Guangxi, mostly within cave or shell mound deposits. 

Notable among these is the Con Co Ngua site in Thanh Hoa Province, which was excavated between 1978 and 1980, and again in 2015, has produced a shell midden and 267 burials, dated to between 6700 and 6200 years before the present, and attributed to the pre-Neolithic Dabutian Culture. The nature of the shells here has been interpreted to indicate that the site was on the coast when inhabited, although it is more than 30 km inland today. The majority of the burials here (about 77%) were placed in a squatting posture, while the remainder (about 23%) were flexed and placed on their sides. 

Examples of Early and Middle Holocene flexed burials from northern Vietnam. (A) Burial 80M27 from the Con Co Ngua Shell Midden; (B) Burial M16 from Mai Da Dieu Cave, both located in Thanh Hoa Province. Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

The Gua Harimau (Harimau Cave) site on southern Sumatra is considered to be one of the most significant burial sites in Island Southeast Asia, with a chronological sequence which runs from the late pre-Neolithic into the Iron Age. A total of 33 burials have been uncovered, containing 82 individuals, the majority of which are Late Neolithic or Iron Age, which are mostly either in a supine position (on their backs) or secondary burials. There is a smaller number of pre-Neolithic burials, placed predominantly in flexed positions, two of which have been directly dated, the older to between 5715 and 5587 years before the present, and the younger to between 3819 and 3568 years before the present, making it the youngest known burial of the type in Southeast Asia. 

A major question which needs to be addressed in order to understand these burials is how individuals were placed into the hyper-flexed positions in which they are found? Such skeletons frequently retain all of their original articulation, but are folded into very compact positions, which would have required a degree of contortion unlikely for an intact body.

M26, a tightly flexed human burial from Huiyaotian, Guangxi, southern China. (A) Skeletal position of a middle-aged male, and (B) surface scan of Burial M26. The mostly complete skeleton retains its original articulated position. The pelvis lies on the ground, while the Right and Left femora are nearly vertical, with their distal ends oriented upward. Both knees are strongly flexed, positioning the feet just medial to the hip joints, and the foot bones are largely intact. The shoulders, rib cage, and upper limbs have collapsed downward, but the positions of the humerus, radius, and ulna indicate that the arms were crossed beneath the thighs, with each hand placed under the opposite knee. Overall, the body is folded in an extremely compact manner. Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

When unmodified bodies are buried within sediments, decomposition of the flesh creates voids, which in turn allow skeletal elements to move, leading to varying degrees of disarticulation, particularly of small bones such as the phalanges (bones of the fingers and toes). Examination of hyper-flexed skeletal remains from Guangxi and Vietnam shows that they appear to have been buried with no space between their limbs and torsos. This would appear to imply that there was no soft tissue (with the possible exception of dried skin) left on the bodies when they were buried. 

This combination of extreme flexion and preservation of small bones in their original position has been seen in other parts of the world, such as the Mesolithic burials from the Sado Valley in Portugal, which have also been interpreted as having undergone some port-mortem treatment before burial.

Another question which arose from examination of the skeletons is whether they were treated with fire or smoke before being buried. Some of the bones from Huiyaotian and Liyupo show clear signs of fire exposure, in the form of burned and blackened patches, even though the skeletons are still articulated (something which is not usually the case with cremated remains). Curiously, this burning appears to be quire localised, and restricted to certain bones, notably the frontal bones of the skull, the lower limb bones such as the femur, tibia, and fibula, the upper limb bones in the elbow region including the humerus, ulna, and radius, and the pelvic bones. About 15% of the skeletons from Huiyaotian and Liyupo showed signs of such burning.

This combination of highly flexed yet articulate skeletons with occasional burn marks has also been recorded from sites in northern Vietnam, Sarawak (Malaysia), southern Java (Indonesia), and northern Palawan (Philippines). Notably, a male skeleton from Hang Muoi Cave in Hoa Binh Province, northern Vietnam, which shows intense burning of some bones, also shows cranial features characteristic of Indigenous Australo-Papuan populations, and has been radiocarbon dated to between 14 027 and 13 798 years before the present. Another cranium showing a similar burn pattern was found at Dong Can, close to Hang Muoi Cave, has been interpreted as that of an older male from with a similar date.

Examples of hyper-flexed burials with partially burned bones from southern China and Indonesia. (A) and (B) Burial M35, a young male from Liyupo in Guangxi, with its partially burned skull; (C) and (D) Burial ST1 from Song Terus Cave in Java, showing its partially burned left femur, tibia, and humerus. Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

In the 1950s and 1960s, archaeologists  Tom and Barbara Harrisson excavated a series of burials at the West Mouth of the Niah Caves in Sarawak (Malaysian Borneo). They found over 150 burials, 39 of which they classified as Mesolithic or pre-Neolithic. These burials again were typically flexed or seated, sometimes mutilated, and showed signs of burning, and were dated to between 11 698-11 270 and 8454-8354 years before the present. 

The Song Terus individual from southern Java has been directly dated to 8500 years before the present, and was buried in an articulated but highly flexed position with charring on the bones of the left side, notably the left femur, tibia, and humerus.

At Ille Cave on northern Palawan, a fragmentary Human skeleton dated to the Early Holocene shows burning and cut marks which may indicate disarticulation, which has been directly dated to between 9260 and 9006 years before the present.

This consistent presence of localised burning on certain parts of the skeleton strongly implies that the intention was never full cremation. The presence of charring on areas such as the lower limbs, elbows, and frontal areas of the cranium may suggest that the remains were arranged in a seated or tightly flexed position and exposed to heat in a controlled, or semi-controlled, way. This may have been intended to smoke the remains as a way of preserving them, with burning occurring in areas with less muscle or other soft tissue covering the bone. Logically, if this was the practice, and it was as widespread as it appears to have been, many of the flexed burials which do not show visible charring may show signs of bone-recrystallisation caused by exposure to heat. 

X-ray diffraction spectroscopy is known to be particularly effective at detecting thermal alterations which occur within bone when it is heated to temperatures in excess of 500°C. Hung and Deng et al. selected 20 pre-Neolithic archaeological samples from northern Vietnam, as well as two sub-modern samples from Edo Castle in Japan. Nine of the samples showed signs of having been heated to above 525°C, with some of these having potentially been heated to temperatures greater than 645°C. Three of the samples showed no signs of having been heated. The remaining eight samples showed signs which could be associated with having been heated to about 525°C, but which could be associated with long term diagenetic processes.

Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy is more sensitive to lower heating of bone, which often does not involve recrystallisation. Because this method does not rely on detecting recrystallisation, it is also less prone to being confused by diagenetic effects. Hung and Deng used Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy to analyse 69 bone samples from 11 pre-Neolithic sites in southern China, northern Vietnam, and Indonesia, as well as one premodern sample from Edo Castle. Five of the samples produced poor quality results, and were excluded from the study. Of the remaining 64 samples, eight showed no signs of having been heated, 33 showed signs of having been heated to low temperatures, and 23 showed signs of having been heated to high temperatures. Notably, different elements from the same skeletons did not always show the same degree of heating. For example, in skeleton M18 from Huiyaotian, the proximal end of the left ulna showed signs of having been heated to high temperatures, while the middle section of the same bone appeared to have been exposed to only moderate heating. Another skeleton, M1 from Mai Da, showed signs of strong heating to the talus (anklebone), but only moderate heating to a tooth. Such variation within a single skeleton is unlikely to have been caused by diagenetic processes. Notably, areas with minimal soft tissue covering again typically showed signs of greater heating.

Thus, evidence of heating was found in almost all of the bones in the sample, but the majority did not appear to have been heated to great temperatures, suggesting that such exposure was only sporadic and localised to certain parts of the skeleton. Interestingly, while some areas which appeared blackened also seemed to have been heated to high temperatures, this was by not always the case, suggesting that another cause, such as blackening by smoke, might be responsible.

Based upon this, Hung and Deng et al. conclude that the skeletons had undergone a form of heat treatment, prior to burial. During this process, most of the body was exposed to only moderate heat, and only certain parts were directly exposed to fire. Furthermore, much of the blackening observed might not stem from prolonged exposure to heat, but instead from prolonged exposure to smoke. This specialised mortuary practice appears to have been carried out across a wide area of South China and Southeast Asia.

Locations of nine sites with confirmed mummification by smoking identified in this study, along with two uncertain and four relevant sites. Burial samples from 11 sites were analysed, and confirmed that smoke-dried mummification occurred at nine of them: Huiyaotian, Liyupo, Hon Hai Co Tien, Cai Beo, Hang Mang Chieng, Mai Da Dieu, Hang Diem, Con Co Ngua, and Gua Harimau. Two other sites, Gaomiao and Hang Cho, remain uncertain due to their weaker Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy signals. Beyond the 11 primary study sites in China and Vietnam, the six ad￾ditional sites of Zengpiyan, Hang Muoi, Dong Can, Ille Cave, Niah West Mouth, and Song Terus, although not yet tested by X-ray diffraction or Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy, present strong evidence of comparable cultural practices. Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

Many prehistoric societies are best known from their burial practices, and this tends to be particularly true of those which modified bodies in some way before burying them. The Chinchorro culture of the Atacama Coast of South America are generally considered to have been the oldest practitioners of mummification. Between around 7000 and about 3700 years ago, they developed a practice in which bodies had their brains and viscera removed, and their limbs reinforced with sticks, before being deliberately desiccated by exposure to the arid climate, and having their faces coated with clay and painted. 

The Ancient Egyptians are probably the most famous example of a culture using mummification, due to the complex preservation methods they used, combined with monumental architecture and often lavish grave goods. Here too, mummification predates the dynastic period first appearing around 4500 years ago, where again a form of desiccation mummification was used in the Nile Valley.

The smoke mummification described by Hung and Deng et al. predates either of these examples by thousands of years, and apparently originating in an area with a humid monsoon climate. These mummies were produced by a hunter-gatherer society living in South China and Southeast Asia from the Late Pleistocene to the Middle Holocene, who predominantly buried articulated remains in caves, rock shelters, and shell middens. Many of these burials are associated with sites which are associated with the Hoabinhian Epipalaeolithic cultural assemblage of Southeast Asia, which includes pebble, core and flake tools, but which lacks blades and bifaces. Other sites in South China and northern Vietnam are associated with a 'para-Neolithic' culture, which had earthenware pottery and ground pebble axes, but which did not appear to practice any form of agriculture or Animal husbandry, and which left no stylistic remains. Unlike later burials from the true Neolithic, none of these burials were associated with any form of grave goods.

In order to try to better understand the mummification practice used in ancient South China and Southeast Asia, Hung and Deng et al. carried out an ethnographic visit to the Dani and Pumo peoples of Indonesian Papua, who live in the Bellem Valley of Jayawijaya Regency. The Dani traditionally made mummies by smoking a body until it turned entirely black, often in a tightly compressed position with the limbs bound to the trunk. This process is presumed to have been carried out soon after death, before rigor mortis set in, although there does appear to have been some flexibility about the process, with some bodies being preserved without binding. These mummified bodies were then stored in special rooms within the houses of the living, and brought out on special occasions. Importantly, the bodies were often bound in a very compact way, as was observed in Southeast Asia, and preserved by what appears to be a similar method of smoke mummification. 

Examples of smoked mummies kept in private households in Papua, Indonesia, photographed in January 2019. (A) A Dani hyper-flexed mummy; (B) A flexed mummy from Pumo Village. Both locations are in Wamena, Jayawijaya Regency, Papua. Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

The Anga (or Kukukuku) people of the Aseki region of Morobe Province in eastern Papua New Guinea, also practice a form of mummification, with revered figures such as warriors, shamans, and village leaders, being placed in a seated position on a frame over a constantly smoking fire, typically for about three months. Once the process is completed, the mummies are placed in a protected ledge or niche on a cliff.

Both of these examples appear to show a mummification practice similar to that used in ancient South China and Southeast Asia. However, in neither case is there any record of bodies being buried, or any indication as to what the ultimate fate of the mummies is.

Based upon these observations, Hung and Deng et al. suggest that many (but not all) of the individuals from South China and Southeast Asia which they examined are likely to have been tightly bound shortly after death, then suspended over low-temperature, smokey, fires for long periods of time. The occasional blackened and burned bones are probably the result of occasional loss of control over the fires during this lengthy process. It had previously been suggested that individuals may have been burned by fires set inside graves at Niah West Mouth and other sites, but Hung and Deng et al. could find no evidence to support this. Comparison to modern examples of similar practices in Papau suggest that this was carried out under a roof, potentially within a house or specially constructed hut. They also feel that it is likely that after being smoked, the body was transferred to a special site, such as a residence, cave, or rock shelter, where they would have remained on display for some time, potentially many years, before finally being buried. 

 Proposed scenario for prehistoric smoke-drying mummification, drawing on both archaeological findings and ethnographic parallels from Papua. The illustration shows the multi-step process of smoke-drying mummification, as ascertained through our study. (A) Preparation for the smoking ritual—corpses were bound to varying degrees, often in a hyper-flexed position; (B) Processing – the corpse could be bound, as shown in (A), or unbound, as shown in (B), based on a modern example in Papua New Guinea, while placed above a low-temperature fire. In the Late Pleistocene–Middle Holocene examples, all individuals were bound; (C) Post-smoking treatment – after the smoking was completed, then the smoked mummy was transferred to a residence, a specially constructed hut, a rock shelter, or a cave. In some cases, however, the mummy decayed due to prolonged exposure to open air. As seen in the example presented here, the head and body became separated; (D) Final burial – the smoked mummy eventually was buried. Most were intact at the time of burial. Some cases had decayed by this time in the process, and those remains were rearranged in the burial pit, sometimes appearing as suspected intentionally dismembered burials in the archaeological record. Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

Some of the individuals found at sites such as Dingsishan, Huiyaotian, and Liyupo in Guangxi, had anatomical anomalies, with parts of the bodies placed out of their natural, anatomical position, such as having the head placed within the thoracic cavity, of the legs in the place of the arms. These have previously been interpreted as evidence of intentional dismemberment, but Hung and Deng et al. suggest an alternative explanation, that these bodies may have been exposed so long that they began to decay, or that they became disarticulated while being transported from their display position to their final burial site. In this scenario, attempts at reconnecting the body may have been hurried, as the ultimate burial was not the purpose of the mummification, but the intervening period when the body was on display being more important.

Burials M6, M7, and M8 at the Huiyaotian site, Guangxi, southern China. This image shows a corner of the excavation area at Huiyaotian, excavated in 2011. The three burials - M6 (female aged 40 to 60 years), M7 (a middle-aged adult female), and M8 (an adult male) - were all found in a squatting position. Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

Having established the practice of mummification by smoking in ancient Southeast Asia, Hung and Deng et al. next consider the presence of cur marks on some skeletons, something which has been reported at many sites in Southeast Asia and Guanxi. These have previously been interpreted as signs of ritual dismemberment, but Hung and Deng et al. note that they are often concentrated around the epiphyses of major limb bones such as the humerus and femur, and suggest that they may represent interventions to enable joint release in bodies which had started to undergo rigor mortis prior to the beginning of the mummification process, which would have enabled tighter binding of the limbs. It is also possible that some may represent incisions made to enable the draining of body fluids during the smoking process.

Diagram showing the percentages of cut marks recorded different joints from theHuiyaotian sample of 19 individuals (excavated in 2016), Guangxi, southern China. The small rectangles indicate additional cut marks on long bones that are considered to be from flesh removal, mostly from the femur and tibia. Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

There are also a smaller group of marks, predominantly on the femora and tibiae, which appear consistent with some form of defleshing, probably carried out after the body had been mummified. Hung and Deng et al. note an ethnographic account of smoke mummification in South Australia, in which relatives sometimes removed small pieces of flesh from the thighs of bodies to offer to sorcerers, in exchange for magical protection or retribution. Such marks have been reported on burials from Huiyaotian in Guangxi, Ille Cave in Palawan, and other sites.

This all suggests a complex mortuary tradition dating back to over 10 000 years ago, involving smoke mummification, delayed burial, and, at least in some cases, ritual interactions with the preserved remains.

This practice appears to have been carried out over a huge geographical area, including South China, Southeast Asia, New Guinea, and Australia. It is likely that in many of these areas, which have predominantly wet tropical climates, smoking would have been the most effective way of preserving bodies. Nevertheless, the large geographical area and long period of time over which these practices persisted suggests that the activity had more significance than the simple preservation of bodies. Hung and Deng et al. note that the Anga people believe that the spirits of the deceased are able to roam freely during the day, but return to their bodies at night, while among the Taramindjeri people of South Australia, mummification has been linked to the possibility of immortality. They suggest that similar beliefs are likely to have been present in ancient South China and Southeast Asia, and that this is probably the cause of the long persistence of smoke mummification as a practice.

The final question that Hung and Deng et al. ask is whether there is direct continuity between the ancient smoke mummification practices of South China and Southeast Asia and similar practices in recent New Guinea and Australia. If there is, then this would represent a cultural practice dating back into the Pleistocene, which tracked the expansion of ancient Homo sapiens through the tropical latitudes of southern Asia, and which might potentially be tracked back to our first emergence from Africa. Alternatively, it might all just be a coincidence. 

Studies of genomic, craniofacial, and archaeological evidence have all suggested that the ancient, pre-Neolithic peoples of South China and Southeast Asia, and the ancestors of the modern indigenous populations of Papua and Australia, were related to the earliest Modern Humans to migrate out of Africa, and that they represent a distinct population from the later Neolithic farmers of the same region, who migrated from further north in Asia during the Holocene, eventually giving rise to the speakers of the modern Austroasiatic, Kra-Dai, and Austronesian language groups, amongst others. 

This more ancient population, sometimes referred to as 'first layer' occupiers, are considered to be ancestral to the modern Negrito peoples of the Andaman Islands, Peninsular Malaysia, and the Philippines, as well as  Indigenous Australians, New Guinea Papuans, and the ancient Jomon people of Japan. All of the mummified remains examined had craniofacial features consistent with belonging to this ancient 'first layer' population.

The two-layer model for Anatomically Modern Human (AMH) population movements across eastern Eurasia.The southern and northern major migration contexts for early Homo sapiens dispersal towards eastern Asia may have been separated by mountain ranges and deserts in central Asia. The southern route followed the coastal rim of the Indian subcontinent and continued onwards into the ancient Pleistocene continent of Sahul by at least 50 000 years ago. This southern migration was associated with a continuation of the Epipalaeolithic Hoabinhian pebble and flake tool complex, presumably a direct descendant of the Middle Palaeolithic industries introduced by the initial modern human inhabitants of this region. The northern route of early Homo sapiens dispersal is less clear, but in this scenario, it involved migration from western Eurasia across Siberia around 45 000 years ago. The descendants of this northern migration domesticated millet and rice after 9000 years ago in the Yellow and Yangtze valleys, and migrated south with their food producing economies to reach northern Mainland Southeast Asia by about 5000 years ago. Hung & Deng et al. (2025).

Given this scenario, it is possible that smoked mummification may have originated even earlier, and have been even more widespread, than currently identified. Several sites with flexed burials and partial burning have been documented at a number of Southeast Asian sites more than 12 000 years old. Examples from South China include Dayan, thought to be between 15 000 and 12 000 years old, Miaoyan, thought to be between 19 000 and 12 000 years old, Fengyan, potentially between 42 000 and 33 000 years old, Zhaoguodong, between 12 000 and 9000 years old, Huangmenyan, between 14 000 and 10 000 years old, while in Vietnam, a Human clavicle from such a burial has been directly dated to between 14 027 and 13 798 years before the present. 

Similar mortuary practices have also been recorded further north in Asia. These include the Initial Jomon Period in Japan, between 10 500 and 7000 years ago, the pre-farming period on Gadokto Island, Korea, between 6600 and 6300 years before the present, as well as some parts of the southern Korean Peninsula. Some sites in northern China have flexed burials, dating to between 13 000 and 10 000 years ago. Finally, the Sakhalin Ainu of the Russian Far East are recorded to have practised mummification by sun-drying as recently as the early 19th century.

Flexed burials have also been recorded from archaeological sites in Australia, such as the Broadbench Burial Ground of Queensland, which was excavated in the 1960s, although this has never been formally dated, instead being considered to be from 'Late Prehistory'.

Thus, there is clearly a biological and cultural continuity between the ancient 'first layer' peoples of South China and Southeast Asia, and the modern indigenous populations of Australia and New Guinea. This creates a compelling (but ultimately unprovable) case for the retention of smoke mummification as a custom among hunter-gatherer populations over a wide area and a vast span of time.

See also...

Officials from the Libyan Tourist Police and Antiquities Protection Agency protecting newly discovered rock art in the Jabal al-Hasawna mountains.

Officials from the Libyan Tourist Police and Antiquities Protection Agency are protecting a series of newly discovered rock engravings in the Jabal al-Hasawna mountains. The rock art was discovered by a Libyan citizen who notified the offices of the agency in Sabha, the nearest city. They are currently under investigation by experts from the Fezzan Antiquities Authority, the Archaeology Department at Sabha University, and the Brak Al-Shati Security Directorate, with a view to determining their historical significance, and how they can best be protected.

Newly discovered rock art in the Jabal al-Hasawna mountains of Libya. Libyan Tourist Police and Antiquities Protection Agency.

The new discoveries include artworks in a number of styles previously described from elsewhere in the Sahara, including art attributed to the Buffalo or Large Wild Fauna Period (so called because the art often features Giant Buffalo, Syncerus antiquus, and other extinct African megafauna). This artwork was created between 12 000 and 8000 BC by hunter gatherer populations living in a still green Sahara, and comprises geometric shapes and images of Animals such as Antelope, Aurochs, Buffalo, Fish, Giraffe, Hippopotamus, Ostrich, and Rhinoceros, painted onto wall panels with clay, manganese, iron oxide, and organic dyes. Examples of Buffalo Period rock art are found across Morocco, Algeria, and Tunisia, and are particularly abundant in the Fezzan Region of southwestern Libya, and around Oued Djerat in the northern part of the Tassili N'Ajjer, Algeria.

Also present is art from the Round Head Period, which was produced by Epipalaeolithic and Mesolithic hunter gatherers from about 7550 to about 5050 BC. Round Head art is painted onto or pecked into rock panel surfaces, and depicts Animals such as Antelope and Barbary Sheep alongside stylised Human figures with rounded heads, often engaged in dancing or other ritual activities. The best known examples of Round Head art come from the Tassili Plateau of southern Algeria, over a thousand kilometres to the southwest of the Jabal al-Hasawna, but examples are also known from the Tadrat Akakas of Libya, and the Djado Plateau of Niger. 

Art from the younger Bovidian, or Pastoral Period, has also been reported. This art style first appears around 6000 BC, and persist to about 700 BC (although most dates to between 5200 and 3800 BC), and contains the first examples of Animal-herding (pastoralism), and depicts Human figures with domestic Animals such as Cattle, Sheep, and Goats, as well as wild Animals such as Antelope, Barbary Sheep, Elephant, and Ostrich. Pastoral Period art contains the oldest known examples of domestic scenes, including women and children, in the Sahara, and is thought to have been made by Neolithic pastoralists migrating seasonally with their herds. The first Pastoral Period art was created while the Sahara was still green, while the latest was made in a desert environment. Over the period the wild Animals depicted in this art reflect this changing climate, as do the locations where it was placed, reflecting changing migration routes as the landscape dried. Examples of Pastoral Period art are common in southwestern Libya and the neighbouring Tassili n'Ajjer area of Algeria.

Younger Horse Period art has also been reported in the Jabal al-Hasawna. This style, dated to between 1200 BC and about 1000 AD, depicts people on Horses and in Chariots, and as well as the first people wearing cloths in Saharan rock art. This style is known from the Tassili n'Ajjer area of Algeria.

Camel Period art appears around 1000 BC and continues to the end of the first millennium BC. This style of art depicts the first Camels in the Sahara, but also domestic Animals such as Cattle and Goats. Men in Camel Period art are often armed with swords, spears, and shields. Examples of Camel Period art are known from Libya, Algeria, and Chad.

See also...

Successful genotyping of two end-Pleistocene, Palaeolithic, individuals from Britain.

The warming period after the Last Glacial Maximum saw radical shifts in the distribution of Animals and Plants in Europe, and with it an expansion of both Human populations and their cultural diversity. However, while the importance of this interval is well understood, we have relatively little evidence from this time.

Improvements in genotyping ancient remains have enabled scientists to study ever older populations in recent years, with the ability now including individuals from the Late Pleistocene of Europe. Such studied have exposed shifts in genetic patterns within populations, exposing Human migrations that were not clear from the conventional archaeological record. One of the more notable of these newly discovered population shifts occurred between the Last Glacial Maximum, approximately 23 000 years ago, and the onset of the Holocene Epoch, which is placed at 11 700 years before the present. During this shift, populations belonging the 'Goyet Q2' ancestry group, named after the 15 090-year-old Goyet Q2 individual from Belgium were replaced with populations belonging to the 'Villabruna' ancestry group, named after the approximately 14 010-year-old Villabruna individual from Italy. 

The Goyet Q2 ancestry group has been shown to include the roughly 18 700-year-old El Mirón individual from Spain, as well as other individuals associated with the ancient Magdalenian Culture, which is found at archaeological sites dated to between about 20 500 years ago and about 14 000 years ago across Europe. It has been suggested that this group represents individuals descended from a population from a southwest European glacial refugia, which spread across Europe as the glaciers covering the continent retreated.

The Villabruna ancestry group, also known as the Western Hunter Gatherers, includes a range of individuals found across Europe, dating to between about 14 000 and about 7000 years ago. This genotype group has been associated with individuals from archaeological sites associated with Epigravettian, Azilian/Federmesser, Epipalaeolithic and Mesolithic cultures. While this ancestry group is considered to be entirely European in distribution, all of the individuals assigned to it also show genetic affinities to modern Near Eastern populations. The expansion of this population has been linked to the onset of the rapid warming phase known as the Late Glacial Interstadial, about 14 650 years ago, as well as the cultural transition that saw the Magdalenian/Late Upper Palaeolithic culture replaced by the Azilian/Federmesser-Gruppen/Final Palaeolithic culture, and has been suggested to have been linked to a new group of people migrating into Europe during this warming phase.

Curiously, individuals of mixed Goyet Q2/Villabruna ancestry are also known from southern Europe, first appearing about 18 700 years ago, with the El Mirón individual. This has led to the suggestion that European Humans were confined to a few isolated refugia in the southern part of the continent during the Last Glacial Maximum, but that there was some genetic and cultural exchange between these refugia. However, the fact that people with unadmixed Goyet Q2 genotypes were living in Europe as late as 14 000 years ago suggests that this interchange was very limited, and that high levels of isolation persisted through the Last Glacial Maximum and into the Late Glacial. 

There is also evidence of people living north of the Alps during the Last Glacial Maximum, migrating from east to west, and remaining in ice-marginal environments. These people have been linked to the Magdalenian culture, which would fit with the model of the Goyet Q2 ancestry group being Magdalenian hunter gatherers, who retreated into northern Europe as the climate warmed, possibly following herds of Reindeer or Horses. South of the Alps, species such as Red Deer persisted throughout the Last Glacial Maximum and Late Glacial, creating a wider range of ecological opportunities for Human hunter gatherers, and thereby allowing greater population admixture in this region. 

The northwesternmost limit of this post-glacial expansion reached Britain, of which two thirds were covered with ice during the Last Glacial Maximum. Britain deglaciated rapidly, leading to accelerated ecological and environmental changes. By 19 000 years ago the ice sheet which had covered much of Britain and Ireland was melting rapidly, with England and Wales being free of ice by about 16 000 years ago. Reindeer are known to have been present in southwest England by 17 000 years ago, living in a landscape dominated by open steppe–tundra vegetation. The earliest evidence for Human occupation in post-glacial Britain comes from about 15 500 years ago, with populations probably established in several areas by the onset of the Late Glacial Interstadial, 14 650 years ago. Current dating suggests that Britain was repopulated after the nearby Paris Basin and the Belgian Ardennes, possibly by people expanding from those regions. The Magdalenian toolset used by these earliest colonisers was similar to that used in the northern Netherlands and the lowlands of northern Germany and Poland. Nevertheless, the amount of archaeological material we have from Britain during this period is extremely limited, restricting the the inferences that can be made about this population.

Genetic analysis techniques have been applied to Mesolithic, Neolithic, and Bronze Age individuals from Britain, but not, to date, to individuals from the Palaeolithic. This is, at least in part, due to the extremely limited nature of the Palaeolithic skeletal record, with such material only having been recovered from only six sites across Britain. The position of this population, at the extreme fringe of the post-Late Glacial Maximum European expansion, means that they can potentially tell us a great deal about the movement of Human populations during this time. All Mesolithic British individuals genotyped to date have belonged to the Villabrauna population, suggesting that this group had reached the northwesternment fringe of Europe by about 10 500 years ago. It is not clear, however, just when these people arrived in Britain, or what the genetic affinities of the Palaeolithic populations of Britain were. The apparent link between the Goyet 2 ancestry group and the Magdalenian culture leads to the hypothesis that these earliest settlers in Britain belonged to that group, but this has not, to date, been tested.

In a paper published in the journal Nature Ecology and Evolution on 24 October 2022, a team of scientists led by Sophy Charlton of the School of Archaeology at the University of Oxford and the Natural History Museum, Selina Brace, also of the Natural History Museum, and Mateja Hajdinjak of the Ancient Genomics Laboratory a the Francis Crick Institute, present the results of analysis of the DNA of two individuals from the Late Palaeolithic of England and Wales, and discuss the implications of their results. 

The first individual included in the study came from Kendrick’s Cave, which is located on Great Orme’s Head, a limestone massif in Llandudno, North Wales. This cave yielded four individuals, three adults and a child, which have been radiocarbon dated to between 11 990 and 11 905 years before the present. As well as the Human remains, the site yielded a range of artefacts which have been linked to the Magdalenian culture, including the proximal portion of a broken blade with en éperon butt preparation, a cut-marked Bovine bone dated to about 14 500 years before the present, a decorated Horse mandible dated to about 12 900 years before the present, and beads made from the teeth of Brown Bear,  Aurochs and Red Deer. 

The first molar from the mandible of the one individual (Kendricks_074, the skeleton dated to 11 905 years before the present) from Kendrick's Cave was subjected to DNA analysis. In addition, samples a were taken from all four Kendrick's Cave skeletons for  carbon and nitrogen isotope analysis. This isotopic analysis provided insight into the diet of the individuals, which suggested a diet rich resources obtained from marine or freshwater sources. This is known to have an impact on radiocarbon dating, leading to a revised date for Kendricks_074 of 13 770 to 13 390 years before the present, and a revised occupancy period for the cave, starting between 16 410 and 14 070 years before the present, and ending between 13 730 and 13 140 years ago. 

The mandible of Kendricks_074. Rhiannon Stevens/Institute of Archaeology, University College London.

The second individual included in the study comes from Gough’s Cave, part of a large cave system situated in Cheddar Gorge in Somerset, southwest England. Gough's Cave is one of the best known Palaeolithic sites in Britain, with a large assemblage of both stone tools and Animal remains. Occupancy at the site is thought to have begun at the beginning of the Late Glacial Interstadial, as temperatures in the region began to rise rapidly. The technology present comprises a mixture of late Magdalenian and early Federmesser-Gruppen tools. At least six Palaeolithic Humans were buried here (one child, two adolescents, and three adults), as well as a later, Mesolithic individual (famous as 'Cheddar Man'). Two of the Palaeolithic Humans have been directly radiocarbon dated, and all show signs of considerable postmortem modification, interpreted as signs of cannibalism, and the modification of skulls to manufacture drinking cups. Based upon the radiocarbon dates obtained and the technologies present in the cave, the Palaeolithic occupation of Gough's Cave is thought to have lasted from about 14 840 to about 14 680 years ago - less than 200 years.

One of the human skulls carefully shaped into a cup or bowl by the people who lived at Gough's Cave 14,700 years ago. Natural History Museum.

Charlton et al. obtained sample DNA from a Human temporal bone (PVM 96544) from Gough's Cave, as well as carrying out new radiocarbon dating on this and other material from the site. The new radiocarbon data was used to obtain a revised occupation period for the cave, starting between 15 070 and 14 850 years ago, and ending between 14 960 and 14 610 years ago. This new dating suggests that occupation began before the onset of the Late Glacial Interstadial warming.

None of the Human material from Gough's and Kendrick's caves shows overlapping dates. However, the modified Bovid bone from Kendrick's Cave does overlap chronologically with the Human remains from Gough's Cave, suggesting that both sites were occupied simultaneously for at least some of the period. The two individuals included in the study were separated in time by at least 600 years (assuming no seafood was consumed in either party's diet), but this could potentially be as high as 840-1200 years.

Charlton et al. recovered 15 497 unique fragments of mitochondrial DNA and 30 587 614 unique fragments of nuclear DNA from the Gough's Cave individual, representing about 23% of the total genome. From the Kendrick's Cave individual they recovered 9702 unique fragments of mitochondrial DNA, and 29 326 159 unique fragments of nuclear DNA, representing about 18% of the total genome. 

ecause mitochondrial DNA is found in the mitochondria, organelles outside the cell nucleus, it is passed directly from mother to child without being sexually recombined each generation, enabling precise estimations of when individuals shared common ancestors, at least through the female line, forming a mitochondrial haplogroup. It is also possible to trace direct ancestry through the male line, using DNA from the Y chromosome, which is passed directly from father to son without sexual recombination, forming a Y-chromosome haplogroup.

The mitochondrial DNA recovered was sufficient to assign both individuals to mitochondrial haplogroups. The Gough's Cave individual belongs to the U8a haplogroup, while the Kendrick's Cave individual belongs to the U5a2 haplogroup. The U8a haplogroup has not been previously recorded in Britain, but is the haplogroup to which the Goyet Q2 individual belongs, as well as individuals associated with Magdalenian artefacts at several archaeological sites, including those at Hohle Fels and Brillenhöhle in Germany. The U5 haplogroup has been recorded at several Mesolithic sites in Britain, including one from Kent's Cavern who shares the U5a2 haplogroup variant. 

It was also possible to determine the sex of both individuals, with the Gough's Cave individual being female, and the Kendrick's Cave individual being male. Interestingly, the Kendrick's Cave individual had been recorded as 'male' in the original description of the skeleton, although no reason was ever given for this.

The nuclear genome of the Gough's Cave individual is close to that of the Goyet Q2 individual, placing that individual within the Goyet Q2 ancestry group. The Kendrick's Cave individual clusters with individuals from the Villabrauna ancestry group, including Mesolithic individuals from Britain; to date all Mesolithic individuals from Britain have belonged exclusively to the Villabrauna ancestry group, with the exception of 'Cheddar Man' (who was also recovered from Gough's Cave), who's ancestry was 84.6% Villabrauna and 15.4% Goyet Q2.

Location, genetic ancestry and Accelerator Mass Spectrometry date of End Palaeolithic European individuals. (a) Map indicating the location of Pleistocene sites and the genetic ancestry of individuals analysed from them. (b) North Greenland Ice Core Project ice core δ¹⁸O values and event stratigraphy, genetic ancestry and date  of individuals (95% confidence interval of calibrated radiocarbon dates for directly dated Humans). The Gough’s Cave and Höhle Fels specimens are not directly dated and therefore for Höhle Fels specimen the age range shown is the 95% confidence interval of calibrated radiocarbon dates from bones recovered from the same area/context. For the Gough’s Cave specimen, the age range shown is the Bayesian modelled site occupation start and end dates based on Accelerator Mass Spectrometry dating of the Human remains and Human modified faunal remains. Charlton et al. (2022).

The genetic and radiocarbon dating evidence obtained by Charlton et al. indicates that two genetically distinct populations of Humans were present in Britain during the Late Glacial period. The individual sampled from Gough's Cave showed clear affinity to the Goyet Q2 ancestry group, while the Kendrick's Cave individual clearly grouped with the Villabrauna group. Neither individual showed any genetic admixture, although the Gough's Cave tool assemblage does appear to be of mixed origins, containing both late Magdalenian and early Federmesser-Gruppen technologies. Furthermore, the only lithic tool from Kendrick's Cave clearly fits with the Magdalenian technology, while the individual sampled from the same location belonged to the Villabrauna ancestry group, typically associated with the Epigravettian and Azilian/Federmesser technologies. However, the decorative objects from Kendrick's Cave are similar to items from Federmesser-Gruppen sites in Europe. This may indicate that the boundaries between cultures were not so rigid at this time as generally assumed, or even that the populations at both sites contained a mixture of Humans from both cultures, but this has not been captured by sampling only one individual from each group. What the study does clearly demonstrate is that the Villabrauna ancestry group had clearly reached Britain by the Late Glacial, though whether there is a continuity with Holocene populations belonging to the same group, or whether they represent a subsequent second migration to the island after the Younger Dryas cooling event (between 12 900 and 11 700 years ago) is unclear.

The Younger Dryas represents a significant interlude between the temperate climate of the Late Glacial and that of the Holocene. During this interval ice sheets spread southward from Scotland, and Reindeer become the most common Animal remains found in caves in southwest Britain. At the moment, there are no Human remains from Britain which can be assigned to the Younger Dryas interval by radiocarbon dating, though it is unclear if this represents a lack of (discovered) preserved material or an actual absence of Humans. If there really were no Humans present in Britain during this period, then the subsequent Villabrauna populations must represent a second migration of that group into Britain. Furthermore, whilst the Villabrauna ancestry group appears to be dominant in Britain during the Mesolithic, at least one individual is known to be of mixed heritage, possibly suggesting that the cultural changes that led to the Mesolithic involved a degree of blending between groups.

Britain is not the only area where both Late Palaeolithic European populations are present, the same has been observed in Iberia, where individuals with mixed heritage are present at El Mirón in Spain from about 18 770 years ago. However, while both populations have been detected in Britain, no trace of genetic admixture has (yet) been discovered in the Palaeolithic, which may indicate a more dramatic population turnover.

These two Late Palaeolithic populations from Britain lived somewhere between 600 and 12 000 years apart, and, as well as being genetically different, appear to have had different diets, based upon stable isotope analysis of skeletal material from the two sites. They also appear to have had quite different approaches to the handling of the dead, with modification of remains and possible cannibalism present at Gough's Cave but not at Kendrick's Cave. This does suggest that a considerable degree of cultural, as well as genetic, turnover was occurring during a time of known climatic and ecological shifts, again, something seen elsewhere in Europe.

The very limited supply of skeletal material from the Late Pleistocene of Britain, along with the rate at which DNA degrades in deceased individuals, means that there will never be a very clear picture of the genetic make-up of these populations. However, a limited amount of information is not zero, and Charlton et al. have demonstrated that useful studies can be done on Late Pleistocene genetics in Britain, raising the potential that we yet learn more about this subject.

See also...

Follow Sciency Thoughts on Facebook.

Follow Sciency Thoughts on Twitter.

Lithic technologies at the onset of the Neolithic in the Lesser Khingan Mountains of Northeast China.

The long-term and historically contingent transition from Palaeolithic to Neolithic lifestyles, or Neolithisation, has long been a key issue in archaeological studies, and remains the subject of ongoing debate. The emergence of pottery is often used to define the beginning of the Neolithic period, especially in Russia and Japan. In China, the pre-Holocene material culture associated with early pottery is often attributed to the Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period although it is also sometimes described as late Upper Palaeolithic. In recent decades, studies of the Neolithisation process in China, Russia and Japan have begun to give greater attention to the importance of establishing more secure chronologies and to the climatic and environmental context of these changes. 

In a paper published in the journal Antiquity on 15 July 2019, Jian-Ping Yue of the Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins at the  Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, and the University of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, You-Qian Li of the Heilongjiang Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology, and Shi-Xia Yang, also of the Key Laboratory of Vertebrate Evolution and Human Origins at the  Institute of Vertebrate Paleontology and Paleoanthropology of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the Center for Excellence in Life and Paleoenvironment, and of the Department of Archaeology at the Max Planck Institute for the Science of Human History, describe the results of excavations at two sites in the Lesser Khingan Mountains of Northeastern China, and the implications of these findings for our understanding of Neolithisation in East Asia.

Northeast China sits between the Korean Peninsula, the Russian Far East, north China and Hokkaido Island. Covering several geological areas, including the Khingan Mountains, Changbaishan Mountains, the Song-Nen Plain, the Sanjiang Plain and the Liaohe Plain, north-east China is separated from north China by the Great Wall. Previous research on this region and its abundant palaeoenvironmental evidence has revealed climatic and environmental changes in the terminal Late Pleistocene. Thus, the region offers an ideal context in which to study the adaptive behaviours of hunter-gatherers and the Neolithisation process. The Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period industries of north-east China, however, are relatively poorly understood, due to a lack of intensive archaeological survey and excavation in the region. In recent years, this picture has gradually improved as archaeological materials have been identified in stratified, datable contexts, such as at the sites of Houtaomuga and Taoshan.

Over the last decade in the southern Lesser Khingan Mountains of north-east China, archaeologists from the Heilongjiang Provincial Institute of Cultural Relics and Archaeology have conducted a series of archaeological surveys in advance of local highway reconstruction projects. This work identified several archaeological sites with associated Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period  assemblages, leading to formal excavations at Huayang and Taoshan. Yue et al. present reports on these two sites, with a particular focus on the lithic assemblages that extend across the Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period boundary. Both sites are stratified and securely dated, and contain cultural remains dating from roughly 18 000 to 5000 years ago (16 000 to 3000 BC). Together, the sites offer a comprehensive view of the Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period lithic industry, allowing an assessment of long-term human behaviour in this region. Yue et al. present these results in relation to the regional archaeological evidence and the context of pre-Holocene climatic and environmental changes in Northeastern Asia.

Topographic map of north-east China showing the excavation areas of the Huayang and Taoshan sites. Yue et al. (2019).

The Huayang site is situated in Heilongjiang Province at approximately 180 m above sealevel and 20m above the local river, on the second terrace of the Tangwanghe River. Discovered in 2011, the site was excavated the following year as a salvage archaeology project under the direction of You-Qian Li. Three excavation areas and many test pits were opened, covering almost 1000 m² of the site, which itself is estimated to cover more than 70 000 m². The main excavation area covers around 560 m², divided into 24 squares labelled from A–V. In addition, another square (MK) was opened as an extension of square M, in response to the discovery of a high-density distribution of lithic artefacts.

Photograph showing the excavation area of the Huayang site. Yue et al. (2019).

In addition to the modern plough soil, three prehistoric cultural layers were identified, labelled CL1, CL2 and CL3. Accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon measurements date CL1 to 5992–5916 before the present, CL2 to 14 355–14 025 before the present and CL3 to 18 614–17 885 before the present. The Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period cultural layer (CL2) yielded a few pottery sherds and a significant number of lithic artefacts (25 090), the latter forming the principal lithic assemblage of the site.

The Taoshan site is also located in  Heilongjiang Province, on the southern slope of the Taoshan Mountains, approximately 500m from the Hulan River. The site is 241 m above sealevel and approximately 21 m above the local river. Taoshan was discovered in 2011 and excavated in 2013–2014. A total of 36 m² was uncovered, yielding 2908 stone artefacts, 71 pottery shards and five bead fragments made from amazonite. Three prehistoric layers were identified and accelerator mass spectrometry radiocarbon dated. From top to bottom, layer 2 dates to 5588–5051 before the present, layer 3 dates to 15 172–14 044 before the present and layer 4 dates to 19 156–16 557 before the present. Layer 3 corresponds with the Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period and yielded 2281 lithic artefacts and 12 pottery shards.

Photograph showing the excavation area of the Taoshan site. Yue et al. (2019).

Analysis of the lithic assemblage from Huayang includes tools, blades, microblades and related fragments of all sizes. Due to the large quantity of debitage, lithics smaller than 10 mm (of which there were 6613) were excluded from the analysis. The material examined therefore comprises 18 477 artefacts larger than 10 mm from CL2. A techno-typological approach was used to develop an understanding of lithic raw material procurement and exploitation, blank manufacture and tool production at the site.

Rhyolites, comprising predominantly banded rhyolite and felsite, serve as the primary raw material at Huayang, accounting for 90.25 per cent of the lithic assemblage. Shale, dacite and tuff were also procured in relatively large quantities. Other raw materials, such as agate, chert, sandstone and andalusite-hornfels, are present in small amounts. A geological survey of the site and surroundings and a follow-up petrological study were undertaken to document procurement sources. The results suggest that all the lithic raw materials at Huayang were available in close proximity (within 5 km) of the site.

Several methods of debitage production were found at the Huayang site. These can be classified largely into debitage from core-flake, bladelet and microblade production. The presence of predetermined products, such as blades and microblades, informs of the processes that produced the debitage. Although bipolar reduction was occasionally applied for agate and crystal exploitation at the site, it is relatively scarce.

Core-flake reduction is particularly prominent at Huayang and is represented by cores, core fragments, flakes and flake fragments. Rhyolite, chert, dacite and a few other materials were procured. Pebbles, cobbles and blocks were preferentially selected for blanks, as well as some thick flakes. Most of the cores exhibit a simple debitage process, with one or two platforms present. Only two truncated-facetted pieces have been identified; these are flakes that exhibit a truncation face, which serves as a platform for the removal of one or more small flakes.

Cores from the Huayang site. Yue et al. (2019).

Bladelet production is well represented at the site. The bladelet cores can be divided into two main types: prismatic and narrow-faced. These cores appear to have been made exclusively on felsite blocks, and most exhibit a partially retained natural surface. The debitage indicates that full advantage was taken of blank morphology. The debitage surface was usually not elaborately prepared, and the initial blade extraction followed the natural convexities of the core. Preparation of the platform prior to blade removal was common. Indirect percussion was used for bladelet removal.

Microblade debitage is present, although the number of microblades is small. The microblade cores, represented by two pieces, are bifacially shaped, exhibiting a wedge-like morphology. Microblades were detached from the elaborately prepared platform along one end of the core.

Bladelet and microblade cores from the Huayang site: (a)–(e) bladelet core; (f)–(g) microblade core. Yue et al. (2019).

The toolkit at Huayang includes a great diversity of tool types and technical features. The most frequently represented tools are bifacial points, with 138 complete and broken pieces identified. Approximately 91.3% of the bifacial points are broken and some can be conjoined. Banded rhyolite is the most frequently used raw material (94.93%). Themorphology of the points shows a high degree of standardisation, characterised by a pointed or elliptical base, and a V-shaped point with straight or slightly curved sides. Initially, the blanks were made by hard-hammer percussion, and subsequently retouched using a soft hammer.

Stone tools from the Huayang site: (a)–(b) arrowhead; (c) point on bladelet; (d) borer; (e)–(f) convex scraper; (g) bifacial point; (h) backed scraper. Dark red scale bars are 10mm. Yue et al. (2019).

Scrapers are represented by 44 pieces, most of which have one cutting edge, with some showing continuous and elaborate retouch. Arrowheads (5) are small with an average maximum length of 25.57 mm. These pieces are partially bifacially retouched by softhammer percussion and pressure flaking. A small quantity of additional implements, such as notches, points, denticulates, choppers and awls, were also retrieved. Overall, most of the aforementioned formal tools selected flakes as blanks; only three pieces were manufactured on bladelets. Rhyolite dominates the assemblage, along with some chert, dacite and tuff.

Some Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period tools, including axes, adzes and chisels, have also been identified at Huayang. These pieces are made on tuffaceous sandstone, quartzite and diorite, reflecting different raw material preferences and exploitation strategies. Some pieces, particularly the stone chisels, also show evidence of grinding, which is further attested by the presence of two grinding stones. Tabular cobbles in sandstone and quartzite sandstone were selected as grinding stones and show clear traces of ground-stone tool production.

Grinding stones (a)–(b) and ground-stone chisels (c)–(d) from the Huayang site. Yue et al. (2019).

The Taoshan lithic assemblage is dominated by crystal tuff, with lesser amounts of rhyolite and andalusite-hornfels. Other raw material types (e.g. chert, quartz sandstone and agate) are present in smaller quantities. Field survey and statistical analysis of the presence of cortex indicate that almost all the raw materials were taken from the local riverbed.

Flakes and flake fragments constitute the dominant artefact type at Taoshan, while cores of flake debitage are represented by only two pieces, showing a simple debitage method without preparation. Yue et al. therefore suggest that most of the flakes result from the shaping out of microcores—the primary activity at the site.

Lithic artefacts from the Taoshan site: (a)–(b) flake core; (c)–(f) microblade core; g) broken bifacial point; (h) adze; (i) axe. Yue et al. (2019).

Microblade debitage is well represented by six wedge-shaped microblade cores and a series of characteristic debitage products. The blanks are on cobbles or flakes and were shaped using bifacial percussion. The platform was formed with successive transverse preparation and subsequent removal of longitudinal spalls. Microblades were detached by pressure flaking, following the removal of the crested blade, the first bladelet that displays negatives of the bifacial shaping of the core.

Although the Taoshan assemblage contains a relatively small quantity of formal tools, various types have been identified and demonstrate similarities with those of Huayang. Along with some retouched pieces, such as scrapers, denticulates, end-scrapers and notches, relatively large-sized domestic tools, including adzes and axes, have been identified. These pieces were made on cobbles in tuff and andalusite-hornfels, and achieved morphological standardisation through progressive shaping, although they show no evidence of grinding. A single broken bifacial point was also recovered from Taoshan.

The sites of Huayang and Taoshan are located in the southern Lesser Khingan Mountains, approximately 100 km from each other, and are almost contemporaneous, with assemblages exhibiting clear technological similarities. In terms of raw material procurement, igneous rocks were preferentially selected, followed by shale, chert, agate and andalusite-hornfels. All raw materials were obtained from local primary or secondary sources and show clear procurement management strategies. Banded rhyolite, for example, was primarily procured for bifacial point production, while felsite was mainly used for bladelets at Huayang. Several reduction sequences were used at both sites. Flake debitage demonstrates a predominantly simple reduction method, with little evidence for elaborate core preparation. Microblade debitage is characteristic of the bifacial shaping-out of wedge-shaped microblade cores. The toolkits of these two sites are also similar in the types of tool represented and in the evidence for the addition of new forms, including adzes, axes and chisels. There is also a notable presence of early pottery at both sites.

Nonetheless, there are some distinctions in blank debitage and tool production between the two sites. Bladelets and bifacial points, for example, constitute significant components of the Huayang Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period assemblage, while at Taoshan the lithic industry is characterised by microblade technology, with no evidence of bladelets and only a single bifacial point. What, then, might explain the differences between the two assemblages? At other contemporaneous sites in north-east China, blade and microblade items serve as common features of the regional Late Pleistocene lithic industries. Yue et al. note that at the Huayang site, cores and tools of different raw material types, selected for their particular knapping qualities, are found in distinct parts of the excavation area. Felsite, for example, which was used predominantly for bladelet and core-flake production, is concentrated in the southern area, while banded rhyolite, which was used mainly for bifacial point production, concentrates in the western part. Regardless of the small excavation area at Taoshan, it is reasonable to deduce that an uneven spatial distribution of lithic artefacts could explain the lack of blade and bifacial points found at the site. In sum, the lithic assemblages of Huayang and Taoshan site can be clustered into the same techno-complex, which collectively represent the Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period lithic industries in the southern Lesser Khingan Mountains.

The Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period lithic evidence from Huayang and Taoshan demonstrates important technological innovations and developments of the earlier lithic industry, especially the production of adzes, axes and chisels and the initial application of grinding techniques. On the basis of a systematic analysis of the lithic raw materials of Taoshan it has been suggested that a decrease in population mobility was concurrent with greater exploitation of more local raw materials.

In addition to changes in tool types and mobility patterns, a transformation in subsistence strategies is also evidenced by the presence of early pottery in the Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period cultural layers at Huayang and Taoshan. Sherds of sand-tempered vessels fired at low temperatures were recovered from both sites. The development of ceramic containers is suggested to have provided prehistoric hunter-gatherers with new strategies for storing, processing and consuming foodstuffs. Isotopic analysis of charred residues on the early pottery sherds (dated to 13 000 to 11 000 before the present) from the Houtaomuga site on the Song-Nen Plain of north-east China suggests that freshwater fish may have been a major component of the local diet.

Similar changes in technology and subsistence have also been identified in adjacent regions of North-eastern Asia, particularly the Russian Far East and Hokkaido. Early pottery has been widely reported in the Russian Far East, particularly from the Oshipovka Culture layers along the lower Amur River, at such sites as Gasya, Khummi, Goncharka 1, Novotroitskoe 10 and Oshinovaya-rechika 16. Together, these sites suggest a use-life ranging from 14 000 to 12 000 before the present. The earliest pottery on Hokkaido is reported from the Taisho 3 site, is associated with projectile points, burins and axes, and dates from 15 030 to 13 570 years ago. New technological innovations, including stemmed points and axes, also developed contemporaneously in both Hokkaido and the Russian Far East, and are accompanied by the miniaturisation of microblades and a higher frequency in burin (stone tools with chisel points) maintenance. Although local lithic raw materials replaced non-local materials, tool type and inter-site assemblage variability increased.

A combined focus on climatic conditions and cultural developments highlights the important role of environmental changes in the course of the Neolithisation of this region. North-eastern Asia is located on the northern boundary of the modern Asian monsoonal systemand is highly sensitive to rapid changes in climate. A series of high-resolution palaeoclimatic records clearly characterise the vegetation history and climatic variability during the terminal Late Pleistocene, which includes prominent climatic phases, such as the Last Glacial Maximum, the Bølling-Allerød warm phase and the Younger Dryas cold event. Pollen analysis of samples from Taoshan also reveals substantial change in vegetation from a steppe environment, during the layer 4 period (Last Glacial Maximum), to dense forest in layer 3. This change is attributed to increasing precipitation and rising temperature concurrent with the start of the Bølling-Allerød warm phase.

During the Late Glacial phase (15 000 to 11 700 years before present), climatic and environmental conditions changed significantly, which led to an improvement in landscape productivity and a noticeable alteration in plant and animal resources. The population density seems to have increased, as attested by the higher number of archaeological sites and larger amounts of intrasite material remains in the area. Thus, the imbalance between population and available resources could have accelerated over time. All of these factors probably contributed directly to the Neolithisation process, as they enabled local populations to develop new, innovative subsistence strategies and behaviours. During this period, the mobility of prehistoric populations tended to decrease while exploitation of locally available resources, not only faunal and floral resources but also lithic raw materials, intensified. Several technologies indicative of resource intensification (e.g. pottery, axes and adzes) appeared in North-eastern Asia, signalling the beginning of a new period: the Neolithic.

Here, we have focused on the Palaeolithic-to-Neolithic transition period lithic assemblages from the Huayang and Taoshan sites in the southern Lesser Khingan Mountains of northeast China. Analysis of the assemblages in combination with contemporaneous material from adjacent regions, particularly the Russian Far East and Hokkaido Island, demonstrates both a uniformity of the trajectory of the Neolithisation process in North-eastern Asia and a close connection with environmental shifts during the Late Glacial phase. These analyses enrich our understanding of the nature, course and geographic extent of Neolithisation in both north-east China and Northeastern Asia more widely, and facilitate comparative study with neighbouring regions, such as north China, where the Neolithisation process followed a different trajectory.

See also...

Follow Sciency Thoughts on Facebook.