Documenta Praehistorica XLII (2015)
The origins of pottery in East Asia: updated analysis (the 2015 state-of-the-art)
Yaroslav V. Kuzmin
Institute of Geology and Mineralogy, Siberian Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk/ Laboratory of Mesozoic and Cenozoic Continental Ecosystems, Tomsk State University, Tomsk, RU
kuzmin@fulbrightmail.org
ABSTRACT - Recent developments related to the emergence of pottery in East Asia and neighbouring regions are presented. According to a critical evaluation of the existing evidence, the oldest centres with pottery in East Asia are situated in South China (dated to c. 18 000 calBP), the Japanese Islands (c. 16 700 calBP), and the Russian Far East (c. 15 900 calBP). It is most likely that pottery-making appeared in these regions independently of each other. In Siberia, the earliest pottery now known is from the Transbaikal region (dated to c. 14 000 calBP). However, it did not influence the more westerly parts of Siberia in terms of the origin and spread of pottery-making.
IZVLEČEK - Predstavljamo najnovejši razvoj študij pojava lončarstva v Vzhodni Aziji in sosedstvu. S pomočjo kritične presoje podatkov lahko sklepamo, da so najstarejši centri z lončenino v Vzhodni Aziji umeščeni v južno Kitajsko (ok. 18 000 calBP), Japonsko otočje (ok. 16 700 calBP) in Daljni Vzhod Rusije (ok. 15900 calBP). Zelo verjetno se je izdelava lončenine v teh regijah pojavila neodvisno druga od druge. V Sibiriji je najstarejše lončarstvo poznano na področju Trans-bajkala (ok. 14 000 calBP). Vendar to ni vplivalo na razvoj in širjenje lončarske tehnologije v zahodne dele Sibirije.
KEY WORDS - pottery; East Asia; China; Japan; Russian Far East; Siberia; Transbaikal; radiocarbon dating; Late Glacial
Introduction
The emergence of pottery is one of the most important phenomena in prehistory (e.g., Jordan, Zvele-bil 2009; Kuzmin 2013a). Although it is now widely accepted that the oldest vessels made of fired clay appeared first in greater East Asia, encompassing modern China, Japan, and the Russian Far East (e.g., Kuzmin 2006; Boaretto et al. 2009), debates about the exact location and timing of the earliest pottery-making cultural complexes have continued (Wu et al. 2012; Kuzmin 2013a; 2013b; Cohen 2013). Recent attempts to model the spread of pottery technology in the Old World using the radiocarbon (14C) dates of ceramic-bearing sites and the ambiguous results obtained (see Kuzmin 2013b; 2014; Silva et al. 2014) highlight the necessity of a thorough evaluation of the existing records.
The aim of this paper is to give an updated analysis of the data on the earliest pottery from greater East
Asia and neighbouring Siberia as of mid-2015 in order to introduce new information and its critical evaluation to the international scholarly community.
Material and methods
Recent overviews on the emergence of pottery among hunter-gatherers in East Asia and the neighbouring regions are used here as background (Dik-shit, Hazarika 2012; Cohen 2013; Kuzmin 2013a; Gibbs, Jordan 2013; Gibbs 2015). The newly released data on the early pottery from the Transbaikal (southern part of Eastern Siberia) (Razgildeeva et al. 2013) are incorporated into the existing dataset for this region (Kuzmin 2013a; Kuzmin, Vetrov 2007; McKenzie 2009) and interpreted. Information on the Gromatukha site in the Russian Far East, published previously by Japanese scholars (see Kani 1992; Jomon 1996a; 1996a), is discussed in the
DOI> 10.4312\dp.42.1
1
Yaroslav V. Kuzmin
light of a new study conducted by Shevkomud and Yan-shina (2012).
The evaluation of 14C dates for the early pottery complexes is crucial for understanding the origins and spread of ceramics in the Old World, and it is provided here for all the earliest pottery complexes. The calibration of 14C dates was conducted with the help of the Calib 7.0.2 computer programme (Reimer et al. 2013) at ± 2-sigma, and all possible intervals are combined and rounded to the next ten years (see Tab. 1).
Results and discussion
China
The results of additional studies at the Xianrendong Cave in southern China (Fig. 1) conducted in 2009 were recently published by Wu et al. (2012). According to these authors, the 14C dates of the oldest site's component with pottery are c. 16915 BP (western section) and c. 17 105 BP (eastern section), correspond to the calibrated age ranges of 19 950-20 880 calBP and 20 440-20 850 calBP, respectively. If true, this would be the earliest pottery in the Old World.
However, several crucial issues allow me to cast doubt on these 14C dates: (1) there is no direct association between the deer bone samples collected by
Fig. 1. Location of archaeological sites mentioned in the text. 1 Xianrendong Cave; 2 Yuchanyan Cave; 3 Miaoyan Cave; 4 Wang Dong Cave; 5 Nanzhuangtou; 6 Odai Yamamoto 1; 7 Kitahara; 8 Tokumaru Nakata; 9 Nakamachi; 10 Senpukuji Cave; 11 Taisho 3; 12 Omotedate; 13 Torihama; 14 Khummi; 15 Gasya; 16 Goncharka 1; 17 Gromatukha; 18 Ust-Karenga 12; 19 Studenoe 1; 20 Ust-Menza 1; 21 Ust-Kyakhta; 22 Lijiagou; 23 Ko-sanni; 24 Osanni.
Xiaohong Wu et al. (2012) and the potsherds: "We did not recover any sherds from the reopened sections ... [in 2009]" (Wu et al. 2012.1697); (2) a 14C date obtained previously from Stratum 3C1A, the second earliest site component with pottery - 12 530 ± 140 BP (BA95145) (MacNeish 1999.238; Kuzmin 2013a.544) - was ignored by Wu et al. (2012) despite the fact that it is much younger than the rest of the 14C values from this layer at c. 13 885-16 340 BP (Wu et al. 2012.1698); (3) some 14C dates, which do not fit the age model suggested by Wu et al. (2012), were declared as 'outliers' without any reasonable explanation (see Kuzmin 2013a.544).
Fig. 2. Chronology of the earliest pottery complexes in greater East Asia and Siberia, on the background of climatic changes. Abbreviations: B0-Al - B0lling-Aller0d; YD - Younger Dryas.
2
The origins of pottery in East Asia: updated analysis (the 2015 state-of-the-art)
Site	14C date, BP	Lab code and No.	Material dated	Calendar age, cal BP**	Reference
South China					
Yuchanyan Cave	14 800 ± 55	RTB5464/BA06864	charcoal	17 830-18 190	Boaretto et al. 2009
Miaoyan Cave	13 710 ± 270	BA92034-1	charcoal	15 820-17 380	Yuan et al. 1995
Xianrendong Cave	12430 ± 80	UCR-3561	charcoal	14 160-14 990	MacNeish 1999
Wang Dong Cave	11 500 ± 150	BK95138A	charcoal	13 060-13 700	MacNeish 1999
North China					
Nanzhuangtou	10 210 ± 110	BK-87075A	charcoal	11 400-12 390	Yuan et al. 1992
Japanese Islands					
Odai Yamamoto 1	13 780 ±170	NUTA-6510	adhesion	16170-17180	Nakamura et al. 2001
Kitahara	13 060 ± 80	Beta-105398	ch. wood	15 320-15 920	Keally et al. 2003
Tokumaru Nakata	12 770 ± 225	PAL-383	wood	14 240-15 860	Keally et al. 2003
Nakamachi	12 740 ± 380	GaK-9624	charcoal	13 850-16 180	Keally et al. 2003
Senpukuji Cave	12 220 ± 80	MTC-11296	adhesion	13 820-14 520	Sato et al. 2011
Taisho 3	12 460 ± 40	Beta-194629	adhesion	14 270-14 960	Yamahara 2006
Russian Far East					
Khummi	13 260 ± 100	AA-13392	charcoal	15 640-16 240	Kuzmin et al. 1997
Gasya	12 960 ±120	LE-1781	charcoal	15 150-15 870	Okladnikov, Medvedev 1983
Goncharka 1	12 500 ± 60	LLNL-102169	charcoal	14 300-15 070	Shevkomud 1997
Gromatukha	12 380 ± 70	MTC-05937	charcoal	14 110-14 850	Nesterov et al. 2006
Transbaikal (Eastern Siberia)					
Ust-Karenga 12	12 180 ± 60	AA-60210	charcoal	13 840-14 240	Kuzmin, Vetrov 2007
Ust-Karenga 12	11 240 ± 80	GIN-8066	charcoal	12 930-13 280	Kuzmin, Vetrov 2007
Studenoe 1	11 960 ± 80	TKa-15554	adhesion	13 580-14 020	Razgildeeva et al. 2013
Studenoe 1	11 995 ± 15o	AA-33040	charcoal	13 470-14 210	Buvit et al. 2003
Studenoe 1	11 730 ± 60	MTC-16736	adhesion	13 450-13 720	Razgildeeva et al. 2013
Ust-Menza 1
11 550 ± 50
MTC-16738
adhesio
13 280-13 470 Razgildeeva et al. 2013
*	Only the oldest 14C dates for each site are listed here; for more complete information, see the relevant references.
**	The IntCali3 dataset (Reimer et al. 2013) is used.
a	These dates are re-calculated (see Kuzmin 2013a).
b	Only selected oldest sites (with 14C dates older than c. 12 000 BP) are included; see the full list in Keally et al. (2003).
c	Food remains on the surface of pottery (e.g., Nakamura et al. 2001).
d	Charred wood.
e	Bulk sample collected from Layer 7.
f	Sample collected from a hearth in Layer 7.
g	Sample collected from Layer 9G.
h	Samples collected from Layer 8.
Tab. 1. The earliest East Asian and Siberian sites with pottery and their 14C dates (from Kuzmin 2013a, with additions*).
The disturbed nature of the Xianrendong Cave profile can be easily demonstrated by information provided by Wu et al. (2012). For example, age-depth reversals are common at this site; here, there are 14C dates which contradict the stratigraphic 'integrity' sensu David J. Cohen (2013) (layers are listed from top to bottom): (1) Layer 3B1: c. 14 610 BP (BA 093181), it is much older than the 14C dates from both underlying and overlapping layers, c. 12 24012 420 BP; (2) Layer 3B2: c. 12 420 BP (UCR3561), it is much younger than the 14C date from overlapping Layer 3B1 at c. 14 610 BP (see above); and (3) Layer 3C2: c. 15 180 BP (UCR3300), it is much younger than the 14C dates from both underlying and over-
lapping layers at c. 17 580-18 510 BP and c. 16 16518 520 BP, respectively (see Wu et al. 2012.1698). As a result, the chronological model created by Wu et al. (2012) is heavily biased toward the older i4C dates and completely ignores the possibility of post-depositional mixing of the cultural layers and material for i4C dating.
Cohen (2013.62) has stated that "... these dates [by Wu et al. (2012)] are reliable due to the internal consistency across a large, systematic series of radiocarbon dates done on samples from stable, stratigraphic contexts ...". Being aware of criticism by Yaroslav V. Kuzmin (2013a), Cohen (2013) neverthe-
3
Yaroslav V. Kuzmin
less accepted the c. 20 00020 900 calBP age for the Xian-rendong Cave pottery without addressing the reliability of their 'stratigraphic contexts', which are not secure due to the lack of association between bone samples for 14C dating collected in 2009 and the pottery (see above). Therefore, Cohen's (2013.62-65) arguments are not convincing.
Upon critical analysis of the 14C records from the earliest Chinese sites with pottery (e. g., Kuzmin 2006; 2013a), it is secure to conclude that the Yuchanyan Cave with ceramics dated to 17 830-18 190 calBP (Tab. 1), centred at 18 010 calBP, represent the oldest case of pottery-making in greater East Asia (Fig. 2). The most reliable age for pottery from the Xianrendong Cave, in my opinion, is c. 14 600 calBP. For other sites in South China such as Miao-yan Cave and Wang Dong Cave [Diaotonghuan] (Fig. 1), the age of the earliest potsherd-containing strata is not older than c. 16 600 calBP (Tab. 1).
Japanese Islands
Since the publication of summary works in the early 2000s (Ono et al. 2002; Keally et al. 2003; 2004),
Fig. 3. Potsherds from the Odai Yamamoto 1 site, dated to c. 13 50013 800 BP (after Odai Yamamato 1999; modified).
supplemented by more recent overviews (Omoto et al. 2010; Kuzmin 2013a), the situation with the earliest pottery corresponding to the Incipient Jo-mon of Japan has been consistent. The oldest 14C dates, c. 13 500-13 800 BP (centred at c. 17 000 calBP), come from the northern part of Honshu Island at the Odai Yamamoto 1 site (Fig. 1, Tab. 1). Potsherds found at this site are quite fragmentary (Fig. 3), and it is not possible to reconstruct the vessel's shape. Pottery from other sites is represented mainly by pointed-bottomed vessels (Figs. 4-6), but round-bottomed pots (Fig. 7) and flat-bottomed ones
Fig. 4. Pottery from the Omotedate site, Incipient Jomon (after Jomon 1996b; modified).
Fig. 5. Pottery from the Senpukuji Cave (bean-relief design) dated to c. 12 200 BP (after Jomon 1996b; modified).
4
The origins of pottery in East Asia: updated analysis (the 2015 state-of-the-art)
Fig. 6. Pottery from the Taisho 3 site dated to c. 12 460 BP (after Yamaha-ra 2006; modified).
(e.g., Keally et al. 2003.4) are also known. The recent study of lipids in Incipient Jomon pottery indicated that it was used for cooking (Craig et al. 2013); therefore, the function of the earliest ceramics in Japan was utilitarian.
Based on current knowledge, the existence of pottery on the Japanese Islands can be securely established from c. 17 000 calBP onwards (Fig. 2, Tab. 1).
The Russian Far East
Since analysis of the main results related to 14C dating of the earliest sites in the Amur River basin (Kuz-min 2006; 2013a), the situation has not changed. It is now widely accepted that the first evidence of pottery-making in this region dates to c. 12 38013 260 BP, corresponding to c. 14 110-16 240 calBP (Fig. 2, Tab. 1). Flat-bottomed vessels were reconstructed at the Gasya and Goncharka 1 sites (Figs. 89). The most probable function of this pottery was utilitarian (e.g., Medvedev 1995; Kuzmin 2013a).
The issue of the pottery from the Gromatukha site in the middle course of the Amur River can now be clarified in the light of new research conducted by Igor Y. Shewkomud and Oksana Yanshina (2012). Previously, Mikaeil Kani (1992) had reconstructed the vessel as round-bottomed (Figs. 10, 11). According to Shewkomud and Yanshina (2012), the most common shape of pottery at the lower level of the Gromatukha site, dated to c. 12 380 BP (or 14 11014 850 calBP), is flat-bottomed (Fig. 12).
Why are these reconstructions so different? This question puzzled me for a long time, until I saw the
conclusion by Shewkomud and Yanshina (2012). After that, I examined the circumstances related to the acquisition of Kani's (1992) material. The eyewitness for this is Ku-mi Kato (1992), who participated in the trip when these potsherds were obtained. During the field excursion in 1988 (not in 1991, as Shevko-mud and Yanshina (2012. 220) assumed), Japanese archaeologists along with Russian colleagues conducted a very brief (four hours only) survey of the Gromatukha site (Kato 1992.117). Therefore, it seems less likely that the small Russian-Japanese team was able to dig a proper test pit, as suggested by Shevkomud and Yanshina (2012.220). More probably, the potsherds were collected from the talus where the cultural material from all components of the Gromatukha site has accumulated since the large-scale excavations in the 1960s (Okladnikov, Derevianko 1977). Because it is now clear that the Gromatukha site contains material of the later Neolithic along with the Initial Neolithic of the Gromatukha complex, it is quite possible that the reconstructed vessel belongs to the Belkachi complex dated to c. 3900-6300 BP (e.g., Mochanov, Fedoseeva 1985; Alekseev, Dyako-nov 2009) with round-bottomed and cord-decorated pottery.
Fig. 7. Pottery from the Torihama site dated to c. 11800 BP (after Jomon 1996b; modified).
5
Yaroslav V. Kuzmin
Shevkomud and Yanshina (2012.221) noted the single round-bottom fragment recovered from the entire collection of the 1960s excavations at the Gromatukha site, which consists of several hundred potsherds. It might be that this particular piece is not related to the Initial Neolithic complex, because the prevailing paradigm of Aleksei P. Okladnikov and Anatolii P. Derevianko (1977) was a gradual development of the Neolithic in the middle course of the Amur River basin, and all the potsherds were described as belonging to the single cultural complex. Therefore, the reconstruction of round-bottomed pottery of the Initial Neolithic at the Gromatukha site (e.g., Kani 1992; Jomon 1996a; 1996b) is most probably unreliable. Perhaps, the notion that pottery emerged on the Japanese Islands, which was common in the 1970s and 1980s (e.g., Aikens 1995), influenced the reconstruction of the Gromatukha vessel, because Kani (1992) assumed that its origin was directly related to the spread of pottery-making from Japan to the neighbouring regions.
Transbaikal
Since the early 2000s, new data on the earliest pottery in the Transbaikal region of Eastern Siberia have been obtained. The Ust-Karenga 12 site is located in the northern part of this territory, on the Vitim Plateau, which is covered by dense forest consisting mainly of Dahurian larch (Suslov 1961.293-294), on the border between the middle and southern taiga zones (Tishkov 2002.219). Another cluster of sites, Studenoe 1, Ust-Menza 1, and Ust-Kyakhta, is
0	5 cm
Fig. 8. Pottery from the Gasya site dated to c. 12960 BP (after Derevianko, Medvedev 1995; modified).
%
0_5 cm
Fig. 9. Pottery from the Goncharka site dated to c. 12500 BP (after Shewkomud, Yanshina 2012; modified).
situated in the southern part of the Transbaikal, in the southern taiga zone (Tishkov 2002.219). The most important of these are Studenoe 1 and Ust-Menza 1 in the Khilok-Chikoy region (Suslov 1961. 292-293) or Dahuria (Shahgedanova et al. 2002. 335), with mountain ranges and river valleys covered by conifer forests (spruce, fir, and Siberian pine) (Suslov 1961.320).
In the northern Transbaikal, the age of dispersed charcoal collected from Layer 7 with pottery at the Ust-Karenga 12 site is c. 12 180 BP (13 840-14 240 calBP (Tab. 1) (see Kuzmin, Vetrov 2007). It was proposed that the most secure estimate is the age of charcoal from a hearth in Layer 7, c. 11 240 BP (12 930-13 280 calBP) (see Tab. 1).
As for the southern region, I previously suggested that the earliest pottery from Layer 8 of Studenoe 1 (also known as Studenoe 1/1) site could be as old as c. 12 000 BP (13 470-14 210 calBP) (Kuzmin 2013. 547-548). Recently, new data were generated by Irina N. Razgildeeva et al. (2013). Food adhesions attached to the potsherds from Layer 9G (the lowermost stratum with pottery at this site) were 14C dated to c. 11 600-11 960 BP; the oldest value corresponds to 13 580-14 020 calBP (see Tab. 1). Several 14C dates of c. 11 570-11 730 BP were obtained from food residues on pottery in Layer 8, with the oldest calendar age being 13 450-13 720 calBP (Tab. 1). These new 14C values are in accord with the charcoal date from Layer 8 at c. 11 995 BP (13 47014 210 calBP; see Tab. 1).
Pottery from Layer 9G of the Studenoe 1 site is parabolic in shape (Fig. 13.A), with walls 0.6-0.7cm thick
6
The origins of pottery in East Asia: updated analysis (the 2015 state-of-the-art)
Fig. 10. Reconstruction of pottery from the Groma-tukha site (after Kani 1992; modified).
at the rim, and 1.0-1.1cm at the bottom. The clay paste contains plant material added at the time of manufacture. The diameter of the vessel at the rim is 23-32cm, and 17cm at the bottom. On the surface, grooves made by a tool with 8-10 protruding 'teeth' and vertical traces made by cord (perhaps, rope on a stick) are visible. The pottery from Layer 8 (Fig. 13.B) is similar to that from Layer 9G; however, no bottom parts were found (Razgildeeva et al. 2013.175).
Razgildeeva et al. (2013) concluded that the 14C age for food adhesions at the Studenoe 1 site is older than the 14C values obtained on charcoal, and the former should be c. 12 000-13 000 calBP. Perhaps, they are not aware of the charcoal 14C date of c. 11 995 BP (Buvit et al. 2003) corresponding to 13 470-14 210 calBP. This value fits perfectly well with the age of the food remains, and in my opinion, the pottery from the Studenoe 1 site can now be securely dated to c. 12 000 BP (centred at c. 13 840 calBP).
The earliest pottery from the Ust-Menza 1 site was recently 14C dated for the first time (Razgildeeva et al. 2013). Previously, it was associated with the Early Holocene, c. 8715 BP (e.g., Kuzmin, Orlova 2000). The age of food adhesion on pottery from Layer 8 is c. 11 500 BP (13 280-13 470 calBP; Tab. 1). Potsherds are quite fragmentary, but their overall appearance is similar to the pottery from the Stu-denoe 1 site (Razgildeeva et al. 2013.176). The 14C date on food residue is considered older than its real age judging from the 14C value of c. 10380 BP (11 350-12 710 calBP) in the underlying Layer 11
Fig. 11. Reconstruction of pottery from the Gro-matukha site (after Jomon 1996a' modified).
(see Razgildeeva et al. 2013.172), and the 'true' age of the pottery from Ust-Menza 1 was suggested as c. 12 000-13 000 calBP (Razgildeeva et al. 2013). In my opinion, the 14C dating of adhesions is quite reliable, as in the case of the Studenoe 1 site (see above), and the age of pottery from Layer 8 at the Ust-Menza site can be accepted as c. 13 380 calBP.
Based on the general appearance of pottery from the entire Transbaikal region (including the Ust-Ka-renga 12, Studenoe 1, Ust-Menza 1, and Ust-Kyakhta
Fig. 12. Pottery from the Gromatukha site dated to c. 12380 BP (after Shewkomud, Yanshina 2012; modified).
7
Yaroslav V. Kuzmin
Fig. 13. Pottery from the Studenoe 1 site: A - from Layer 9G (dated to c. 11960-11 600 BP); B -from Layer 8 (dated to c. 11 730-11570 BP) (after Razgildeeva et al. 2013; modified).
2014.720). Therefore, to the best of my knowledge, no reliable evidence about the diffusion/dispersal of pottery-making from any of these three centres to the neighbouring regions in greater East Asia (including Siberia) is known, contrary to the con-elusion that "Evidence for the dispersal of hunter-gatherer pottery from East Asia and via Siberia, across the continent to Europe suggests that it played an important role in the wider development of Eurasian pottery" (Gibbs, Jordan 2013.28).
sites, see Fig. 1), it was concluded that it represents a single cultural tradition of the earliest pottery-making in Eastern Siberia (Razgildeeva et al. 2013.177). Its age can now be established as c. 12 000 BP (c. 14 000 calBP) (Fig. 2).
Centre(s) of pottery origin(s) in East Asia and neighbouring regions - how many?
Based on previous data, three primary centres of pottery origin in greater East Asia have been suggested: (1) South China; (2) the Japanese Islands; and (3) the Russian Far East (Amur River basin) (e.g., Kuzmin 2010; 2013a). This model is still valid, especially in the light of updated information on the age of the earliest pottery complexes outside of these centres (Fig. 14). For example, the oldest pottery in Korea (between the far eastern Russian and Japanese centres) is dated to c. 11 780 calBP at the Kosanni site, and c. 7960 calBP at the Osanni site (Bae, Kim 2003; Choe, Bale 2002). The earliest pottery complexes situated between the southern Chinese centre and the Japanese Islands, the Russian Far East, and the Transbaikal date to c. 11 900 calBP in North China at the Nan-zhuangtou site (see Tab. 1), c. 10 360 BP in Central China at the Lijiagou site (Wang et al. 2015), and c. 8480 calBP in Mongolia (e.g., Kuzmin
As for the Transbaikal, today we have much stronger evidence in favour of a very early appearance of pottery in this region - at c. 14 000 calBP, most probably independent of the primary East Asian centres (Fig. 14). However, it did not influence the more western parts of Siberia in terms of the spread of pottery-making. This issue was recently analysed by Kuzmin (2014), and no solid evidence was found concerning the diffusion/dispersal of pottery-making from East Asia toward Eastern Europe via Siberia sensu Dolukhanov and Shukurov (2004) and Davison et al. (2006).
Kevin Gibbs (2015.340) stated: "It is possible that in some regions the invention of pottery correspond-
Fig. 14. Primary centres of pottery origin in greater East Asia and neighbouring regions with their calibrated ages (the mid-2015 state-of-the-art).
8
The origins of pottery in East Asia: updated analysis (the 2015 state-of-the-art)
ed with a newly developed need, perhaps the introduction of a new potential food source that could be better exploited using durable, water-tight containers." I drew the following conclusion some time ago: "The appearance of pottery was most probably facilitated by the necessity for East Asian populations in the Late Glacial (after c. 16,000 BP, or c. 19,000 cal. BP) to have light, easily made containers for the processing and storing of such types of food as wild plants and their nuts and fruit, which are otherwise hard to utilize without vessels for boiling and leaching" (Kuzmin 2013a. 551). A similar view was expressed in the 1970s (e.g., Ikawa-Smith 1976.515).
Conclusions
Three regions in greater East Asia, namely South China, the Japanese Islands, and the Russian Far East, are the primary centres of pottery origin in the Old World. It is most likely that pottery-making emerged in these independently of each other, as recent archaeological and chronological data have suggested. It is worthwhile to emphasise that the earliest evidence of pottery preceded the climatic amelioration in the Late Glacial period, the B0lling - Aller0d warm interval (c. 14 700-12 900 calBP) (Fig. 2).
In Siberia, the oldest pottery is now known from the Transbaikal, with a secure age of c. 14 000 calBP. It is, however, very unlikely that it is related to the later pottery complexes in both the eastern and western parts of Siberia. It seems that pottery-making in Siberia, as in East Asia in general, emerged in several regions independently and almost simultaneously.
-ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS-
I am grateful to Prof. Mihael Budja for the invitation to participate in this volume, and to Prof. Akira Ono (Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan) for providing information about some Japanese sites. Dr. Susan Keates kindly checked the grammar of the manuscript, and I am indebted for that. This research was supported by the Japan Society for Promotion of Science (2015); the Russian Foundation for Basic Sciences (RFFI), grant No. 12-06-00045; the Fulbright Program (USA), grant No. 03-27672; the Japan Foundation; the Korea Foundation; the Civil Research and Development Foundation (USA), grant No. RUG1-7097-N0-13; and the Ministry of Education, Science, Culture and Sport (Mombu Kagakusho) (Japan). This study was also supported by a grant from Tomsk State University 'D. I. Mendeleev Academic Fund' Programme (grant No. 8.1.22.2015) in 2014-2015.
References
Aikens C. M. 1995. First in the world: the Jomon pottery of early Japan. In W. K. Barnett, J. W. Hoopes (eds.), The Emergence of Pottery: Technology and Innovation in Ancient Societies. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington, D.C. & London: 11-21.
Alekseyev A. N., Dyakonov V. M. 2009. Radiocarbon chronology of Neolithic and Bronze Age cultures in Yakutia.
Archaeology, Ethnology & Anthropology of Eurasia 37 (3): 26-40.
Bae K., Kim J.-C. 2003. Radiocarbon chronology of the Palaeolithic complexes and the transition to the Neolithic in Korea. The Review of Archaeology 24(2): 46-49.
Boaretto E., Wu X., Yuan J., Bar-Yosef O., Chu V., Pan Y., Liu K., Cohen D., Jiao T., Li S., Gu H., Goldberg P. and Weiner S. 2009. Radiocarbon dating of charcoal and bone collagen associated with early pottery at Yuchanyan Cave, Hunan Province, China. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 106: 9595-9600.
Buvit I., Waters M. R., Konstantinov M. V. and Konstantinov A. V. 2003. Geoarchaeological investigations at Stu-denoe, an Upper Paleolithic site in the Transbaikal region, Russia. Geoarchaeology 18: 649-673.
Choe C. P., Bale M. T. 2002. Current perspectives on settlement, subsistence, and cultivation in prehistoric Korea. Arctic Anthropology 39:95-121.
Cohen D. J. 2013. The advent and spread of early pottery in East Asia: new dates and new considerations for the world's earliest ceramic vessels. Journal of Austronesian Studies 4:55-92.
Craig O. E., Saul H., Lucquin A., Nishida Y., Taché K., Clarke L., Thomson A., Altoft D. T., Uchiyama J., Ajimoto M., Gibbs K., Isaksson S., Heron C. P. and Jordan P. 2013. Earliest evidence for the use of pottery. Nature 496:351-354.
Davison K., Dolukhanov P., Sarson G. R. and Shukurov A. 2006. The role of waterways in the spread of the Neolithic. Journal of Archaeological Science 33: 641-652.
9
Yaroslav V. Kuzmin
Derevianko A. P., Medvedev V. E. 1995. The Amur River basin as one of the earliest centers of ceramics in the Far East. In H. Kajiwara (ed.), The Origin of Ceramics in East Asia and the Far East. Tohoku Fukushi University Press. Sendai: 13-25.
Dolukhanov P., Shukurov A. 2004. Modelling the Neolithic dispersal in northern Eurasia. Documenta Praehisto-rica 31:35-47.
Dikshit K. N., Hazarika M. 2012. The earliest pottery in East Asia: a review. Puratattva 42: 227-237.
Gibbs K. 2015. Pottery invention and innovation in East Asia and the Near East. Cambridge Archaeological Journal 25:339-351.
Gibbs K., Jordan P. 2013. Bridging the boreal forest: Siberian archaeology and the emergence of pottery among prehistoric hunter-gatherers of northern Eurasia. Sibirica 12:1-38.
Ikawa-Smith F. 1976. On ceramic technology in East Asia. Current Anthropology 17:513-515.
Jomon 1996a. Jomon Jidai Sosoki (The Incipient Jomon of Japan). Exhibition Booklet. Yokohama Rekishi Haku-butsukan. Yokohama. (in Japanese)
Jomon Jidai Sosoki (The Incipient Jomon ofJapan). Exhibition Catalogue. Yokohama Rekishi Hakubutsu-kan. Yokohama. (in Japanese)
Jordan P., Zvelebil M. (eds.) 2009. Ceramics before Farming: The Dispersal of Pottery among Prehistoric Eurasian Hunter-Gatherers. Left Coast Press. Walnut Creek, CA
Kani M. 1992. Fukugen sareta Shiberia no Jomon semon no doki Amurugawa ryuiki Guromathuha iseki shutsudo (Reconstructed Siberian cord-marked pottery from the Gromatukha site). Kikan Kokogaku 38:66-67. (in Japanese)
Kato K. 1992. Sibir v Serdtse Yapontsa (Siberia in the Heart of a Japanese Man). Nauka Publ. Novosibirsk. (in Russian)
Keally C. T., Taniguchi Y. and Kuzmin Y. V. 2003. Understanding the beginnings of pottery technology in Japan and neighboring East Asia. The Review of Archaeology 24(2): 3-14.
Keally C. T., Taniguchi Y., Kuzmin Y. V. and Shewkomud I. Y. 2004. Chronology of the beginning of pottery manufacture in East Asia. Radiocarbon 46:345-351.
Kuzmin Y. V. 2006. Chronology of the earliest pottery in East Asia: progress and pitfalls. Antiquity 80:362-371.
2010. The origin of pottery in East Asia and its relationship to environmental changes in the Late Glacial. Radiocarbon 52: 415-420.
2013a. Origin of Old World pottery as viewed from the early 2010s: when, where and why? World Archaeology 45:539-556.
2013b. Two trajectories in the Neolithization of Eurasia: pottery versus agriculture (spatiotemporal patterns). Radiocarbon 55:1304-1313.
2014. The Neolithization of Siberia and the Russian Far East: major spatiotemporal trends (the 2013 state of the art). Radiocarbon 56: 717-722.
Kuzmin Y. V., Jull A. J. T., Lapshina Z. S. and Medvedev V. E. 1997. Radiocarbon AMS dating of the ancient sites with earliest pottery from the Russian Far East. Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research B123:496-497.
Kuzmin Y. V., Orlova L. A. 2000. The Neolithization of Siberia and the Russian Far East: radiocarbon evidence. Antiquity 74: 356-365.
Kuzmin Y. V., Vetrov V. M. 2007. The earliest Neolithic complex in Siberia: the Ust-Karenga 12 site and its significance for the Neolithisation process in Eurasia. Documenta Praehistorica 34: 9-20.
MacNeish R. S. 1999. A Paleolithic-Neolithic sequence from South China Jiangxi Province, PRC. In K. Omoto (ed.), Interdisciplinary Perspectives on the Origins of the Japanese. International Research Center for Japanese Studies. Kyoto: 233-255.
McKenzie H. G. 2009. Review of early hunter-gatherer pottery in Eastern Siberia. In P. Jordan, M. Zvelebil (eds.), Ceramics before Farming: The Dispersal of Pottery among Prehistoric Eurasian Hunter-Gatherers. Left Coast Press. Walnut Creek, CA: 167-208.
Medvedev V. E. 1995. To the problem of the Initial and Early Neolithic of the Lower Amur. In A. P. Derevianko, V. E. Larichev (eds.), Obozrenie Rezultatov Polevykh i Laboratornykh Issledovaniy Arkheologov, Etnografov i Antropologov Sibiri i Dalnego Vostoka v 1993 Godu. Institut Arkheologii i Etnografii. Novosibirsk: 228-237.
Mochanov Y. A., Fedoseeva S. A. 1985. Main periods in the ancient history of Northeast Asia. In V. L. Kontrimavi-chus (ed.), Beringia in the Cenozoic Era. A. A. Balkema. Rotterdam: 669-693.
Nakamura T., Taniguchi Y., Tsuji S. and Oda H. 2001. Radiocarbon dating of charred residues on the earliest pottery. Radiocarbon 43:1129-1138.
TO
The origins of pottery in East Asia: updated analysis (the 2015 state-of-the-art)
Nesterov S. P., Sakamoto M., Imamura M. and Kuzmin Y. V. 2006. The Late-Glacial Neolithic complex of the Groma-tukha site, Russian Far East: new results and interpretations. Current Research in the Pleistocene 23: 46-49.
Odai Yamamoto 1999. Odai Yamamoto I Iseki no Koko-gaku Chosa (Archaeological Research at the Odai Yamamoto I Site). Department of Archaeology. Kokugakuin University. Tokyo. (in Japanese)
Okladnikov A. P., Derevianko A. P. 1977. Gromatukhin-skaya Kultura (The Gromatukha Culture). Nauka Publ. Novosibirsk. (in Russian)
Okladnikov A. P., Medvedev V. E. 1983. Raskopki mnogo-sloinogo poseleniya Gasya na Nizhnem Amure (The excavations in the multilayered site of Gasya on the Lower Amur River basin). Izvestiya Sibirskogo Otdeleniya Aka-demii Nauk SSSR 20(1): 93-97. (in Russian)
Omoto K., Takeishi K., Nishida S. and Fukui J. 2010. Calibrated 14C ages of Jomon sites, NE Japan, and their significance. Radiocarbon 52:534-548.
Ono A., Sato H., Tsutsumi T. and Kudo Y. 2002. Radiocarbon dates and archaeology of the Late Pleistocene in the Japanese Islands. Radiocarbon 44: 477-494.
Razgildeeva I. I., Kunikita D. and Yanshina O. V. 2013. New data about age of oldest pottery complexes of west Transbaikal area. In G. I. Medvedev (ed.), Eurasia in the Cenozoic. Stratigraphy, Paleoecology, Cultures. Issue 2. Fundamental Problems of Formation and Paleoenvi-ronment Diversity in Eurasia. Paradigm Shift. Irkutsk State University Press. Irkutsk: 168-178.
Reimer P. J. and 30 co-authors. 2013. IntCal13 and Ma-rine13 radiocarbon age calibration curves 0-50,000 years cal BP. Radiocarbon 55:1869-1887.
Sato H., Izuho M. and Morisaki K. 2011. Human cultures and environmental changes in the Pleistocene-Holocene transition in the Japanese Archipelago. Quaternary International 237:93-102.
Shahgedanova M., Mikhailov N., Larin S. and Bredikhin A. 2002. The mountains of southern Siberia. In M. Shahgedanova (ed.), The Physical Geography of Northern Eurasia. Oxford University Press. Oxford - New York: 314-349.
Shevkomud I. Y. 1997. New research concerning the Osi-povskaya culture in the Amur River basin. Kokogaku Kenkyu 44:102-109.
Shevkomud I. Y., Yanshina O. V. 2012. Beginning of the Neolithic in the Amur River Basin: The Goncharka-1 Site. Museum of Archaeology and Ethnography. St. Petersburg.
Silva F., Steele J., Gibbs K. and Jordan P. 2014. Modeling spatial innovation diffusion from radiocarbon dates and regression residuals: the case of early Old World pottery. Radiocarbon 56: 723-732.
Suslov S. P. 1961. Physical Geography of Asiatic Russia. W. H. Freeman. San Francisco & London.
Tishkov A. 2002. Boreal forests. In M. Shahgedanova (ed.), The Physical Geography of Northern Eurasia. Oxford University Press. New York: 217-233.
Wang Y. J., Cheng H., Edwards R. L., An Z. S., Wu J. Y., Shen C.-C. and Dorale J. A. 2001. A high-resolution absolute-dated Late Pleistocene monsoon record from Hulu Cave, China. Science 294: 2345-2348.
Wang J., Zhang S., Gu W., Wang S., He J., Wu X., Qu T., Zhao J., Chen Y. and Bar-Yosef O. 2015. Lijiagou and the earliest pottery in Henan Province, China. Antiquity 89: 273-291.
Wu X., Zhang C., Goldberg P., Cohen D., Pan Y., Arpin T. and Bar-Yosef O. 2012. Early pottery at 20,000 years ago in Xianrendong Cave, China. Science 336:1696-1700.
Yamahara T. 2006. Taisho 3 site: the discovery of the earliest ceramic culture in Hokkaido. Current Research in the Pleistocene 23:35-36.
Yuan S., Chen T. and Zhou K. 1992. Nanzhuangtou yizhi tan shisi niandai ceding yu wenhuaceng baofen fenxi (14C dating and pollen analysis of the cultural layer at the Nan-zhuangtou site). Kaogu 11:967-970. (in Chinese)
Yuan S., Zhou G., Guo Z., Zhang Z., Gao S., Li K., Wang J., Liu K., Li B. and Lu X. 1995. 14C AMS dating the transition from the Paleolithic to the Neolithic in South China.
Radiocarbon 37:245-249.
back to contents
11