임실 하가 후기구석기유적의 돌날제작기법 연구

Abstract

The blade is a representative artifact of the upper Paleolithic of Korea. Factually observing from these artifacts excavated from the sites of the upper Paleolithic, we can find that people in the upper Paleolithic must have produced a blade with raw materials such as rhyolite, hornfels, shale etc., and must have utilized it as a basic blank of the tool. Moreover, they must have used the blade in itself as a tool as well. The study of the manufacturing techniques of the blade and restoration of it play an important role in understanding of survival skills of upper Paleolithic human. This paper researches into the technology and process of the blade production through the blade production technology we learned from ‘refitting artifact’ of Imsil Haga site, and analogizes the kind of the hammer which they used for the blade production in comparison with the existing research result of experimental archaeology on the blade production. Imsil Haga site safely stores the upper Paleolithic cultural layers, where numerous blades, blade cores and tools were excavated five times in total from 2006 to 2011. Their dating measurements are 19,700±300 BP and 19,500±200 BP (AMS Charcoal). Blades and Blade cores excavated from their sites were restored to the original state of the raw material by refitting around the area, where blades were excavated concentrically. Consequently, we preceeded to analyze the state, width and thickness of butts, the state of trimming, flaking angle, angle de chasse, bulb etc. of 68 pieces ‘refitting artifacts’ in 5 groups. We observed the production process of blade via the trace analysis of these remains on the artifacts and we analogized the knapping technique on the basis of this property analysis set up previously; according to the production process of blade, we can analyze: 1) the shaping, 2) the preparation for the production process of blade, 3) the production process of blade, 4) the arrangement for new striking platform, 5) the throwing away. In the case of ‘refitting artifact No. 1’ composed of the greatest number of artifacts, they must have produced a blade with rhyolite pebbles; removed cortical face and superfluous parts they must have prepared to produce it; at first on striking platform, secondly on the surface of striking platform and on the front of the production face alternatively, at last on that surface they must have produced and then thrown it away. In the case of ‘refitting artifact No. 3’ they must have produced a blade turning around striking platforms in succession for a knapping accident; having produced the blade on the existing striking platform, they must have produced it no more because of stab or hinge appearance, and so continued to work on the opposite side. In the case of ‘refitting artifact No. 2 & No. 5’ we can notice the remaking and the changing of striking platforms. When manufacturers produced blades they must have tended to hold the cortical face on the back of blade core without using to the end to produce it grasping its blank firmly; we can notice this in ‘refitting artifact No. 1, No. 4 & No. 5’ too. Via property analysis, observation of artifact and in comparison with the material of experimental archaeology, we analogize the hammer used in used in Haga site.: the features of its butts are sorted into three kinds. As the result of the comparison with the study of experimental archaeology, they must have produced the antler hammer in the way of the direct percussion.