lable at ScienceDirect

Quaternary International 229 (2011) 112e122

Contents lists avai

Quaternary International

journal homepage: www.elsevier .com/locate/quaint

Late Pleistocene to Early Holocene Lithic industries in the southern fringesof the Himalaya

Claire Gaillard a,*, Mukesh Singh b, Anne Dambricourt Malassé a

aUMR 7194 CNRS, Département de préhistoire du Muséum national d’Histoire naturelle, Paris, Franceb Society for Archaeological and Anthropological Research, Chandigarh, India

a r t i c l e i n f o

Article history:Available online 2 August 2010

* Corresponding author. Department of PrehistorHumaine, 1 rue René Panhard, 75013 Paris, France. Teþ33 (0)1 43 31 22 79.

E-mail addresses: gaillacl@mnhn.fr (C. Gaillard(M. Singh), iphadm@mnhn.fr (A.D. Malassé).

1040-6182/$ e see front matter � 2010 Elsevier Ltd adoi:10.1016/j.quaint.2010.06.023

a b s t r a c t

The Siwalik Range especially in its western sector is known for numerous surface sites yielding largequantities of cobble tools. These tools have for long been considered to belong to the Lower Palaeolithicbut they are sometimes associated with other apparently more evolved tool types having a transversaltrimmed cutting edge. These types look like adzes/axes and are made from large flakes, split cobbles orflat cobbles. Moreover, such assemblages composed of choppers along with these adze/axe-like toolsoccur on geological surfaces formed in the late Pleistocene; they are probably later than these deposits inage. These assemblages compare well with the industries occurring further east in Nepal or northernSouth-East Asia related to the Hoabinhian industries. It is suggested that they are linked throughsubsistence and technical behaviours to the particular environment of the sub-Himalayan belt and itseastern extension characterised by densely forested hilly landscapes, generously irrigated by perennialstreams. Besides, this region was not severely disturbed during the last glacial maximum and could havebeen a refuge for many animal and vegetal species. It has certainly favoured “latitudinal” circulation(precisely circulation along the geomorphological features) of human and animal populations despite theglobal climatic changes.

� 2010 Elsevier Ltd and INQUA. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

In the sub-Himalaya region, all along the highest mountainrange of the world (Fig. 1), late Pleistocene and early Holocenehuman settlements are poorly known. The Neolithic begins around5 ka BP in the Swat Valley, with hand-made pottery associated witha lithic assemblage rich in cobble tools (Stakul, 1981), and in theKashmir Valley it begins around 4.5 ka BP with a possible aceramicphase at Burzahom (Agrawal, 1982; I.A.R., 1961e1962; I.A.R.,1964e1965). At the opposite end of the sub-Himalayan belt (ina wide sense) in Northern Thailand, the Neolithic emerges in themid-Holocene with a local facies called Bacsonian, in continuationof the Hoabinhian (see Forestier et al., 2006). Except in a few sites inNepal (Corvinus, 2007), there is no trace in this 2500 km long stripof hills, covered with forests and generously supplied in water bymany streams, of the microlithic technical stage that characterisesthe late Pleistocene and early Holocene of peninsular India.

y, Institut de Paléontologiel.: þ33 (0)1 55 43 27 37; fax:

), muksingh21@yahoo.co.in

nd INQUA. All rights reserved.

However, lithic artefacts occur in plenty, especially in the westernSiwaliks.

The earliest of these artefacts are represented by a few flakes inthe Soan valley (Indus basin) dated to ca. 2 Ma (Dennell et al., 1988).At the time of the first surveys in the Potwar, in the 1930s, two typesof lithic assemblages had been identified. The Acheulian, often rolledand ina lower stratigraphical position,was consideredasolder,whilethe Soanian (further sub-divided into two stages) was considered aslater (Teilhard de Chardin, 1936, 1937). In synthesising the dataregarding the Lower Palaeolithic of South and East Asia, Movius(1944, 1948) considered the early Soanian and the Acheulian of thewestern Siwaliks as belonging to the same time period; in hisconclusions he proposed a sketch of the Old World distinguishingtwo Lower Palaeolithic cultural areas: “handaxe culture” and“chopper-chopping tool culture”. Subsequently this concept wasoversimplified and became “the Movius line”. Although the Acheu-lian is acknowledged even by Movius himself in both cultural areas,this famous line is still a matter of debate (Keates, 2002; Corvinus,2004; Petraglia and Shipton, 2008), recently leading to the “Moviusline sensu lato” (Norton et al., 2006; Norton and Bae, 2008) thatactually matches well with the original proposition of Movius.

However, geological and chronological contexts suggest that theearly Soanian, at least in a number of cases, is later than the

Fig. 1. Map of south and south-east Asia showing location of the main sites or regions mentioned in the text.

C. Gaillard et al. / Quaternary International 229 (2011) 112e122 113

Acheulian. Moreover, in central Nepal assemblages mostlycomprising cobble tools are dated between 24 and 20 ka (Kadereitet al., 2007), and in eastern Nepal a rich site yielding cobble toolsalong with adzes/axes akin to Hoabinhian types dates back to EarlyHolocene (Corvinus, 1987, 1989). This latter site known as Patu isa key for understanding the cobble tool industries of the westernSiwaliks (Soanian), and probably also those of the Irrawaddyterraces (Anyathian) in Myanmar (Movius, 1944, 1948). Looking ina broader perspective, it appears that comparable industries arecommon further east in late Pleistocene and early Holocenecontexts, for instance in Thailand and Vietnam. They precede theHoabinhian tradition and progressivelymerge into it. At places theyalready include some of the characteristic Hoabinhian tool types,which are much more significant than the time-transgressive anduniversal cobble tools.

Recent studies of the early Soanian artefacts in the westernSiwaliks lead to the identification of these tool types, suggestingthat the “early” Soanian in many cases if not all probably belongs tothis later phase of the Pleistocene. The abundance of cobbles as rawmaterial along the Himalayan rivers might have prompted prehis-toric populations to use them with minimal modification, just ascobble tools and flakes. As well, the particular landscape in the hillyenvironment of the Siwaliks and its frequent modifications due tocontinuous tectonic activity might have been one of the reasons forthe originality of this tradition when compared to the sharplydifferent contemporaneous industries in peninsular India.

2. Western Siwaliks

From the 1930s, the Western Siwaliks became well known fortheir rich assemblages of prehistoric industries, especially in thePotwar plateau and Soan Valley (Teilhard de Chardin, 1936; Terraand Paterson, 1939). Two technical groups were identified:“Sohan/Soan industry” (Soanian) and Acheulian. The former was

the richest one and was first found at the base of the Potwar loess,assigned to the Upper Pleistocene, and therefore was regarded asthe youngest. It was considered as a local Middle Palaeolithic,especially rich in cobble tools. The latter was usually occurring inthe form of rolled but very typical specimens in the basal gravel ofthe Potwar loess andwas considered as belonging to the underlyingBoulder Conglomerate, the last formation of the Upper Siwaliks(Teilhard de Chardin, 1936, 1937).

Since then many assemblages of different facies have beencollected in the Western Siwaliks (Rendell et al., 1989; Dennell,2004, 2007, 2009; Chauhan, 2007, 2008), especially betweenIndus and Sutlej (Mohapatra, 1966, Mohapatra and Singh, 1979a,b).The Acheulian, characterised by handaxes and cleavers, fits well tothe Acheulian’s variability known in Africa and Eurasia (Gaillardet al., 2008; Singh, in press). The Soanian has been sub-dividedinto different evolutionary stages according to the stratigraphicalorigin and state of preservation (Terra and Paterson, 1939; Patersonand Drummond, 1962). However, the stratigraphical context wasseverely questioned by later field studies (Rendell et al., 1989) andonly two Soanian stages are now referred to (Early and Late Soa-nian), apart from a very rare Final Soanian (Mohapatra, 1974). Thelate Soanian mostly including flakes and cores (sometimes wellorganised), along with cobble tools, is technologically related to theMiddle Palaeolithic (Teilhard de Chardin, 1937; Movius, 1948;Paterson and Drummond, 1962; Sankalia, 1974; Karir, 1985;Lycett, 2007). It is dated to between >57 ka and 20 ka in the Sirsavalley (Fig. 2; Suresh et al., 2002).

The Early Soanian is represented by numerous assemblagesmainly composed of cobble tools (choppers and chopping tools),flakes and cores being occasional. This industry, like the Late Soa-nian, is made from the well silicified quartzite cobbles, usually ofdark colour, transported by the Himalayan rivers from the innermountain ranges. It displays simple technical features and there-fore has for long been assigned to the Lower Palaeolithic like the

Fig. 2. Map of the sub-Himalayan sector between Beas and Ghaggar Rivers, focussing on the Janauri Anticline of the Siwalik Frontal Range and showing the sites where tools withtransversal trimmed cutting edge occur (small circles: 1 tool; medium: 2e5 tools, large: 6e10 tools; very large circles: 11 tools or more).

C. Gaillard et al. / Quaternary International 229 (2011) 112e122114

Acheulian. It was then suggested that people bearing different“cultures” or technical traditions were alternatively “invading” theregion (Terra and Paterson, 1939; Movius, 1944, 1948; Sankalia,1974). However, the early Soanian appears to be later than theAcheulian (Gaillard and Mishra, 2001;Chauhan, 2003, 2008;

Mishra, 2007; Gaillard and Dambricourt Malassé, 2008). On theone hand this latter tradition is dated to between 0.7 and 0.4 Ma inthe Jhelum valley, at Dina and Jalapur (Pakistan; Rendell andDennell, 1985) and it is probably older than 0.6 Ma at Atbarapur(Punjab, India; Gaillard et al., 2008, 2010a,b), on the other hand the

C. Gaillard et al. / Quaternary International 229 (2011) 112e122 115

abundant assemblages of cobble tools representing the early Soa-nian mainly occur on the 2nd and 3rd terraces of the Himalayanrivers, which formed after the post-Siwalik tectonic phase in thesecond half of the Middle Pleistocene. Besides, field observationsshow that the cobble tools are usually much better preserved thanthe Acheulian cleavers or handaxes, and at places they occur indense clusters in a very fresh condition suggesting they have beenmade on the spot and have not been disturbed afterwards.

Recent reassessment of the early Soanian assemblages collectedbetween the Beas and Sutlej Rivers, in association with new fieldwork by the authors (Singh et al., 1999, 2008), resulted in theidentification of several specimens looking more standardised thanthe choppers; with their rectangular, square or sometimes trian-gular shape, they may recall the adze/axe-like tools of the earlyHoabinhian of South-East Asia (Colani, 1936; Forestier, 2000;Forestier et al., 2008; Zeitoun et al., 2008), or of the Sonvian (pre-Hoabinhian) of North Vietnam (Hà Van Tan, 1997, 2001), which areattributed to the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene. In theWestern Siwaliks these adze/axe-like tools, or at least tools witha transversal trimmed cutting edge (Figs. 3e5), usually occur alongwith typical Soanian choppers and chopping tools, in differentlocalities of the Siwalik Frontal Range between Sutlej and BeasRivers, a sector forming the Janauri Anticline. Their maximumconcentration is observed in the area which is facing the Sutlej’deflection zone downstream of Nangal, i.e. when the Sutlejencounters the anticline and turns from NE-SW to NW-SE, (Fig. 2).In this area the final uplift occurred quite late in the Pleistocene andeven possibly in the Holocene, as the Janauri anticline results fromthe junction of two segments that have been growing towards eachother (Delcaillau et al., 2006). As long as they were not connected,the Sutlej continued flowing southwest, at 90� to the tectonicstructure (Malik and Mohanty, 2007). The top of the ridge isbroader and flatter in this junction area, forming a sort of plateau,wherein at places the landscape is littered with quartzite cobblesdeposited by the ancient Sutlej. These were selected by theprehistoric craftsmen for making their tools, mostly choppers ofearly Soanian type, but sometimes also thinner tools with one ortwo transversal cutting edge(s). These assemblages are not dated,but they are definitely later than the deposition of the cobblygravels by the Sutlej, during a high energy (tectonic rather thanclimatic) phase. In the Sirsa-Soan dun (longitudinal valley along thenorth-eastern flank of the Janauri and Chandigarh Anticlines; Fig. 2)the last aggradation phase ended around 20 ka (Kumar et al., 2007).It would have been the same in the Sutlej Valley, to where thesetwo rivers merge upstream the Siwalik crossing, and this date maycorrespond to the period when the river was blocked by theemerging Janauri Anticline. It is difficult to know whether thepopulations who were using the cobbles as raw material hadsettled in this sector at a time when the river was still flowing“straight” through the Siwalik structure, or whether they camelater, probably for encampments of short duration only, in theabsence of a close source of water.

Within the assemblages dominated by choppers, these toolswith transversal trimmed cutting edge look significantly morerefined. Most are made on flakes (nearly 40%) and otherwise on flatcobbles or on split cobbles. They are trimmed on 2e4 of their edgesby unifacial or bifacial flaking, the transversal edge being generallybifacially trimmed. The shaping never hides the original shape ofthe blank support, whose selection or initial production (by flakingor splitting) therefore strongly determines the final toolmorphology. The contour is mostly trapezoidal (35%; Fig. 3(1) and(3)). Square, rectangular (Figs. 3(2) and 4(2)) or pentagonal (Fig. 4(1)) tools are also common. The only 3 triangular tools (Fig. 5(1)),along with some of the trapezoidal ones, clearly resemble the“primitive axe/adze” identified by Colani (1929) in North Vietnam

and the “axes/adzes” found by Corvinus (1987, 1989, 2007) inEastern Nepal (see below).

It is interesting to note that some of these tools show a polishedfacet on one or two lateral side(s), perpendicular to the preferentialcutting edge (Fig. 6(1)). However, no gloss is observed except onone of the rectangular tools, whose surface is almost entirely glossy.Similarly the flakes do not show any gloss on the edge, unlike thosefrom the Nangal-Barmla sites on the left bank of the Sutlej, on thelower terrace dated to 6.2� 0.8 BP (Soni et al., 2008; G.C. pers.observation 2009) or from Amapur in Nepal (Corvinus, 2007).

Close scrutiny of the cobble tools also shows severe abrasion ofsome of the edges, comparable to small polish facets (Fig. 6(2)),while some others have been heavily chipped as if they had beenused for battering or pounding. Many choppers present this type ofwear on one part of their edge only, while the other part looksunworn for a large flake scar having re-sharpened it. The corre-sponding flakes do occur in the field at places: they are charac-terised by frequent step-retouch on the striking platform’s dorsalridge. The cobble tools therefore appear as evolving tools, recur-rently re-sharpened by a large removal that affects one part of theircutting edge only. In general the early Soanian collections actuallyinclude all the stages of modification, from the cobbles onlyshowing a few removals to the intensively reduced cobbles.

3. Nepal

During her 20 years work in Nepal, Gudrun Corvinus laid thefoundations of the prehistory in the central sub-Himalayas, in closerelationwith the Quaternary stratigraphy. Not only did she discoverthe first Acheulian elements (Corvinus, 1990, 1995) in this part ofthe central Siwaliks (dun and frontal range), and excavate a richMiddle Palaeolithic site belonging toMIS 5 or earlyMIS 4 (Corvinus,1994, 2007), but also she found many cobble tool assemblages andshowed that they came from Late Pleistocene deposits. Moreover, atPatu site in Eastern Nepal she discovered a unique “macrolithicMesolithic” assemblage and compared it to the Hoabinhian ofSouth-East Asia, thus suggesting a technical link between theSiwaliks and the South-East Asia (Corvinus, 1987, 1989, 2007).

Her contribution regarding the cobble tool industries is espe-cially interesting when related to the comparable assemblagesfound in the Western Siwaliks. In Nepal this techno-cultural phaseis abundantly represented in the dun as well as in the top of theriver terraces and hill wash deposits (Fig. 1); given such a promi-nence, she named it the “Brakuti industry”. It is characterised byvarious types of cobbles tools but the main component are flakes,apparently resulting from the shaping of the cobble tools; a fewadze/axe-like tools are also noted within these assemblages. Thistype of industry is usually found in the upper part of the yellowsilts in the upper Babai formation, dating to 25e15 ka BP (MIS 2).In the lower part of the same silts, dating to 43e34 ka BP, anassemblage characterised by end-choppers occurs at Sanpmarg ona buried paleosol. Corvinus never compared these industries to theearly Soanian assemblages from the Western Siwaliks, probablyfor the latter being known as Lower Palaeolithic largely dominatedby cobble tools and practically devoid of flakes. Actually sitesyielding large quantities of flakes are extremely rare in the JanauriAnticline, but they do exist as shown by recent field work(Dambricourt Malassé, 2008; Singh et al., 2008). Salient features inboth the Brakuti industry and the so called “early” Soanian fromthe Janauri Anticline are the “rejuvenation flakes” as Corvinus alsointerpreted them. These flakes bear a characteristic “step-flakingor step-retouch at their platform edges on the dorsal face”(Corvinus, 2007: 93).

In Eastern Nepal, the site of Patu (Fig. 1) covers an area of2� 3 km on the higher terrace along the Rato Khola. It has yielded

Fig. 3. Tools with transversal trimmed cutting edge (adze/axe-like tools) from the Janauri anticline, Western Siwalik Frontal Range (drawings).

C. Gaillard et al. / Quaternary International 229 (2011) 112e122116

Fig. 4. Tools with transversal trimmed cutting edge (adze/axe-like tools; shorter shapes) from the Janauri anticline, Western Siwalik Frontal Range.

C. Gaillard et al. / Quaternary International 229 (2011) 112e122 117

a rich (2590 artefacts) “macrolithic Mesolithic” industry mainlycomposed of flakes (80%) along with unifacial and bifacial “adzes”,choppers and core-scrapers. It also includes 6 “sumatraliths”, whichare typical tools of the Hoabinhian. These artefacts are imbedded ina red soil developed in the upper part of the alluvial silt capping theterrace. Originally they might have been abandoned on the surfaceof the silt and later buried in it by bioturbation. A charcoal found inthe same horizon as the artefacts provided a date of 7 ka BP andtherefore a minimum age for the industry. Nearly half of the 83“adzes” show a very distinct gloss on their transversal edge. Thisassemblage made from quartzite cobbles and boulders by splittingand flaking is interpreted as mainly oriented towards wood orbamboo working (Corvinus, 1987, 1989, 2007).

4. South-east Asia

The Hoabinhian was identified by Madeleine Colani in the late1920s on the basis of lithic assemblages from the region of HoaBinh,east of Hanoi in North Vietnam (Fig. 1; Colani, 1927, 1929). It hasbeen recognised inmost parts of Mainland South-east Asia to SouthChina, Myanmar, and Malaysia (Zuraina Majid, 1990) and inSumatra (Forestier et al., 2005), where the “sumatraliths” had firstbeen described. These large oval tools, unifacially shaped are themost typical stone artefact of this “industry” rather than “techno-complex” or “material culture” (Bowdler, 2008) but in most of the

sites the lithic assemblages are mainly composed of cobble tools,core tools and flakes. Some triangular “primitive axes” (Colani,1927, 1929) and rectangular tools are also reported from NorthVietnam (especially from the Xom Trai cave, near HoaBinh; Hà VanTan, 1997) and from Northern Thailand (Zeitoun et al., 2008). Thevarious studies on these lithic assemblages (reviewed by Marwick,2007) usually conclude that they were mainly used for workingwood and various vegetal matters.

In Northern Vietnam, the Xom Trai cave providing a typicalHoabinhian industry is dated by 14C to between 18 and 17 ka BP (HàVan Tan, 1997). In Huang Cho rockshelter, the first occupationoccurred around 30 ka BP (Yi et al., 2008), but the first stages mayinclude only cobble tools and flakes without the typical large uni-facial tools known as “sumatraliths”. In several Vietnamese sites theindustries preceding the Hoabinhian are identified as Sonvian (HàVan Tan, 1997). In Thailand, especially in the rich province of Kan-chanaburi, the Hoabinhian covers the time range of about 32e7 kaBP (Santoni et al., 1990; Shoocongdej, 2000). In the north, the lowerlevels in Tham Lod rockshelter are dated TL to 35 ka (Shoocongdej,2006) but it is not clear whether Hoabinhian tools are from theselower levels. Similarly in South Thailand, the Hoabinhian startsaround 35 ka BP at Lang Rongrien (Anderson, 1990), while at MohKhiew, the lower level yielding a local facies of the Hoabinhian(Moser, 2001) is dated to 25 ka BP (Pookajorn, 2001). However,unlike in Vietnam, it is not sure in South Thailand andMalaysia that

Fig. 5. Tools with transversal trimmed cutting edge (adze/axe-like tools; triangular and elongated shapes) from the Janauri anticline, Western Siwalik Frontal Range.

C. Gaillard et al. / Quaternary International 229 (2011) 112e122118

there is continuity between the earlier technical stages and thetypical Hoabinhian (Bellwood, 1997).

Hoabinhian settlements are found both in caves or shelters andin the open. The formers provide good information regarding theenvironment and subsistence behaviour of people who made andused such tool kits. These people were foragers and movingaccording to the seasons; they probably had different strategiesduring the wet and dry seasons. Their sites are usually located in

forested environments and the stone artefacts are associated withlarge quantities of fresh water or sea shells (often boiled or burnedat Moh Khiew; Pookajorn, 2001) and bones from small to mediumsized animals (Shoocongdej, 2000; Auetrakulvit, 2004). Some sites,as in Vietnam, also yield abundant nuts, provided by an environ-ment that was forested even during the colder but not dry LastGlacial Maximum (Viet, 2008). Open-air sites are especially char-acterised by huge accumulations of shells. A large number of such

Fig. 6. Polished marks on (1) the cortical side of a tool with transversal trimmed cutting edge (adze/axe-like tool) and (2) both ends of a chopper edge.

C. Gaillard et al. / Quaternary International 229 (2011) 112e122 119

shell middens occur along the north-east coast of Sumatra and inthe Malay Peninsula. They attest a human occupation from 12 to3 ka (McKinnon, 1990; Forestier, 2007). More than the cave sites,they indicate an intensive exploitation of the marine or river foodresources, but game from the forest is also found.

Wood and especially bamboo were probably used as main rawmaterials, as they are nowadays, for all the activities of the day today life (Pope, 1989; Forestier, 2003). This might have given itsspecificity to the “Hoabinhian”, which has to be better defined, notonly on technological terms but also in relation to the chrono-climatic variations, subsistence strategies and territories (Zeitounet al., 2008).

5. Discussion

All the industries presented here, mainly composed of unre-touched flakes, cobble tools and a few tools with transversaltrimmed cutting edge (adze/axe-like tools), occur in sites located inthe sub-Himalayan belt (between the Main Boundary Thrust andthe Himalayan Frontal Fault) and its eastern continuation innorthern South-east Asia. They belong to a geographic area occu-pied, nowadays, by the monsoon forest (clearly visible on satelliteviews such as Fig. 1), of which bamboo is a typical component. Thisforest grades into the tropical rain forest towards the south-eastand to the mountain forest on the Himalayan slopes; it is borderedby the Alpine and savannah biomes and may be replaced by themaccording to the climate fluctuations.

It is difficult to reconstruct the exact landscape and environmentassociated to these particular lithic industries, all the more as theyencompass several climatic phases including the end of the MIS 3,

then the entire last glacial cycle as well as the subsequent warmingand cooling phases of the first part of the Holocene. During thisperiod the stone tool kit did not change much, apart from anincreasing number of tools with a transversal trimmed cuttingedge.

In the Nepali sub-Himalayas, these industries date back to 25 kaBP. They are even earlier (34e43 ka BP) at Sanpmarg, where theartefacts are lying on a red soil indicating milder conditions(Corvinus, 2007). They probably last till the beginning of theHolocene, as observed at Patu site, where they are also associated toa red soil. In the Janauri Anticline of Western Siwaliks, betweenBeas and Sutlej, they may date back to 20 ka or older, and inNorthern South-east Asia, the Hoabinhian (and Sonvian in Viet-nam) cover the same time period. In the North-West, comparableassemblages have been observed in the aceramic Neolithic of Sri-nagar valley (Pant et al., 1982) or in the upper Yarkhun Valley ofNorthern Pakistan (Gaillard et al., 2002; Dambricourt Malassé andGaillard, this issue). These industries did not change much till themid-Holocene, despite the global climatic alternation of cold andwarm phases.

However, the sub-Himalayan belt provides specific conditionsduring the climate changes, whichmay be favourable to continuous(or nearly continuous) human occupation. The strong gradient ofthe mountain slopes offers refuges for the vegetation, whichremains quite stable despite the climatic changes, since slightupwards or downwards shifts allows the biomes finding again theirspecific climatic conditions. This is observed for instance on theslopes of Tibetan Plateau in Eastern China (Qiu et al., 2009).Moreover the last glacial maximum (LGM) was not as severe as inmost parts of theworld. In the Himalayas, themaximal extension of

C. Gaillard et al. / Quaternary International 229 (2011) 112e122120

the glaciers occurred during MIS 3, earlier than the globalmaximum (Owen et al., 2002). In the Kumaun Himalaya andLadakh, for instance, the lake deposits have recorded detailedclimatic alternations. Many lakes in this sector have formed asa consequence of a regional tectonic event that happened around40 ka. At that time the climate was rather dry and cold; then itbecame more humid between 35 and 30 ka (Kotlia et al., 1997,2000). This latter phase may be in relation with the paleosol atSanpmarg in Nepal with cobble tool industry lying on it. Aftera short alternation (cold and dry, thenwarm and humid), the majorglacial phase is recorded between 29 and 21.7 ka cal. BP in Kumaun(Kotlia et al., 2000) or between 28 and 21 ka BP in Ladakh(Bhattacharya, 1989), while only a short cold event is observedaround 18 ka BP (Sharma, 1995), at the time of the global LGM. InNorth Thailand the late Pleistocene vegetation is forested with pineand oak as characteristic taxa (White et al., 2004). In North Vietnamcharred plant remains and especially walnut trees indicate thatduring the LGM the conditions were rather cool but not dry (Viet,2008). Therefore, the global LGM (18� 2 14C ka BP, correspondingto 21�2 cal ka BP) was not the harshest period of the late Pleis-tocene in the Himalayas: due to dryness and snowfall decrease, theice cover could not spread. The glaciers did not extend beyond10 km of the present day ice margin (Owen et al., 2002) and amongall the tropical and sub-tropical glaciers of the world, the Hima-layan glaciers show the smallest equilibrium-line altitude drop(100 m) from the present day altitude (Mark et al., 2005). Moreover,it appears that the climate variations are less abrupt in the Asianmonsoon zone (Shakun et al., 2007). In the Andaman Sea thetemperature during the LGM is estimated to be about 3 �C less thanduring the late Holocene (Rashid et al., 2007).

The relative stability of the forested environment and theabundance of perennial rivers and other water sources such aslakes, possibly linked to the constant tectonic activity, havecertainly favoured a particular way of life that remained more orless the same throughout the late Pleistocene and early Holocene,until the Neolithic. The use of bamboo, wood and various types ofvegetal rawmaterials may have induced the particular aspect of thelithic tool kit; some other tasks may also be involved. For examplethe cobble tool and flake industry from Votaw site on the SnakeRiver (Washington State, USA) is supposed to be associated withfishing activities (Andrefsky, 2007). The abundance of shellfish inthe Hoabinhian sites supports the idea of a subsistence strategyclosely linked to the water foods. Why not apply this pattern to theWestern Siwaliks, as the Soanian sites are mostly settled along therivers? To date, the cobble tool assemblages have not been shownto be associated with shells; the absence of faunal remains in theseopen-air sites prevents any approach of the subsistence pattern(large or small game, shellfish, fish, etc.) and strategies (hunting,trapping, vegetal food collection, etc.). There is no possibility eitherto know how long the settlements lasted at each place, whetherthey were seasonally recurrent, and how wide were the territoriesof these foraging populations. The continuity of the forested envi-ronment all along the sub-Himalayan belt and its south-easternextension was certainly favourable to population movements,especially as the upland regions (above 400 m) have been shown tobe particularly rich in resources during the entire Palaeolithic,providing opportunities to people to migrate eastwards (Schepartzet al., 2000) and probably westwards too. This “latitudinal” circu-lation, or rather circulation along the geological structures infollowing similar geomorphological features, might have beenforced by the marked contrast between the hilly forested envi-ronment, rich in quartzitic or other siliceous raw material (as far asstone is concerned), and the indo-gangetic plain lacking suchmaterial (Dennell, 2007) and therefore implying other behaviours.The sharply different lithic industries in peninsular India, where

blade and bladelet technology is widely applied in the same timeperiod, confirm that this vast plainwas a barrier, or at least a borderseparating two types of behaviours. As the Movius line is slowlyvanishing from the concepts regarding the Asian Lower Palae-olithic, this new line, partly superimposed to the former one,appears as clearly related to the late Pleistocene and early Holoceneenvironment.

References

Agrawal, D.P., 1982. The archaeology of India. Scandinavian Institute of AsianStudies Monograph Series 46, 294.

Anderson, D., 1990. Lang Rongrien Rockshelter: A Pleistocene, Early HoloceneArchaeological Site from Krabi, Southwestern Thailand. The UniversityMuseum, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.

Andrefsky Jr., W., 2007. Cobble tool or cobble core: exploring alternative typologies.In: McPherron, S.P. (Ed.), Tools Versus Cores: Alternative Approaches to StoneTool Analysis. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle, p. 280.

Auetrakulvit, P., 2004. Faunes du Pléistocène final à l’Holocène de Thaïlande:approche archéozoologique. Université de Provence, Faculté des lettres etsciences humaines, unpublished Ph.D. Thesis, 433 p.

Bellwood, P., 1997. Prehistory of Indo-Malaysian Archipelago. University of HawaiiPress, 384 p.

Bhattacharya, A., 1989. Vegetation and climate during the last 30,000 years inLadakh. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology 73, 25e38.

Bowdler S., 2008. Hoabinhian and non-Hoabinhian. In: Pautreau, J.P., Coupey A.S.,Zeitoun V., Rambault E. (Eds.), From Homo erectus to the living traditions.Papers from the 11th International Conference of the EurASEAA, Siam RatanaLtd. Part, Chiang Mai, pp. 59e66.

Chauhan, P., 2003. An Overview of the Siwalik Acheulian and Reconsidering ItsChronological Relationship with the Soanian e A Theoretical Perspective.Assemblage 7. Available from: http://www.shef.ac.uk/assem.

Chauhan, P.R., 2007. Soanian cores and core-tools from Toka, northern India:towards a new typo-technological organization. Journal of AnthropologicalArchaeology 26 (3), 412e441.

Chauhan, P.R., 2008. Soanian lithic occurrences and raw material exploitation in theSiwalik Frontal Zone, northern India: a geoarchaeological perspective. Journalof Human Evolution 54, 591e614.

Colani, M., 1927. L’âge de la Pierre dans la province de Hoa-Binh (Tonkin). Mémoiresdu service géologique de l’Indochine 14 (1), 95.

Colani, M., 1929. Quelques paléolithes hoabiniens typiques de l’abri sous roche deLang-Kay. Bulletin de la Société Préhistorique Française 6, 354e384.

Colani, M., 1936. Recherches sur le préhistorique indochinois. Extraits du Bulletin del’École Français d’Extrême Orient 30 (3e4), 126.

Corvinus, G., 1987. Patu, a new stone age site of a jungle habitat in Nepal. Quartär37/38, 135e187.

Corvinus, G., 1989. The Patu industry in its environment in the Siwaliks in easternNepal. Quartär 39/40, 95e123.

Corvinus, G., 1990. A note on the first discovery of handaxes in Nepal. Man andEnvironment 15 (2), 9e11.

Corvinus, G., 1994. Prehistoric occupation sites in the DangeDeokhuri Valleys ofwestern Nepal. Man and Environment 19, 73e89.

Corvinus, G., 1995. The Satpati handaxe site and the Chabeni uniface site inSouthern Nepal. (A handaxe site in tectonically folded alluvial sandstones at thefrontal Himalayan thrust zone). Quartär 45/46, 15e36.

Corvinus, G., 2004. Homo erectus in East and Southeast Asia, and the questions ofthe age of the species and its association with stone artifacts, with specialattention to handaxe-like tools. Quaternary International 117, 141e151.

Corvinus, G., 2007. Prehistoric cultures in Nepal. Harrassowitz Verlag Wiesbaden 1and 2, pp. 383, 263.

Dambricourt Malassé, A., 2008. Le peuplement humain en Eurasie: l’Asie centralemontagneuse et les piémonts sous-himalayens du Plio-Pléistocène à l’Holo-cène, origines, évolution humaine et migrations. L’Anthropologie 112 (3),370e403.

Dambricourt Malassé, A., Gaillard, C., this issue. Relations between climatic changesand prehistoric human migrations during Holocene between Gissar Range,Pamir, Hindu-Kush and Kashmir: the archaeological and ecological data.Quaternary International.

Delcaillau, B., Carozza, J.M., Laville, E., 2006. Recent fold growth and drainagedevelopment: the Janauri and Chandigarh anticlines in the Siwalik foothills,northwest India. Geomorphology 76, 241e256.

Dennell, R.W., 2004. Early Hominin landscapes in the Pabbi Hills, Northern Pakistan.British Archaeological Reports International Series 1265, 454.

Dennell, R.W., 2007. Resource-rich, stone poor: early hominin land use in large riversystems of Northern India and Pakistan. In: Petraglia, M., Allchin, B. (Eds.), TheEvolution and History of Human Populations in South Asia. Springer,Netherlands, pp. 41e68.

Dennell, R., 2009. The Palaeolithic Settlement of Asia. Cambridge World Archae-ology, Cambridge University Press.

Dennell, R.W., Rendell, H., Hailwood, E., 1988. Early tool-making in Asia: two-million-year-old artefacts in Pakistan. Antiquity 62, 98e106.

C. Gaillard et al. / Quaternary International 229 (2011) 112e122 121

Forestier, H., 2000. Chaînes opératoires lithiques en Asie du Sud-Est au Pléistocènesupérieur final et au début de l’Holocène. L’Anthropologie 104, 531e548.

Forestier, H., 2003. Des outils nés de la forêt. L’importance du végétal en Asie duSud-Est dans l’imagination et l’invention technique aux périodes pré-historiques. In: Froment, A., Guffroy, J. (Eds.), Actes du colloque: Peuplementsanciens et actuels des forêts tropicales, Ermes-IRD, Coll. Colloques et sémin-aires, pp. 315e337.

Forestier, H., 2007. Les éclats du passé préhistorique de Sumatra: une longue his-toire des techniques. Archipel 74, 15e44.

Forestier, H., Simanjuntak, H.T., Guillaud, D., Driwantoro, D., WiradnyanaI, K.,Siregar, D., Due Awe, R., Budiman, 2005. Le site de Tögi Ndrawa, île de Nias,Sumatra nord: les premières traces d’une occupation préhistorique Hoa-binhienne en grotte en Indonésie. Compte Rendu Palevol (Académie desSciences, Paris) 4, 727e733.

Forestier, H., Zeitoun, V., Maitay, C., Winayalai, C., 2008. The Hoabinhian site of HuaiHin (Northern Thailand). In: Pautreau, J.P., Coupey A.S., Zeitoun V., Rambault E.(Eds.), From Homo Erectus to the Living Traditions. Papers from the 11thInternational Conference of the European Association of Southeast AsianArchaeologist, Bougon 2006, Siam Ratana Ltd. Part, Chiang Mai, pp. 67e72.

Forestier, H., Zeitoun, V., Tiamtinki, C., Boonyai, S., Winayalai, C., Auetrakulvit, P.,2006. Lames du Neolithique dans les carrières de Nan (Nord de la Thaïlande).Aséanie 18, 47e81.

Gaillard, C., Dambricourt Malassé, A., 2008. Les principales étapes de l’occupationhumaine en bordure de l’Himalaya occidentale, vol. 112. L’Anthropologie, Paris,pp. 404e422.

Gaillard, C., Dambricourt-Malassé, A., Magraner, J., Maîtrerobert, A., Taj, Ali,Voisin, J.-L., Abdul, Nasir, 2002. Discovery of recent lithic industries with archaicfeatures in the Hindu Kusch range (Chitral district, North Pakistan). Bulletin ofthe Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association 22, 25e33.

Gaillard, C., Mishra, S., 2001. The Lower Palaeolithic in South Asia. In: Sémah, F.,Falguères, Ch., Grimaud-Hervé, D., Sémah, A.-M. (Eds.), Origine des peuple-ments et chronologie des cultures paléolithiques dans le Sud-Est Asiatique.Semenanjung-Artcom, Paris, pp. 73e91.

Gaillard, C., Mishra, S., Singh, M., Deo, S., Abbas, R., 2010a. Lower and early MiddlePleistocene Acheulian in the Indian sub-continent. Quaternary International.doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2009.08.021.

Gaillard, C., Mishra, S., Singh, M., Deo, S., Abbas, R., 2010b. Reply to Chauhan 2010:comments on lower and early Middle Pleistocene Acheulian in the Indian sub-continent. Quaternary International. doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2010.01.022.

Gaillard, C., Singh, M., Rishi, K.K., 2008. Technological analysis of the Acheulianassemblage from Atbarapur in the Siwalik Range (Hoshiarpur District, Punjab).Man and Environment 33 (2), 1e14.

Hà Van Tan, 1997. The Hoabinhian and before. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific PrehistoryAssociation 16, 35e41.

Hà Van Tan, 2001. Perspectives de recherche sur le Paléolithique au Viêt Nam. In:Sémah, F., Falguères, C., Grimaud-Hervé, D., Sémah, A.-M. (Eds.), Origine despeuplements et chronologie des cultures paléolithiques dans le Sud-Est Asiat-ique. Semenanjung-Artcom, Paris, pp. 139e148.

I.A.R., 1961e1962. Indian Archaeology e A Review. Archaeological Survey of India,New Delhi.

I.A.R., 1964e1965. Indian Archaeology e A Review. Archaeological Survey of India,New Delhi.

Kadereit, A., Wagner, G.A., Corvinus, G., 2007. OSL/IRSL fine-grain dating. A prelimi-nary chronology of Quaternary slopewash and alluvial deposits from the DunValleys of Dang andDeokhuri inwesternNepal. Appendix II. In: Corvinus, G. (Ed.),Prehistoric Cultures in Nepal. Harrassowitz Verlag, Wiesbaden, pp. 372e379.

Karir, B.S., 1985. Geomorphology and Stone Age Culture of North-Western India.Sundeep Prakashan, Delhi, 156 p.

Keates, S.G., 2002. The movius line: fact or fiction? Bulletin of the Indo-PacificPrehistory Association 22, 17e24.

Kotlia, B.S., Bhalla, M.S., Sharma, C., Rajagopalan, G., Ramesh, R., Chauhan, M.S.,Mathur, P.D., Bhandari, S., Chacko, S.T., 1997. Palaeoclimatic conditions in theupper Pleistocene and Holocene Bhimtal-Naukuchiatal lake basin in south-central Kumaun, North India. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palae-oecology 130, 307e322.

Kotlia, B.S., Sharma, C., Bhalla, M.S., Rajagopalan, G., Subrahmanyam, K.,Bhattacharyya, A., Valdiya, K.S., 2000. Palaeoclimatic conditions in the latePleistocene Wadda Lake, eastern Kumaun Himalaya (India). Palaeogeography,Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology 162, 105e118.

Kumar, R., Suresh, N., Sangode, S.J., 2007. Differential features of alluvial fans in thePinjaur-Soan Dun, NW Himalaya, India: controlling factors. Himalayan Geology28 (1), 37e46.

Lycett, S.J., 2007. Is the Soanian techno-complex a Mode 1 or Mode 3 phenomenon?A morphometric assessment. Journal of Archaeological Science 34, 1434e1440.

Malik, J.N., Mohanty, C., 2007. Active tectonic influence on the evolution of drainageand landscape: geomorphic signatures from frontal and hinterland areas alongthe Northwestern Himalaya, India. Journal of Asian Earth Sciences 29, 604e618.

Mark, B.G., Harrison, S.P., Spessa, A., New, M., Evans, D.J.A., Helmens, K.F., 2005.Tropical snowline changes at the last glacial maximum: a global assessment.Quaternary International 138e139, 168e201.

Marwick, B., 2007. Approaches to flaked stone artefact archaeology in Thailand:a historical review. Silpakorn University International Journal 7, 49e88.

McKinnon, E.E., 1990. The Hoabinhian in the Wampu/Lau Biang valley of North-eastern Sumatra: an update. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association10, 132e142.

Mishra, S., 2007. The Indian Lower Palaeolithic. Bulletin of the Deccan College Post-graduate and Research Institute 66e67, 47e94.

Mohapatra, G.C., 1966. Preliminary report of the exploration an excavation of thestone age sites in eastern Punjab. Bulletin of the Deccan College ResearchInstitute 25, 221e237.

Mohapatra, G.C., 1974. Lithic industries of Himachal Pradesh. In: Ghosh, A.K. (Ed.),Perspective in Palaeoanthropology. Firma K.L, Mukhopadyay, Calcutta, pp.199e212.

Mohapatra, G.C., Singh, M., 1979a. Stratified occurrence of lithic artifacts in theSiwalik frontal range of western sub-Himalaya. Panjab University ResearchBulletin (Arts) 10 (1e2), 65e77.

Mohapatra, G.C., Singh, M., 1979b. Prehistoric investigations in a sub-HimalayanValley, Himachal Pradesh, India. Current Anthropology 20, 600e602.

Moser, J., 2001. Hoabinhian, geographie und chronologie eines steinzeitlichentechnocomplexes in Südostasien. AVA-Forshungen 6, 256.

Movius, H.L., 1944. Early man and Pleistocene stratigraphy in Southern and EasternAsia. Papers of the Peabody Museum 19 (3), 125.

Movius, H.L., 1948. The Lower Palaeolithic cultures of Southern and Eastern Asia.Transactions of the American Philosophical Society 38 (4), 329e420.

Norton, C.J., Bae, K., Harris, J.W.K., Lee, H., 2006. Middle Pleistocene handaxes fromthe Korean Peninsula. Journal of Human Evolution 51, 527e536.

Norton, C.J., Bae, K., 2008. The Movius Line sensu lato (Norton et al., 2006) furtherassessed and defined. Journal of Human Evolution 55, 1148e1150.

Owen, L.A., Finkel, R.C., Caffee, M.W., 2002. A note on the extent of glaciationthroughout the Himalaya during the global Last Glacial Maximum. QuaternaryScience Reviews 21 (1e3), 147e157.

Pant, R.K., Gaillard, C., Nautiyal, V., Gaur, G.S., Shali, S.L., 1982. Some new lithic andceramic industries from Kashmir. Man and Environment 6, 37e40.

Paterson, T.T., Drummond, H.J.H., 1962. Soan the Palaeolithic of Pakistan, vol. 2.Memoir of the Department of Archaeology, Pakistan, Karachi.

Petraglia, M.D., Shipton, C., 2008. Large cutting tool variation west and east of theMovius Line. Journal of Human Evolution 55, 962e966.

Pookajorn, S., 2001. New perspectives for Palaeolithic research in Thailand. In:Sémah, F., Falguères, C., Grimaud-Hervé, D., Sémah, A.-M. (Eds.), Origine despeuplements et chronologie des cultures paléolithiques dans le Sud-Est Asiat-ique. Semenanjung-Artcom, Paris, pp. 167e187.

Pope, G.G., 1989. Bambou and human evolution. Natural History 10, 49e57.Qiu, Y.X., Guan, B.C., Fu, C.X., Comes, H.P., 2009. Did glacials and/or interglacials

promote allopatric incipient speciation in East Asian temperate plants? Phy-logeographic and coalescent analyses on refugial isolation and divergence inDysosma versipellis. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 51, 281e293.

Rashid, H., Flower, B.P., Poore, R.Z., Quinn, T.M., 2007. A w25 ka Indian Oceanmonsoon variability record from the Andaman Sea. Quaternary Science Review26, 2586e2597.

Rendell, H., Dennell, R.W., 1985. Dated Lower Palaeolithic artefacts from northernPakistan. Current Anthropology 26 (3), 393.

Rendell, H.M., Dennell, R.W., Halim, M.A., 1989. Pleistocene and Palaeolithicinvestigations in the Soan Valley, Northern Pakistan. In: British ArchaeologicalReports International Series, vol. 544. Oxford, 346 p.

Sankalia, H.D., 1974. Prehistory and Protohistory of India and Pakistan. DeccanCollege Postgraduate and Research Institute, Poona. 529.

Santoni, M., Pautreau, J.P., Prischanschit, S., 1990. Excavations at Obluang, Provinceof Chiang Mai, Thailand. In: Glover, I., Glover, E. (Eds.), Southeast AsianArchaeology 1986. Proceedings of the first conference of the Association ofSoutheast Asian Archaeologists. British Archaeological Research Internationalseries, 561, Oxford, Archaeopress, pp. 37e54.

Schepartz, L.A., Miller-Antonio, S., Bakken, D.A., 2000. Upland resources and theearly Palaeolithic occupation of Southern China, Vietnam, Laos, Thailand andBurma. World Archaeology 32 (1), 1e13.

Shakun, J.D., Burns, S.J., Fleitmann, D., Kramers, J., Matter, A., Al-Subary, A., 2007. Ahigh-resolution, absolute-dated deglacial speleothem record of Indian Oceanclimate from Socotra Island, Yemen. Earth and Planetary Science Letters 259,442e456.

Sharma, K.K., 1995. Quaternary stratigraphy and prehistory of the Upper IndusValley, Ladakh. In: Wadia, S., Korisettar, R., Kale, V.S. (Eds.), Quaternary Envi-ronments and Geoarchaeology of India. Geological Society of India, Bangalore,pp. 98e108.

Shoocongdej, R., 2000. Forager mobility organization in seasonal tropical environ-ments of western Thailand. World Archaeology 32, 1. Archaeology in SoutheastAsia, 14e40.

Shoocongdej, R., 2006. Late Pleistocene activities at the Tham Lod rockshelter inhighland Pang Mapha, Mae Hong Son province, northwestern Thailand. In:Bacus, E., Glover, I., Pigott, V. (Eds.), Uncovering Southeast Asia’s Past. SingaporeUniversity Press, pp. 22e37.

Singh, M., in press. Acheulian in the Siwaliks of North-Western India. Proceedings ofthe international conference on Les cultures à bifaces du Pléistocène inférieur etmoyen dans le monde. Émergence du sens de l’harmonie, Tautavel 25e30juillet 2007.

Singh, M., Chopra, S.N., Karir, B.S., 2008. Prehistoric Investigations in the SiwalikFrontal Ranges of the Punjab (Part II: Between Jaijon-Doaba and Roopnagar).Society for Archaeological and Anthropological Research, and Department ofCultural Affairs, Archaeology and Museum, Government of Punjab, Chandigarh,218 p. (unpublished report).

Singh, M., Karir, B.S., Chopra, S.N., 1999. Prehistoric and Quaternary Studies of theRoop Nagar District of Punjab, Research Project Sponsored by the Government

C. Gaillard et al. / Quaternary International 229 (2011) 112e122122

of Punjab. Department of Cultural Affairs, Archaeology & Museums, Chandigarh,265 p. (unpublished report).

Soni, A.S., Soni, V.S., Dhillon, D.S., 2008. Large assemblages of flakes and cores foundon dated young terraces of River Satluj and its tributaries. Current Science 94(5), 577e580.

Stakul, G., 1981. Cultural change in the Swat Valley and beyond, c. 3000e1400 BC.In: Allchin, B. (Ed.), South Asian Archaelogy 1981, Proceedings of the SixthInternational Conference of the Association of South Asian Archaeologists inWestern Europe, Cambridge University 5e10 July 1981. Cambridge UniversityPress, pp. 205e212.

Suresh, N., Bagati, T.N., Thakur, V.C., Kumar, R., Sangode, S.J., 2002. Optically stim-ulated luminescence dating of alluvial fan deposits of Pinjaur Dun, NW SubHimalaya. Current Science 82, 1267e1274.

Teilhard de Chardin, P., 1936. Joint geological and prehistoric studies in the lateCenozoic in India. Science 83 (2149), 233e236.

Teilhard de Chardin, P., 1937. Notes sur la Paléontologie humaine en Asie Mér-idionale. L’Anthropologie (Paris) 47, 23e33.

Terra, H. de, Paterson, T.T., 1939. Studies on the Ice Age in India and AssociatedHuman Cultures, vol. 493. Carnegie Institution of Washington Publications,Washington, 350 p.

Viet, N., 2008. Hoabinhian macrobotanical remains from archaeological sites inVietnam: indicators of climate changes from the Late Pleistocene to theEarly Holocene. Bulletin of the Indo-Pacific Prehistory Association 28,80e83.

White, J.C., Penny, D., Kealhofer, L., Maloney, B., 2004. Vegetation changes from thelate Pleistocene through the Holocene from three areas of archaeologicalsignificance in Thailand. Quaternary International 113, 111e132.

Yi, S., Lee, J.J., Kim, S., Yoo, Y., Kim, D., 2008. New data on the Hoabinhian: inves-tigations at Hang Cho cave, Northern Vietnam. Bulletin of the Indo-PacificPrehistory Association 28, 73e79.

Zeitoun, V., Forestier, H., Nakbunlung, S., 2008. Préhistoire au sud du Triangle d’Or.IRD Éditions, 252 p.

Zuraina Majid, 1990. The Tampanian Problem Resolved. Modern QuaternaryResearch in South-East Asia 11, 71e96.