Is Hafting Technology a Driving Force of Difference in Paleolithic Technological Evolution Between East and West? A Novel Hypothesis
The contrast in technological trajectories between East and West has stimulated debates about the reasons for such differences since the proposal of the Movius Line in the 1940s. We rephrase the East–West contrasts from ergonomic and functional perspectives: (1) the long-lasting use of handheld tools in the East versus the emerging use of hafted tools in the West around the early Middle Pleistocene or later, and (2) stone-tipped hunting tools were becoming popular in the West during the Middle Stone Age/Middle Paleolithic, whereas they were nearly absent in the East before the Late Paleolithic. By evaluating the impacts of hafting technology and stone-tipped weapons on the morphology and structure of lithic parts, we consider that they may have initiated a new technological path based on hafting. We propose that the scarcity of hafting technology, especially hafted hunting tools, may help explain the limited advances in lithic technology in the East.
Authors
- 蓝祥西
- Justin Guibert (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9426-6250)
- Christophe Griggo (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2040-9546)
- Hubert Forestier (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9720-8515)
- Isis Mesfin (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1322-6925)
- Yuduan Zhou (ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5999-5047)
- Ruxi Yang
Institutions
- University of Johannesburg (ZA)
- Wuhan University (CN)
- Sorbonne Université (FR)
- Histoire Naturelle des Humanités Préhistoriques (FR)
- Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle (FR)
- Université Toulouse - Jean Jaurès (FR)
- Musée national d'histoire naturelle Luxembourg (LU)
- Pôle de recherche et d'enseignement supérieur Université de Grenoble (FR)
- Université Grenoble Alpes (FR)
Publication Details
- Journal
- Lithic Technology
- Published
- 2026-10-15
- DOI
- https://doi.org/10.1080/01977261.2026.2747599
- Primary Topic
- Pleistocene-Era Hominins and Archaeology
- Type
- article
- Field-Weighted Citation Impact
- 0.00
Funders
- National Social Science Fund of China