MAJOR THEME 1: LITHIC STUDIES AND ALLIED TOPICS
SESSION
1A: REVISITING THE MOVIUS LINE: A REASSESSMENT OF THE EASTERN
PALAEOLITHIC (Susan Keates and Nicolas Rolland) (keats20039@yahoo.co.uk, rolland@uvic.ca)
This session is planned to be a forum for a
re-evaluation of the Palaeolithic record of the East, namely East, Northeast,
South and Southeast Asia, and specifically of
the Movius Line. In light of a larger artefactual record since Hallam Movius
examined Palaeolithic assemblages and collections in the East, including the
more recent discoveries of bifaces and handaxes (in China,
Korea,
etc.), the validity of the Movius Line has been called into question by several
archaeologists. We take this opportunity to invite experts of the Eastern
Palaeolithic to present papers and join in discussions at the next IPPA
Congress in Manila, the Philippines.
We propose a number of topics in order to
examine the archaeological record of this region within a more or less
comprehensive framework: the biogeographic, ecological, climatic, and
chronological context in which mammals and humans existed; the Palaeolithic
record and its behavioural implications; the human fossil record. Questions to
be considered include: What were the ecological constraints of Eastern hominids
in the Pleistocene? What was the evolutionary history of mammals and what can
it tell us about the Pleistocene environment? What was the significance of so-called
geographical barriers: is there evidence for the biological and cultural
isolation of Eastern hominids? How can the overall conservative character of
tool technology in the East be explained? Was hominid technology in these
regions constrained by the kind of lithic materials available? What is the
distribution, chronology and function of bifaces and handaxes? What kind of
environments are they found in? Are these artefacts of regional or non-regional
origin? Of what significance may non-lithic materials for tool manufacture have
been?
Presentations: Speakers are asked to submit
titles and abstracts for this session corresponding with the issues relevant to
the themes covered. Other aspects not mentioned here may also be explored so
long as they are within the general framework of the session's aims. Field- and
museum reports should be directly relevant to the session's aim. Potential
speakers are asked to contact the organisers for further information.
Monday 20 March
Claire
Gaillard (Département de
Préhistoire du Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Paris) and Mukesh Singh
(Society for Archaeological and Anthropological Studies, Chandigarh):
Large cutting tools in Acheulian and non
Acheulian sites in the Siwalks of north-western India
Susan G. Keates (Columbia, MO, U.S.A.): A
preliminary framework of technology, classification and chronology of Eastern Palaeolithic bifaces
Rasmi Shoocongdej (Department of Archaeology, Silpakorn University):
Late Pleistocene lithic assemblages from
Highland Pang Mapha, Northwestern Thailand
Johan Kamminga (Department of Archaeology and Natural History, Australian National
University): The Hoabinhian at Sai Yok in central Thailand
Truman
Simanjuntak (Archaeological Research
Center, Jakarta)
and Hubert Forestier (IRD, Jakarta): Once upon a time in South Sumatra : The
Acheulian stone tools of the Ogan
River
SESSION
1B: TECHNOLOGY, EXCHANGE, AND IDEOLOGY: NEW APPROACHES TO THE STUDY OF VOLCANIC
GLASS (Robin Torrence, Australian
Museum, Sydney) (robint@austmus.gov.au)
The purpose of the session is to review new
developments in the study of volcanic glass (obsidian and basaltic glass)
across the whole region comprising East Asia, SE Asia
and the Pacific region. This session will enable a large group of people to
meet and share information for the first time. Although there have been several
international conferences on obsidian studies recently, a number of the people
in this group have not met, specifically students from Australia and scholars from Russia and Korea.
Tuesday 21 March
Introduction
Robin
Torrence (Australian
Museum)
Characterisation Studies
Musao Suzuki (Rikkyo University)
What are the prerequisites and limitations of source identification of
archaeological obsidians?
J.C. Kim (Accelerator Mass Spectrometry laboratory, Seoul National University,): PIXE for the provenance
study of obsidian artefacts from prehistoric sites in Korea
Nam-chul Cho: Characterization
of obsidian found in the southern part of the Korean Peninsula
Jean-Christophe Galipaud
(Research Institute for Development (IRD) Nouméa,
New Caledonia): New evidence for transport of Talasea obsidian to Vanuatu
Pip Rath (University
of Sydney): New ways to use old methods: obsidian characterisation in Papua New Guinea
Matthew Spriggs and Sue O'Connor (Australian
National University)
Sourcing Island Southeast Asian obsidians: what do we know and where do we go from
here?
Dating
Keita Watanabe (Rikkyo University)
Hydrogen ion profiling of obsidian hydration layer using secondary ion
mass spectrometry
Sites and Technology
Nikolai Klujev (Russian Academy
of Sciences, Vladivostok): Late Pleistocene
and Early Holocene uses of basaltic glass in Primorye, Far East Russia: a new
perspective based on sites near the sources
Irina Pantyukhina (Russian Academy of Sciences,
Vladivostok): The role of raw material in the microblade complexes of
Primorye, Russian Far East
Use-wear and Residue
Analyses
Nina Kononenko (Australian National
University): The contribution of use-wear/residue studies of obsidian for
understanding changes in settlement and subsistence patterns in West New Britain, Papua New Guinea
Nina Kononenko (Australian
National University)
Use-wear analysis of obsidian artefacts
from the Palaeolithic site of Hopyeong-dong,
Korea
Syntheses
Robin Torrence (Australian Museum): Why was obsidian glass so
special?
Glenn Summerhayes (Otago University):
Modelling interaction and mobility using
obsidian – a view from Melanesia
SESSION 1C: MISSING TYPES: OVERCOMING THE TYPOLOGY
DILEMMA OF LITHIC ARCHAEOLOGY IN SOUTHEAST ASIA (Miriam Noël Haidle and Alfred
Pawlik, University of Tübingen, Germany) (alfred.pawlik@uni-tuebingen.de, mnhaidle@web.de)
In
Europe, as well as in the Americas,
typology of at least some key forms was and still is the basis of relative
chronology. For Southeast Asian prehistory, attempts to classify lithic
assemblages morphologically and technologically in order to press them into
established stone tool typologies from other parts of the world have proven not
to be very useful. Up to now, the formation of a specific regional typology
system has failed. Is the typological approach not appropriate to the special
characteristics and circumstances of lithic industries in SEA? Why do we know
only few formal “Asian” types and how did the availability and acquisition of
raw material influence lithic technology? Are morphological features of lithic
artefacts significant enough to establish an acceptable chronological system of
lithic periods? How can morphological features of lithic artefacts be linked to
geostratigraphy in SEA? Can surface finds contribute to Palaeolithic and
Neolithic chronologies in that region? And if we dismiss the typological
approach, what are the alternatives? This session will discuss the actual state
of research on lithic chronologies in Southeast Asia,
with related technological and functional approaches. It is the aim to gather
perspectives for future site prospection, excavation and stone tool analysis.
Friday 24 March
Alfred Pawlik (University
of Tübingen): Introduction to the
session
Israel B. Cabanilla(University of the Philippines): River Basin
Archaeology
Alfred Pawlik (University
of Tübingen): Introduction to the
session
Israel B. Cabanilla (University of the Philippines): River Basin
Archaeology
Jean-Michel Chazine (Maison Asie-Pacifique/CNRS-Marseille): Prehistory and Connections from East Borneo
Helen Selimiotis (Archaeology and Anthropology,
Australian National
University): Core Technology at Bui
Ceri Uato, East Timor
Susan Bulmer (Auckland, New Zealand):
Pleistocene stone tools of New
Guinea. A new analysis from the Far East of
the Far East.
Sharon F. Teodosio (University of the Philippines):
A reassessment of the Cabalwanian Industry
Elise Patol-Edoumba (Natural
History Museum,
La Rochelle, France): A typo-technological
definition of Tabonian industries
Nishimura Masanari (Center for Vietnamese
and Inter-cultural Studies, Ha Noi National University): Lithic assemblage
problems in the Palaeolithic and epi-palaeolithic Age of Vietnam and
surrounding regions
Johan Kamminga (National Heritage
Consultants, Canberra): Hoabinhian stone
technology at Sai Yok, Kanchanaburi Province, central Thailand
Tessa Boer-Mah (University of Sydney):
Ground stone adzes from Northeast Thailand
Miriam Noel Haidle (University of Tübingen):
Bifaces,
shouldered adzes, and chert prisms: the chronological potential of stone tool
assemblages in Cambodian younger prehistory
Ben Marwick (Australian
National University):
Beyond typologies: The reduction thesis and its implications for lithic
assemblages in Southeast Asia
Alfred Pawlik (University of Tübingen):
Typology, technology and function: A use-wear analyst’s perspective
Miriam Noel Haidle (University of Tübingen):
Summary
of the session
MAJOR THEME 2: HUNTER-GATHERERS IN PREHISTORY
SESSION 2A: THE NATURE AND
LIMITS OF HUNTER-GATHERER COMPLEXITY IN THE INDO-PACIFIC REGION (Mark Hudson, University of Tsukuba, Japan) (mjhudson63@hotmail.com)
This panel will look at the
range of hunter-gatherer complexity from India to the Pacific and attempt to
understand the causes and limits of that complexity. Papers will discuss a
range of themes from ecological approaches to the role of states and maritime
trade in engendering complexity. Papers that discuss the dynamics of “simple”
hunter-gatherers in the region are also welcome.
Tuesday 21 March
Mark Hudson (University of Tsukuba):
Postmarital residence and social
complexity in the Jomon: cross cultural perspectives on Harunari’s hypothesis
Takamune Kawashima (University of Tsukuba):
Salt production and complexity in the
Jomon
Yudai Itakura (Kyushu
University): Plant utilization system and social complexity of the Late and Final
Jomon periods in Western Japan
Jun Takakura (Hokkaido
University): Lithic reduction processes and settlement patterns in the Late Holocene
hunter-gatherers in Hokkaido, Northern Japan: a case study of the Epi-Jomon
Yaroslav V. Kuzmin (Pacific Institute of
Geography, Vladivostok): Geoarchaeology of the Russian Far East
prehistoric complexes: recent progress and problems
Nimal Perera (School
of Archaeology and Anthropology, Australian National
University): Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene human occupation at the Batadomba
Lena rock shelter in Sri Lanka
Karina Arifin (Universitas Indonesia, Jakarta):
The Punan Basap: the last hunther
gatherers of East Kalimantan
SESSION
2B: LATE PLEISTOCENE-EARLY HOLOCENE FORAGER ORGANIZATIONS: TIMING AND CAUSES OF
CHANGES IN SOUTHEAST ASIA (Rasmi Shoocongdej, Silpakorn University, and Ben Marwick, Australian National
University) (venesia10@yahoo.com,
This symposium presents a
series of papers on recent research in late Pleistocene-early Holocene forager
organizations in Southeast Asia in recent
decades. The goals is to improve
understanding of timing and causes of changes during the late Pleistocene-early
Holocene transition. The symposium provides an opportunity to compare
archaeological data from a number of sites across many regions of environmental
variability throughout Southeast Asia.
Wednesday 22
March
Rasmi Shoocongdej
(Department of Archaeology, Silpakorn University) and Ben Marwick (Australian National
University): A brief
introduction to the session
Nguyen Gia Doi (Institute of Archaeology,
Hanoi): Late
Pleistocene- early Holocene inhabitants of the Lam river basin near Viet-Lao
border
Lam Thi My Dzung
(Hanoi University),
Yamagata Mariko (Waseda University), Matsumura Hirofumi (Sapporo University):
Hang Cho cave in the context of Hoabinhian culture
Seonbok Yi and
June-Jeong Lee (Department of Archaeology, Seoul National
University): New data
on the Hoabinhian - a preliminary report on the SNU Hoabinhian Project
Nguyen Viet (Center for
Southeast Asian Prehistory, Hanoi): Hoabinhian Plant
Remains in Vietnam
as a indicator for climate changes from Late Pleistocene to Early Holocene
Thongsa Sayavongkhamdy (Department of
Archaeology and Museums, Laos):
Late Pleistocene sites in Laos
Chaowalit
Khaokiew (Department of Archaeology, Silpakorn
University): Chronostratigraphic
sequence of Tham Lod Rockshelter, Mae Hong Son Province, Northwestern Thailand
Anusorn Ampansri
(Highland Archaeology Project in Pang Mapha, Mae Hong Son
Province, Thailand):
Late Pleistocene subsistence organization at Tham Lod rockshelter, northwest
Thailand
Cholanwit
Thongcharoenchaikit, Pipad Krajaejun (Highland Archaeology Project in Pang
Mapha, Mae Hong Son Province, Thailand) Late Pleistocene technological
organization at Tham Lod Rockshelter, northwest Thailand
Siriluck
Kanthasri (Highland Archaeology Project in Pang Mapha district, Mae Hong
Son Province,
Phase II. Thailand): Analysis
of prehistoric pottery from Tham Lod rockshelter, northwest Thailand
Armand Salvador
B. Mijares (National Museum, Manila): The
Late Pleistocene to Early-Holocene foragers of northern Luzon
Phil Piper
(Department of Archaeology, York University), Ryan Rabett (Department of Archaeology, Cambridge University):
Changes in human foraging strategies and behaviour at the end of the Pleistocene
in tropical South East Asia: a case study from Niah
Cave Sarawak, Borneo
Daud Tanudirjo (Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia): Late Pleistocene -
Holocene transition and cultural change in the Indonesian Archipelago
Anggraeni (Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia): Exploitation of
natural resources in the Early Holocene: A case study from Bentar Rockshelter,
Southern Mountains of Java.
Mike Morwood
(Archaeology and Palaeoanthropology, SHES, University
of New England), Thomas Sutikna, Rokus
Awe Due, Jatmiko and Wahyu Saptomo (Indonesian Centre for
Archaeology): Islands in transition: Flores
and Java compared
Mahirta (Gadjah Mada University, Indonesia): Changes in stone
technology and chronology of human occupation in Nusa Tenggara Timur
Sue O’Connor (Australian National
University): A Matter of balance:
an overview of late Pleistocene/early Holocene occupation and the impact of the
LGM in Wallacea and the Aru Islands
Rasmi Shoocongdej (Department of
Archaeology, Silpakorn University): Summary: The regional perspective on late Pleistocene-early Holocene forager
organization in Southeast Asia
MAJOR THEME 3: RELATIONS BETWEEN ACADEMIC ARCHAEOLOGY, AND HERITAGE AND
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
SESSION 3A: INTEGRATING
"COMMERCIAL" ARCHAEOLOGY AND “ACADEMIC” RESEARCH (Richard Engelhardt,
UNESCO Bangkok and Julie Van Den Bergh,
Archaeological Assessments Ltd, Hong Kong). (julie@archassess.com)
How can groups doing impact assessments,
pre-construction survey, monitoring of engineering works etc. bridge the gap
with academic archaeologists and share data and findings? Are
we publishing enough, in places accessible to our academic colleagues and
in a mutually understandable language? Archaeological Impact Assessments are
increasingly required by international agencies and governments in the region;
UNESCO is in the process of preparing a manual on the implementation of impact
assessments for managers of cultural heritage sites in Asia.
All of these trends highlight the need for closer understanding among all of
us.
Sunday 26 March
C. Sand, F. Barp,
D. Baret, J. Bolé, A. Ouetcho (Archaeology Department of New Caledonia): Not
letting archaeology go totaly private : the case of New
Caledonia (Southern Melanesia)
David Blundell (UCLA
Center for Southeast Asian Studies),
Jeanette Zerneke (International and Area Studies, University
of California, Berkeley)
and Michael Buckland (Electronic Cultural Atlas Initiative (ECAI) University of California,
Berkeley): “A’li Bang Bang” Flying fish
culture digital language and cultural mapping of Orchid
Island of Taiwan
and the Batanes of the Philippines
Richard Olmo (University of Wollongong):
Taking the grey literature out of the
dark
Ellen Cameron (Archaeological
Assessments Ltd, Hong Kong): Retrieval of
palaeoenvironmental data in the context of “commercial” archaeology
Giovanni Bautista (National
Museum, Manila):
The challenges that beset cultural
resource management in the Philippines
Kevin Sun (Antiquities and
Monuments Office, Hong Kong): Contribution
and experience: contract archaeology in Hong Kong
Sandra Lee Yee (International Archaeological Research
Institute, Inc., Guam): Malesso, Guam
- Modern utility trench or a slice in time?
Nik Hassan Shuhaimi
(Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia):
Archaeology and the conservation of
heritage buildings and sites: the Malaysian experience
Nguyen Giang Hai (Institute of Archaeology,
Hanoi): Archaeology
and the conservation of underground
cultural heritage in Vietnam
SESSION 3B:
RELEVANCE OF UNDERWATER ARCHAEOLOGY IN THE INDO-PACIFIC REGION (Eusebio Z. Dizon
and Maharlika Cuevas, National Museum, Manila).
(drbongdizon@yahoo.com)
Underwater archaeology is distinguished from
land archaeology only by the environment of the work area. But underwater
archaeology, which is often associated with the lucrative business of shipwreck
recovery, suffers from a view held by many that it is simply treasure hunting.
Added to this, specialized exploration and excavation techniques and equipment
are required, often entailing expenses far greater than would be seen in
dry-land archaeology. As a result, underwater archaeologists will at times
collaborate with commercial enterprises, a practice that unavoidably sustains
the critical view held toward underwater archaeology; while at the same time
produces invaluable cultural and artistic data that would have otherwise not
been found. This session will be a setting for the discussion of the different
aspects and issues involved in underwater archaeology. We invite papers to
discuss topics related to the following:
Commercial versus scientific practices
Contributions of archaeological data derived from
underwater archaeology
Concealment of new information or findings
Trends in the use of scientific equipment in
underwater archaeology
Policies initiated regarding underwater heritage sites
Site reports
Wednesday 22 March
Michael Flecker
(Maritime Explorations, Singapore/Malaysia): Shipwreck policies throughout Asia: a
first-hand account
Maharlika A. Cuevas (Assistant Director for Operations,
National Museum,
Manila): The
Greco case: A case study on the protection of underwater archaeological
materials from the Philippines.
Bobby Orillaneda (National Museum
of the Philippines): A view of a 15th century trade cargo in
Southeast Asia: the Santa Cruz
shipwreck
MAJOR THEME 4:
REGIONAL ARCHAEOLOGY
SESSION 4A: ARCHAEOLOGY IN THE WESTERN EXTENSION OF
SOUTHEAST ASIA (ASSAM, BANGLADESH) (Dilip Medhi, Gauhati University, Assam)
(dkbharat1@sancharnet.in)
Wednesday 22 March
Bandita Medhi (Arya Vidyapeeth
College, Guwahati,
Assam): Pottery industries in Assam
: present scenario and an ethno-archaeological projection
Dilip
K. Medhi (Gauhati University), Boichhingpuii (Director, Art and Culture Department, Government of
Mizoram, Aizawl) and Prasanta Sarma
(Gauhati University): Palaeolithic
cultural evidence in Mizoram, India
Upala Barua (Gauhati University):
Archaeological potential of the ancient
city of Guwahati
Tiluttama Barua (Cotton
College, Guwahati): Swidden cultivation and the indigenous
people of Assam
Shabeena Yasmin Saikia (Gauhati
University): Administration and management of archaeological resources in Assam
P. Binodini Devi (Anthropology Dept, D.M.College of
Science, Imphal, Manipur): Megalithism: a
living tradition in Manipur
Tiatoshi Jamir (Department of
History and Archaeology, Nagaland University, Kohima-797001, Nagaland, India):
Feasting and monumental building: the
socio-economic aspects of Angami and Chakhesang megaliths
SESSION 4B: CURRENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH IN LAOS (Joyce
White, Anna Källén, and Viengkeo Souksavatdy) (banchang@pop.sas.upenn.edu,
Anna.Kallen@arkeologi.uu.se)
This is the first IPPA Congress to have a full session
devoted to current archaeological research in Lao PDR. After an almost complete
hiatus of research for five decades, the 1990s saw archaeology in Laos picking up
where the French colonial period left off. Several archaeological projects have
been initiated, and some completed, in south, central, and northern Laos. These
projects have investigated the country's human occupation from the late
Pleistocene through the Holocene, and thus are beginning to fill in major gaps
in data and understanding of Southeast Asia's
past. Methodologies range from survey to excavation, GIS to heritage management
assessments. This session includes papers on a wide range of current work in Laos,
from an update on current research at well-known phenomena such as the Plain of
Jars, to new discoveries such as the Pleistocene remains at Tam Pha Phen.
Tuesday 21 March
Thongsa
Sayavongkhamdy, Fabrice Demeter and
Elise Patole-Edoumba: A Pleistocene site
in Northern Laos: Tam Hang revisited.
Viengkeo Souksavatdy (Dept. of Museums and
Archaeology, Laos): Archaeological reconnaissance from Phu Bia, Northeastern Laos
Thongsa Sayavongkhamdy (Dept. of Museums and
Archaeology, Laos): Archaeological excavation at Tam Pha Phen,
Nam Theun 2 Hydroelectrical Project, Bolikhamxay Province, Central Laos
Julie Van Den Bergh (UNESCO, Bangkok) and Samlane Luangaphay (Dept. of Museums and
Archaeology, Laos):
Archaeological findings in the Plain of Jars
Kanda Keosopha (Ministry of Information and
Culture, Department of Museums and Archaeology, Vientiane, Lao PDR): Archaeological sites
in the highlands of Hua Phan province
Anna Källén (Department of Archaeology and
Classical Studies, Stockholm University): A Past Beyond the Valleys - an
archaeological research programme in Hua Phanh, Laos.
Thonglith Luong Khoth (Dept. of Museums and
Archaeology, Laos): Wat
Phu and My Son Sanctuaries: in regards to the relationship of the religious
sites on the trading route between the Eastern side and the 3.00 – 3.20 Western
side of the Indochina
Peninsula
Joyce White (University of Pennsylvania
Museum): The Middle Mekong Archaeological
Project (MMAP): background to the Luang Prabang Survey
Olivia Given (University
of Pennsylvania) Using mobile GIS
for reconnaissance survey in Laos:
a test case
Bounheuang Bousisengpaseuth (Dept. of
Museums and Archaeology, Laos)and
Joyce C. White (University of Pennsylvania Museum): Preliminary results of
the 2005 Middle Mekong Archaeological Project: reconnaissance survey in Luang Prabang
Province.
Ben Marwick (Australian
National University),
Chowalit Thongcharoenchaikit, and Kanda
Keosopha (Dept. of Museums and Archaeology, Laos): Adzes for sale:
Archaeology and tourism in the night-market at Luang Prabang, Lao PDR
Katherine Arrell (University of Leeds): The MMAP survey: preliminary
assessment of environmental context
SESSION 4C: RECENT ADVANCES
IN TAIWAN ARCHAEOLOGY (Tsang
Cheng-hwa, Institute of Hiastory and Philology, Academia Sinica, and National
Museum of Prehistory, Taitung) (chtsang@gate.sinica.edu.tw)
Friday 24 March
Ing-hau Wang (Department of
Agronomy, National Taiwan University), Tze-fu Hsu (Institute of Plant and
Microbial Biology, Academia Sinica, Taipei), Cheng-hwa Tsang (Institute of
History and Philology, Academia Sinica, Taipei and National Prehistory Museum,
Taitung), Kuang-ti Li (Institute of History and Philology, Academia Sinica,
Taipei), Cheng-yi Chu (National Prehistory Museum, Taitung), Yue-ie Hsing (Institute
of Plant and Microbial Biology, Academia Sinica, Taipei) and Jaw-shu Hsieh (Department
of Agronomy, National Taiwan University, Taipei): Preliminary characterization of excavated rice kernels in Taiwan
Kuang-ti Li (Institute of History
and Philology, Academia Sinica, Taipei): Shellfish, subsistence and
paleoenvironmental implications: isotopic study of shell remains lately
unearthed from Tainan Science-based Industrial Park, Taiwan
Hsiu-Man Lin (National Museum
of Prehistory, Taitung): Preliminary
study of the human skeletal remains from the Wu-Chen-Tsu South site, Taiwan
Ho Chuan Kun and Whei-Lee Chu
(National Museum of National Science, Taichung): New light on the prehistory of Taichung City
Scarlett Chiu1, Yi-Chang Liu2, and Aggie W-F Lu3
(1 & 3, Center for Archaeological Studies, Research Center for
Humanities and Social Sciences, Academia Sinica, Taipei; 2, Institute of
History and Philology, Academia Sinica, Taipei): Technical style: a new way of looking at the Austronesian expansions
Cheng-hwa Tsang ((Institute of History
and Philology, Academia Sinica, Taipei and National Prehistory
Museum, Taitung): Recent archaeological excavations on the Qimei
Islands, Penghu