Archaeologists have unearthed the oldest known documentation of hafted tool use in East Asia, which challenges a previously held assumption regarding stone implements.
The discovery reveals that early humans in what is now China utilized sophisticated stone tools as far back as 160,000 years ago. The research team stated regarding their finding, “This discovery refutes the notion that stone tool technology in Asia lagged behind that of Europe and Africa during this period.”
At the Shiqiao archaeological site, located in Henan Province in central China and first identified in 2017, the investigative group recovered over 2,600 stone artifacts. They determined that some of these items had been “hafted,” meaning they were attached to a piece of wood or another type of shaft.
The research group noted in their study, published in Nature Communications, “To our knowledge, the identification of hafted tools represents the earliest evidence of composite tools in East Asia.”
Prior knowledge indicated tool use in East Asia at very early stages, with the oldest known wooden implements dating back 300,000 years. However, the new findings, derived from excavations conducted between 2019 and 2021, present the earliest known examples of tools constructed from dual materials—evidenced by these hafted artifacts.
Michael Petraglia of the Australian Research Centre for Human Evolution at Griffith University, a co-author of the study, explains, “Hafting is a novel technical innovation, involving embedding or attaching a stone implement onto a handle or shaft.” He continued, “This enhanced the tool’s performance, allowing the user to gain greater leverage and apply more force for actions like drilling.”
It appears these tools were predominantly employed for processing plant matter. Petraglia commented, “Microscopic analysis of the edges of the stone tools suggests drilling actions directed at plant material, likely wood or reeds.”
In their official statement, the team pointed out that their tool-making methods “appear well-practiced and involve several intermediate steps, indicating foresight and planning.”
Co-author Professor Ben Marwick from the University of Washington mentioned that determining the exact species of early human responsible for these tools remains uncertain. “The precise identity of the creators remains unclear, as multiple hominin species likely inhabited the region at that time,” he stated. “Therefore, these tools could have been manufactured by Denisovans, Homo longi, Homo juluensis, or Homo sapiens, for instance. Hopefully, future recoveries of fossil remains or DNA will shed more light on this intriguing question.”
Marwick also remarked that, notably, many artifacts are small—under 50 millimeters—yet they were shaped using complex techniques. “These date to a period where previous archaeological surveys had mainly uncovered larger artifacts manufactured using simpler flaking techniques,” he observed, adding, “Thus, our findings suggest that complicated tool-making strategies emerged earlier than previously assumed.”
The recently discovered tools are dated between 160,000 and 72,000 years ago. During this era, inhabitants of the region lived as hunter-gatherers, though specifics about their lifestyle stay vague.
Co-author Shi-Xia Yang from the Chinese Academy of Sciences remarked, “While the lack of mammal bones and other evidence makes it difficult to define their lifestyle, their stone toolkit at least points to a high degree of behavioral flexibility and successful adaptation to local climate and resources.”
As the study’s authors noted, finding sophisticated stone tools from this specific region and time period contradicts a long-standing presupposition about the early stages of tool development.
Marwick stated, “The broader significance of these finds is that they challenge the entrenched bias that East Asian hominins only produced ‘conservative’ tools.” He explained, “This bias was deeply embedded and dominated archaeology for over half a century due to the concept of the Movius Line.”
“Proposed in the 1940s, this ‘line’ suggested a geographical divide between ‘advanced’ Acheulean cultures employing hand-axes in Africa and West Eurasia, and ‘conservative’ cultures utilizing chopping tools in East Asia,” he continued. “This painted a picture of East Asia as a cultural backwater where hominin evolution was thought to have stagnated.”
John Shea, a Professor of Anthropology at Stony Brook University who was not involved in the research, praised the work but noted that the perception of East Asia as culturally behind was never accurate. He pointed out that in his own stone tool experiments, he found that the small, complex, and sharp stone flakes more often made in Europe could be dangerous to handle. “Believe me, I have the scars to prove it,” he commented.
Shea argued, “Any hominin with an ounce of common sense would have almost certainly minimized the time spent working on razor-sharp flakes.” He added, “In that regard, the hominins of [East] Asia were doing exactly what should be expected… The idea that ‘simple tools equal simple minds’ is an archaeological myth.”
Ann Ford from the University of Otago in New Zealand also commended the study. “This is truly an excellent finding, and it underscores the need to move away from prior characterizations of Asian technologies as merely simple industries based on core reduction,” she explained. She highlighted that the creation of points—or projectile components—is “a significant technological step with implications for assessing the cognitive abilities of Chinese hominins during this time.”
About the Author
