Spirit Cave (Thailand)

Cave and archaeological site in Thailand
Spirit Cave in Thailand
Spirit Cave in Thailand
Location in Thailand
Alternative nameTham Phi MaenLocationPang Mapha district, Mae Hong Son Province, ThailandAltitude650 m (2,133 ft)HistoryPeriodsUpper Paleolithic, NeolithicCulturesHoabinhianSite notesArchaeologistsChester Gorman
Mae Hong Son Province, Pang Mapha district in red
Map of the Salween watershed

Spirit Cave (Thai: ถ้ำผีแมน, Tham Phii Man) is an archaeological site in Pang Mapha district, Mae Hong Son Province, northwestern Thailand. It was occupied 12,000 to 7,000 uncalibrated radiocarbon years ago by prehistoric humans of the Hoabinhian culture.

Location

The site is situated at an elevation of 650 m (2,130 ft) above sea level on a hillside overlooking a small stream. It was excavated in the mid-1960s by Chester Gorman. The Salween River, one of Southeast Asia's longest rivers, flows less than 50 km (31 mi) to the north. Two other significant nearby sites are the Banyan Valley Cave and the Steep Cliff Cave.

Chronology

Human presence at the site is documented from the Upper Paleolithic to the early Neolithic, but the primary occupation layers represent Hoabinhian hunter-gatherers.[1] Radiocarbon dating of organic resin on some pottery sherds returned Late Neolithic-Bronze ages, at odds with Gorman's claims for the Palaeolithic age of the deposit.[2] Radiocarbon dating of four freshwater crab (Indochinamon sp.) dactyls from Spirit Cave showed that they all date to the Early Holocene, consistent with Gorman's claims of occupation during the Pleistocene–Holocene transition.[3]

Plant domestication

Gorman [4] claims that the Spirit Cave included remains of Prunus (almond), Terminalia, Areca (betel), Vicia (broadbean) or Phaseolus, Pisum (pea) or Raphia lagenaria (bottle gourd), Trapa (Chinese water chestnut), Piper (pepper), Madhuca (butternut), Canarium, Aleurites (candle nut), and Cucumis (a cucumber type) in layers dating to around 9,800 to 8,500 years BCE. None of the recovered specimens differed from their wild phenotypes. He suggested that these may have been used as foods, condiments, stimulants, for lighting and that the leguminous plants in particular "point to a very early use of domesticated plants".[5] He later wrote [6] that "Whether they are definitely early cultigens remains to be established... What is important, and what we can say definitely, is that the remains indicate the early, quite sophisticated use of particular species which are still culturally important in Southeast Asia".

In 1972 W.G. Solheim, as the director of the project of which Spirit Cave was part, published an article in Scientific American discussing the finds from Spirit Cave. While Solheim noted that the specimens may "merely be wild species gathered from the surrounding countryside", he claimed that the inhabitants at Spirit Cave had "an advanced knowledge of horticulture". Solheim's chronological chart suggests that "incipient agriculture" began about 20,000 years BCE in Southeast Asia. He also suggests that ceramic technology was invented at 13,000 years BCE although Spirit Cave does not have ceramics evident until after 6,800 years BCE.[7]

Although Solheim concludes that his reconstruction is "largely hypothetical", his overstatement of the results of Gorman's excavation has led to inflated claims of Hoabinhian agriculture. These claims have detracted from the significance of Spirit Cave as a site with well-preserved evidence of human subsistence and palaeoenvironmental conditions during the Hoabinhian.

Lithics

Gorman discussed cultural levels with respect to lithic artifacts and identified two layers at Spirit Cave.[6] Course-grained quartzite was the most abundant stone found in both layers. The remains included large unifacially worked pebble cores aka sumatraliths, grinding stones, and retouched/utilized flakes.[6] Cultural level two consisted of new types of artifacts including flaked and polished quadrangular adzes and small ground/polished slate knives.[6] He used the findings at Spirit Cave to argue the notion that the Hoabinhian culture was a techno-complex due to a response to similar ecological adaptations.[6]

See also

References

  1. ^ Conrad, Cyler; Higham, Charles; Eda, Masaki; Marwick, Ben (14 October 2016). "Palaeoecology and Forager Subsistence Strategies during the Pleistocene – Holocene Transition: A Reinvestigation of the Zooarchaeological Assemblage from Spirit Cave, Mae Hong Son Province, Thailand". Asian Perspectives. 55 (1): 2–27. ISSN 1535-8283.
  2. ^ Lampert, C.D.; Glover, I.C.; Hedges, R.E.M.; Heron, C.P.; Higham, T.F.G.; Stern, B.; Shoocongdej, R.; Thompson, G.B. (March 2003). "Dating resin coating on pottery: the Spirit Cave early ceramic dates revised". Antiquity. 77 (295): 126–133. doi:10.1017/S0003598X0006141X.
  3. ^ Conrad, Cyler; Shoocongdej, Rasmi; Marwick, Ben; White, Joyce C.; Thongcharoenchaikit, Cholawit; Higham, Charles; Feathers, James K.; Tumpeesuwan, Sakboworn; Castillo, Cristina C.; Fuller, Dorian Q.; Jones, Emily Lena (8 October 2021). "Re-evaluating Pleistocene–Holocene occupation of cave sites in north-west Thailand: new radiocarbon and luminescence dating". Antiquity: 1–18. doi:10.15184/aqy.2021.44.
  4. ^ Gorman C. (1971) The Hoabinhian and After: Subsistence Patterns in Southeast Asia during the Late Pleistocene and Early Recent Periods. World Archaeology 2: 300-20
  5. ^ Gorman C. (1969) Hoabinhian: A pebble tool complex with early plant associations in Southeast Asia. Science 163: 671-3
  6. ^ a b c d e Gorman C. (1971) The Hoabinhian and After: Subsistence Patterns in Southeast Asia during the Late Pleistocene and Early Recent Periods. World Archaeology 2: 311
  7. ^ Solheim, W.G. (1972) An earlier agricultural revolution. Scientific American 226: 34-41

Sources

  • Charles Higham (2002). Early Cultures of Mainland Southeast Asia. River Books. pp. 46–49.
  • v
  • t
  • e
Prehistoric cave sites, rock shelters and cave paintings
  • Paleoanthropological sites
  • Cave paintings
  • Caves containing pictograms
Europe
Austria
Belgium
Bosnia
Bulgaria
Croatia
Cyprus
Czech Republic
Finland
France
Vézère Valley World Heritage Site
Bara Bahau
Bernifal
Cap Blanc
Castel Merle
Abri Castanet
Reverdit
Les Eyzies-de-Tayac-Sireuil
Abri Audi
Abri Chadourne
Les Combarelles
Cro-Magnon
Font-de-Gaume
Laugerie-Basse
Laugerie-Haute
La Micoque
La Mouthe
Pataud
Abri du Poisson
Lascaux
La Madeleine
Rouffignac
Other World Heritage Sites
Chauvet
Other caves with decoration
Arcy-sur-Cure
Gargas
Cosquer
Cussac
Fontéchevade
La Chaire a Calvin
La Marche
Lombrives
Grotte de Gabillou
Marsoulas
Le Mas-d'Azil
Mayrières supérieure
Niaux
Pair-non-Pair
Pech Merle
Roc-aux-Sorciers
Renne
Trois Frères
Villars
Other caves
Arago
Aurignac
Azé
Balauzière
Bonne-Femme
Bouillon
Bruniquel
Calès
Cauna
La Chapelle-aux-Saints
Combe Grenal
La Ferrassie
Fées
Fontbrégoua
Lazaret
Le Moustier
Noisetier
La Quina
Raymonden
Le Regourdou
Rochereil
Vallonnet
Germany
Gibraltar
Greece
Hungary
Italy
Jersey
Kosovo
Luxembourg
Malta
North Macedonia
Norway
Poland
Portugal
Romania
Russia
Serbia
Slovakia
Slovenia
Spain
Switzerland
Ukraine
United Kingdom
Asia
Afghanistan
Armenia
Azerbaijan
Cambodia
China
East Timor
Georgia
India
Indonesia
Iran
Iraq
Israel
Japan
Jordan
Laos
Lebanon
Malaysia
Mongolia
Myanmar
Pakistan
Palestine
Philippines
Sri Lanka
Thailand
Turkmenistan
Turkey
Uzbekistan
Vietnam
Africa
Algeria
Botswana
Cameroon
DR Congo
Egypt
Kenya
Lesotho
Libya
Morocco
Mozambique
Namibia
Nigeria
Somaliland
South Africa
Tanzania
Uganda
Zambia
Zimbabwe
North and South America
Argentina
Aruba
Belize
Brazil
Canada
Chile
Colombia
Cuba
  • Ambrosio
  • Calero
  • Centella
  • Cura
  • Patana
  • Pluma
Curaçao
Dominican Republic
Jamaica
Mexico
Peru
Suriname
United States
Oceania
Australia
Guam
Hawaii
New Caledonia
New Zealand
Northern Mariana Islands
Papua New Guinea
Samoa
Tuvalu

19°34′04″N 98°16′52″E / 19.5678055556°N 98.2810833333°E / 19.5678055556; 98.2810833333