Unearthing Southern China’s Neolithic Foundations

The river valleys of southern China hold remarkable clues to humanity’s transition from mobile foraging to settled communities. Between 6000-5000 BCE, two distinct Neolithic cultures flourished in what is now Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region: the Dingsishan culture centered around Nanning, and contemporary settlements represented by Zengpiyan Cave and Dayan Site’s fifth phase near Guilin. These archaeological discoveries reveal sophisticated adaptations to subtropical environments through their unique artifacts, burial practices, and subsistence strategies.

The Dingsishan Culture: A Riverine Adaptation

Named after the extensively excavated Dingsishan site discovered in 1997, this culture thrived along the Yong River system. Its territory stretched from Fusui and Wuming in the east to the Zuojiang and Youjiang river confluence near Nanning, with particularly dense settlements around present-day Nanning City, Yongning County, and Heng County.

Archaeologists have identified over a dozen related sites including:
– Baozitou (early phase representative)
– Shichuantou
– Xijiang’an
– Ganzao
– Xijin

The Dingsishan site itself covers 5,000 square meters with cultural deposits reaching 3 meters deep in areas, indicating prolonged occupation by sizable communities.

Material Culture of the Dingsishan People

### Pottery Traditions
The Dingsishan people created distinctive hand-built pottery characterized by:
– Predominantly round-bottomed jars and fu cauldrons
– Open mouths with constricted necks
– Coarse quartz-tempered fabrics
– Early phase: Basket-marked surfaces
– Late phase: Combed cord-marking dominance

Notably absent were flat-bottomed or ring-foot vessels, suggesting unique culinary practices adapted to their riverine environment.

### Innovative Tool Technologies
Excavations revealed sophisticated toolkits combining:
– Shell implements: Fish-head shaped knives (often perforated)
– Bone tools: Finely polished axes, adzes, arrows, needles
– Stone tools: Axes and adzes with polished edges but rough bodies
– Absence of pottery in burials

The prevalence of shell tools reflects the culture’s adaptation to riverine resources, with fish-head knives possibly serving both practical and symbolic purposes.

Chronological Development

### Early Phase (c. 6000-5500 BCE)
Represented by Dingsishan’s second period, this phase features:
– Coarse quartz-tempered gray-brown pottery
– Predominantly basket-marked surfaces
– Simple jar forms
– Limited stone tools with partial polishing
– Elaborate fish-head shell knives

### Late Phase (c. 5500-5000 BCE)
The third period shows technological refinements:
– Finer clay mixtures with selective tempering
– Cord-marking replaces basket impressions
– New vessel types: High-necked jars, fu cauldrons
– Increased stone tool production
– Continued shell tool sophistication

Carbon-14 dating of early phase materials (from snail shells) initially suggested remarkably early dates around 10,000 BCE, but researchers now place the culture firmly within the 6th-5th millennium BCE based on typological comparisons.

Subsistence Strategies

The Dingsishan people developed a specialized riverine adaptation:
– Shell middens dominate site stratigraphy
– Aquatic resources: Fish, mollusks, turtles
– Terrestrial hunting: Deer, wild boar
– No evidence of domesticated crops
– Silicon phytolith analysis shows wild plant gathering

Their settlements consistently occupied river terraces at bends or confluences, strategically positioned for aquatic resource exploitation. The absence of agricultural evidence suggests these were complex hunter-gatherer-fishers rather than early farmers.

Mortuary Practices and Social Complexity

Dingsishan burials reveal striking ritual complexity:
– Five distinct burial postures:
– Supine flexed
– Side-flexed
– Prone flexed
– Squatting
– Disarticulation burials

The disarticulation practice represents a unique mortuary tradition:
– Bodies systematically dismembered at joints
– Parts carefully arranged in graves
– Example: Skull placed within rib cage
– No clear patterns by age or gender
– Possible ritual or cosmological significance

Grave goods were minimal (1-2 tools), but many burials contained strategically placed stones, including one interment with 48 unworked stones arranged beneath the body.

Contemporary Cultures: Zengpiyan and Dayan

### Zengpiyan Phase V (c. 6000-5000 BCE)
This cave settlement shows technological advances:
– Diverse pottery forms: Stemmed cups, ring-foot vessels
– Sophisticated surface decoration:
– Fine cord-marking
– Complex incised patterns
– Applied clay strips
– Improved firing techniques
– Increased polished stone tools

### Dayan Phase V Characteristics
– New vessel types: Pots with flared rims
– Ornamental techniques:
– Wave-pattern incising
– Notched rims
– Bone harpoons for fishing
– Double-perforated shell knives

Both contemporary cultures show similarities with middle Neolithic traditions in Hunan’s Tangjiagang site, suggesting regional interactions.

Environmental Context and Adaptation

Paleoenvironmental data reveals:
– Warmer, wetter mid-Holocene climate
– Rich subtropical flora/fauna
– Riverine/forest resource exploitation
– No evidence for environmental stress

This favorable environment supported complex hunter-gatherer societies without requiring agricultural intensification.

Technological Innovations

Several advancements mark this period:
– Clay selection refinement
– Early slow-wheel pottery finishing
– Composite tool production
– Specialized fishing equipment
– Ornamental object creation

Cultural Legacy and Modern Significance

These Neolithic cultures represent:
– Unique riverine adaptations in southern China
– Alternative pathways to complexity without agriculture
– Early examples of ritual disarticulation
– Sophisticated aquatic resource management
– Foundations for later regional cultures

Current research focuses on:
– DNA analysis of human remains
– Residue analysis of pottery
– Regional interaction patterns
– Climate change impacts

The Dingsishan culture and its contemporaries provide crucial insights into the diversity of Neolithic lifeways in East Asia, challenging traditional narratives about the necessity of agriculture for social complexity. Their sophisticated adaptation to subtropical environments represents an important chapter in human cultural development.