Talk:Prehistoric Korea

Illustrations
As well as text, if anyone can add images, it would be appreciated. Mumun 22:19, 8 December 2006 (UTC)


 * I'd help, but those museum guards get awfully touchy whenever I start taking flash pictures. :-)  There has to be something we can use by way of illustration, though... Thanks for getting this article off to a great start! -- Visviva 10:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Name table
Does this article need one? I mean, we don't have one on History of Korea, or Economy of South Korea, or most other "{Concept} of {Placename}"-type articles. -- Visviva 10:25, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Yes, this article doesn't need a name table as per your examples. Thank you for the above compliment, too. Mumun 10:40, 11 December 2006 (UTC)
 * I removed as per your note Mumun 17:44, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Palaeolithic
As it currently is written, the article makes no mention that I can see of the possible Homo erectus occupation of the peninsula (Norton, Christopher, 2000, "The Current State of Korean Paleoanthropology," Journal of Human Evolution Volume 38, Issue 6,  June 2000,   Pages 803-825:     DOI10.1006/jhev.1999.0390 ).

In support of a date earlier than 100,000 bp (and firmer than Homo erectus claims), Norton and  co-authors state that, "Reanalysis of the age of the Chongokni deposits suggests a hominin occupation between 350–300 ka" (Norton,Christopher J.; Kidong Bae; John W.K. Harri; and Hanyong Lee, 2006,"Middle Pleistocene Handaxes from the Korean Peninsula," Journal of Human Evolution Volume 51, Issue 5,   November 2006,   Pages 527-536: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science?_ob=ArticleURL&_udi=B6WJS-4KF74RH-1&_user=506232&_coverDate=11%2F30%2F2006&_rdoc=1&_fmt=high&_orig=gateway&_origin=gateway&_sort=d&_docanchor=&view=c&_searchStrId=1752972341&_rerunOrigin=scholar.google& _acct=C000025058&_version=1&_urlVersion=0&_userid=506232&md5=012b02d62eb637b009bfd6bff204c89a&searchtype=a).

More recently, Kidong Bae has published an article re-affirming the Chongokni dates and suggesting earlier dates elsewhere: "The earliest hominin occupation of the Korean peninsula is likely older than 400 ka. The Chongokni site has recently been dated to 350–300 ka.Komunmoru, Jangsanni, and Jangdongni are likely older than Chongokni. Currently, the oldest hominin fossils      in Korea date to the late Middle Pleistocene or early Late Pleistocene and have tentatively been assigned to Homo erectus or archaic H. sapiens" (abstract of Bae, Kidong, 2010, "Peopling in the Korean Peninsula," Asian Paleoanthropology Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology, 2010, 181-190:  DOI 10.1007/978-90-481-9094-2_14). Thus, dates of around 200,000 bp for Chongokni that are based on Bae's earlier publications should be disregarded.

The presence of Acheulean-like artifacts beyond the Movius Line might be taken to reflect an early Homo erectus presence in East Asia (part of China and northern Korea) that probably did not continue. 05:18, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I think the reference to a 1983 article questioning the age of early items should be removed. On the other hand, the 500,000 date should probably be changed to reflect Bae's 350/300Kbp with possible earlier dates. Kdammers (talk) 05:29, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Maybe we need a seperate paleolithic korea article or neolithic korea article.
Considering the vastness of the topic of paleolithic korea, I personally think we need a seperate article for this to explore all the intricacies of the paleolithic landscape. There are lots of different archaeological sites all around the korean peninsula, and they each kinda have their own story going on, and many of them are kinda notable in korean sources for their own right. This is why I feel like we need a seperate article for this. Mockingjay555 (talk) 08:30, 23 March 2024 (UTC)