The infancy of Chinese geoarchaeology: dilemmas from the Quaternary to the Anthropocene

The study of some classic cases in archeology could provide key information to track where geoarchaeology came from. Joseph Anderson made great contributions to Chinese archaeology and geoarchaeology from the 1920s to 1940s. Previous academic historical studies reflected particularly on pure archaeological methodology; however, in rare cases there has been a focus on the decisive transition from geology to archaeology. Anderson was one of the pioneers who used his knowledge from field work in Europe and America to inform his geoarchaeological work in China. His earliest geoarchaeological study addressed earlier human-environmental interactions by deploying basic concepts and tools. Anderson combined methods from geology with archaeology in three case studies from the 1920s to the 1940s. He came across three dilemmas: i) Analogy dilemma: homological fossils or multiregional origin of artifacts; ii) Principle dilemma: cross-cutting relationships in stratigraphy or archaeology; iii) Time dilemma: synchronic or diachronic systems. At the time, his conclusions drew massive criticism from some archaeologists, especially because of confusion in terminology or principles arising from immature archaeological methodology and neglect of premises in different disciplines. After the development of stratigraphy in the work of classical archaeology before the 1900s and studies on Quaternary human-environmental interactions during the 1900s to 1920s, Anderson found a means to approach the Anthropocene. In summary, here we review the initial geoarchaeological exploration of China during the 1920s to1940s, which is crucial to better understand archaeological academic history and the early history of the Anthropocene as an independent stratigraphic geological unit.