Chapter 12

Coast to Coast: The Spread of Cereal

Cultivation in the Taiwan Strait Region
Before 3500 BP

Tuukka Kaikkonen

Abstract The expansion of cereal cultivation is a major area of debate in the

archaeology of the Holocene (e.g., Fuller and Lucas 2017). Indeed, the adoption of
cultivation arguably represents a significant shift that fed cultural, demographic, and
environmental transformations throughout the Asia-Pacific region. However, based
on studies of the Taiwan Strait region, this chapter argues that the introduction of
cultivated cereals did not immediately or uniformly replace pre-existing subsistence
practices. Rather, this shift appears to have taken place in various forms over time
according to changing environmental conditions in the Taiwan Strait. This chapter
traces connections between environmental and subsistence changes and identifies
present gaps in the knowledge about plant use in the region until ca. 3500 BP. By
that date the Neolithic period in Fujian had come to an end and cereal cultivation
was an established (if not necessarily a dominant) subsistence strategy on either side
of the Strait.

12.1 Introduction

In China, research suggests that cereals such as domesticated rice (Oryza sativa),
common millet (Panicum miliaceum), and foxtail millet (Setaria italica) originated
in the Yangzi and Yellow River regions during the Early Holocene, after which
they began to spread outward from these core areas (He et al. 2017; Wang et al.
2016; Zhao 2011). One direction was to the south, as observed through the gradual
expansion of rice cultivation from the Yangzi River to coastal southern China
between 7000 and 5000 BP (He et al. 2017; Wang et al. 2016; Zhao 2011).
Although the intensity and extent of cereal cultivation varied between regions, it has
been argued that the adoption of cultivation was a major process that contributed to
cultural, demographic, and environmental changes over a wide area of the
Asia-Pacific region (Bellwood 2005, 2017). A key location in this process was the

T. Kaikkonen (&)
Canberra, Australia
e-mail: tuukka.kaikkonen@anu.edu.au

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019 217

C. Wu and B. V. Rolett (eds.), Prehistoric Maritime Cultures and Seafaring
in East Asia, The Archaeology of Asia-Pacific Navigation 1,
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-32-9256-7_12
218 T. Kaikkonen

Fig. 12.1 Map of representative sites in the Taiwan Strait region with plant remains dating to ca.
5000-3500 BP (except for Liangdao, which dates to an earlier period, ca. 8000-7000 BP). Map
generated by the author in QGIS using data available at naturalearthdata.com

Taiwan Strait region, defined here as a stretch of ocean and islands bracketed by the
coastlines of present-day Fujian and Taiwan. According to present knowledge,
cereal cultivation first appeared in this region between 5000-4000 BP (Hung and
Carson 2014; Zhang and Hung 2010) (Fig. 12.1). Yet instead of an instant or
wholesale replacement of existing subsistence practices, the introduction and
adoption of cultivated cereals appears to have occurred in variable patterns that
reflect a sensitivity to the changing environmental conditions on both sides of the
Strait.

12.2 Background

12.2.1 Terminology

In Chinese-language scholarship, the period under examination here is usually

labelled the ‘Neolithic.’ In the Taiwan Strait region specifically, the ‘Neolithic’ has
conventionally been identified as a time period following the Palaeolithic when
ceramics, polished stone tools, sedentary settlements, and agriculture appear in the
archaeological record (e.g., Chang 1969). However, it is now known that in China
12 Coast to Coast: The Spread of Cereal Cultivation … 219

as well as in much of the world, these crafts and practices did not emerge or spread
as a single package, but rather were assembled over time, in regionally variable
patterns (Cohen 2014; Liu and Chen 2012; Zhang and Hung 2010, 2012). For
example, in southern China, pottery was already being manufactured in the
Pleistocene by non-sedentary communities without demonstrable cereal cultivation
practices (Cohen et al. 2017). Likewise, ground and polished stone tools emerged in
southern China in the Pleistocene and became gradually more common in the
southeast from 8000 BP onwards (Cohen 2014; Zhao et al. 2004). Sedentism,
identified through physical evidence of longer and greater investment in fixed
settlements, also developed gradually over time, without a clear-cut beginning (Liu
and Chen 2012). And as will be demonstrated below, agriculture, defined here as a
system of food production with a significant reliance on domesticated resources
(Smith 2001), also emerged gradually over time, spread slowly through space, and
was often combined with food procurement strategies that predate the adoption of
cultivation.
The above examples illustrate how the ‘Neolithic’ in its conventional meaning
fails to capture the gradual, cumulative, and multifaceted nature of the cultural
changes it intends to label and describe. To circumvent some of the problematic
assumptions embedded in the established terminology, the following discussion
uses ‘Neolithic’ solely as shorthand for the three millennia (6500-3500 BP) under
examination, without assuming any of the particular forms of culture (including
residence or subsistence strategies) usually associated with the term. To help orient
the reader, names of culture phases from the Chinese-language literature are
retained and used together with calibrated radiocarbon dates (BP), where available.

12.2.2 The Foraging–Farming Transition

Prior attempts to characterize the onset of cereal cultivation in the Taiwan Strait
region have prompted a multitude of perspectives on when, where, how, how fast,
and why it took place. The first reconstructions appear to have been informed by an
explicitly diffusionist paradigm. Focusing on Taiwan and working with limited
materials, Chang (1969) envisaged a transition from primary foraging to primary
agriculture that was marked by changes in material culture. The earlier cord-marked
pottery cultures were equated with forager groups practicing root and tree horti-
culture, while incised and painted pottery-producing groups were equated with rice
farmers arriving from the mainland at a later time. Subsistence and material culture
were tightly associated with notions of distinct ethnic groups, and change was
explained as a movement of these groups from the mainland to Taiwan.
Since then, the diffusionist paradigm has remained influential in the archaeology
of the Taiwan Strait. However, the process of subsistence change has come to be
viewed in a more gradualistic light. Recently, Bellwood (2005, 2017) has
hypothesized that the shift from foraging to farming may have occurred through an
incremental process of “demic expansion” (e.g., Cavalli-Sforza 1997). According to
220 T. Kaikkonen

this model, differences in the relative productivity of subsistence systems resulted in

farmers holding a reproductive advantage over foragers. Over generations, this
differential led to the spread and establishment of farming communities (and certain
language families) in much of East and Southeast Asia. For the model to hold true,
we would expect to see food production, perhaps in the form of cereal cultivation,
to play a prominent role in subsistence economies prior to and during the
hypothesized dispersal periods. Determining the nature and importance of food
production therefore becomes a major, if somewhat under-researched, topic for
Taiwan Strait prehistory.
However, despite the prominent role played by subsistence in studies of the
Taiwan Strait Neolithic period, resolving questions about food production has
proven difficult due to the scarcity of chronometric dates and archaeological plant
remains. Existing evidence has thus necessitated the development of alternative
hypotheses about subsistence practices in the region. While acknowledging the
dearth of substantive evidence for the earliest portion of the Neolithic in southern
China and Taiwan, Hung and colleagues (Hung and Carson 2014; Zhang and Hung
2010, 2012) suggest that the earliest pottery-bearing communities in this area
engaged in maritime-oriented hunting and gathering without demonstrable food
production. In their view, cereal cultivation appeared only later, and separately,
from the introduction of ceramics and stone tools. In this case the relationship
between material culture and subsistence change is less marked than in Chang’s and
Bellwood’s models, and the role of cultivation in explaining the spread of ceramics
and other novel material culture from southern China to Taiwan is likewise
diminished. The significance of cereal cultivation during the Neolithic in Fujian is
further questioned by Jiao (2016), who views subsistence in coastal Fujian as a
mosaic of maritime-oriented practices with only limited food production observable
until the end of the Neolithic. These views call for close examination of the evi-
dence for subsistence and of the models used for linking subsistence with other
changes, be they cultural or environmental.

12.3 The Environmental Context

The Taiwan Strait region (Fig. 12.1) has experienced dramatic changes to its land-
and seascapes during the Holocene. These have been the consequence of changes to
climate, sea levels, geomorphology, and vegetation.
Today, Taiwan and coastal Fujian are separated by 130 kilometers or more of
sea and islands. The Fujian coastline is steep, winding, and dotted with bays, deltas,
and offshore islands (Rolett et al. 2011), while the Taiwan seaboard is characterized
by extensive coastal plains in the west and narrow plains and mountain valleys in
the east (Carson 2017). Both inland Fujian and Taiwan are mountainous, creating
barriers for movement and limiting the availability of arable land. The climate is
subtropical monsoonal and supports broadleaf to coniferous vegetation and the
cultivation of cereals, legumes, roots and tubers, and fruit.
12 Coast to Coast: The Spread of Cereal Cultivation … 221

In the past, the Strait region would have looked radically different than it does
today. During the Last Glacial Maximum, sea levels were between 100 and 150
meters lower than at present (Wang and Sun 1994), and Taiwan was connected to
the mainland via a land bridge. Modelling suggests that this connection lasted until
ca. 11,500 BP (Guedes et al. 2016), after which Taiwan was separated from the
mainland as the warming climate led to a rise in sea levels. A sea-level high stand of
ca. 2 meters above present sea levels lasted probably until the Mid-Holocene (Zong
2004). During this time, the sea reached far inland, coastal shelves were narrow,
arable land scarce, and settlements were located in elevated positions on hilltops
and offshore islets. This state of affairs lasted until the Late Holocene, when a
cooling climate led to falling sea levels that, together with isostatic uplift and
erosional sedimentation, contributed to a seaward expansion of coastlines on both
sides of the Strait. On Taiwan, it is estimated that the expansion of the western
coastal plain began ca. 4800 BP, while that of the eastern plains began ca. 3500 BP
(Carson 2017). In contrast, on the central Fujian coast the formation of bays,
beaches, and deltas is estimated to have begun only ca. 1900 BP (Rolett et al.
2011). Intriguingly, it has been suggested that the seaward expansion of coastlines
may have been further compounded by erosion resulting from vegetation clearance
(Carson 2017), raising questions about the extent to which human activities con-
tributed to geomorphological changes in the region.
Evidence for anthropogenic and climate-driven vegetation changes can be seen
in the regional pollen and charcoal records collected from highland bogs, riverine
settings, and archaeological sites. Vegetation in the warm and humid Early
Holocene was dominated by subtropical broadleaf vegetation. In the Late Holocene,
as the climate took a turn towards cooler and drier conditions, there was a shift
towards coniferous and herbaceous taxa (Lee et al. 2010; Liew et al. 2006; Ma et al.
2016a; Yue et al. 2012, 2015; Zhao et al. 2017). In Fujian, these changes are
paralleled by increased charcoal in both near-site and off-site records, possibly
reflecting anthropogenic disturbance that appears to have remained minimal until
3500-900 BP (Ma et al. 2016a, b; Yue et al. 2012, 2015; Zhao et al. 2017).
A gradual shift towards herbaceous taxa in central Taiwan beginning ca. 5000 BP
has also been taken to indicate human disturbance (Liew et al. 2006; Tsukada
1967). However, no similar changes are observed in southern Taiwan during this
period (Lee et al. 2010).
To summarize, geomorphological and vegetation changes in the Taiwan Strait
region appear to have been asynchronous and variable in their extent and magnitude
during the Late Holocene. Although human activities may have contributed to
vegetation change and erosion, the effects appear to have been limited or indis-
tinguishable from other changes until later in prehistory. By contrast, changes to the
land- and sea-scapes may have exerted a stronger influence on subsistence choices,
making these an important contextual factor in examining the archaeological
record.
222 T. Kaikkonen

12.4 The Archaeological Record

Since Chang’s (1969) pioneering work, significant progress has been made on the
culture histories of the Taiwan Strait region. But while radiometric dating and
typological studies have helped to reconstruct cultural chronologies, reports
addressing subsistence practices, especially plant use, have been scarce. This sec-
tion reviews available evidence for plant use (with a focus on domesticated cereals)
up to 3500 BP. A brief overview of representative sites in southern China will
provide background for the subsequent review of evidence from Fujian and Taiwan.
Recent syntheses of the evidence for plant use in the northern regions (including the
Yangzi) can be found in, for example, He et al. (2017) and Wang et al. (2016).

12.4.1 Southern China

The earliest plant remains in southern China have been reported from a number of
Pleistocene and Holocene cave sites. Analyses of sediments from Xianrendong and
Diaotonghuan (Jiangxi), Yuchanyan (Hunan), and Zengpiyan (Guangxi) have
produced small quantities of rice phytoliths, but it is not clear whether the rice was
cultivated or whether it was wild or domesticated (Nakamura 2010; Zhang and
Hung 2012). Apart from rice, these sites have also yielded seeds and nuts from a
range of plants including Chinese gooseberries (Actinidia sp.), hickory nuts (Carya
sp.), Chinese hackberries (Celtis sinensis), plums (Prunus sp.), and grapes (Vitis
sp.). At Zengpiyan, excavations also recovered the charred remains of tubers,
possibly from either taro (Colocasia sp.) or yam (Dioscorea sp.) (Wang et al. 2016;
Zhang and Hung 2012).
Later in the Holocene, a broad range of plants is evident at the open-air Xincun
Site (ca. 5300-4420 BP) in the Pearl River Delta of Guangdong Province (Yang
et al. 2013). Starch granules and phytoliths from grinding stones found here have
been attributed to sago palms (e.g., Caryota sp.), bananas (Musa sp.), freshwater
roots and tubers (e.g., lotus [Nelumbo nucifera], Chinese arrowroot [Sagittaria sp.],
water chestnut [cf. Eleocharis dulcis]), fern (Angiopteris sp.), acorns (Quercus sp.),
Job’s tears (Coix sp.), and rice (Oryza). The rice phytoliths at Xincun are interpreted
as originating from wild rather than domesticated rice, and as with the earlier cave
sites, it is not clear what role rice may have played in the local economy.
At present, the earliest directly dated evidence for domesticated rice (and, by
inference, rice cultivation) in southern China comes from the Shixia Site, also
located along the Pearl River in Guangdong (Yang et al. 2016). One rice grain,
identified as belonging to the Oryza sativa subspecies japonica, was directly dated
to ca. 4300-4100 BP. Based on contextual evidence, the authors place the arrival of
domesticated rice in the region between 5000-4100 BP, long before the estab-
lishment of intensive cultivation in the Pearl River Delta around ca. 2500 BP (Yang
et al. 2016). Phytoliths attributed to domesticated rice at the even earlier date of
12 Coast to Coast: The Spread of Cereal Cultivation … 223

ca. 5600 BP have also been recently reported from Hainan, but it is unclear whether
this conclusion is supported by the data and analysis reported in the same study.
Until more evidence becomes available, it may be safer to favor the later date,
especially as it more closely reflects previous reconstructions of the spread of rice
cultivation from the Yangzi River southwards (Silva et al. 2015; Zhang and Hung
2010).
In its current state, the archaeobotanical record allows some broad generaliza-
tions to be made about plant use in southern China. Although rice may have been
utilized from the Late Pleistocene onwards at various locations, it seems that rice
cultivation was introduced to the southern China coast only after 5000 BP, after
which it took another 2500 years for intensive rice agriculture to become estab-
lished there (Yang et al. 2016). Prior to this time, the broad range of fruits, nuts, and
vegetative crops indicates at least a long tradition of plant use and management, if
not quite an entirely separate center for plant domestication (see Zhao 2011).
However, the introduction of exotic domesticates and cultivation practices did mark
the beginning of a prolonged transition from foraging to farming. A similar
transformation, albeit with local characteristics, began to unfold in the Taiwan Strait
region around the same time.

12.4.2 The Fujian Neolithic, 6500-3500 BP

The archaeological record in Fujian begins with cave sites that were occupied in the
Pleistocene and the Early Holocene (Jiao 2013). However, little information about
plant remains has emerged from these sites, and the earliest plant remains date only
to the Mid-Holocene during the Neolithic.
The Neolithic begins in Fujian by at least 6500 BP. At this date, ceramics and
polished stone tools appear in fully developed form at coastal sites, having arrived
there as probable introductions from source areas to the north and south (Jiao 2013;
Lin 2005; Zhang and Hung 2012). This period is also marked by the emergence and
growth of open-air sites, first in the form of shell middens and later as ‘villages’,
though most of these remained only a modest 1–2 ha in size (Jiao 2013; Rolett et al.
2011). These were scattered on offshore islets and promontories along coastlines
that would have extended far inland during the time of the sea-level high stand
(Rolett et al. 2011). The overall number of sites appears to have remained low,
implying low population densities throughout the Neolithic (Hosner et al. 2016;
Jiao 2013).
The Neolithic period has been subdivided into several cultural phases, some of
them regional. Although recent reports have begun to fill in gaps in the record of
inland Fujian, the region is still poorly understood (Deng et al. 2018; Jiao 2013),
and here the main focus will be on the central and northern Fujian coast, followed
by a brief overview of sites in southern and inland Fujian (Table 12.1).
224 T. Kaikkonen

Table 12.1 Neolithic culture phases of central and northern coastal Fujian (based on Lin 2005)
Phase Culture Region Dating (BP)
Early Neolithic Keqiutou Central coast 6500-5500
Middle Neolithic Tanshishan Central to northern coast 5500-4300
Late Neolithic Huangguashan Central to northern coast 4300-3500

Early Neolithic, 6500-5500 BP

The record for plant use in Fujian is patchy both in terms of time and geography,
and this is especially the case for the earliest Neolithic sites. Although excavations
of the Keqiutou Shell Midden located on an offshore island on the central Fujian
coast indicate that fish, shellfish, and terrestrial fauna were important sources of
nutrition, no evidence for cereals has been recovered (Jiao 2013). Subsistence
appears to have been maritime-oriented, and it is only ca. 5000 BP that the earliest
plant remains are reported from coastal Fujian.
Middle to Late Neolithic, 5500-3500 BP
Open-air sites along the Min River in the Upper Fuzhou Basin hold some of the
earliest evidence for cereal cultivation in all of Fujian. The sites in question are
Tanshishan and Zhuangbianshan, dated to 5500-4300 BP and 5000-3500 BP,
respectively (Ma et al. 2016b; Rolett et al. 2011). These village sites span the
Tanshishan and Huangguashan phases, and their material record includes ceramics,
stone, bone, and shell tools; human burials; and the remains of aquatic and ter-
restrial animals, including pigs and dogs. Palaeo-landscape reconstructions indicate
that both sites would have been located on small offshore islets along the Min River
Estuary at the time of their occupation (Ma et al. 2016b; Rolett et al. 2011).
Together, these two sites record the earliest presence of rice in coastal Fujian
from ca. 5000 to 3500 BP. Excavations at Tanshishan have recovered two car-
bonized rice grains, dated to ca. 4900-4300 BP on the basis of associated materials
and radiocarbon determinations (Zhang and Hung 2010). While no macroscopic
remains of rice or other plants have been reported from Zhuangbianshan, the shell
midden deposits contain phytoliths from rice husks that increase in abundance from
ca. 4500 BP until the end of the Neolithic cultural sequence at 3500 BP (Ma et al.
2016b).
Although the reports do not address whether the remains are wild or domesti-
cated rice, and although no direct dates for the plant remains are available, the
evidence is in keeping with the general chronology for the spread of rice cultivation
from the Yangzi River southwards (Silva et al. 2015; Zhang and Hung 2008, 2010).
However, cereal cultivation appears to have been of limited importance at these
sites. Although rice phytoliths increase in abundance over time at Zhuangbianshan,
the small quantities of remains suggests that cultivated cereals were of limited
importance throughout the occupation. This is also suggested by pollen and char-
coal records that document only circumscribed anthropogenic impacts in the Upper
Fuzhou Basin and its surroundings until ca. 2000 BP (Ma et al. 2016b; Yue et al.
2012, 2015). Whatever the uses of the numerous stone adzes (Jiao 2013) recovered
12 Coast to Coast: The Spread of Cereal Cultivation … 225

from these sites, their application to the clearance of vegetation appears to have
been limited.
The modest scale of rice cultivation at Tanshishan and Zhuangbianshan may
be explained in the light of palaeo-landscape reconstructions. Modelling suggests
that when the sites were occupied, the coastline of the Fuzhou Basin reached
75–80 kilometers further inland than at present, limiting the availability of arable
wetlands and thus the productivity of cereal cultivation (Ma et al. 2016b; Rolett
et al. 2011). Wild resources such as shellfish, fish, and terrestrial fauna appear to
have been the preferred sources of food (Jiao 2013), a conclusion also supported by
analyses of stable carbon and nitrogen isotopes. It is interesting to speculate
whether stable isotopes might reveal changes in diet over time that would reflect the
diachronic reduction in shell midden densities and the increase in rice phytoliths
observed at Zhuangbianshan (Ma et al. 2016b).
Despite the limited scale of food production documented in the Upper Fuzhou
Basin, cereal cultivation appears to have persisted over time, becoming established
further north on the coast. This is recorded at Huangguashan (4500-3800 BP) and
Pingfengshan (3800-3500 BP), both located on low hills within 8 kilometers of the
present-day coastline in northern coastal Fujian (Deng et al. 2018). The material
culture at these sites is mostly associated with the Huangguashan Phase and
comprises ceramics, stone and bone tools, and bones of marine and terrestrial
animals, including pigs (Jiao 2013).
In contrast to the Upper Fuzhou Basin sites, flotation and sediment samples at
Huangguashan and Pingfengshan revealed macroscopic plant remains and phy-
toliths of fruits and cereals dated to at least 4000-3500 BP (Deng et al. 2018).
Included among these are a few carbonized grains and spikelet bases from
domesticated rice that, despite their small number, still vastly outnumber the very
limited remains recovered from the Tanshishan Phase sites. Perhaps more impor-
tantly, material from these sites represents the earliest known instance of cultivated
millets in coastal Fujian (Deng et al. 2018). Carbonized foxtail millet grains at both
locations, as well as the Panicoid-type millet husk phytoliths found at
Huangguashan, indicate that these grains were cultivated together with rice.
Together, these findings probably signal the dispersal of a crop cultivation package
that ultimately can be traced to regions further to the north. However, many gaps
exist in the prehistory of mixed cereal cultivation in southern China, including the
Taiwan Strait region. It remains to be seen whether sampling from the deeper layers
at Huangguashan and other sites could push the dates back to rival those recently
reported from inland Fujian, examined below.

12.4.3 Southern Fujian Coast and Inland Fujian Neolithic

The sites discussed above contain some of the earliest material evidence for cereal
cultivation in southeastern coastal China and are important for tracing the spread of
crop cultivation from the Yangzi to the southern seaboard and onwards into
226 T. Kaikkonen

Taiwan. However, questions remain concerning when and by what route (inland or
coastal) these cereals spread to coastal Fujian. Despite the presence of rice in the
Pearl River Delta in 5000 BP (Yang et al. 2016), no equivalent results have been
reported for southern coastal Fujian sites such as Damaoshan (5500-4500 BP) (Jiao
2013). However, new evidence from inland Fujian is beginning to fill in other gaps
in the record. Recent reports from the Nanshan site in western Fujian document the
presence of rice, common millet, and foxtail millet (as well as other plant remains)
in significant quantities at an early date of ca. 5000 BP (Zhao 2017; Fig. 12.2). Rice
and foxtail millet have also been reported from Hulushan (4000-3500 BP) in
northwestern Fujian (Fujian Provincial Museum et al. 2016), although more
extensive reports have yet to be published (Deng et al. 2018). Forthcoming results
from these sites will hopefully offer insight on the timing, extent, and variability of
cereal cultivation in Fujian and the wider region.

Fig. 12.2 View of the Nanshan archaeological site, Mingxi County, Fujian Province on
November 5, 2017. Photo by the author
12 Coast to Coast: The Spread of Cereal Cultivation … 227

12.4.4 Taiwan and the Taiwan Strait Neolithic,

6000-3500 BP

As in Fujian, the archaeological record of Taiwan begins with cave sites that were
occupied from the Pleistocene until the Mid-Holocene (Hung and Carson 2014).
Plant remains have not been reported at these sites, and with the exception of
indeterminate fibers and possible acorn starch extracted from the dental calculus
of the Liangdao burials (ca. 8000-7500 BP) (Chiu et al. n.d.), the nature of
pre-Neolithic plant subsistence on Taiwan and the Strait islands remains poorly
understood (Hung and Carson 2014).
The beginning of the Neolithic on Taiwan is conventionally dated to ca.
6000 BP, when the arrival of coarse cord-marked ceramics, polished stone adzes,
and other novel material culture at open-air sites mark a distinct break from the
preceding cultural traditions (Hung and Carson 2014). Chronology and typology
suggest that these were introduced from the southern coast of China, including
coastal Fujian (Hung and Carson 2014). While the Neolithic Age in Taiwan has
been subdivided into several culture phases (Table 12.2), the focus here is on the
Early and Late Tapenkeng (or TPK; Dabenkeng in modern pinyin), as well as the
Middle Neolithic. Despite the presence of rice at Late Neolithic sites and its
implications for tracing the long-term history of cultivation on Taiwan, findings
from this period are beyond the scope of this chapter.
Early TPK, 6000-4800 BP
The Early TPK (ca. 6000-4800 BP) is known from thinly layered shell middens and
sand dune sites from across Taiwan that were located on promontories near aquatic
resources during their occupation (Hung and Carson 2014). Only two of the ten
known sites have been radiocarbon dated, with results ca. 6500-5300 BP (Hung and
Carson 2014). This leaves the chronology of Taiwan’s earliest Neolithic popula-
tions rather weakly resolved.
Perhaps owing to the small number of poorly preserved sites, the Early TPK has
produced little direct evidence for plant use or cultivation. Phytoliths of what might
be wild rice from pottery sherds have been reported from the Dapenkeng Site, but
no other plant remains have been reported (Hung and Carson 2014). Stone adzes are
still few and harvesting knives are absent (Hung and Carson 2014), while no signals

Table 12.2 Neolithic culture phases of Taiwan and the Straits islands (after Hung and Carson
2014)
Phase Culture Region Dating (BP)
Early Neolithic Early Tapenkeng Island-wide 6000-4800
Late Tapenkeng Island-wide 4800-4500/4200
Middle Neolithic Several Regional subdivisions 4500/4200-3500
Late Neolithic Several Regional subdivisions 3500-2400
228 T. Kaikkonen

of human-induced vegetation disturbance have been reported. This is perhaps

unsurprising, since the Early TPK occupation would have preceded coastal plain
expansion, with the consequence that arable land would have been scarce. At this
time, subsistence strategies were probably based on a mix of wild marine and
terrestrial resources (Hung and Carson 2014).
Late TPK to Middle Neolithic, 4800-3500 BP
In contrast to the sparse record for the Early TPK, the Late TPK (4800-4500/4200
BP) sites number over 40, and are regarded as a direct development of the
Early TPK culture on the basis of stylistic continuities (Hung and Carson 2014).
Remains of fish, shellfish and terrestrial fauna indicate the continued importance of
wild resources, although the discovery of pigs and dogs also suggests the presence
of domestic fauna. Importantly, the Late TPK sites also provide the first indications
of crop cultivation on Taiwan, a shift most strikingly illustrated at the waterlogged
open-air sites of Nanguanli and Nanguanlidong, dated to 4800-4200 BP (Hung and
Carson 2014; Tsang and Li 2013). Excavations into layers buried under seven
meters of alluvial sediment uncovered tens of thousands of “carbonized and
charred” seeds identified as rice, foxtail millet, common millet, and yellow foxtail
(Setaria glauca) (Tsang et al. 2017). While microbotanical analyses have failed to
yield good results from these sites (Lee Tsuo-ting, personal communication,
November 8, 2011), the sheer quantity of charred remains leaves little doubt that
cereals were a significant component of the subsistence economy. However,
questions remain about the nature and significance of this assemblage, not least
because of the lack of direct radiocarbon dates from the plant remains (Hung 2017).
Resolving these issues is crucial for a more comprehensive reconstruction of the
early stages of cereal cultivation in Southwest Taiwan.
While Nanguanli and Nanguanlidong document the use of mixed cereals at an
unprecedented scale in the Neolithic, the island-wide extent of these practices is
revealed by the distribution of harvesting tools and plant remains across Taiwan
during the Late TPK and the Middle Neolithic. Potential harvesting tools such as
shell knives are recorded for the first time during the Late TPK (Hung and Carson
2014), and the abundance of stone knives and stone adzes in the subsequent phases
suggests an increased emphasis on crop and landscape management over time.
Carbonized grains and impressions of rice have also been found throughout the
island, including Dalongdong, Zhishanyuan, and Zhiwuyuan in the northwest;
Anhelu in the central west; Fengbitou, Kending, and Sanbaozhunan in the south
and southwest; and Chikan B in the Penghu archipelago (Deng et al. 2017; Zhang
and Hung 2010) (Fig. 12.1). Recent observation of domesticated rice phytoliths at
Chaolaiqiao demonstrate that cultivation had also extended to the eastern coast by
at least 4200-4000 BP (Deng et al. 2017). Still, the relative importance of rice vis-à-
vis other plant foods remains an open question.
Environmental and settlement data further reinforce the impression that cereal
cultivation expanded on Taiwan from the Late TPK. As mentioned above, coastline
expansion on Taiwan appears to have begun ca. 4800 BP, coinciding with the
introduction and spread of cereal cultivation. Erosion and sedimentation may well
12 Coast to Coast: The Spread of Cereal Cultivation … 229

have been compounded by human-induced vegetation clearance (Carson 2017), as

also suggested by the gradual shift towards more grassy vegetation observed in
pollen profiles from ca. 5000 BP onwards (Liew et al. 2006). Together, such
transformations would have created arable lands where none had existed previ-
ously. It was also during this period that settlements on Taiwan expanded to the
emerging coastal plains and began to grow in size and number (Hung and Carson
2014). While the Penghu archipelago appears to have experienced a population
collapse during this time (Bellwood 2011), the general pattern from Taiwan sug-
gests that demographic change took place simultaneously with the introduction of
cereal cultivation. Determining causal relationships between the two remains an
important objective for future research.

12.5 Conclusion

As suspected for some time (e.g., Chang 1969), there are strong reasons to believe
that the onset of cereal cultivation was not the result of indigenous innovation but
rather one stage in the spread of domesticates and cultivation practices from the
Yangzi River and northern China to the south. Although the lack of directly dated
plant remains makes it difficult to estimate the speed of dispersal, the available
chronologies agree with reconstructions of the gradual southward spread of rice
cultivation (Silva et al. 2015; Zhang and Hung 2008, 2010). The existing
chronology further shows that crossing the Taiwan Strait did not pose a major
barrier to cross-Strait crop dispersal. Indeed, maritime-oriented technology and
networks had already been established prior to the expansion of cultivation, as
documented by the cross-Strait movement of Penghu basalt, ceramics, stone tools,
and other novel material culture (Rolett et al. 2007; Zhang and Hung 2010, 2012).
Similar growth conditions (climate, daytime length) probably also aided this pro-
cess, as did the practice of mixed rice and millet farming, which may have enabled
the more efficient utilization of available land and swidden farming (Bellwood
2011).
The discovery of a mixed cereal package of rice and millets on both sides of the
Taiwan Strait is significant for helping to trace how cereal farming may have moved
together with people and languages (e.g., Bellwood 2005). Prior to the recent
discoveries of mixed cereals in coastal and inland Fujian, the rice and millets from
Nanguanli and Nanguanlidong were the earliest known case of a Neolithic mixed
cereal package in the region. This co-occurrence has in part been used to suggest
that the Early Neolithic period in Taiwan was an extension of the mixed-cereal
farming societies in the Shandong–Jiangsu region of northern China (Fuller 2011;
Sagart 2008). Although the recent findings of millets in Fujian cannot disprove the
Shandong-Jiangsu connection, it now seems reasonable that the closest source area
for mixed-cereal cultivation in Taiwan should be looked for in present-day Fujian
Province (Deng et al. 2018; see also Sagart 2008).
230 T. Kaikkonen

Why and how cultivation expanded across the Taiwan Strait at the particular
time and in the way that it did probably has no simple answer. Barring trade,
founder lineage, and other social hypotheses, it has been suggested that the dis-
persal of cereal cultivation was likely due to a combination of environmental and
demographic factors (Bellwood 2005, 2017). As described above, land- and seas-
capes across the Taiwan Strait underwent major changes during the Late Holocene,
and the asynchronous development of coastal alluvia on Taiwan and in the river
deltas of Fujian may have contributed to the spread and establishment of cereal
cultivation. A higher reproductive rate among farmers, relative to foragers, may also
have played a role (Bellwood 2005; Bocquet-Appel 2011). However, this
hypothesis is complicated by low population estimates and the limited evidence for
cereal cultivation and anthropogenic disturbance observed in Fujian during this
period (Hosner et al. 2016; Jiao 2013; Zhao et al. 2017). An alternative explanation,
namely the proposal of an expansionist “frontier mentality” associated with shifting
dry land cultivation (Bellwood 2011), remains to be evaluated through further
studies of cultivation regimes and vegetation histories that address the typology of
early cultivation systems. Above all, the spread of cereal cultivation was part of a
wider process, but its local manifestations emphasize the importance of paying
attention to the local conditions under which it occurred. Whatever further research
may reveal, the dynamic land- and seascapes of the Taiwan Strait should not be
ignored when discussing the spread of cereal cultivation from continental Asia to
the doorstep of the Pacific.

Acknowledgements I wish to thank Wu Chunming and Barry Rolett for the opportunity to
participate in the conference and to contribute to these proceedings. I also wish to express my
gratitude to Hung Hsiao-chun for constructive feedback and suggestions that greatly helped to
improve this paper. Any errors remain my own. I acknowledge the Australian Government
Research Training Program scholarship as the source of funding for my Ph.D. candidature at the
Australian National University (2017–2018).

References

Bellwood, P. S. (2005). First farmers: The origins of agricultural societies. Malden, MA:
Wiley-Blackwell.
Bellwood, P. S. (2011). The checkered prehistory of rice movement southwards as a domesticated
cereal—From the Yangzi to the Equator. Rice, 4(3–4), 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s12284-011-9068-9.
Bellwood, P. S. (2017). First islanders: Prehistory and human migration in island Southeast Asia.
Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Bocquet-Appel, J. P. (2011). When the world’s population took off: the springboard of the
Neolithic Demographic Transition. Science, 333(6042), 560–561. https://doi.org/10.1126/
science.1208880.
Carson, M. T. (2017). Coastal palaeo-landscapes of the Neolithic. In P. S. Bellwood (Ed.), First
islanders: Prehistory and human migration in island Southeast Asia (pp. 240–244). Malden,
MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
12 Coast to Coast: The Spread of Cereal Cultivation … 231

Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. (1997). Genes, peoples, and languages. Proceedings of the National Academy
of Sciences, 94(15), 7719–7724. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.94.15.7719.
Chang, K. (1969). Fengpitou, tapenkeng, and the prehistory of Taiwan. New Haven: Department
of Anthropology, Yale University.
Chiu, H. L., Chen, C. Y., & You, Z. (n.d.). Research on the Liangdao-Daowei site group on
Liangdao, Mazu islands: Final report (pp. 1–274). Unpublished report on file at National
Tsinghua University, Hsinchu (Mazu Liangdao Daowei Yizhiqun Zhonghe Yanjiu Jihua:
Chengguo Baogao 《馬祖亮島島尾遺址群綜合研究計劃:成果報告》).
Cohen, D. J. (2014). The neolithic of Southern China. In C. Renfrew & P. Bahn (Eds.), The
Cambridge world prehistory 3 volume set (pp. 765–781). Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CHO9781139017831.053.
Cohen, D. J., Bar-Yosef, O., Wu, X., Patania, I., & Goldberg, P. (2017). The emergence of pottery
in China: Recent dating of two early pottery cave sites in South China. Quaternary
International, 441, Part B, 36–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.08.024.
Deng, Z., Hung, H., Carson, M. T., Bellwood, P. S., Yang, S., & Lu, H. (2017). The first discovery of
Neolithic rice remains in eastern Taiwan: phytolith evidence from the Chaolaiqiao site.
Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-017-0471-z.
Deng, Z., Hung, H., Fan, X., Huang, Y., & Lu, H. (2018). The ancient dispersal of millets in
southern China: New archaeological evidence. The Holocene, 28(1), 34–43. https://doi.org/10.
1177/0959683617714603.
Fujian Provincial Museum, Xiamen University, Wuyishan Museum. (2016). Preliminary report on
the 2014 excavation of the Hulushan site, Wuyishan City, Fujian Province. Southeast Culture,
2, 19–36 (Fujian Wuyishanshi Hulushan Yizhi 2014 Nian Houjue Jianbao 《福建武夷山市葫
芦山遗址2014年发掘简报》東南文化 2016 年).
Fuller, D. Q. (2011). Pathways to Asian civilizations: Tracing the origins and spread of rice and
rice cultures. Rice, 4(3–4), 78–92. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12284-011-9078-7.
Fuller, D. Q., & Lucas, L. (2017). Adapting crops, landscapes, and food choices: Patterns in the
dispersal of domesticated plants across Eurasia. In N. Boivin, M. Petraglia, & R. Crassard
(Eds.), Human dispersal and species movement (pp. 304–331). Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781316686942.013.
Guedes, J. A., Austermann, J., & Mitrovica, J. X. (2016). Lost foraging opportunities for East
Asian hunter-gatherers due to rising sea level since the Last Glacial Maximum.
Geoarchaeology, 31(4), 255–266. https://doi.org/10.1002/gea.21542.
He, K., Lu, H., Zhang, J., Wang, C., & Huan, X. (2017). Prehistoric evolution of the dualistic
structure mixed rice and millet farming in China. The Holocene, 27(12), 1885–1898. https://
doi.org/10.1177/0959683617708455.
Hosner, D., Wagner, M., Tarasov, P. E., Chen, X., & Leipe, C. (2016). Spatiotemporal distribution
patterns of archaeological sites in China during the Neolithic and Bronze Age: An overview.
The Holocene, 26(10), 1576–1593. https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683616641743.
Hung, H. (2017). Neolithic cultures in Southeast China, Taiwan, and Luzon. In P. S. Bellwood
(Ed.), First Islanders: Prehistory and human migration in island Southeast Asia (pp. 234–
240). Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hung, H., & Carson, M. T. (2014). Foragers, fishers and farmers: Origins of the Taiwanese
Neolithic. Antiquity, 88(342), 1115–1131. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00115352.
Jiao, T. (2013). The neolithic of Southeast China. In A. P. Underhill (Ed.), A companion to
Chinese archaeology (pp. 599–612). Chichester, West Sussex: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
Jiao, T. (2016). Toward an alternative perspective on the foraging and low-level food production
on the coast of China. Quaternary International, 419, 54–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.
2015.06.060.
Lee, C. Y., Liew, P. M., & Lee, T. Q. (2010). Pollen records from southern Taiwan: Implications
for East Asian summer monsoon variation during the Holocene. The Holocene, 20(1), 81–89.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683609348859.
232 T. Kaikkonen

Liew, P. M., Huang, S. Y., & Kuo, C. M. (2006). Pollen stratigraphy, vegetation and environment
of the last glacial and Holocene: a record from Toushe Basin, Central Taiwan. Quaternary
International, 147(1), 16–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2005.09.003.
Lin, G. (2005). Neolithic cultures in coastal Fujian. In C. C. Chung-yu & J. Pan (Eds.), The
archaeology of southeast coastal islands of China (pp. 75–90). Mazu: Lianjiang County
Government (Fujian Yanhai Xinshiqishidai Wenhua Zongshu 《福建沿海新石器時代文化綜
述》連江省政府 2005年).
Liu, L., & Chen, X. (2012). The archaeology of China: From the late paleolithic to the early
bronze age. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. http://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/
anu/detail.action?docID=907107. Accessed 8 May 2018.
Ma, T., Tarasov, P. E., Zheng, Z., Han, A., & Huang, K. (2016a). Pollen- and charcoal-based
evidence for climatic and human impact on vegetation in the northern edge of Wuyi
Mountains, China, during the last 8200 years. The Holocene, 26(10), 1616–1626. https://doi.
org/10.1177/0959683616641744.
Ma, T., Zheng, Z., Rolett, B. V., Lin, G., Zhang, G., & Yue, Y. (2016b). New evidence for
Neolithic rice cultivation and Holocene environmental change in the Fuzhou Basin, Southeast
China. Vegetation History and Archaeobotany, 25(4), 375–386. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00334-016-0556-0.
Nakamura, S. (2010). The origin of rice cultivation in the Lower Yangtze Region, China.
Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences, 2(2), 107–113. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12520-
010-0033-0.
Rolett, B. V., Guo, Z., & Jiao, T. (2007). Geological sourcing of volcanic stone adzes from
Neolithic sites in Southeast China. Asian Perspectives, 46(2), 275–297. https://doi.org/10.
1353/asi.2007.0018.
Rolett, B. V., Zheng, Z., & Yue, Y. (2011). Holocene sea-level change and the emergence of
Neolithic seafaring in the Fuzhou Basin (Fujian, China). Quaternary Science Reviews, 30(7–8),
788–797. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quascirev.2011.01.015.
Sagart, L. (2008). The expansion of Setaria farmers in East Asia: A linguistic and archaeological
model. In A. Sanchez-Mazas, R. Blench, M. D. Ross, I. Peiros, & M. Lin (Eds.), Past human
migrations in East Asia: Matching archaeology, linguistics and genetics (pp. 133–157).
London: Routledge.
Silva, F., Stevens, C. J., Weisskopf, A., Castillo, C., Qin, L., Bevan, A., et al. (2015). Modelling
the geographical origin of rice cultivation in Asia using the Rice Archaeological Database.
PLoS ONE, 10(9), e0137024. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0137024.
Smith, B. D. (2001). Low-level food production. Journal of Archaeological Research, 9(1), 1–43.
Tsang, C., & Li, K. (2013). Archaeological heritage in Tainan Science Park of Taiwan, 1. Taidong
City: National Taiwan Museum of Prehistory.
Tsang, C., Li, K. T., Hsu, T. F., Tsai, Y. C., Fang, P. H., & Hsing, Y. I. C. (2017). Broomcorn and
foxtail millet were cultivated in Taiwan about 5000 years ago. Botanical Studies, 58(1), 3.
https://doi.org/10.1186/s40529-016-0158-2.
Tsukada, M. (1967). Vegetation in subtropical Formosa during the Pleistocene glaciations and the
Holocene. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 3, 49–64.
Wang, C., Lu, H., Zhang, J., He, K., & Huan, X. (2016). Macro-process of past plant subsistence
from the Upper Paleolithic to Middle Neolithic in China: A quantitative analysis of
multi-archaeobotanical data. PLoS ONE, 11(2), e0148136. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.
pone.0148136.
Wang, P., & Sun, X. (1994). Last glacial maximum in China: Comparison between land and sea.
CATENA, 23(3), 341–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/0341-8162(94)90077-9.
Wu, M., Ge, W., & Chen, Z. (2016a). Diets of a late Neolithic maritime settlement: carbon and
nitrogen stable isotope analysis of human bones from the Tanshishan site. Acta Anthropologica
Sinica, 35(2), 246–256 (Haiyangxing Juluo Xianmin De Shiwu Jiegou: Tanshishan Yizhi
Xinshiqishidai Wanqi Rengu De Tandan Wending 《海洋性聚落先民的食物结构:昙石山遗
址新石器时代晚期人骨的碳氮稳定同位素分析》人類學學報 2016年).
12 Coast to Coast: The Spread of Cereal Cultivation … 233

Wu, Y., Mao, L., Wang, C., Zhang, J., & Zhao, Z. (2016b). Phytolith evidence suggests early
domesticated rice since 5600 cal a BP on Hainan Island of South China. Quaternary
International, 426, 120–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.quaint.2016.01.008.
Yang, X., Barton, H. J., Wan, Z., Li, Q., Ma, Z., Li, M., et al. (2013). Sago-type palms were an
important plant food prior to rice in southern subtropical China. PLoS ONE, 8(5), e63148.
https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0063148.
Yang, X., Wang, W., Zhuang, Y., Li, Z., Ma, Z., Ma, Y., et al. (2016). New radiocarbon evidence
on early rice consumption and farming in South China. The Holocene, 27(7), 1045–1051.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0959683616678465.
Yue, Y., Zheng, Z., Huang, K., Chevalier, M., Chase, B. M., Carré, M., et al. (2012). A continuous
record of vegetation and climate change over the past 50,000 years in the Fujian Province of
eastern subtropical China. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 365–366,
115–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2012.09.018.
Yue, Y., Zheng, Z., Rolett, B. V., Ma, T., Chen, C., Huang, K., & Lin, G., et al. (2015). Holocene
vegetation, environment and anthropogenic influence in the Fuzhou Basin, Southeast China.
Journal of Asian Earth Sciences, 99(Supplement C), 85–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jseaes.
2014.12.004.
Zhang, C., & Hung, H. (2008). The Neolithic of southern China: Origin, development, and
dispersal. Asian Perspectives, 47(2), 299–329. https://doi.org/10.1353/asi.0.0004.
Zhang, C., & Hung, H. (2010). The emergence of agriculture in southern China. Antiquity, 84
(323), 11–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00099737.
Zhang, C., & Hung, H. (2012). Later hunter-gatherers in southern China, 18,000-3000 BC.
Antiquity, 86(331), 11–29. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003598X00062438.
Zhao, C., Wu, X., Wang, T., & Yuan, X. (2004). Early polished stone tools in South China
evidence of the transition from Palaeolithic to Neolithic. Documenta Praehistorica, 31, 131.
https://doi.org/10.4312/dp.31.9.
Zhao, L., Ma, C., Leipe, C., Long, T., Liu, K., Lu, H., et al. (2017). Holocene vegetation dynamics
in response to climate change and human activities derived from pollen and charcoal records
from southeastern China. Palaeogeography, Palaeoclimatology, Palaeoecology, 485, 644–
660. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.palaeo.2017.06.035.
Zhao, Z. (2011). New archaeobotanic data for the study of the origins of agriculture in China.
Current Anthropology, 52(S4), S295–S306. https://doi.org/10.1086/659308.
Zhao, Z. (2017). Discussion on ancient ocean passage based on flotation results from the Nanshan
site. Presented at the International Conference of Prehistoric Archaeology in Southeast China
through the Pacific, Jiangle County, Fujian Province, 3 November 2017 (Cong Nanshan Yizhi
Fuxuan Jieguo Tan Gudai Haiyang Tongdao 《從南山遺址浮選結果談古代海洋通道》,
Zhongguo Dongnan Ji Huan Taipingyang Diqu Shiqian Kaogu Guoji Xueshu Yanjiuhui 《中
国东南及环太平洋地区史前考古国际学术研讨会》 2017年).
Zong, Y. (2004). Mid-Holocene sea-level highstand along the Southeast coast of China.
Quaternary International, 117(1), 55–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1040-6182(03)00116-2.