Is the Middle Palaeolithic an appropriate concept in eastern Asia? The issue
has been debated for China in two recent papers in
Antiquity (Yee 2012; Li 2014), which
in turn responded to an earlier argument set out by Gao and Norton (2002). But does the Korean record
offer a different perspective? Here, the authors argue that Korean
archaeology, as with the Chinese record, provides no support for a distinct
Middle Palaeolithic. Rather than seeking to validate an inappropriate
chronological framework derived from European Palaeolithic research,
emphasis should instead be placed on developing a regionally specific model
of prehistory for eastern Asia. They conclude, akin to Gao and Norton (2002), that the East Asian
Palaeolithic should be divided into two major cultural periods: Early and
Late.