A Site Catchment Analysis of Hong Kong’s Neolithic Subsistence

Abstract

This chapter examines Hong Kong Neolithic site data with the site catchment analysis approach, in order to help reveal the subsistence nature of this region during the period under study. Based on a recheck of some original literature of the site catchment analysis and key materials on local historical, economic and ecological developments including site location, distance between sites and resources, characteristics of environments, nature of subsistence activities, technological levels, cultural/economic traditions and social interactions of the region and related areas, supported by unearthed archaeological evidences and scientific results, a couple of proposals are put forth hereinafter: (1) A dichotomy between a primary site catchment and a secondary site catchment is made, so that the catchment (particularly the subsistence resources) of a site can be better understood. The typical 5-km radius catchment zone for farmers or 10-km radius catchment zone for foragers is in nature equivalent to the primary site catchment which is basically of a subsistence nature, as this chapter has suggested. (2) The 5-km/10-km radii are largely the maximum limits of radius distance for the forager/farmer catchments in theory. And in reality, the radii are usually much smaller and often varied, due to ecological differences and other factors. (3) A preliminary 1-km radius site catchment zone, where the most basic or regular subsistence resources regardless of terrestrial or aquatic ones were drawn, is proposed for the Neolithic sites of Hong Kong, incapable of revealing possible fluctuations of site catchment size from the Middle to the Late Neolithic though. (4) Through primary site catchment analyses from both regional perspective and individual site perspective, this chapter suggests that, during the Neolithic in Hong Kong, procuring aquatic (i.e. marine or estuary riverine) resources would have been a major subsistence activity, probably coupled with plant or animal foraging even cultivation (e.g. tubers and rice). (5) From the late phase of the Middle Neolithic to the Late Neolithic, more headland and upland or inland sites were present and more site catchment zones were overlapping or closely situated, which would have probably resulted from increase of population and sedentism plus political or social interactions between neighbouring groups, indicating possible expansion and intensification of food procurement and exploitation, or competition of broad-spectrum subsistence resources. It is likely that both aquatic (especially marine) and land food demands may have been increasing simultaneously, most obviously during the late phase of the Late Neolithic. (6) Overall, the site catchment analysis approach can at least help archaeologists to locate a reasonable hypothesis to stick to or lean to in their studies and more so when checked against or backed up by sound archaeological findings and/or other lines’ research outcomes, for example, local environmental history.