DOCSLIB.ORG

Later Stone Age Technological Strategies at Blydefontein Rock Shelter, South Africa

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Later Stone Age Technological Strategies at Blydefontein Rock Shelter, South Africa Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 24 (2005) 193–226 www.elsevier.com/locate/jaa Coping with risk: Later stone age technological strategies at Blydefontein Rock Shelter, South Africa C. Britt Bousman Department of Anthropology, Center for Archaeological Studies, Texas State University-San Marcos, 601 University Drive, San Marcos, TX 78666-4616, USA Received 19 January 2005; revision received 18 March 2005 Available online 11 July 2005 Abstract I use Later Stone Age artifacts and faunal remains from Blydefontein Rock Shelter in the eastern Karoo, South Africa to investigate the interaction between risk and hunter–gatherer technological organization. ModiWcations in stone-tool repair and replacement are inXuenced by changes in past environments, resources, and the economic and set- tlement strategies of these Later Stone Age hunter–gatherers. The technological approaches range from time-minimiza- tion tactics to resource-maximization tactics. Time-minimization tactics favor the intense curation of extractive tools and the expedient use of maintenance tools, while resource-maximization tactics employ a more rapid replacement of extractive tools coupled with intense curation of maintenance tools. Time-minimization tactics occur with lower risk wetter conditions and the selection of larger animals for prey, while resource-maximization tactics correspond to higher risk conditions during drier periods and the more intensive exploitation of smaller animals. EYcient technologies were also employed for the rapid production of backed microlithic tools, but this does not appear to be in response to eco- nomic or environmental factors. 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Introduction hunter–gatherers manipulated these strategies to cope with changing conditions through time. Tactical shifts In the Karoo of South Africa, Later Stone Age (LSA) coincide with environmental changes and with oscillations hunter–gatherers occupied Blydefontein Rock Shelter in the faunal remains. The correspondence of technologi- sporadically in the Late Pleistocene and throughout the cal indicators with the economic and paleoenvironmental Holocene (Fig. 1). Discarded stone tools, lithic manufac- records suggests that short-term Xuctuations in food turing debris, bone refuse, and hearths scattered through- availability and economic risk inXuenced hunter–gatherer out the stratiWed rock shelter’s deposits, as well as the technological responses. occasional potsherd in the later components, represent the First, I will discuss the theoretical foundations of this enduring record of their encampments. This study exam- paper in terms of risk and organization of technology ines ways by which these hunter–gatherers organized their among hunter–gatherers, then present the South African technological strategies, especially regarding the design, evidence for Later Stone Age technology, and Wnish with use and maintenance of their stone tools, and how these an analysis of the Blydefontein Rock Shelter data. The approach taken here uses optimal foraging theory (Bettinger, 1991; Smith and Winterhalder, 1992; E-mail address: [email protected]. Winterhalder, 2001) and especially those tenets 0278-4165/$ - see front matter 2005 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.jaa.2005.05.001 194 C.B. Bousman / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 24 (2005) 193–226 Fig. 1. Map of Southern Africa showing location of Blydefontein Rock Shelter, signiWcant LSA sites, and landmarks. concerned with risk management (Cashdan, 1990; risk solely in terms of likelihood-of-loss (cf. Jochim, 1976). Torrence, 1989, 2001; Wiessner, 1982). Risk has many However, as Torrence (1989), and Bamforth and Bleed diVerent meanings, but in a general sense, scholars view (1997) persuasively argue, it is not only the frequency but risk either as a measure of unpredictable physical peril or also the severity of shortfalls, and thus the costs of over- uncertain economic returns. The following discussion only coming these shortfalls that provide the most important considers risk in terms of uncertain economic returns. limiting factors to human survival. Bamforth and Bleed (1997, p. 117) present a simple analogy that is worth Economic risk and hunter–gatherer technology repeating. The probability of falling oV a tightrope is the same whether it is 1 or 100 ft. above the ground, but the Economic risk gauges resource availability in terms of costs of falling oV the two tightropes diVer dramatically. abundance, diversity, and spatial and temporal distribu- Backup resources also diminish the cost-of-loss tions (Cashdan, 1990). Torrence (1989), who published (Bamforth and Bleed, 1997). For example, hunter–gath- one of the Wrst and best argued cases illustrating the inXu- erers in far northern latitudes often focus their seasonal ence of risk on technological strategies, partitioned risk economic pursuits on one or two resources with few, if into two components: the probability of an economic any, available backup resources (Kelly, 1995). Risks are shortfall (likelihood-of-loss) and the severity of an eco- diVerent in other areas such as Southern Africa where nomic shortfall (cost-of-loss). In hunter–gatherer econo- hunter–gatherers exploit a wider variety of resources if mies, the likelihood and severity of shortfalls are preferred food sources fail. This is not to say that areas determined by a multitude of factors that include seasonal like Southern Africa are not risky and that the potential climatic patterns, unpredictable weather, prey density and for starvation was not a serious factor for prehistoric their ecological relationships, and the speciWc hunting and hunter–gatherers, but the structure of risk is diVerent. In gathering tactics that include mobility and technology, as this paper, I assume that the timing and severity of well as the social strategies that inXuence access to food shortfalls are the two harshest “selectional forces” that (Wilmsen and Durham, 1988). Most archaeologists view inXuence technology among hunters–gatherers. C.B. Bousman / Journal of Anthropological Archaeology 24 (2005) 193–226 195 Wiessner (1977, 1982) identiWes four generalized Using paleoenvironmental data as a proxy measure strategies used by hunter–gatherers to cope with risk: (1) of risk can lead to erroneous assessments. Minc and prevention-of-loss, (2) transfer-of-loss, (3) food storage, Smith (1989) provide an example of potential pitfalls. and (4) storage though social obligations. Bamforth and Using tree-ring records, they reconstruct resource Xuctu- Bleed (1997) argue that archaeologists have spent too ations for neighboring inland and coastal areas in much eVort investigating prevention-of-loss strategies, Northern Alaska during the historic period, and show and other coping strategies should be our focus. Trans- that risk proWles in these two adjacent areas vary fer-of-loss (sharing within a single group) and storage inversely with climatic conditions. Dry, warm conditions through social obligations (sharing between groups allow greater caribou calf survival in winter and increase using reciprocal exchange systems such as hxaro) do not productively of caribou hunting for inland groups, while necessarily require technological devices (Wiessner, the same conditions decrease the hunting success of 1982), and these can be diYcult to monitor with archae- bowhead whale and ringed seal hunting at the coast due ological evidence. to the early breakup of sea ice. This inverse correlation Food storage often does involve technological strate- with climate shows that simple equations with proxy evi- gies (Testart, 1982; Wiessner, 1982). For example, closer dence can be misleading. Care must be taken, but rea- to the South African southern coast, Holocene sites such sonable measures can be made with an understanding of as Melkhoutboom and Boomplaas have storage pits local paleoecology. with preserved seeds and corms (H.J. Deacon, 1976, 1979; Mitchell, 2002, pp. 175–176, 178), but hunter–gath- Organization of technology erers in the Interior Plateau near Blydefontein never relied on storage intensively enough to develop elaborate Archaeologists have introduced a series of concepts technological devices. Many other hunter–gatherer soci- used in the study of technological organization (see eties follow a similar pattern. Consequently, this paper Bousman, 1993 for more detailed summary). Binford returns to prevention-of-loss strategies, especially those and Binford (1966) distinguish between extractive and that inXuence hunter–gatherer technologies, as a valid maintenance tasks and suggest that technology was topic for analysis. designed to address the needs of these two distinct types While risk is diYcult to monitor with ethnographic or of tasks. We can then classify tools as to their role in archaeological data, a few attempts to document risk these primary functions as either extractive or mainte- have been made over the last 20 or so years (Ambrose nance tools. Extractive tools are those used to obtain and Lorenz, 1990; Dyson-Hudson and Smith, 1978). One food and maintenance tools are those used to manufac- limitation is that very few modern hunter–gatherer stud- ture or repair other technological devices. ies report environmental information in great enough Later, Binford (1973) introduced the concept of detail from which risk can be assessed, but see Wilmsen design goals and made a contrast between expedient and and Durham (1988) and Kent (1996) for notable excep- curated tools. Expedient tools are those
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Further Evidence for Bow Hunting and Its Implications More Than 60 000
    1 Further evidence for bow hunting and its implications more than 60 000 2 years ago: results of a use-trace analysis of the bone point from Klasies River 3 Main site, South Africa. 4 5 Justin Bradfield1*, Marlize Lombard1, Jerome Reynard2, Sarah Wurz2,3 6 1. Palaeo-Research Institute, University of Johannesburg, P.O. Box 524, Auckland Park, 2006, 7 Johannesburg, South Africa 8 2. School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Science, University of the 9 Witwatersrand 10 3. SFF Centre for Early Sapiens Behaviour (SapiensCE), University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway 11 * [email protected] 12 13 14 15 Abstract 16 The bone point (SAM 42160) from >60 ka deposits at Klasies River Main Site, South Africa, is 17 reassessed. We clarify the stratigraphic integrity of SAM 42160 and confirm its Middle Stone 18 Age provenience. We find evidence that indicates the point was hafted and partially coated 19 in an adhesive substance. Internal fractures are consistent with stresses occasioned by high- 20 velocity, longitudinal impact. SAM 42160, like its roughly contemporaneous counterpart, 21 farther north at Sibudu Cave, likely functioned as a hafted arrowhead. We highlight a 22 growing body of evidence for bow hunting at this early period and explore what the 23 implications of bow-and-arrow technology might reveal about the cognition of Middle Stone 24 Age people who were able to conceive, construct and use it. 25 26 Keywords: arrowhead; bone point; bow hunting; traceology; cognition, palaeo-neurology; 27 symbiotic technology 28 29 30 31 1. Introduction 32 Multiple lines of evidence have been mounting over the last decade to support bow hunting 33 in South Africa before 60 ka.
    [Show full text]
  • The Middle Stone Age of East Africa and the Beginnings of Regional Identity
    Journal of Worm Prehistory, Vol. 2, No. 3. 1988 The Middle Stone Age of East Africa and the Beginnings of Regional Identity J. Desmond Clark ~ The history of research into the Middle Stone Age of East Africa and the present state of knowledge of this time period is examined for the region as a whole, with special reference to paleoenvironments. The known MSA sites and occurrences are discussed region by region and attempts are made to fit them into a more precise chronological framework and to assess their cultural affinities. The conclusion is reached that the Middle Stone Age lasted for some 150,000 years but considerably more systematic and in-depth research is needed into this time period, which is now perceived as of great significance since it appears to span the time of the evolution of anatomically Modern humans in the continent, perhaps in Last Africa. KEY WORDS: Middle Stone Age; Sangoan/Lupemban; long chronology; Archaic Homo sapiens; Modern H. sapiens. • . when we eventually find the skulls of the makers of the African Mousterian they will prove to be of non-Homo sapiens type, although probably not of Neanderthal type, but merely an allied race of Homo rhodesiensis. The partial exception.., of the Stillbay culture group is therefore explicable on the grounds that Homo sapiens influence was already at work. (Leakey, 1931, p. 326) The other view is that the cradle of the Aurignacian races lies hidden somewhere in the Sahara area, probably in the south-east, and that an early wave of movement carried one branch of the stock via Somaliland and the Straits of Bab el-Mandeb into Arabia, and thence to some unknown secondary centre of distribution in Asia.
    [Show full text]
  • Conservation Easement Management Plan
    Conservation Easement Management Plan Prepared by: Hidden Springs Town Association Boise, ID January 2015 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Contents TABLE OF CONTENTS.............................................................................................................................. 2 CONSERVATION EASEMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN HIDDEN SPRINGS, IDAHO .... 3 1.0 INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................... 3 2.0 PURPOSE AND IMPLEMENTATION ........................................................................ 9 3.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTINGS ................................................................................. 9 3.1 GEOLOGY AND SOILS ......................................................................................................................... 9 3.2 HYDROLOGY....................................................................................................................................... 10 3.3 CLIMATE ............................................................................................................................................. 11 3.4 FLORA ................................................................................................................................................. 12 3.5 FAUNA ................................................................................................................................................. 18 3.6 WILDLAND-URBAN INTERFACE ........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Nile Valley-Levant Interactions: an Eclectic Review
    Nile Valley-Levant interactions: an eclectic review The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation Bar-Yosef, Ofer. 2013. Nile Valley-Levant interactions: an eclectic review. In Neolithisation of Northeastern Africa, ed. Noriyuki Shirai. Studies in Early Near Eastern Production, Subsistence, and Environment 16: 237-247. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:31887680 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Open Access Policy Articles, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#OAP In: N. Shirai (ed.) Neolithization of Northeastern Africa. Studies in Early Near Eastern: Production, Subsistence, & Environment 16, ex oriente: Berlin. pp. 237-247. Nile Valley-Levant interactions: an eclectic review Ofer Bar-Yosef Department of Anthropology, Harvard University Opening remarks Writing a review of a prehistoric province as an outsider is not a simple task. The archaeological process, as we know today, is an integration of data sets – the information from the field and the laboratory analyses, and the interpretation that depends on the paradigm held by the writer affected by his or her personal experience. Even monitoring the contents of most of the published and online literature is a daunting task. It is particularly true for looking at the Egyptian Neolithic during the transition from foraging to farming and herding, when most of the difficulties originate from the poorly known bridging regions. A special hurdle is the terminological conundrum of the Neolithic, as Andrew Smith and Alison Smith discusses in this volume, and in particular the term “Neolithisation” that finally made its way to the Levantine literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Persistence of Middle Stone Age Technology to the Pleistocene/Holocene Transition Supports a Complex Hominin Evolutionary Scenario in West Africa
    This is a repository copy of Persistence of Middle Stone Age technology to the Pleistocene/Holocene transition supports a complex hominin evolutionary scenario in West Africa. White Rose Research Online URL for this paper: http://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/129212/ Version: Accepted Version Article: Scerri, E.M.L., Blinkhorn, J., Niang, K. et al. (2 more authors) (2017) Persistence of Middle Stone Age technology to the Pleistocene/Holocene transition supports a complex hominin evolutionary scenario in West Africa. Journal of Archaeological Science: Reports, 11. pp. 639-646. ISSN 2352-409X https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jasrep.2017.01.003 Reuse This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs (CC BY-NC-ND) licence. This licence only allows you to download this work and share it with others as long as you credit the authors, but you can’t change the article in any way or use it commercially. More information and the full terms of the licence here: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/ Takedown If you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing [email protected] including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. [email protected] https://eprints.whiterose.ac.uk/ Persistence of Middle Stone Age technology to the Pleistocene/Holocene transition supports a complex hominin evolutionary scenario in West Africa Eleanor M.L. Scerria*, James Blinkhornb, Khady Niangc, Mark D. Batemand, Huw S. Groucutta a Research
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliography
    Bibliography Many books were read and researched in the compilation of Binford, L. R, 1983, Working at Archaeology. Academic Press, The Encyclopedic Dictionary of Archaeology: New York. Binford, L. R, and Binford, S. R (eds.), 1968, New Perspectives in American Museum of Natural History, 1993, The First Humans. Archaeology. Aldine, Chicago. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Braidwood, R 1.,1960, Archaeologists and What They Do. Franklin American Museum of Natural History, 1993, People of the Stone Watts, New York. Age. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Branigan, Keith (ed.), 1982, The Atlas ofArchaeology. St. Martin's, American Museum of Natural History, 1994, New World and Pacific New York. Civilizations. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Bray, w., and Tump, D., 1972, Penguin Dictionary ofArchaeology. American Museum of Natural History, 1994, Old World Civiliza­ Penguin, New York. tions. HarperSanFrancisco, San Francisco. Brennan, L., 1973, Beginner's Guide to Archaeology. Stackpole Ashmore, w., and Sharer, R. J., 1988, Discovering Our Past: A Brief Books, Harrisburg, PA. Introduction to Archaeology. Mayfield, Mountain View, CA. Broderick, M., and Morton, A. A., 1924, A Concise Dictionary of Atkinson, R J. C., 1985, Field Archaeology, 2d ed. Hyperion, New Egyptian Archaeology. Ares Publishers, Chicago. York. Brothwell, D., 1963, Digging Up Bones: The Excavation, Treatment Bacon, E. (ed.), 1976, The Great Archaeologists. Bobbs-Merrill, and Study ofHuman Skeletal Remains. British Museum, London. New York. Brothwell, D., and Higgs, E. (eds.), 1969, Science in Archaeology, Bahn, P., 1993, Collins Dictionary of Archaeology. ABC-CLIO, 2d ed. Thames and Hudson, London. Santa Barbara, CA. Budge, E. A. Wallis, 1929, The Rosetta Stone. Dover, New York. Bahn, P.
    [Show full text]
  • A Later Stone Age Assemblage from Canteen Kopje, Northern Cape
    204 South African Archaeological Bulletin 65 (192): 204–214, 2010 Field and Technical Report A LATER STONE AGE ASSEMBLAGE FROM CANTEEN KOPJE, NORTHERN CAPE TIM R. FORSSMAN1, KATHLEEN KUMAN1,2, GEORGE M. LEADER1,3 & RYAN J. GIBBON1,4 1School of Geography, Archaeology and Environmental Studies, University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa E-mail: [email protected] / [email protected] [email protected] / [email protected] 2Institute for Human Evolution 3Department of Archaeology, University of Southampton, Southampton, United Kingdom 4Department of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana, USA (Received June 2010. Revised November 2010) INTRODUCTION formation in the foraging economy. While such changes Canteen Kopje has been mentioned in archaeological occurred throughout southern Africa (e.g. Dowson 1998; Hall literature for almost a century because of artefacts which & Smith 2000; Sadr 2002), the outcome, according to Kent had come to light during exploitation of the Vaal River gravels (2002), was constrained by site and situational context. Yet, by diamond miners. It was first registered as a diamond mining some general trends are noticed. Most prominently, lithic site in the 1870s under the name Klip Drift (De Wit 2008). In frequencies changed. A general increase in scrapers and corre- 1948, the site was declared a national monument due to the sponding decrease in backed tools occurred across southern richness of its Earlier Stone Age collections (J. Deacon 1993), yet Africa. At the same time, trade items in the form of ceramics, only recently have systematic archaeological excavations been glass beads and iron implements began appearing in the LSA conducted.
    [Show full text]
  • Prehistoric Lithic Technology} Workshops} and Chipping Stations in the Philippines
    Prehistoric Lithic Technology} Workshops} and Chipping Stations in the Philippines D. KYLE LATINIS THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS represent an important area for research of problems concerning prehistoric archaeology in Southeast Asia. These insular areas, located east of the biogeographic boundary known as Huxley's line, include a variety of tropical environments. These islands remained detached from the continental portion of Southeast Asia throughout the Pleistocene and Holocene. Archaeolog­ ical research has documented human occupation and adaptation from at least the Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene within these islands. Unfortunately, relatively little intensive prehistoric archaeological research has been undertaken in the Philippines compared to some areas in mainland South­ east Asia, Oceania, and Australia. Warren Peterson's dissertation (1974) focused on a series of sites in northern Luzon and represents one of the foundation stud­ ies in the Philippines for modern archaeology. Peterson's work has often been cited and his conclusions used for the development of models concerning prehis­ tory in the Philippines and Southeast Asia. Peterson's research was conducted during a period when behavioral reconstruc­ tions from site assemblage analyses were prominent in archaeological research. Specifically, Peterson attempted behavioral reconstruction from the analysis of stone tools from the Busibus/Pintu site in northern Luzon, Philippines. A reanal­ ysis of the entire Busibus/Pintu lithic assemblage has revealed problems with Peterson's initial analysis and interpretation of this site-problems that will be addressed in this paper. Lithic technology, stone tool manufacture, and selection and reduction strategies will also be explored. Finally, new interpretations of the nature of the lithic assemblage and site activities at Busibus/Pintu rock shelter will be provided.
    [Show full text]
  • Standing at the Gates of Europe: Human Behavior and Biogeography in the Southern Carpathians During the Late Pleistocene
    ARTICLE IN PRESS Available online at www.sciencedirect.com Journal of Anthropological Archaeology xxx (2008) xxx–xxx www.elsevier.com/locate/jaa Standing at the gates of Europe: Human behavior and biogeography in the Southern Carpathians during the Late Pleistocene Julien Riel-Salvatore a,*, Gabriel Popescu b,c, C. Michael Barton c,d a Department of Anthropology, McGill University, Stephen Leacock Building, Room 717, 855 Sherbrooke Street, W., Montre´al, Que., Canada H3A 2T7 b Institute of Archaeology ‘‘Vasile Parvan”, 11, Henri Coanda Street, Sector 1, Bucharest 010667, Romania c School of Human Evolution & Social Change, Arizona State University, P.O. Box 872402, Tempe, AZ 85287-2402, USA d Center for Social Dynamics & Complexity, Arizona State University, Tempe, AZ 85287, USA Received 8 November 2006; revision received 5 February 2008 Abstract This study presents a behavioral analysis of Middle and Upper Paleolithic lithic assemblages from 14 sites located in the southern Carpathian Mountains. Using a whole assemblage behavioral indicator, we show that the hominins that manufactured those stone tools do not appear to have differed in terms of the flexibility of the mobility strategies they employed to exploit their landscapes. Rather than biological change, we argue that large-scale climate changes are likely more important drivers of behavioral changes during the Late Pleistocene of the region, including during the Middle–Upper Paleolithic transition. These results agree well with the results of studies having employed this methodology
    [Show full text]
  • Lukenya Hill, Kenya)
    Late Pleistocene age and archaeological context for the hominin calvaria from GvJm-22 (Lukenya Hill, Kenya) Christian A. Tryona,1, Isabelle Crevecoeurb, J. Tyler Faithc, Ravid Ekshtaina, Joelle Nivensd, David Pattersone, Emma N. Mbuaf, and Fred Spoorg,h aDepartment of Anthropology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138; bUnité Mixte de Recherche 5199, de la Préhistoire à l’Actuel: Culture, Environnement, et Anthropologie, Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique, Université de Bordeaux, 33615 Talence, France; cArchaeology Program, School of Social Science, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD 4072, Australia; dDepartment of Anthropology, New York University, New York, NY 10003; eCenter for the Advanced Study of Hominid Paleobiology, Department of Anthropology, The George Washington University, Washington, DC 20052; fNational Museums of Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya 00100; gDepartment of Human Evolution, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, D-04103, Leipzig, Germany; and hDepartment of Cell and Developmental Biology, University College London, WC1E 6BT London, United Kingdom Edited by Erik Trinkaus, Washington University, St. Louis, MO, and approved January 16, 2015 (received for review September 19, 2014) Kenya National Museums Lukenya Hill Hominid 1 (KNM-LH 1) is Hominid 1 (KNM-LH 1) partial calvaria from site GvJm-22 at a Homo sapiens partial calvaria from site GvJm-22 at Lukenya Hill, Lukenya Hill, Kenya, the only eastern African fossil hominin Kenya, associated with Later Stone Age (LSA) archaeological de- from a Last Glacial Maximum [LGM; 19–26.4 kya (19)] LSA posits. KNM-LH 1 is securely dated to the Late Pleistocene, and archaeological context. We construct a revised accelerator mass samples a time and region important for understanding the origins spectrometry (AMS) radiocarbon chronology built on 26 new of modern human diversity.
    [Show full text]
  • Revista De Arqueologia – Volume 27
    http://www.diva-portal.org This is the published version of a paper published in . Citation for the original published paper (version of record): Högberg, A. (2018) Approaches to children's knapping in lithic technology studies Revista de Arqueologia, 31(2): 58-74 https://doi.org/10.24885/sab.v31i2.613 Access to the published version may require subscription. N.B. When citing this work, cite the original published paper. Permanent link to this version: http://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:lnu:diva-79331 Recebido em: 09/09/2018 Aceito em: 10/10/2018 ART ICLE Anders Högberg* ABSTRACT This text gives an overview of how lithic technology studies have approached the topic of finding and interpreting the work of children in lithic assemblages. It focuses on examples from Scandinavian and European contexts. A selection of published studies is presented. Methods used in lithic technology studies and results from these studies are discussed. Achievements made and obstacles that still needs to be resolved by future research are discussed. Keywords: Children; Lithic; Assemblages. * Linnaeus University, School of Cultural Studies, Archaeology, Faculty of Art and Humanities, SE-391 82 Kalmar, Sweden. Centre for Anthropological Research, University of Johannesburg, P.O. Box 524, Auckland Park, 2006, South Africa DOI: https://doi.org/10.24885/sab.v31 i2.613 ARTI GO RESUMO Este texto fornece uma visão geral de como os estudos de tecnologia lítica abordaram o tópico de encontrar e interpretar o trabalho de crianças em conjuntos líticos. Centra-se em exemplos de contextos escandinavos e europeus. Uma seleção de estudos publicados é apresentada.
    [Show full text]
  • Behavioural Complexity and Modern Traits in the Philippine Upper Palaeolithic
    Behavioural Complexity and Modern Traits in the Philippine Upper Palaeolithic AlFred F. PAwlIk introduction The discussion of cultural, cognitive, and behavioral modernity has a long tradition in europe’s prehistoric archaeology ( Dibble 1989; Hahn 1986; Jelinek 1982; klein 1995, 1999; Mellars 1989a, 1989b). The appearance of specialized blade indus- tries, bone and antler tools, and especially figurative art, musical instruments, and personal ornaments are seen as significant indicators of the highly developed cultural and cognitive abilities of their makers (Clottes 2001; Conard 2003; Conard et al. 2004). The seemingly sudden appearance of expressive art and symbolism together with complex tool technologies in europe at around 40,000 years ago has been attributed to explosive cultural and cognitive advancement with the arrival of ana- tomically modern Homo sapiens ( Klein and Blake 2002; Mellars 1991; Mithen 1996). Whether this Upper Palaeolithic revolution in europe was due to social factors or genetic mutation, was related to changes in the ecosystem, or has a cultural expla- nation (such as competition with another human species, the Neanderthals) is still under debate ( Bar-Yossef 2002; Conard et al. 2004; d’errico 2003; Haidle 2006; McBrearty and Brooks 2000; Mellars 2005; Zilhão 2001). Yet, the “human revolu- tion” model is used to explain the success of the Homo sapiens immigrants over the Neanderthals ( Bräuer and Smith 1992; Conard 2006, 2008; Mellars 2005). On the other hand, potential indicators of an earlier and gradually developing cul- tural and cognitive modernity have been seen in African assemblages. The appearance of some modern cognitive traits (e.g., production of projectile points, shell-fishing, personal ornaments, notational or incised pieces, and pigment processing) in Africa has been dated back to the Middle Pleistocene, earlier than the first evidence of ana- tomically modern hominids 200,000 years ago (Henshilwood et al.
    [Show full text]