Sourcebook of Paleolithic Transitions 2009
DOI: 10.1007/978-0-387-76487-0_2
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Accidents of History: Conceptual Frameworks in Paleoarchaeology

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

1
25
0

Year Published

2010
2010
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
5
2
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 30 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 57 publications
1
25
0
Order By: Relevance
“…17,41,42 Three of the more popular methodologies currently being practiced by Paleolithic archeologists can be adapted to this purpose.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…17,41,42 Three of the more popular methodologies currently being practiced by Paleolithic archeologists can be adapted to this purpose.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…16 Early twentieth-century concerns added to this agenda a growing interest in prehistoric cultural variability. 17 Stone tool assemblages with shared typological characteristics were grouped together into named ''industries'' with relationships to one another that were modeled, more or less, on the kinds of social relationships observed among named ethnohistoric groups. 18 These concerns remain part of the contemporary research agenda in paleolithic archeology, but they are less and less central to the major issues in paleoanthropology.…”
Section: An Historical Perspective On the Problemmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reconstruction of the evolutionary processes in lithic techno-complexes during the Palaeolithic in general and the Middle-Upper Palaeolithic transition in particular has been hindered by the diversity in the methodologies used to approach it (Clark, 2009). Some proposals are even teleologically hostile to the description of transition processes as they use different premises according to whether the ensemble is thought to belong to the Middle Palaeolithic or the Upper Palaeolithic.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In fact, we believe we can detect an emerging consensus that the factors just noted are important determinants of forager assemblage composition in general (Clark 2002(Clark , 2009Clark and Riel-Salvatore 2006). Since we are likely not dealing with 'culturally diagnostic' artifacts but rather with the range of products of blade technology, we continue to think that the effect of sample size on assemblage diversity is quite significant and needs to be explicitly accounted for (e.g., Grayson and Cole 1998).…”
Section: A Forum For Commentary On Articles and Research Issuesmentioning
confidence: 91%