Chronology Construction and the Study of Prehistoric Culture Change

Recalibrating grave-good chronologies: new AMS radiocarbon dates from Late Bronze Age burials in Lika, Croatia

“…Reinecke (1902) and Müller-Karpe (1959) in Central Europe; Montelius (1885) in Scandinavia), and researchers continue to use these frameworks to build regional sequences. Although useful, these relative chronologies are susceptible to many of the critiques levelled at typologies in general, including: 1) the definition and acceptable range of variation within a type (Chapman 2003); 2) the ability to perceive or predict changes in type over time accurately (Plog & Hantman 1990; Buck et al . 1996; Fowler 2017); 3) whether typologies can actually be representative of a culture or time period (Feinman & Neitzel 1984; Fowler 2017); and 4) the ability of current theory to deal with these issues (Sørensen 2015).…”

The history of method and theory in the study of prehistoric puebloan pottery style in the American Southwest

“…Southwestern pottery types and wares formed much of the basis for determining archaeological cultures and regional groupings by Culture Historians Gladwin, 1929, 1931;Hargrave, 1932;Haury, 1934). Given the association between painted pottery stylistic traits and ceramic types in the Southwest (Graves, 1984;S. Plog and Hantman, 1990), geographically delimited cultural historical units were largely determined by spatial patterns of stylistic variation.…”

Profile of Stephen E. Plog

“…This demographic change piqued Plog's interest. He explains that others attributed the abandonment to environmental causes, like drought, but Plog noted that the decline occurred well before documented environmental change (8,9). Curious about social drivers that could explain the shift, he used data on pottery patterns and the trade of stone tools to document the rise and fall in the magnitude and spatial extent of trade.…”