A Critique of the Case for Paleoindian Caribou Hunting on the Submerged Alpena-Amberley Ridge

White, Andrew A.

doi:10.1080/20555563.2021.1942651

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 47 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Rowe et al 2022); or under water (e.g. O'Shea 2014; Lemke 2021; White 2021). Once a null model is created from the specific context(s) in question, quantitative and qualitative morphological, technological, frequency and density comparisons could be made between the null model(s) and the proposed archaeological dataset(s), such that objective and probabilistic statements of archaeological validity can be made.…”

Section: Going Forwardmentioning

confidence: 99%

Antarctica as a ‘natural laboratory’ for the critical assessment of the archaeological validity of early stone tool sites

et al. 2023

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Lithic technologies dominate understanding of early humans, yet natural processes can fracture rock in ways that resemble artefacts made by Homo sapiens and other primates. Differentiating between fractures made by natural processes and primates is important for assessing the validity of early and controversial archaeological sites. Rather than depend on expert authority or intuition, the authors propose a null model of conchoidally fractured Antarctic rocks. As no primates have ever occupied the continent, Antarctica offers a laboratory for generating samples that could only have been naturally fractured. Examples that resemble artefacts produced by primates illustrate the potential of ‘archaeological’ research in Antarctica for the evaluation of hominin sites worldwide.

show abstract