Gravettian and Epigravettian lithics in Slovakia

Kaminská, Ľubomíra

doi:10.1016/j.quaint.2015.08.083

Cited by 10 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Outside the territory of hungary, in the northern Carpathian basin, local and regional raw material use dominate the Late Gravettian assemblages, but TC materials also are present. Nitra-I Cěrmáň in Western Slovakia contained 5% TC material and so did Cejkov I 6% in Eastern Slovakia (Kaminská 2016). Nitra-I Cěrmáň also contained a piece of obsidian as an example for distant material (Kaminská, Kozłowski 2011).…”

Section: The Tool Blank Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lithic analysis of the Middle and Late Upper Palaeolithic in Hungary

Lengyel¹

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A b s t r a c t. This paper presents lithic technology studies on the Middle and Late period of the Upper Palaeolithic in hungary between 26 and 13 ka BP. The studies aimed at describing and then comparing the technological processes from lithic raw material procurement to the formal tool making. An attempt was made to find correlations between technological features and chronological positions of the assemblages to see if lithic technology operated traditionally or opportunistically. The study found that technology was rather shaped toward efficiency with an adaptive behavior. Therefore, in most cases, the way how tools were made is useless to differentiate archaeological cultures, while the tools themselves, especially the armatures, can be markers of cultures as was shown earlier. This study found that the formation of the archaeological record and its variability most likely depended upon the dynamism of human ecology. K e y w o r d s: Lithic technology, technical behavior, raw material procurement, hunter-gatherers, subsistence strategy Publikacja jest udostępniona na licencji Creative Commons (CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 PL)To the memory of Avraham Ronen

show abstract

Section: The Tool Blank Selectionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Lithic analysis of the Middle and Late Upper Palaeolithic in Hungary

Lengyel¹

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, as suggested by the term 'Epigravettian', there is typically held to be far more similarity between Gravettian and Epigravettian assemblages than between Aurignacian and Gravettian assemblages. This is often interpreted as reflecting population continuity (Anghelinu et al 2012;Perlès 2013;Kaminská 2016). The robustness of the multiplicity of units describing the Final Palaeolithic record is also debatable.…”

Section: The Shortcomings Of the Current Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This is often interpreted as reflecting population continuity (Anghelinu et al . 2012; Perlès 2013; Kaminská 2016). The robustness of the multiplicity of units describing the Final Palaeolithic record is also debatable.…”

Section: The Shortcomings Of the Current Systemmentioning

confidence: 99%

House of cards: cultural taxonomy and the study of the European Upper Palaeolithic

Reynolds

Riede

2019

Antiquity

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The presence of shouldered points, Kostenki knives, and the import of good quality siliceous raw materials from moraines in Silesia and Poland are traditionally considered to be characteristic fossiles directeurs for this period (e.g. Kaminská, 2004 and2016;Kozłowski, 1996;Oliva, 2009b;Svoboda, 1996b). However, their informative value is unequal.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%