Réflexion autour des industries gravettiennes « post-pavloviennes » de Slovaquie occidentale et de Moravie (25,500/24,500–22,000 BP non calibré)

Polanská, Michaela; Hromadová, Bibiána

doi:10.5817/cz.muni.m210-7781-2015-12

Cited by 6 publications

(12 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This knowledge is often limited to the types that are classified according to the Sonneville-Bordes type list and, at best, to tables of drawings (e.g., Klíma, 1997;Hromada and Kozlowski, 1995). Discussion of types of Central Europe industries and attempts to define and describe the production systems are rare (e.g., Oliva, 2009a;Polanská et al, in presse;Polanská and Hromadová, 2015;Vlačiky et al, 2013;Wilczyński et al, 2015). Hence, the detailed description and characterization of the types from this geographical area are important.…”

Section: Methodological Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gravettian backed points from Unit K11 of Dolní Věstonice II (South Moravia, Czech Republic)

Polanská

2021

Quaternary International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Methodological Approachmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gravettian backed points from Unit K11 of Dolní Věstonice II (South Moravia, Czech Republic)

Polanská

2021

Quaternary International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…The risk of misidentifying index fossils as incomplete or modified versions of other index fossils, e.g. fragments of incompletely backed bladelets as shouldered points (Reynolds 2014, Polanská and Hromadová 2015, Wilczyński 2015, is widely understood among lithic specialists. Some of the variation that we do see within particular groups of artefacts may well be a reflection of the application of additional retouch to modify given tool types for use, as argued by Neeley and Barton (1994) for some Levantine Epipaleolithic tools.…”

Section: The European Upper Paleolithic Chronocultural Framework: Warmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Finally, we can try to refine the criteria used, in order to see if distinctions can be made. For example, truncated backed bladelets sensu lato may not be useful for establishing connections between assemblages, but the specific type of truncated backed bladelet known as éléments bitronqués/Late Gravettian rectangles probably are: they appear to form a geographically coherent, temporally restricted group in Central and Eastern Europe in assemblages dating to the late Mid Upper Paleolithic (Rogachëv and Anikovich 1982;Lisitsyn 1998;Reynolds 2014;Polanská and Hromadová 2015;Wilczyński et al 2015;Lisitsyn 2015).…”

Section: Coherence and Convergencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…This has led to the definition of new types (e.g. éléments bitronqués/Late Gravettian rectangles in Central Europe;Polanská and Hromadová 2015;Wilczyński et al 2015), the correction of previous misclassifications of artefacts (e.g. Kostënki knives in Western and Central Europe;Lev et al 2011;Klaric et al 2015); critical analysis of the coherence of particular types (e.g.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Threading the Weft, Testing the Warp: Population Concepts and the European Upper Paleolithic Chronocultural Framework

Reynolds

2020

Vertebrate Paleobiology and Paleoanthropology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Interpretations of the European Upper Paleolithic archaeological record have long relied on concepts of past populations. In particular, cultural taxonomic units-which are used as a framework for describing the archaeological record-are commonly equated with past populations. However, our cultural taxonomy is highly historically contingent, and does not necessarily accurately reflect variation in the archaeological record. Furthermore, we lack a secure theoretical basis for the inference of populations from taxonomic units. In order to move past these problems and satisfactorily address questions of Upper Paleolithic 2 populations, we need to entirely revise our approach to chronocultural framework building. Here, I outline a specific way of describing the archaeological record that deliberately avoids the use of cultural taxonomic units and instead concentrates on individual features of material culture. This approach may provide a more appropriate basis for the archaeological study of Upper Paleolithic populations and for comparison with genetic data.

show abstract

“…In studies of Gravettian lithic variability, culture-historical causes have received considerable attention (e.g. Djindjian and Bosselin, 1994;Klaric, 2007;Otte & Noiret, 2007;Svoboda, 2007;Moreau, 2010Moreau, , 2011Pesesse, 2010;Anghelinu et al, 2012;Ríos-Garaizar et al, 2012;Djindjian, 2013;Wierer, 2013;Marreiros et al, 2015;Polanská & Hromadová, 2015). This is partly imputable to the definition and routine practice of the chaîne opératoire as an analytical tool (Pelegrin et al, 1988), and related with it, the underlying claim of reading the enculturated minds of prehistoric knappers (Audouze, 1999;Bar-Yosef & Van Peer, 2009).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Did prehistoric foragers behave in an economically irrational manner? Raw material availability and technological organisation at the early Gravettian site of Willendorf II (Austria)

Moreau¹,

Brandl

Nigst

2016

Quaternary International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Willendorf II provides the longest and best-studied MIS 3 sequence in the Middle Danube region, and represents one of the key reference sequences for this time period in Central Europe. The assemblage chosen for analysis derives from archaeological horizon (AH) 5, attributed to the period of the first Gravettian between 30 and 27 ka uncal. BP. While previous analyses were all based on a selected inventory (mainly tools and cores) derived from the 1908/1909 excavations, the discovery of labelled wooden boxes containing numerous additional artefacts from the 1908/1909 excavations at the end of the 1990´s in the cellar of the Natural History Museum in Vienna considerably raises the total number of finds for all archaeological horizons, and opens new perspectives for investigating Upper Palaeolithic behavioural variability in the Middle Danube region. For the first time, the total assemblage of AH 5 has been analysed. Moreover, for the first time all artefacts have been assigned to a raw material source area, allowing for quantified observations on raw material economy and technological variability in the early Gravettian of the Middle Danube region. Willendorf II provides an excellent basis for the study of Gravettian lithic assemblage variability due to the wide array of local and nonlocal lithic resources available at varying distances from the settlement. We discuss the results in the light of the concepts of "technological provisioning" developed by S.L. Kuhn (1992), as it turns out that distance to source alone is not suitable to predict and explain raw material frequencies and the character of transported technologies on nonlocal material at Willendorf II-AH5. We argue that other factors such as the degree of anticipation of foreseeable activities and occupation span might account for the observed economic patterns. Our results clearly have broader relevance for understanding assemblage variability in the Gravettian of Central Europe and further afield.

show abstract

Réflexion autour des industries gravettiennes « post-pavloviennes » de Slovaquie occidentale et de Moravie (25,500/24,500–22,000 BP non calibré)

Cited by 6 publications

References 0 publications

Gravettian backed points from Unit K11 of Dolní Věstonice II (South Moravia, Czech Republic)

Gravettian backed points from Unit K11 of Dolní Věstonice II (South Moravia, Czech Republic)

Threading the Weft, Testing the Warp: Population Concepts and the European Upper Paleolithic Chronocultural Framework

Did prehistoric foragers behave in an economically irrational manner? Raw material availability and technological organisation at the early Gravettian site of Willendorf II (Austria)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About