Archaic minds? : a critical examination of the character and perception of Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic lithic assemblages in Germany and their implications for Neanderthal behaviour
This thesis examines the classification of Palaeolithic lithic artefacts and their impact on our perception of Neanderthal and - to some extent - anatomically modern human behaviour. It is my contention that the classificatory systems used within European archaeology has shaped and perhaps misled our perception of this period. In this thesis a focus on materials from Germany - the Middle Palaeolithic of OIS 5 and 3, including those with leafpoints - is maintained to demonstrate the impact of the use of distinct typological systems i.e. the system devised by Bosinski and published in 1967 versus the French System Bordes. Germany is particularly relevant because of a lack of integration of its archaeological materials and their interpretation with the critical dialogue that exists within the French, British and American archaeological community. Although this is slowly changing and German archaeology is now more critical and interpretative, the lack of interpretation extant was particularly suitable for a critical analysis of the theories surrounding the late Middle Palaeolithic and Early Upper Palaeolithic, including supposed ~transitional' archaeological complexes. In order to integrate the archaeology of
Drell, Julia R. R.
CC Archaeology
Archaic minds? : a critical examination of the character and perception of Middle and Early Upper Palaeolithic lithic assemblages in Germany and their implications for Neanderthal behaviour. This thesis examines the classification of Palaeolithic lithic artefacts and their impact on our perception of Neanderthal and - to some extent - anatomically modern human behaviour. It is my contention that the classificatory systems used within European archaeology has shaped and perhaps misled our perception of this period. In this thesis a focus on materials from Germany - the Middle Palaeolithic of OIS 5 and 3, including those with leafpoints - is maintained to demonstrate the impact of the use of distinct typological systems i.e. the system devised by Bosinski and published in 1967 versus the French System Bordes. Germany is particularly relevant because of a lack of integration of its archaeological materials and their interpretation with the critical dialogue that exists within the French, British and American archaeological community. Although this is slowly changing and German archaeology is now more critical and interpretative, the lack of interpretation extant was particularly suitable for a critical analysis of the theories surrounding the late Middle Palaeolithic and Early Upper Palaeolithic, including supposed ~transitional' archaeological complexes. In order to integrate the archaeology of
archaic mind critical_examination character perception middle early upper_palaeolithic lithic_assemblage germany implication neanderthal behaviour examines classification palaeolithic lithic_artefact impact perception neanderthal extent modern human_behaviour contention classificatory_system use within european_archaeology shape perhaps mislead perception period focus material germany middle_palaeolithic include maintain impact use distinct typological system system devise publish versus french system germany particularly relevant lack integration archaeological_material interpretation critical dialogue exists within french british_american archaeological community although slowly changing german archaeology critical interpretative lack interpretation extant particularly suitable critical_analysis theory surround late middle palaeolithic early upper_palaeolithic include suppose transitional archaeological complex order integrate archaeology