Submit a preprint

388

A meta-analysis of Final Palaeolithic/earliest Mesolithic cultural taxonomy and evolution in Europeuse asterix (*) to get italics
Felix Riede, David N. Matzig, Miguel Biard, Philippe Crombé, Javier Fernández-Lopéz de Pablo, Federica Fontana, Daniel Groß, Thomas Hess, Mathieu Langlais, Ludovic Mevel, William Mills, Martin Moník, Nicolas Naudinot, Caroline Posch, Tomas Rimkus, Damian Stefański, Hans Vandendriessche, Shumon T. HussainPlease use the format "First name initials family name" as in "Marie S. Curie, Niels H. D. Bohr, Albert Einstein, John R. R. Tolkien, Donna T. Strickland"
2023
<p>Archaeological systematics, together with spatial and chronological information, are commonly used to infer cultural evolutionary dynamics in the past. For the study of the Palaeolithic, and particularly the European Final Palaeolithic and earliest Mesolithic, proposed changes in material culture are often interpreted as reflecting historical processes, migration, or cultural adaptation to climate change and resource availability. Yet, cultural taxonomic practice is known to be variable across research history and academic traditions, and few large-scale replicable analyses across such traditions have been undertaken. Drawing on recent developments in computational archaeology, we here present a data-driven assessment of the existing Final Palaeolithic/earliest Mesolithic cultural taxonomy in Europe. Our dataset consists of a large expert-sourced compendium of key sites, lithic toolkit composition, blade and bladelet production technology, as well as lithic armatures. The dataset comprises 16 regions and 86 individually named archaeological taxa (‘cultures’), covering the period between ca. 15,000 and 11,000 years ago (cal BP). Using these data, we use geometric morphometric and multivariate statistical techniques to meta-analytically explore to what extent the dynamics observed in different lithic data domains (toolkits, technologies, armature shapes) correspond to each other and to the culture-historical relations of taxonomic units implied by traditional naming practice. Our analyses support the widespread conception that some dimensions of material culture became more diverse towards the end of the Pleistocene and the very beginning of the Holocene. At the same time, cultural taxonomic unit coherence and efficacy appear variable, leading us to explore potential biases introduced by regional research traditions, inter-analyst variation, and the role of disjunct macroevolutionary processes. In discussing the implications of these findings for narratives of cultural change and diversification across the Pleistocene-Holocene transition, we emphasize the increasing need for cooperative research and systematic archaeological meta-analyses.</p>
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8119719You should fill this box only if you chose 'All or part of the results presented in this preprint are based on data'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8119719You should fill this box only if you chose 'Scripts were used to obtain or analyze the results'. URL must start with http:// or https://
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.8119719You should fill this box only if you chose 'Codes have been used in this study'. URL must start with http:// or https://
Final Palaeolithic; lithic technology; archaeological culture; systematics; geometric morphometrics; macro-archaeology; hunter-gatherers
NonePlease indicate the methods that may require specialised expertise during the peer review process (use a comma to separate various required expertises).
Computational archaeology, Europe, Lithic technology, Mesolithic, Upper Palaeolithic
Gil Tostevin (toste003@umn.edu), Latifa Sari (sari.latifa@cnrpah.org), Iwona Sobkowiak-Tabaka (iwona.sobkowiak-tabaka@amu.edu.pl), Andreas Maier (a.maier@uni-koeln.de), Aitor Ruiz-Redondo (aruizredondo@unizar.es), Erella Hovers (hovers@mail.huji.ac.il), Charles Perreault (perreault.c@gmail.com), Briggs Buchanan (briggs-buchanan@utulsa.edu), Julien Riel-Salvatore (julien.riel-salvatore@umontreal.ca), Thomas Terberger [thomas.terberger@phil.uni-goettingen.de] suggested: Dear sir or adame, , Thomas Terberger [thomas.terberger@phil.uni-goettingen.de] suggested: the subject is certainly of interest for me, but unfortunately I'm very occupied at the moment and have to finsh manuscripts with strict deadlines. As reviewers I would like to recommend my colleagues Prof. Michael Baales and Dr. Dirk Leder (see below), both very familiar with the subject. , Thomas Terberger [thomas.terberger@phil.uni-goettingen.de] suggested: Kind regards, Thomas Terberger [thomas.terberger@phil.uni-goettingen.de] suggested: Thomas Terberger, Thomas Terberger [thomas.terberger@phil.uni-goettingen.de] suggested: Baales, Michael (Michael.Baales@lwl.org) , Thomas Terberger [thomas.terberger@phil.uni-goettingen.de] suggested: Leder, Dirk <Dirk.Leder@NLD.Niedersachsen.de>, Dirk Leder suggested: Andrew Kandel a.kandel@uni-tuebingen.de, Dirk Leder suggested: Andreas Maier a.maierSpamProtectionuni-koeln.de, Charles Perreault [perreault.c@gmail.com] suggested: jonathan paige (jprnr@missouri.edu) No need for them to be recommenders of PCIArchaeology. Please do not suggest reviewers for whom there might be a conflict of interest. Reviewers are not allowed to review preprints written by close colleagues (with whom they have published in the last four years, with whom they have received joint funding in the last four years, or with whom they are currently writing a manuscript, or submitting a grant proposal), or by family members, friends, or anyone for whom bias might affect the nature of the review - see the code of conduct
e.g. John Doe [john@doe.com]
2023-07-29 16:06:17
Anaïs Vignoles