A 2D Geometric Morphometric Assessment of Chrono-Cultural Trends in Osseous Barbed Points of the European Final Palaeolithic and Early Mesolithic

IF 0.9 3区 历史学 0 ARCHAEOLOGY Open Archaeology Pub Date : 2023-01-01 DOI:10.1515/opar-2022-0276
Kalliroi Tsirintoulaki, David N. Matzig, F. Riede
{"title":"A 2D Geometric Morphometric Assessment of Chrono-Cultural Trends in Osseous Barbed Points of the European Final Palaeolithic and Early Mesolithic","authors":"Kalliroi Tsirintoulaki, David N. Matzig, F. Riede","doi":"10.1515/opar-2022-0276","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Studies on prehistoric osseous barbed points have relied heavily on typology in linking presumed types to broader techno-complexes, and for making chronological inferences. The accumulation of both new finds and of radiocarbon dates obtained directly on such artefacts, however, has revealed that (i) shape variability defies neat typological divisions, and that (ii) chronological inferences based on typology often fail. To further query these issues and to better understand the design choices and cultural evolutionary dynamics within this artefact class, we present a 2D open-outline geometric morphometric analysis of 50 directly dated Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene osseous barbed points primarily from northern and western Europe. The results indicate that (a) different components (tip, base, and barbs) of these artefacts were subject to varying design constraints and that (b) there is no clear-cut distinction between Final Palaeolithic and Mesolithic point traditions. Different techno-functional components evolved at various rates while specimens assigned to the same type and/or techno-complex are only occasionally morphologically similar. The results reflect a relatively low level of normativity for this artefact class and likely a repeated convergence on similar design elements. We propose that interpretations linked to cultural dynamics, individual craft agency, and repeated convergence on locally optimal designs may offer more satisfying avenues for thinking about the barbed points of this period.","PeriodicalId":19532,"journal":{"name":"Open Archaeology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Open Archaeology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1515/opar-2022-0276","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"历史学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"ARCHAEOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Abstract Studies on prehistoric osseous barbed points have relied heavily on typology in linking presumed types to broader techno-complexes, and for making chronological inferences. The accumulation of both new finds and of radiocarbon dates obtained directly on such artefacts, however, has revealed that (i) shape variability defies neat typological divisions, and that (ii) chronological inferences based on typology often fail. To further query these issues and to better understand the design choices and cultural evolutionary dynamics within this artefact class, we present a 2D open-outline geometric morphometric analysis of 50 directly dated Late Pleistocene and Early Holocene osseous barbed points primarily from northern and western Europe. The results indicate that (a) different components (tip, base, and barbs) of these artefacts were subject to varying design constraints and that (b) there is no clear-cut distinction between Final Palaeolithic and Mesolithic point traditions. Different techno-functional components evolved at various rates while specimens assigned to the same type and/or techno-complex are only occasionally morphologically similar. The results reflect a relatively low level of normativity for this artefact class and likely a repeated convergence on similar design elements. We propose that interpretations linked to cultural dynamics, individual craft agency, and repeated convergence on locally optimal designs may offer more satisfying avenues for thinking about the barbed points of this period.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
欧洲晚期旧石器时代和早期中石器时代骨刺点的时间文化趋势的二维几何形态计量学评估
史前骨刺点的研究在很大程度上依赖于类型学,将假定的类型与更广泛的技术复合体联系起来,并进行时间推断。然而,新发现和直接从这些人工制品上获得的放射性碳年代的积累表明,(i)形状的变化违背了简单的类型学划分,(ii)基于类型学的年代推断往往失败。为了进一步了解这些问题,并更好地理解这类人工制品的设计选择和文化进化动态,我们对主要来自北欧和西欧的50个直接追溯到晚更新世和全新世早期的骨刺点进行了二维开放轮廓几何形态测量分析。结果表明:(a)这些人工制品的不同组成部分(尖端、基部和倒刺)受到不同的设计约束;(b)最终旧石器时代和中石器时代的点传统之间没有明确的区别。不同的技术功能成分以不同的速度进化,而属于同一类型和/或技术复合体的标本只是偶尔在形态上相似。结果反映了该人工制品类相对较低的规范性水平,并且可能在类似的设计元素上重复收敛。我们提出,与文化动态、个人工艺代理和对局部最佳设计的重复趋同相关的解释可能为思考这一时期的尖锐问题提供更令人满意的途径。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Open Archaeology
Open Archaeology ARCHAEOLOGY-
CiteScore
1.70
自引率
12.50%
发文量
38
审稿时长
10 weeks
期刊介绍: Open Archaeology is a forum of novel approaches to archaeological theory, methodology and practice, and an international medium for the dissemination of research data and interdisciplinary projects. Scope of the journal includes, but is not restricted to: World Archaeology - discoveries and research Archaeological science Theory and interpretation in archaeology Archaeological heritage preservation and management.
期刊最新文献
Reconciling Contradictory Archaeological Survey Data: A Case Study from Central Crete, Greece Dehesilla Cave Rock Paintings (Cádiz, Spain): Analysis and Contextualisation within the Prehistoric Art of the Southern Iberian Peninsula Crafted Landscapes: The Uggurwala Tree (Ochroma pyramidale) as a Potential Cultural Keystone Species for Gunadule Communities Editorial: Microhistory and Archaeology Two Sides of the Same Coin: Microhistory, Micropolitics, and Infrapolitics in Medieval Archaeology
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1