Anthropos: Anthropos, 102.2007

Anthropos, 102.2007

Bibliographic Data

Journal

Structure Type:: Journal

Works URN (URL):: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-714820

URN:: urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-714820

Persistent identifier:: BV043334262

Title:: Anthropos

Sub Title:: internationale Zeitschrift für Völker- u. Sprachenkunde

Place of Publication:: Fribourg

Publisher:: Ed. St. Paul

Year of Publication:: 1906

Collection:: Journals and Newspapers > Journals of Ethnology

Domain:: Social and cultural anthropology > General overview

Journal Volume

Structure Type:: Journal Volume

Works URN (URL):: https://nbn-resolving.org/urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-711757

URN:: urn:nbn:de:kobv:11-711757

Persistent identifier:: 1510223645165

Title:: Anthropos, 102.2007

Year of Publication:: 2007

Call Number:: LA 1118

Collection:: Journals and Newspapers > Journals of Ethnology

Journal Issue

Structure Type:: Journal Issue

Title:: Bd. 102, 2007, Heft 2

Collection:: Journals and Newspapers > Journals of Ethnology

Journal Article

Structure Type:: Journal Article

Title:: The Late Pleistocene Cultural Shift in Europe

Other person:: Bednarik, Robert G.

Collection:: Journals and Newspapers > Journals of Ethnology

Anthropos 102.2007: 347-370 The Late Pleistocene Cultural Shift in Europe Robert G. Bednarik % • " This article examines the transition in Europe from %e r p tfaditions of the Middle Palaeolithic to those regarded as ^ r ev - eolithi c- Synchronous changes in human morphology in the light of recent palaeoanthropological finds '*1 te c ^' n ^ s - They are found to mirror the parallel gradual change ' n th e e °. §y. as does the available record of palaeoart. Nothing f°Pni at - Vldence as it stands supports the notion of an intrusive Sr s e° n 0r culture, even the very tenuous evidence of genetics %a cia ° iltinuit y rather than replacement. In particular, the Au- " < Seems t0 be § m as an industry of “Neanderthals,” yet the beis? 8 for the most sophisticated artistic productions of hlci ?oaT n& era - [ Tnt " Pleistocene, replacement hypothesis, r °pology, Aurignacian, human evolution] tK^ratio** Bednar ik, convener and editor of the International A 0ri gi n °f Rock Art Organizations (IFRAO), specializes in e arly human constructs of reality and human cognition. %i in Re b alf of his approximately 1000 publications ap- re fereed scientific journals; see References Cited. V o, ?* an a decade ago I considered the ej'dence C" tUral continuity across the perceived divide Middle and Upper Palaeolithic periods is c , ar| k 1995d) The concept of such continu y % AWete anathema to the “replacement hypothe- lc ^ at that time reigned supreme y in el ^tec!, archae ology - and to some extent still dorm 's JJ* discipline today. However, this hypothesis Uc kling under the accumulating weig hsef.,1 ^ ev idence and recent developments ren er i s '>iew the issue. In 1995 I also observed V Eari have no skeletal evidence of the people o Ke L Auri gnacian (Bednarik 1995a), to which (1995. a ’ ) - 625) responded: Aur^ at tBere i s no skeletal evidence to suggest ’§nacian was the work of anatomically mod- ern humans is overdrawn ... Bednarik seems to have for gotten the modem human crania from Aurignacian sites like Vogelherd, Cro-Magnon, and Mladec. I very much doubt that White would use this same argument today, and it is most instructive to recon sider this matter in the light of recent developments. Not only would it serve to clear up previous misun derstandings, it will raise the question how the re placement or African Eve model ever came to such prominence. Such an examination would also serve as a heuristic device to determine why such fads generally gain currency in Pleistocene archaeology so easily. I will attempt such an analysis here. In this article I use archaeological jargon only to comply with established terminology and to con vey generalized concepts, without endorsing any of these terms. All of them can be and should be challenged. To illustrate, it would be absurd to expect that there was a distinctive ethnic or cul tural group, or tribe, or society of “Aurignacians” across Europe, coinciding spatially and temporally with those remnant artifact assemblages we collec tively tend to define as Aurignacian (even though we are notoriously unable to quite agree among ourselves what they include). Terms such as “Mid dle” or “Upper Palaeolithic” are merely concep tual crutches of a discipline steeped on creating etic taxonomies. They and all others like them are not historical facts or definable eras, such as those of history are more likely to be. They, like the definitions of tools, rock art motifs, or anything else archaeologists tend to taxonomize, are contin gent constructs of archaeologists supposedly aid ing communication. While they all may have some

Access restriction

Copyright

fullscreen: Anthropos, 102.2007

Journal

Journal Volume

Journal Issue

Journal Article

Table of Contents

Downloads

Full record

This page

Image fragment

Formats and links

Formats

Links

Cite

Full record

This page

Citation recommendation