Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 2002. / Vita. Accompanying CD-ROM contains data recorded during examinations of six lithic assemblages and Pendulum Indenter tests, plus macros for use with data. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 553-598).

No description available.

No description available.

No description available.

This thesis focuses on the Mid/Upper Palaeolithic Transition in the Iberian Peninsula, and questions whether this process took place as hitherto widely claimed, by testing the validity of the traditional characteristics said to portray this event throughout Europe. Research was carried out at different levels: old archaeological collections from two transitional sites (Abric Romani and Reclau Viver), previously unstudied, were systematically analysed and specific organic components (perforated shells) were radiocarbon dated. A thorough bibliographic database including information on these and all other Iberian sites was complied, in order to extend the study. The theoretical perspective of the topic was also investigated, to assess epistemological factors which are so often overlooked in this field of study. The socio-political events that have marked Spain and Portugal's contemporary histories, were also studied, since they played a crucial role in shaping Palaeolithic Research in both countries. The so-called '40,000 BP Crisis', specifically located in northern Iberia, was revisited by studying not only the traditional sites which have produced chronometric readings around that date, but also others in the same region whose transitional layers have yielded much younger dates, to see if that phenomenon really existed or has been created by generalisations that have masked vital - but ultimately uncomfortable - information. The study of this event is also placed into the peninsular and the wider European contexts, an exercise that has disclosed the vast complexity of the Transition, in terms of both the actual archaeological record and the theoretical interpretations that have been presented so far. Ultimately, this research calls for a revision of some of the theoretical perspectives of Palaeolithic archaeologists, as well as far more careful site and regional-level research, in order to redress the abundant misconceptions that distort our understanding of the Transition process.

Thesis (PhDEducation)--University of South Australia, 2002.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Missouri-Columbia, 1999. / Typescript. Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 162-179). Also available on the Internet.

No description available.

Doctorat en philosophie et lettres / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

Microlith production is a distinctive and significant stone tool technology. However, inter-regional comparative analyses of microlithic industries are rare, and have tended to homogenise these industries by focussing analytical attention on retouched tool typologies alone. This thesis provides the first demonstration and exploration of variability in two of the earliest microlithic industries in the world - the Howiesons Poort of southern Africa and the Late Palaeolithic of South Asia. Analysis of this variation has implications for the long-standing debates concerning modern human behaviour and dispersals. In order to assess variability in underlying technological processes and manufacturing trajectories, detailed attribute analyses were conducted on lithic assemblages. Metric and qualitative variables were recorded on cores, debitage and tools from three southern African Howiesons Poort sites (Rose Cottage Cave and Umhlatuzana, South Africa, and Ntloana Tsoana, Lesotho) and four South Asian Late Palaeolithic sites (Batadomba-lena and Kitulgala Beli-lena, Sri Lanka, and Patne and Jwalapuram 9, India). Analysis of the results reveals variability within sites, over time, and between sites and regions, demonstrating that microlith production is not a homogenous technology. Underlying technological processes are shown to differ more between regions than do retouched tool forms. It is argued that this pattern is more parsimoniously explained by independent innovation of microlithic technology situated within local lithic traditions, rather than by cultural diffusion. Additionally, the exploration of variability in microlithic assemblages highlights the benefits of using a methodological approach to the modern human behaviour debate which focusses on technological variability rather than the presence of particular tool types. It is this behavioural and technological variability that is key to understanding our species.