The Subversive Archaeologist
Providing a much-needed check on mythopoeic archaeological inference, but also on occasion commenting on the important discoveries of the day. Every effort is made to keep the invective to a dull roar. Best plug your ears!
Nefud For Thought: Scerri et al.'s Arabian Levallois Artifacts Give Us Pause To Reconsider Middle Paleolithic Typology
Far be it for me to downplay discoveries that have the potential to overturn long-standing misunderstandings about what went on in the past. On the other hand, I can't help but be excited when I see images of artifacts such as these, for what they imply about the bipedal apes that made 'em.
From Scerri et al. "Middle to Late Pleistocene human habitation in the western Nefud Desert, Saudi Arabia," Quaternary International, available online 8 October 2014.
I call your attention to object number 1. As you can see, it's described as a "Centripetally prepared preferential Levallois core," as is object 2. Object 3 is a "recurrent centripetal Levallois core," 4 is a "Single platform core," 5 a "bidirectional Levallois point core, 6 and 7 "discoidal cores," 8 another "single platform core," 9 a "multiple platform core," 10 and 11 are "bifaces." [BT dub, gotta give the authors credit for not referring to 10 and 11 as hand axes, since that's what they, evidently, are, and would normally be called that in run-of-the-mill Middle Paleolithic scholarship. O' course, they do identify similar objects as hand axes elsewhere in their paper—I guess maybe these two weren't sufficiently 'well made' or pointy enough to make it into that category. In that case, one wonders why they weren't treated as hand axe 'rough-outs' as others have done. Somebody stop me!]
What I'm seeing here could imply much more than what Scerri et al. are reporting—that these Arabian Peninsula Middle Pleistocene assemblages are evidence for multiple demes spanning tens of thousands of years in MIS 5, the last interglacial—including anatomically modern Homo sapiens from northeastern Africa and Homo neanderthalensis from southwestern Asia.
I think the authors are missing something about the size of these artifacts. Here's a close-up of number 1, with some everyday objects for comparison. Yep. Those are a One Pound coin, a Tooney, a Sacagawea dollar, and a 2 Euro coin.
Yet, despite its size, Scerri et al. describe this fragment of rock—barely larger than pocket change—as a "Centripetally prepared preferential Levallois core." It sounds impressive! It is impressive! If it's what the authors' claim, this little beauty could be evidence for a group of bipedal apes with hands smaller than a five-year-old's! Either that, or this so-called Levallois industry is just that, a three dressed up as a nine. After all, could any of these pieces actually be Levallois cores [which, forgive me, perhaps I've missed something all along, but, I thought a Levallois core was something that was being prepared for the final removal of a flake of predetermined shape]? Give me a break!
Object number 3 is an even more impressive piece when you consider that it's a "recurrent centripetal Levallois core." As so many of you already know, I'm not a lithic analyst. But I think that means—unlike number 1, this has more than one flake scar, implying more than one flake removal in preparation for that magical, mystical flake of predetermined shape, which, equally mysteriously, was never removed. So. When is a Levallois core not a Levallois core? And why were all of these not taken to the next stage, according to [the conventionally wise construct of the] plan?
For my part, I don't know why we just can't use the old Bordesian typology, illustrated below. In that case number 1 wouldn't even make it as a Levallois core, and, at best, number 3 would be a "Classic." A classic it be, for sure! Either way, given their size, any flake of predetermined shape that a bipedal ape hoped to remove at this point in the reduction sequence would either be doomed to failure, or so small as to have been useless for any function more adaptive than cleaning one's fingernails. The same goes for the rest of 'em. And for any inferences that they can milk out of these bit of rock, however they want to describe 'em, and regardless of how many others in our field accept their inferences. [But then, that's why I'm here, in my metaphorical pajamas in my metaphorical (dead) mother's basement, bashing out this piece of uninformed criticism.]
Nevertheless, if these little bits of stone can be described in this fashion, and yet be, to all intents and purposes, useless as Levallois cores—in the original sense of the type—what does it say about all of the grown-up 'cores' that we're told were being shaped for the purpose of removing a flake of predetermined shape?
Let's face it, it's easy to recognize a Levallois core after that flake's been removed. Number 5, above, is one such example—mostly because the central flake had a point. It takes a real expert to recognize one that never got that far! Unless, of course, those final flake removals weren't, after all, the predetermined end product of the presumed process.
Many times before I've trotted out the Levallois cores from Douara Cave as evidence for the fallaciousness of the presumed Levallois technology. But it won't hurt to do it again.
Levallois cores from Douara Cave (Credit Akazawa in Suzuki and Takai 1974).
I've outlined in red the final flake removal on these Levallois cores. Can we not agree that if their final shape was 'predetermined' there's nothing here that would fit, without considerable massaging of reality, in Bordes's original—and highly idealized—classification of Levallois flakes, which you see above.
I'd be very happy to throw out the whole Levallois technique baby with this Arabian Peninsula bath water.
I'll say it again, I'm not a lithic analyst. If I were, and if these rocks from the Arabian Peninsula were what the authors said they were, and if I believed them, I'd consider jumping on their bandwagon of desert archaeology and riding it as far as I could on the road to academic fame and fortune. But I'm not. And I don't. And I won't be joining them on their—obviously very prestigious considering the number of papers they're publishing and in what august scholarly journals they're publishing them—bandwagon.
I'm outa here.
Posted by thesubversivearchaeologist at 18:27
Labels: Levallois, Middle Pleistocene, Nubian complex, Out of Africa, western Nefud Desert
Search inside SA
Introducing Archaeology
Robert J. Muckle
OUR FRIENDS PUBLISH BOOKS!
Scroll down and get 'em from Amazon.
Right here! Best prices. Best of all?
Amazon pays me a small commission
that helps maintain the quality of
The Subversive Archaeologist.
Wayward Shamans
Silvia Tomášková
The First Nations of British Columbia
Where Happiness Dwells: A History of the Dane-zaa First Nations
Robin Ridington, Jillian Ridington, & Elders of the Dane-zaa First Nations
A Shark Going Inland Is My Chief
Patrick V. Kirch
Social Zooarchaeology: Humans and Animals in Prehistory
Nerissa Russell
The Pre-Colonial State in West Africa
J. Cameron Monroe
Indigenous Peoples of North America
Race, Monogamy, and Other Lies They Told You
Augustín Fuentes
La pièce de résistance
Out of print! Priceless.
Power and Landscape in Atlantic West Africa
Monroe and Ogundiran
A bona fide classic
Stanley Kubrick's masterpiece
Subscribe To SA
Follow SA by Email
Worsaae's Law of Association applies here
Older Posts: Law of Superposition Applies
Accolades For Tom Wynn: Too Bad About That Hand Ax...
Nefud For Thought: Scerri et al.'s Arabian Levallo...
Some Prefatory Thoughts on TAG 2014 Manchester [Up...
Back To Basics: Stratigraphy 101
Stand With Me—Pledge To End Harassment And Assault...
Noble and Davidson
How Animals Grieve
Barbara J. King
Conservation Biology and Applied Zooarchaeology
Wolverton and Lyman
Shaping Humanity
John Gurche
The Complete World of Human Evolution
Stringer and Andrews
Page views since October 5, 2011. Thanks for visiting!
Unique Visitors Since October 5, 2012 at 4:16 PM PDT
The SA's Blogroll
SPACE AGE ARCHAEOLOGY
Between the house and the stars: the life of Varvara Sokolova who married Konstantin Tsiolkovsky
The Mermaid's Tale
Free will? What could that phrase even mean in a causal universe?
Steamed Persimmon Pudding
john hawks weblog
Looking for the vulture assist with Neolithic burials
Past Horizons Archaeology
Graham Stephan Course– The YouTube Creator Academy Review 2019
Mike Pitts – Digging Deeper
Antony Gormley at the Royal Academy 2019
Paleoantropología hoy
Australopithecus anamensis
The Pleistocene Scene - A.P. Van Arsdale Blog
Running for Science: Science for Running – The Complete Series
For what they were... we are
The Conscience of a Liberal: Paul Krugman
The Blog Moves On
What Makes Us Human
Anthropology Blogs Update: Additions, Revisions, New Blogs
countup
NO worst, there is none. Pitched past pitch of grief,
More pangs will, schooled at forepangs, wilder wring.
Comforter, where, where is your comforting?
Mary, mother of us, where is your relief?
My cries heave, herds-long; huddle in a main, a chief
Woe, world-sorrow; on an age-old anvil wince and sing—
Then lull, then leave off. Fury had shrieked 'No ling-
ering! Let me be fell: force I must be brief'.
O the mind, mind has mountains; cliffs of fall
Frightful, sheer, no-man-fathomed. Hold them cheap
May who ne'er hung there. Nor does long our small
Durance deal with that steep or deep. Here! creep,
Wretch, under a comfort serves in a whirlwind: all
Life death does end and each day dies with sleep.
Gerard Manley Hopkins (1844–89). Poems. 1918.
The Subversive Archaeologist by Robert H. Gargett is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
My primary research interest is and always has been advancing knowledge of how hominids became human. Modern humans exploded out of Africa between about 40 and 50 kyr ago, and there is abundant evidence of recognizably human behaviour from at least that time in Africa, and across Europe, Asia and Australia. Signature modern human behaviour has not been documented unequivocally for the Neanderthals and their contemporaries, the skeletally modern members of the genus Homo (e.g. at Skhul Cave). Instead of recognizably modern implements and other hallmarks of modern human behaviour, in the Middle Palaeolithic we see lithic technology organized around flakes, obtained through bifacial reduction, some platform preparation, and retouch; no unequivocal use of bone other than as an analogue for stone; no evidence of space use that could be recognized as human; no unequivocal evidence of purposeful burial, no unequivocal representational imagery. Achievements include a BA in Archaeology (Simon Fraser University, 1987), "Grave Shortcomings: The Evidence for Neandertal Burial" (Current Anthropology, 1989), a Ph.D. in Anthropology (University of California at Berkeley, 1994), a lectureship in Archaeology and Palaeoanthropology at the University of New England, NSW, Australia, from 1996 to 1999, "Middle Palaeolithic Burial is Not a Dead Issue: The View from Qafzeh, Saint-Césaire, Kebara, Amud, and Dederiyeh" (Journal of Human Evolution, 1999), and, in aggregate, 27 months of field experience in southern central British Columbia (Salishan), Israel (Middle Palaeolithic), France (Mesolithic), Australia, California's Coast Range, its Central Valley and Great Basin desert regions.
The Subversive Archaeologist, Blogging Since October 5, 2011. Powered by Blogger.