Новые данные к вопросу о «забегании вперед» в развитии палеолитических индустрий
Închide
Conţinutul numărului revistei
Articolul precedent
Articolul urmator
1654 0
SM ISO690:2012
. Новые данные к вопросу о «забегании вперед» в развитии палеолитических индустрий. In: Stratum plus, 1999, nr. 1, pp. 275-279. ISSN 1608-9057.
EXPORT metadate:
Google Scholar
Crossref
CERIF

DataCite
Dublin Core
Stratum plus
Numărul 1 / 1999 / ISSN 1608-9057 /ISSNe 1857-3533

Новые данные к вопросу о «забегании вперед» в развитии палеолитических индустрий

Pag. 275-279

 
Институт Истории Материальной культуры, Российская Академия Наук
 
 
Disponibil în IBN: 11 august 2016


Rezumat

New dates to the question of «running ahead of time» in the development of the Palaeolythic industries. The analysis of the material from levels 15 and 13 of Yabrud 1 (Rust’s collection) and bed 75 of Tabun (Jelinek’s collection) leads to the conclusion that the Amudian and Pre-Aurignacian industries are both typologically and technologically rather distant from UP standards. At the same time, though not as advanced (derived) as they are sometimes thought to be, both the Amudian and particularly the PreAurignacian provide a picture of what one might expect to observe in an ideal «transitory» Middle/Upper Paleolithic industry. This is true in both typological and technological respects. Taking into account both the stratigraphic position of these industries and their basic similarity in terms of direction of cultural transformation, it is reasonable to consider the Amudian and Pre-Aurignacian as contemporaneous and representative of a specific episode of a rather substantial (albeit gradual) change within the Yabrudian. The notion of an “IntraYaburdian Episode” and the designation of the Pre-Aurignacian and Amudian as the industries of this episode would seem appropriate on the basis of current evidence. The Intra-Yabrudian assemblages, together with Howiesons Poort in southern Africa and the Seclinien of north-west Europe, provide good examples of what has been called «running ahead of time» in the development of Paleolithic industries (Vishnyatsky, 1994). In each of these examples we have to deal with cultural transformations resembling those characteristic of the Middle/Upper Paleolithic transition (at least in the realm of stone working). It cannot be ruled out that the causes of changes in all these cases (including here the Middle/Upper Paleolithic transition) also were very similar. What we need most of all to reveal these causes, is an understanding of how the changes in stone technology were connected with and depended on changes in subsistence. However, this end remains distant.