Grave markers - Middle and Early Upper Paleolithic burials and the use of chronotypology in contemporary paleolithic research: Comments

Research output: Contribution to journalComment/debate

79 Scopus citations

Abstract

Comparison of mortuary data from the Middle and Early Upper Paleolithic archaeological record shows that, contrary to previous assessments, there is much evidence for continuity between the two periods. This suggests that if R. H. Gargett's critique of alleged Middle Paleolithic burials is to be given credence, it should also be applied to the "burials" of the Early Upper Paleolithic. Evidence for continuity reinforces conclusions derived from lithic and faunal analyses and site locations that the Upper Paleolithic as a reified category masks much variation in the archaeological record and is therefore not an appropriate analytical tool. Dividing the Upper Paleolithic into Early and Late phases might be helpful for understanding the cultural and biological processes at work.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)463-464
Number of pages31
JournalCurrent Anthropology
Volume42
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2001

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Grave markers - Middle and Early Upper Paleolithic burials and the use of chronotypology in contemporary paleolithic research: Comments'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this